This Page

has been moved to new address

I like the Minnesota smoking ban

Sorry for inconvenience...

Redirection provided by Blogger to WordPress Migration Service
Wide White: I like the Minnesota smoking ban

Friday, November 09, 2007

I like the Minnesota smoking ban

But I still think it's wrong.

As of October 1st, smoking is illegal in restaurants and other establishments in the state of Minnesota. While I love not having to breathe smoke, it still violates the constitution.

Apparently, it's also having an impact on business owners.
Bar owner says Minnesota smoking ban put him out of business

DETROIT LAKES, Minn. - A Detroit Lakes area bar owner is blaming Minnesota's new smoking ban for putting him out of business.

Kent Tweten said he had owned T.F. Boonies south of Detroit Lakes for only a few months and was working to build a customer base when the statewide smoking ban took effect Oct. 1.

Tweten said his "happy hours" were growing when the ban hit, but after that his after-work business shrunk to nothing.

Tweten, a former Moorhead bar owner, said most established bars may be able to hang on, but he predicts some will have no choice but to close because of the smoking ban.

On Monday, the state Health Department issued a statement saying that the smoking ban, known officially as the Freedom to Breathe law, was being implemented as anticipated.

It said the department had notified 31 businesses that they need to do more to comply with the law, but the department said it had not taken any formal enforcement action.

"We're grateful to Minnesotans for embracing the law and for helping to protect one another from the hazards of secondhand smoke," said Commissioner of Health Dr. Sanne Magnan, in a prepared statement.

Magnan said the smoking ban would protect Minnesotans from the health risks of secondhand smoke.
I'm kind of surprised that there are that many people who have to have a cigarette with their drink that they're willing to have a beer alone in their living room with cigarette in hand rather than trek into the non-smoking world of the bar.

Still, the constitution is the constitution. Period.

posted by Joey at 11/09/2007 01:37:00 PM

10 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous declared,

I too live in an area with a smoking ban. It's wonderful for both customers and staff members to be able to breath clean air and not smell bad after leaving smoke free establishments. Business has not been hurt either. I don't even think many smokers want to go back to the bad old smokey air days!

11/09/2007 3:17 PM  
Blogger Joey declared,

I agree with your sentiments, but that's still not the point. The point is that the constitution is being violated. Your right to do what you want with your private property is being taken away. That's the problem here.

11/09/2007 4:14 PM  
Blogger zcoffeegirl declared,

Hey Joey...from a mom who has a child with asthma...I'm all for the ban. My mom never smoked, but her dad did and her lungs are severely damaged. When she gets an xray, they always ask her how long she smoked. They have a hard time believing her when she says, "never". I'm not good with constitutional language, but it seems to me if the smoke is harming somebody elses lungs who has no choice about the matter...it's a good thing. Just my two cents.

11/10/2007 4:29 PM  
Blogger Joey declared,

True, secondhand smoke is a problem. But, we also have the freedom not to go to a restaurant that allows smoking. I don't buy the argument that because it's a place that is open to the public, everyone consuming secondhand smoke is a victim.

What's next, people won't be allowed to smoke in their own homes? My grandma smoked in her own home. I hated it when I was a kid and would go visit and my eyes would tear up. She also lost her life to lung cancer due to smoking. But that doesn't give the government the right to interfere with our private lives.

Again, I agree with all of the sentiment surrounding the ban. What I don't agree with is government intrusion.

Thanks for the two cents! I really do appreciate it.

11/10/2007 5:56 PM  
Blogger kristi noser declared,

I agree with you Joey. So wrong. I don't like second-hand smoke, and don't like to eat in restaurants that are smoky, but government's control over the rules people have in their places of business is just going too far.
I fear it won't be long until we will have to "chip" our children at birth, but that's just me.

11/12/2007 5:31 AM  
Blogger zcoffeegirl declared,

You guys are probably right...when we get the "chip", you have the freedom to look at me and say, "Told you so". I was just thinking inside the box. This is why I won't ever run for office...just voting for Kristi for President. :)

11/12/2007 7:39 PM  
Blogger kristi noser declared,

When I am president, the smoking ban is the first thing to go.

11/13/2007 5:45 PM  
Blogger Monday Came declared,

Right or wrong, I love the smoking ban!!!! Aunt Kari

11/18/2007 11:19 AM  
Blogger Kara Jo declared,

I don't even think people should be allowed to smoke in their own homes if children are involved at all. I grew up in a home filled with smoke and I hate it that I had no choice in the matter. :(

11/18/2007 9:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous declared,

"Secondhand smoke" is the red herring, here folks. The bottom line is, private property rights are being destroyed.

Like it or not, cigarettes are a LEGAL substance. If a private property owner wants to allow consenting adults to consume a legal product in their establishments, they should be afforded that right.

You don't have the RIGHT to eat out wherever you want. You don't have the RIGHT to demand certain conditions when you enter a private establishment.

If you're willing to give up something as precious as private property rights for your own comfort, you're a sad, sad individual, and you shouldn't be voting in this republic.

Besides, the data on secondhand smoke is absolutely exaggerated and fabricated. What's the saying? If you repeat a lie often enough...

12/05/2007 8:38 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home