Entries Tagged 'Smoking Ban' ↓

Would you support an outdoor public smoking ban if there was no fine?

The Sioux Falls city council is set to vote on a ban next week. There was talk of several different amendments being proposed (like exceptions from golf courses and the Events Center).

I think several city councilors realized that the amendments would quickly sour the ban, and for the most part I think they do agree on a up or down vote AS is. In other words, it would apply to public parks, golf courses and the Events Center.

But there seems to be a split on whether or not it will get the 5 votes to pass. One of the arguments against the ban is that tobacco is a legal product (to those over 18). One of the ideas that is being floated in order to get a majority of the council on board with the ban is to eliminate the fine. In other words, if you are caught smoking in the banned areas, you would simply be asked to put it out and get a warning (unless you are underage).

Would you support it if there was no fine?

I think a lot of councilors are struggling with this ban, not because of the language and fine alone but how they were handed this ordinance by the administration. It is NOT the job of the executive branch and his minions to write ordinances, that is the responsibility of the council, the legislative branch.

I think if it does pass, it will be without a fine, otherwise, I think it will go down in flames.

Should smoking be banned at JazzFest?

The Argue Endorser’s ED board thinks that the No Smoking policy in city parks should also apply to JF.

JazzFest or No JazzFest, it is important to remember the No Smoking policy in parks was decided by a volunteer board and the city’s health department, NOT by the city council (who are supposed create and regulate policy in this city) secondly, there is NO fines or violations issued if you are caught smoking in a city park, an officer simply asks you to put it out. What’s the point?

Here’s how I look at it. Tobacco is a legal product to adults, city parks are PUBLIC property, and lastly IT’S OUTDOORS! While I think it is perfectly acceptable for a bar or restaurant owner to prohibit smoking on their patios (private property) and they should, I think it is a bit of a stretch to tell taxpayers who own our city parks, to put out their cigarettes, like I said, legal product.

There is an easy solution – courtesy. Ask those around you if they mind if you light up, whether you are in a city park or an outdoor restaurant patio. If they say ‘YES’ they do mind. Then don’t light up or walk to a place where you are not in proximity of others.

I think banning a legal product OUTDOORS on PUBLIC PROPERTY is a slippery slope. We already have the city telling us how to trim THERE trees, mow our lawns and scooping snow, they should concentrate on something else, like a little transparency from the mayor’s office.

Ban smoking in city parks? Laughable.

While I supported banning smoking in drinking and eating establishments (to protect workers in confined areas). I find it quite silly that the city of Sioux Falls is considering banning smoking in our public parks;

Another option would be to ban smoking in parks, which is what Yankton County did back in 2006. Their parks are now completely smoke free.

Yankton County Parks are smoke free? LOL!

1) Impossible to enforce.

2) Tobacco is a legal substance.

3) It is outdoors, there is probably more pollution in the air from traffic and JM’s before people smoking in parks.

4) Public parks are taxpayer funded. Shouldn’t taxpayers decide whether this is a good idea or not?

Obviously if this ban goes in affect, people will ignore it. You will probably see more butts in the parking lots of parks and more butts in the parks themselves. Leave the ‘smoker’s outlet’ ashtrays. I kind of put this in the same category of providing junkies with clean needles. Why complicate it. I would apply the KISS theory;

‘We prefer you do not smoke in our public parks. But if you choose to do so, please dispose your butts properly.’

Give it up already!

State senator Tom Nelson doesn’t give a rip what the voters want. (Image: KELO-TV screenshot)

Here we go again, another rich state senator wanting to mess with the will of the people. Hey Tom, the people voted and told you NO SMOKING IN BARS AND RESTAURANTS. Don’t like, tough titty. I think this guy said it best;

“They keep saying that people aren’t coming because of the non-smoking, but that’s not true. It’s the economy.  Nobody has got any money to spend,” Deadwood visitor Richard Feiok said.


Casino owners still bitchin’ about the smoking ban

And now they have a whiney ass legislator on their side;

“People aren’t coming and that’s just a fact of life. We’ve noticed it almost immediately in the middle of November when the smoking ban started,” Republican Senator Tom Nelson of Lead said.

Good. Gambling is a poor way to fund government anyway, and maybe we will be killing two birds with one stone.

Video lottery revenues in the state have fallen off nearly 20 percent since the ban passed. And, just in November officials say the casinos in Deadwood saw a $10 million drop in revenues, attributing the fall completely to the smoking ban.

Why not raise the state’s take? I have often said that if a majority of South Dakotans think gambling is okay, we should increase the state’s take to 70-80%. It has often amazed me that all of these legislators have come up with 9 million different ways to nickel and dime citizens in user fees but not one single one of them has suggested taking more from gambling.

“It’s not the economy. It’s not the weather. It’s not the holidays. We’re comparing Novembers to Novembers to Novembers,” Nelson said.

Yeah, Tom, because the economy has been just peachy. Video lottery revenue has been down all year, even before the ban. It is the economy, stupid.

“We don’t need a complete lift of the smoking ban. We just need some accommodations so customers have a place to go where they can continue to play their machines or be at the card table,” Nelson said.

Oh, so because they have card tables, they deserve to have smoking? But if you are some dive bar with VL machines you have to keep the ban? Silly. The ban should remain, for ALL establishments. The citizens voted in an overwhelming majority that they wanted this to happen. We have a clear mandate. Besides, this is not about patrons, it’s about workers. How many times do we have to go over this?

Will the legislature try to amend this? Probably. Just like abortion, there are a few knuckle heads in the legislature who think they know better then the majority of South Dakota voters. But remember this, these are the same guys who don’t pay property taxes, molest foster kids, launder money and run stop signs resulting in killing someone.

I DARE the legislature to challenge the will of the people.

What smoking ban?

The Argus Endorser just put out a story today about the virtual ‘non-compliance’ of the smoking ban. Which is no surprise. This state makes a habit of passing laws that they don’t bother enforcing or for that matter charging a proper fine for a violation.

What was not brought up in the article was that fact that Tim Kant’s establishments (STOGEEZ and EASTWALD Smoke Shop) and a Rapid City Cigar Bar are still allowed smoking as long as they follow three requirements;

1) Must have a humidor on site

2) Only can allow cigar smoke

3) 10% of the sales must be from cigars

Seems fair, right? Well the first one will be easy, but the last two will be virtually impossible to enforce. Why? Because the business is supposed to ‘self-audit’ themselves. LMAO!

You can’t tell me on a summer night when Stogeez patio is packed that for every $90 in beer he sells he is sell $10 in cigars. Yeah right.

Now the STATE can do a random audit of his place to make sure his books are in order but the chances of that happening are next to nil unless they see some blatant discrepencies in his returns. Seems NO RULES Kant got away with another one.

Seems Dems care more about business freedoms then Repugs do

Doubt it. It probably has more to do with working class smokers being Dems. Not sure.

See all the polling questions and when they will be released.

How long have we been talking about a smoking ban? I think this toon I did in 2007 sez it all

What pisses me off is that it has taken over 3 years to enact the inevitable because a few bone-headed bar and VL casino owners cried and cried.

These people are smoking more then cigarettes

I always get a kick out of anti-smoking ban people. They have the ‘sky is falling’ mentality;

“I have letters from businesses in Kansas that I’ve been compiling. They are down 30 to 80 percent. They have already been laying off people. They’re cutting hours,” Kansas bar owner Sheila Martin said.

First off, I actually think restaurant business will go up. Bar business will drop a bit and then return. People will get over it. I’m actually considering a ‘First day of the smoking ban’ party in one of the smokiest bars I know.

Holy Crap! You mean people are tired of breathing in smoke when they go out to eat and drink

Like this is some big surprise;