Ban on smoking in Va. restaurants passes key test
BOB BROWN
Members of the Virginia House of Delegates vote on an amendment to the smoking bill, which later passed 61-38.
The House of Delegates voted 61-38 today to tentatively approve an amended version of a bill calling for statewide restrictions on smoking in restaurants.
The ban, a compromise between Gov. Timothy M. Kaine, a Democrat, and Speaker of the House William J. Howell, R-Stafford, would make exceptions for private clubs and restaurants with a designated smoking room that is physically separated and independently ventilated from non-smoking dining areas. It also would exclude any permanent outdoor patio area of a restaurant or any portion of a restaurant used just for private functions.
The vote in the Republican-controlled House marks a crack in the last barrier to a further clampdown on smoking in public. In past years, the Senate has passed restrictions on smoking, but the bills have not made it to the full House for a vote.
The House today supported several changes to the bill proposed by Del. Terry G. Kilgore, R-Gate City. Among them was to postpone the implementation to Jan. 1, 2010, and to allow smoking in any restaurant when minors are not allowed in.
The House bill will come up again tomorrow for a final vote. A Senate version of the smoking ban compromise is scheduled to come up on the House floor this evening.
—Olympia Meola
Reader Reactions
“Oh I don’t know. I thought the Asbestos analogy was a pretty good one.“
Why? Is asbestos throwing allowed by the establishment’s owner? If so, then don’t eat there.
“As for all other health codes restaurants are bound to- do you think those are an infringement on your liberties, also?“
Those are issues customers have no control over and aren’t obvious to the casual observer.
The fact that a restaurant does or does not allow smoking is pretty easy to ascertain from the sign outside, or, if there’s no sign, as soon as you walk in the door, right?
“...my aunt died of lung cancer she got through second-hand smoke.“
Her death certificate said it was second hand smoke that caused the cancer? Or you’re just assuming that was it.
Your next sentence negates your anecdotal evidence anyway:
“Furthermore, there are many cases each year, and I mean tens of thousands, where people get lung cancer and have never smoked a cigarette in their life nor ever lived with anyone who smoked at all. “
Then you say:
“common sense dictates that these people die from second-hand smoke..“
Common sense is the furthest thing from your mind with that statement. You probably agree with the nitwits out in California who want to ban all outdoor smoking while living in the smoggiest city in America. Couldn’t be the exhaust fumes, factory smoke, pollen, ozone or any of countless other sources of carcinogens that caused their breathing issues, could it???
yeti37, actually you are just really bad at losing arguments it seems. The comparison said nothing of not telling you the asbestos was in your food. It’s not a matter of asymmetrical information and to suggest so is dishonest. Where I come from, we call that “grasping at straws”. Next.
No, the asbestos analogy was still pretty bad. The difference between health code violations is the expectations of clean food. Asymmetrical information. NOT knowing what is going into my food is a violation of rights and trusts, and violates public safety (and don’t group smoking with public safety, they are two different things). I should know what is in my food and how it is prepared. Knowing what is in the air is symmetrical information because everyone is equally aware of it. I don’t eat hot dogs or eat in smoking resturants for the same reason—I know what is in both.
“My original comment on this page was that patrons have a choice to get up and leave. The employees do not.“
And you don’t see the fallacy in your second sentence? Who held the gun to your head and made you work there?
Of course, in the coming totalitarian state, someone WILL hold a gun to your head and tell you where you’ll work, and who you’ll give your earnings to.
Go out, get a loan, open your own restaurant that doesn’t allow smoking. Work your butt off to make the mortgage payments, taxes, and all other overhead before you take home the first dime for yourself.
When they come to tell you that you can’t serve this dish because of the fat content, or that one because of the salt, then maybe you’ll understand “property rights”.
Civil rights aren’t the issue here. Neither is smokers vs non-smokers.
yeti37, you don’t have to get so defensive and vitriolic about the (quite good) comparison between asbestos and second-hand smoke.
If it would help you comprehend the comparison, understand that putting asbestos in someone’s food is not terribly different, in biological terms, than putting smoke into someone’s air.
John Locke might have supported putting cancer in our air, but that doesn’t mean that the General Assembly has to. Add John Locke to the list of people who could not have possibly known that cigarette-smoking and second-hand smoke are the first and third leading causes of preventable death in this country today.
Heck, in John Locke’s day, cocaine was not illegal. Again, society evolves, even if people like yeti37 refuse to.
Oh I don’t know. I thought the Asbestos analogy was a pretty good one. And we’re not all as stupid as you’d like to believe we are.
I think what people are trying to say here (albeit so VERY badly) is that personal smoking is a civil liberty issue. If it’s personal, I agree. I fully support your right to kill yourself. You don’t, however, get to take me with you.
As for all other health codes restaurants are bound to- do you think those are an infringement on your liberties, also?
Richmond-USA I would love to see scientific proof, that second-hand smoke is more deadly than actually smoking a cig. Also its a matter of ones freedom that you are taking away. “It’s that we would like to eat in peace without you trying to give us lung cancer from secondhand smoke.“ Well personally I was in biology class today, and was told that diffrent genetic codes determines if one gets certain diseases. Wanna guess which one was on that list? You guess right lung cancer….. I think somebody deserves a cookie now dont you? On another note, 47.3% of all statistics are made up and false, so who is to know if second hand smoke really kills people. Maybe its all the bad exhaust coming from factories and cars that causes lung caner. Why dont you liberals stick with that and leave peoples freedoms alone. We live in a land of freedom, and it is people like you that are going to bring down America. Stop running this socialistic crap about the greater good of the people. Is this country not supposed to be built on the very freedoms men died for. Of course not, it is much easier to sit and a chair and be deceitful to the world. I can only honestly sit here and wonder how much praise you idiots will receive. Me personally being sixteen and never having smoked is great. I can also tell you I never will either, yet I defend those who do! You know why? Cause it is their right to smoke. If second hand smoke kills me for another’s freedom praise GOD. Thats the country men died out on the battle field for. I wrote this paper in 9th grade called Power To The Puff. I hope everyone enjoys it, and bands together to protest this law. All Americans that support freedom listen to the words of Ben Franklin “We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately”
GOD BLESS AMERICA!
Power To The Puff
3rd Draft
Smoking kills approximately 420,000 people each year in the USA alone (Glantz). It’s really quite a sad thing to know. It is, however, these people’s right to smoke and do as they please. Don’t you hate it when people come up to you and try to tell you what to do? It really angers me when people do that to me. I like what Wendy Liebman had to say about this issue: “People always come up to me and say that my smoking is bothering them…well, it’s killing me (Liebman)!” Wendy knows exactly what I’m talking about. That it is her right to smoke and others should respect that and leave her alone.
Second hand smoke is responsible for killing 3,000 people per year caused by lung cancer (Glantz). This is disappointing; however, I don’t think it is right to ban smoking in public places. I know people will say to me “You’re crazy, what is your problem, man, it smells!” I would tell these people to calm down. Most places have designated smoking areas even in restaurants. All places should have these instead of just banning smoking. The only place that it should be unacceptable is closed rooms like airplanes. I know most smokers would agree with this approach, even if smokers don’t agree.
People will wonder why others don’t give it up and stop smoking? The truth is, however, that some people have tried and just can’t or will not quit. The answer is simple: it is relaxing to them and they enjoy it. I like this quote from Johnny Carson, the famous American TV host: “I know a man who gave up smoking, drinking, sex, and rich food. He was healthy right up to the day he killed himself (Carson).” I found this quote to be amusing. The way I view it is that when you give things up you truly enjoy in life, you will be un-happy and miserable. That just seems like death to me.
Despite the dangers of smoking, doctors have preached and people will continue to do as they please. Humanity will always be this way. We are free to choose. That’s what makes America the best country in the world. It is because of the word “freedom.” Smoker Jose Rich said, “I don’t think there is anybody that is unaware of what it’s doing to them (Rich).” I would have to say I couldn’t agree more about what Mr. Rich said. Everyone knows the effects of smoking, but it is there right to make their own decisions.
We need to look at smoking from another perspective. In America people should be free to make there own calls on matters of personal health. If we let them take away the freedom to smoke what other freedoms will be taken away from us next? We can make a difference to pursue the rights of all Americans by resisting and protesting laws to stop or unfairly limit smoking.
John S.
Beware of government coming to you and changing rules telling you it is in your own best interest. John Locke wrote that we are entitled to “life, liberty, and property” and if a privately owned establishment wants to allow its patrons to smoke it should be a private decision—not the government’s. If you don’t like an establishment’s policy, then don’t dine there. If they lose business, then it is their choice to change their policy to non-smoking. But for the government to mandate that is scary and for people to support it because “their business will improve” know nothing about a free market economy. Regarding the person who used the asbestos analogy: stupid analogy. What you described was assault and is punishable by law. What would be the difference between your comparison and me spitting in your food—at least saliva is not cancer causing—but you would still not eat the food and would file charges. Stick with what you understand, which is very little.
FYI—I don’t smoke and don’t go to places that allow smoking, but I support places to make a free market decision about what kind of atmosphere they want to have.
Post a Comment(Requires free registration)
- Please avoid offensive, vulgar, or hateful language.
- Respect others.
- Use the "Flag Comment" link when necessary.
- See the Terms and Conditions for details.
Advertisement