Comments on: "Ridiculous" Washington smoking ban may be scaled back

By: Merlin

Merlin — Tue, 07 Sep 2010 03:44:26 +0000

And here we er a few years down the rod, many business closed hundreds if not thousands of people are out of work and what are the Anti-Smoker Nazis doing now, they want the banishment law to extend to inside your own home, because some nut case twelve blocks away fears getting a whiff of smoke.
Get this through your thick heads they will never stop their insane demands, until they have gained control over every aspect of your personal life, maybe when they implant a RFID chip in your body and install cameras in your bedroom and bathroom you might take notice, but it will be far too late by then.
And sadly you will deserve every intrusion you are forced to live with because you were too weak and stupid to take action. Mark these words carefully because that day is coming and faster than you can imagine.

By: Jim

Jim — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 06:19:38 +0000

Here’s a possible solution- Let’s position the state misgovernment for reservation land next door to native reservations. It could be argued that smokers are under opression by the general populace which voted this farce into action, and that all smokers should thusly be entitled to land free of such sophomoric minds. By relocating all smokers into a complex where sanity prevails, perhaps bans on smoking in churches, schools, and hospitals will take effect, without disrupting the businesses which are supported by the money spent by the “evil” smokers. Let the rest of Washington be smoke free, but allow at least a pocket of sanity!

By: McKenzie

McKenzie — Wed, 14 Mar 2007 01:31:52 +0000

Ok seriously people smoking bans are ruining the ecomony as we speak! everyone is closing becuz they dont have enough business and this whole statement is TOTAL bullshit—Who would have ever thought that a smoking ban on businesses which cater to smokers would have had such a negative impact on those businesses? And who would have thought that the employees who were supposed to be â€œprotectedâ€ by the smoking ban would be such ungrateful bastards? So what if you lose your money, your job, your business that you worked for years to build. At least you donâ€™t have to breathe any smoke while you collect unemployment!— umm did you ever think that those workers might have kids to take care of… all of those nonsmoking activists can shove it were the sun dont shine cuz right now they are ruining many ppls lives by putting these bans on… they are all fuckers who just need to shut the hell up!

By: mike hunt

mike hunt — Wed, 24 Jan 2007 20:16:55 +0000

So, I was at McD’s and my car was blowing blue smoke into the window as the cashier got my order. Then I went to 5bucks and did the same thing, more blue smoke. Yes, when will we get it right and ban cars and let the people smoke. Wish I was in Oregon, I could smoke, have a drink and get a stripper to sit on my lap, these are stories of the good old days that I will share with my grandchildren. PS, if you think you smell so nice becasue you don’t smoke, think again Ahole.

By: RGray

RGray — Wed, 10 Jan 2007 16:04:33 +0000

Where are the people who care about the right to choose what is best for ourself? This law is unamerican .Who are these people who think we need to be told to wear helments while riding a bike,a seatbelt while driving,that we cant allow smoking in our own business? Where will it stop?We need to stand up for our right to choose whats best for ourself.

By: Two years of Homeland Stupidity - Homeland Stupidity

Two years of Homeland Stupidity - Homeland Stupidity — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 21:30:41 +0000

[...] For instance, smoking bans of various types have passed in numerous cities and states, undermining further Americans’ property rights. In Indianapolis, the smoking ban is causing businesses to shut their doors. Washington State passed a particularly egregious ban on smoking on private property, and it’s draining Seattle’s creative spirit. And, we also learned, the “science” used to justify smoking bans is pure bunk, some of it even being spread by the Surgeon General. [...]

By: sharon

sharon — Sat, 25 Nov 2006 02:48:37 +0000

To reverse the damage of I-901

View Current Signatures – Sign the Petition

——————————————————————————–

To: The Washington State Legislature
We the Good people of Washington State do hereby exercise our right under the first amendment and petition for a redress of grievance. We petition to strike the infringement upon our rights by I-901.
You the Duly elected representatives of the people have the authority, the power to rectify a terrible wrong, that would be the changes to the RCW from the demands of I-901. We hold that I-901 was passed under false pretense, that the greater truth was withheld from all, that we were never allowed to present the whole truth before the voters. Further that we represent no grave or deadly danger to anyone or anything and we can prove that fact. Greater yet that we have an inalienable right to choose for ourselves, a right protected by the demands and limits within the Constitution.
We petition now our Representatives in Government to have those sections of the RCW so affected by I-901 that in effect banished us from public, from being served by any business, and infringed upon our inalienable right to choose; that they be forever stricken and that our inalienable right to choose be restored, for our businesses, for the people as individuals.

Sincerely,

The Undersigned

View Current Signatures

——————————————————————————–

The To reverse the damage of I-901 Petition to The Washington State Legislature was created by and written by Jon E. Forseth (j6forseth@yahoo.com). This petition is hosted here at http://www.PetitionOnline.com as a public service. There is no endorsement of this petition, express or implied, by Artifice, Inc. or our sponsors. For technical support please use our simple Petition Help form.

Send this to a friend

By: Greg

Greg — Mon, 20 Nov 2006 21:57:47 +0000

If the arguments about the economic benefits were true, you wouldn’t have to mandate a ban. Bar owners would rush to go no-smoking. The very fact that you have to pass a law to make it happen proves the lie.

By: Jay Holzman

Jay Holzman — Mon, 20 Nov 2006 20:50:23 +0000

The protests over the ban are predictable, and at an anecdotal level, some bars probably are losing money. But on the whole, the statistics have and will prove otherwise.(The State Dept. of Revenue only has only released the data from early December through late Feburary ).
Everywhere else bans have been implemented, business has not been affected either way or rises , and when it has gone down, it has decreased minimally. Nationally, one year after implementation, the bans’ popularity rises to 77-82%, and bar compliance is between 92-98%.
Using the stock market as an analogy, when economic policy is set and overall stocks rise in a particular industry, there still will be exceptions that don’t share in the benefits. Just because a small minority of stocks can fall (which is normal in any cycle), doesn’t mean that the economic policy set is a bad one. When society progresses, the markets change(CD’s replacing records). Since the Surgeon General’s report earlier in the year, the arguments in favor of indoor smoking bans to protect public health represent more social progress as society changes for the better.

By: Matt canada

Matt canada — Mon, 16 Oct 2006 06:01:47 +0000

You are mistaken, smoking bans are about toxic pollution by individuals, your smoke kills, we ban it from public places.
I have just returned from Ireland and UK, Ireland already has a smoking ban and business has done so well in the pubs that over in the UK many pubs are adopting no smoking for “better” business prior to laws coming in.
In Victoria, canada we also have gone no smoking in public places, and its great. want to pollute and kill yourself go outside.
Next up medical insurance doubles for smokers…