Arkansas Blog

Unless the city board can slip it in during a special session, don't count on it.

There'll be a lot of pissed off people in the following week that had no idea what was going on and are going to be very verbal.

I doubt your gonna see this get any stronger for a while. People have actually started catching on to what's gotten slipped by them...

If the Arkansas Legislature wants this to be a non-smoking state, why don't those pansies just outlaw cigarettes? Outlaw the sale and possession of cigarettes. We would be swarmed with little yupsters from all over the country, yearning to breathe our clean air. Then, guys like me could move to ... Oklahoma..where there are no laws.

The clean air act is one of the best pieces of legislation to become law in years.

Smokers are selfish, weak-willed junkies who can't discipline themselves to kick a habit that is killing them and endangers everyone around them (even Bush's surgeon general says second hand smoke kills).

Smokers are like a pus-filled boil on the health care system, who raise the costs for everyone else with their disgusting habit. Anyone who smokes should pay a 50 percent (at least) surcharge on health insurance premiums, including Medicare.

Hucklbee, of course, is being a bit disingenuous. His smoke free learning curve has been onerous and opportunistic. It has been documented by various sources revealed in litigation that the tobacco industry drew the line in the sand at the hospitality industry's opposition to clean air years ago. He had the chance to take the Board of Health's recommendations for smoke free public restaurants long before and never supported smoke free county or city properties, fire safe cigarettes, or substantially increased tobacco taxes. I believe that there cannot be too much credit given Joe Thompson in educating the governor. Hucklbee had ignored Joe Bates and David Bourne and perhaps only coincidentally started whistling a smoke free tune when Thompson came on board. But then coincidences are hard to believe.
The lack of a buffer and the presence of exemptions fail to recognize the dangers of tobacco smoke or appreciate litigious opportunities for the tobacco cartel. One may cite the Americans for Nonsmoker's Rights absence in drafting this law because this will have to be worked out. Actually, my understanding is that this was an issue that the legislature purposefully avoided to get clean indoor air passed during a special session.

None the less, it is a real issue that local governments and businesses will have to deal with.

Now Joe Camel here is al pissed off because he and the rest of the pro tobacco voices know that every cigarette that doesn't get smoked is one less that a rogue industry profits from. It is that profit and not the businessperson's rights that make a damn to his ilk. Allowing indoor smoking enables nicotine addiction at an incredibly high cost to all smoking businesses. The only businesses that have shown diminished revenue over time are gambling businesses. But Joe would rather spew the party line no matter who it hurts financially or physically.

Whoa, nicotine fiend! Smokers are good people addicted to a substance that most were seduced into as kids. It is the smoke not the smoker.

I find it interesting that this group chose to meet at the Dixie Cafe. Did they eat as well? Hmm. If they did eat, it seems like that is just as bad.

Unless all those studies are wrong, all that deep fried foods cause just as many health issues as smoking does.

STOP WITH THE FAT FILLED FOOD BULL CRAP!

This ain't about telling people what to do. This is about protecting people from those who have no consideration for the health and welfare of others.

Go ahead and eat as healthy or as unhealthy as you like. The only way you will injure me is if your bloated self keels over and crushes me when you croak. I'll tale my chances with that. I would probably hear a death gurgle before you tumbled and get out of the way.

Your cigarettes would just kill me slowly. That I need protection from.

One more time: It's not the smoke that smokers inhale that is the problem; it's the smoke that smokers exhale and the uninhaled smoke that is allowed to drift into the air that is the problem. It's what we in the reality-based community refer to as secondhand smoke. No one is trying to make smoking illegal, but we who favor the public smoking ban do believe we should be able to breathe air in public venues that is not polluted with secondhand smoke.

As I predicted after the surgeon general confirmed that secondhand smoke is a serious health hazard, 21 percent of the people are incapable of understanding the difference between banning smoking in public venues and making smoking illegal. Any one care to venture a guess how many people smoke? Yes, class, you're right. The answer is 21 percent. Isn't that an incredible coincidence?

PUBLIC venues, Pavel. A park, perhaps. Even a city sidewalk. But private property is private property. If the act is legal, how can the State say it can't be done on private property, if the owner of that property has no objection to it? Please don't lower yourself to give me the "masturbation in a restaurant" argument. I'm not even sure that would be illegal if the owner allowed it. For the record, I'm a member of the 21% idiot club, but I haven't always been, and my opinion was the same then as it is now. My argument is that it would be more acceptable to make cigarettes illegal than what has been done. How long before the supporters of this ban determine that, if they want to come into my house, they can dictate to me what legal activities are allowed and disallowed there?

Dixie cafe has a pretty good chicken and dumplings that I enjoy!
The point you might make is that there is really no comparison between eating healthy and breathing healthy. This is an issue that the right wing 'blame the victim' health advocates like Huckabee and the pro tobacco lackeys have in common. Huck et al would like to blame health care costs on lifestyle decisions. Pro tobacco lackeys seek to discount industry responsibilities for lifestyle decisions determinate of public health policies.

Mr.Baber, please may I copy a selection from a previous post noting that public health officials are vested w protecting the public health. Today tobacco use kills more than the top five causes of preventable death combined, and secondhand smoke is # 3.

"We will learn to take clean indoor air as much for granted as we have clean water. The only differences being that, a hundred years ago, when infectious disease was the leading cause of death,( tobacco is today) no one was clamoring for the right to dysentery; no one was addicted to dirty water; and no multinational industry was marketing and profiting from it's sale and prevalence. "

Smokers are not the issue. Our society's tolerance for an industry that sells only products that cause disease and death is.

P,
Agreed. Then outlaw the production, sale and consumption of cigarettes. Don't dictate to private property owners what "legal" activities can be performed on their property. When tobacco is illegal, I'm sure the paranoia I will experience will force me to quit that, the same way I have quit "other things." (There's really no need to go into details about that....)

"How long before the supporters of this ban determine that, if they want to come into my house, they can dictate to me what legal activities are allowed and disallowed there?"

They already do dictate what "legal activities" can be done inside your home. It's legal to burn trash. It's legal to shoot firearms, etc and it's legal to play music..all of it can be regulated by the authorities.

Restricting-regulating certain actions on private property has been around for a long time.
However when you open your "home" by inviting the public in you've invited regulation. Got it ?

Just give it time RB you're gonna like the 21st Century.

Mr.Baber, please may I copy a selection from a previous post noting that public health officials are vested w protecting the public health. Today tobacco use kills more than the top five causes of preventable death combined, and secondhand smoke is # 3.

"We will learn to take clean indoor air as much for granted as we have clean water. The only differences being that, a hundred years ago, when infectious disease was the leading cause of death,( tobacco is today) no one was clamoring for the right to dysentery; no one was addicted to dirty water; and no multinational industry was marketing and profiting from it's sale and prevalence. "

Smokers are not the issue. Our society's tolerance for an industry that sells only products that cause disease and death is.

Sorry about the double post. We live in the woods and don't have a speedy connection.

Rick, this is not about you or prohibition of tobacco. Most prohibition has really diminishing returns. That is why creating smoke free environments are so effective in reducing tobacco use. One does not preclude tobacco use only where one uses it.

Increasingly diminished areas where secondhand smoke is allowed will reduce the prevalence of nicotine addiction.

That's CDC Best Practices. Now to throw a monkey wrench into the world, we have learned that the CDC is coming out w new best practices this fall. Anybody venture a guess?

I agree with Rick as usual, but he left out, give up the zillions of dollars of tax money gained from the sale of tobacco products in Arkansas. Before the legislature and Huck do that donkeys will be smoking Kent Ultra Lights in church choirs.

I am very happy to report my evening went as usual. Nice people, lots of smoke, laughter and good long term friendships on display. I had a very nice time.

But, knowing the rabid anti-smokers as I do, in their celebration today, they still feel the pain of not being able to stop all smoking at all times, in all places in Arkansas. In a few months there will be more monkeying with the rules and regs. Then smokers won't be allowed to smoke outside the door of the eat place...it will be 25 feet and then the next country and then overseas.

I love ya P, but you're a zealot. And zealots are hard to stop. The anti-fat food zealots are out there warming up. The anti-drinking zealots are out there warming up. Followed by those that will want to put to death all those that are not Christian and by that time registered Republicans.

So, I know what's ahead. But until the next battle I'll enjoy my smoky old bar full of long time friends and I'll worry about the do-gooders at a later date. Osama considers himself a do-gooder too ya know. Pretty scary stuff.

I feel a need to weigh in on the discussion. It won't change anything but here goes:
I have owned a successful restaurant for almost 16 years. I am in a small town and the competition is a "non profit" bar/ restaurant and three fast food joints. We have smoking and non-smoking sections. I paid thousands of dollars for a ventilation system.
I don't smoke, but a big majority of my employees do smoke, and a lot of my customers are smokers.
We went non-smoking six weeks ago, my business dropped 40%, and I am closing my doors at the end of the month.
I laid off half my staff and still can't make it. These old Hillbillies decided to punish me for doing the right thing, so I am done.
And statistics? Sure, the stats are going to show no effects, because statistics are based on tax revenues, by county.
In fact, the revenues might go up, considering that the local bar's average tab is going to be twice what the coat of a meal and drink at my restaurant would be.
Spirit and P, thanks for your support, but I give up.

Real Businessman:
Sorry to hear that. I guess, without the smoke, your patrons could npw taste he food.

Bad joke - But unless you name the restaurant, this just sounds like a made-up story.

Not too much zaealotry, Inch man, just picking my battles and this one fell in my lap. My real passion is composting!
As per taxes from tobacco, health care costs from tobacco related disease supported by medicaid burdens every household in AR an extra $530/ year.
Glad you had a good evening.

Anyone know if Waffle House went smoke free?

Deathbypacks,

I fall into your camp most of the time but on this you are not on the side of rights and freedoms.

It is obvious that your connection (hooked on cigs) is swaying your normal level headedness.

From your post, calling your opposition names "Rabid-antismokers" and "zealots", indicates your "fog" on this issue. Scan back and see if prosmokers, posts are more rabid or indicate "zealotry".

I am confident that over time you will see the inconsistancy of this position with your other oppinions.

Onward through the fog, we shall agree in the future but for now I have to just be aware that you will return from the dark-side.

Rick Baber, you indicate that you were not always a smoker, at what age did you start? I excuse those that started when teens or earlier because their brains were not yet formed completely and prone to idiotic decisions. That is why we regulate idiot youngsters' rights to drink, drive, vote, enter contracts, or buy cigs.

Rick, please tell me that when you said you were not always a smoker you were refering to your pre-teen years.

Businessman,

Six weeks ago we all knew this smoking ban was coming down. Why did you jump out at that time?

In the army if my platoon was going to attack San Juan Hill tomorrow, wouldn't it be stupid for me to go ahead and storm the hill today? Or if I notice the futility of my attack I may retreat till the whole platoon joins me?

Going just a little early does my cause no good and sets it back by getting the enemy on alert before the whole platoon rides up the hill.

The real question is, how were you successful for 16 years with this type of decision making?

My above analysis of your post leads me to conclude that you sir are full of bulls**t! I don't think your restaurant ever existed or if it did it was not succesful for 16 years. Please let me know where it is and what its name is so I can verify your post and then issue you an appology.

Waffle House went smoke free, except for the bacon on the grill. I do feel bad for the wait staff there, within months of FINALLY getting a decent wage and being able (maybe) to make a living...99% of their tips will be gone due to the coffee/smokers going elsewhere.

The smokers aren't going anywhere, they are just smoking outside the Waffle House, Anon. I saw a crowd of them outside the one on McCain today. They looked like they were all ranting to each other about the smoking ban.

Besides, where are they gonna go? Oklahoma? For eggs and bacon? I don't imagine any of the 21 only bars are going to start up a breakfast service any time soon.

Also, I have a confirmation on the smokelessness of the Cornerstone Grill and Pub. Went there last night and had a great burger. No ash trays on the tables downstairs and the barman made a guy who lit up put it out.

Citizen - we'll stop with "the fat filled bullcrap" when you people stop using the health care cost argument against smoking because that throws the door open, with full justification, to the argument that if the cost of healthcare is a good argument against smoking then it works for the known and very extensive health problems caused by eating fatening food because your too week willed to eat healthy - why should I pay higher premiums for my healthcare because your fat ass needs a chicken fried steak instead of an occasional piece of fruit. the ONLY argument for this ordinance is the second hand smoking argument. BUT SHUT THE F$%^& up with the health care Bullshit - you want to start laws against everything that causes rising health care costs that people could do without - fine - lets put that bitch betty crocker out of business - and how about KFC - they've killed more people with their deep fried poison than Hitler.

You know I don't get this added cost thingy to the state. All of my family on both sides for as long back as I can remember never got free medical services or a free casket from the undertaker.

No matter how they died, their bills were paid by the family. No free rides, no coupon for chemo, no nothing. So please exclude my family when you talk about burdening the state. And since I'm not dead yet, please give me the address where I can sign up for some of that free Arkansas medical care. I'd love some right about now, I could save the money I'm currently shelling out to Campus No De Fumar Hospital for a non-smoking related illness, and use it for Christmas presents.

Oh Come On: Your argument holds absolutely no water and fortunately, our state legislators were smart enough to know that. You can eat yourself to death with unhealthy food and it doesn't have a negative effect on me. Quit whining and take your nasty smoking habit outside.

The reason that the increased cost of health care cost is a relevant issue is that the tobacco industry disproportionately targets those most likely to receive subsidized health care, the poor and uneducated. The causes of obesity are varied and diverse but the relationship between a rogue industry's profit and lives, and dollars, lost to tobacco is reciprocal.

Best practices for tobacco prevention recognize that prohibition is ineffective. But, significantly increased tobacco taxes, creating smoke free environments, and marketing reform reducing youth access are. Do note that cessation is stop gap treatment not prevention.

Off to the salt mine!

p and anonymous

drinking is a far more of a burdon on the medical system and causes more deaths from drunk drivers and liver disease than second hand smoke. you are much more likely to be killed by a drunk coming home from a party than second hand smoke unless you live in the smokers house - a couple of hours in a bar wont kill you or anyone else.

over eating and poor health caused by it effects your health care costs so it effects you - if that's too complicated an issue for you to understand - it may not be possible to explain it to you - but others reading this forum will understand.my argument does hold water,

and as far as your contention that the Arkansas Legislature is "smart enough to know that," are your kidding - because that's pretty funny.
Wave some pac money at those idiots and they'll vote to make it illegal for you to breath the air without paying taxes on it first. They wont make you keep your car in good condition which would make everyones air cleaner - and why - because it was politically unpopular to make people pass inspections and we became one of the only states in the union to do away with vehicle inspections in the face of a global warming crisis. oh but you can now go to restaraunts you never went to before and will go to once to make a point now that people can't smoke there. and where will these businesses be when their customers go to places that can allow smoking? broke - great job. going after skokers is easy - making real relelvant change like helping save the environment is hard. so you took the easy way. BE PROUD

Good morning, RickBaber. I apologize for taking so long to get back to your challenge. To me, your argument about the rights of private businesses is part of the even greater argument about the role of government and the limits of governmental power. I am no scholar of Constitutional law (or any other subject, for that matter), but the debate about what our government should or should not do is being conducted daily at every level of government. It is the tension that drives our democracy.

Before the Clean Air Act was passed, a poll of Arkansas voters indicated overwhelming agreement that state and local governments have an obligation to protect public health. If this is not a valid role of government, we should do away with the health department and tell UAMS to shut down its school of public health.

Also, if this particular argument about the rights of privately run businesses had any chance of prevailing in court, I believe the tobacco industry would have funded a legal challenge by now. Although I am not a lawyer or legal scholar, it seems to me that when private businesses operate as public establishments, the laws governing what happens in those places of businesses are and should be weighted toward the protection of the public. Perhaps someone more familiar with this issue would care to comment on this.

Anyway, during this whole debate about the public smoking ban, I have tried to remain focused one thing --- the elimination of secondhand smoke from public venues, indoor and outdoor --- and I still subscribe to the theory that businesses open to the public are public venues. I understand that others do not agree.

Pavel,
Thanks. I understand your argument also. And, I hope nobody thinks mine includes the contention that smoking is not stupid and dangerous. My only concern is granting Big Brother another inch. I don't want them coming into my house and telling me what I can do here (long as it's legal, of course).

Update: went to Waffle House this morning and was third in line for a table, as usual. I saw a few people outside smoking and saw one guy step in with cigs in hand but then leave when he figured out that they weren't allowing smoking.

Yippeee, Waffle House is saved!!!!!!!!

Mr. or Ms. Come On, there is really not much to say but that you are just wrong. All of Arkansas highway deaths just about equal the deaths from secondhand smoke each year. Tobacco kills more people than murder, suicide, illegal drugs, automobile accidents, and AIDS combined.

I'll agree that eliminating inspections was short sighted. So was taking the helmets off of bikers. Huckabee may be the only one here who advocated that and clean indoor air. You may note that I am no fan of his. But the point of fact is that the particulates from one cigarette in an average sized room violate minimum EPA standards for outside air. Three cigarettes will add more particulate than running a diesel engine for 30 minutes.
http://repace.com/factsheet.html

The environmental damage from cigarette litter itself is enormous leaching every filtered toxin into the soil and aquifer; acetate filters taking years to break down.

And if you think that the smoke free efforts have any PAC money you shouldn't be drinking this early in the day. However, the tobacco industry spends $16,000/hour marketing in Arkansas alone.

If you think it is easy challenging the tobacco cartel perhaps you should talk to Patty Young who fought with her fellow flight attendants for a safe smoke free workplace, or Sharon Eubanks the Department of Justice career attorney who resigned after the Bush administration sabotaged efforts at suing the industry under RICO statutes. But it's too late to speak to Heather Crowe, the clean indoor advocate and career waitress who died just weeks ago hoping that she would be the last worker to die from exposure to secondhand smoke.

Get real clear about this. No one is going after smokers. This is about a safe workplace and safe public places. Before you discount the efforts of sincere advocates you should get your facts and rationale straight.

what a crock - this has never been about making the work place a safer place to be - that is a load of bull - Every day I breath in noxious fumes from cars the state wont inspect but rarely do I breath in second hand smoke - oh come on is right about that at least - but now i can go to Waffle house - like I ever would anyway - are you people serious when you say things like Waffle house is saved - oh please.

yeah - by all means - clean up my air by getting smoking wrecks off the road - don't waste my time and public money with this nonsense

Did you girls hear the earth wasn't flat?
http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/smokingconsequences/

P

yes Bitch it's not square either you idiot

http://www.alphanutrition.com/environment/carschemicals.htm

So help me clarify. Is this Oh come on, Another opinion, or Agree that has so little self confidence in their opinion that they post their own schizoid cheerleading section? A quick google of Dr. Gislason reveals that he probably doesn't have any trouble at all w the Surgeon Generals findings. But since you have gone to the trouble of citing your sources, here is another, bitch. http://www.no-smoke.org/getthefacts.php

Stop it, that tickles.

P -ok here's another one for you

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/medical_notes/336738.stm
we can do this all night if you want.

not sure what your rant is supposed to mean in previous post - I don't agree with you and that others seem not to as well has obvioiusly gotten under your skin - but please rant on.

"The Waffle Hoiuse is Saved". I think I'm gonna get Tshirts made!

Son, all this shit is in tobacco smoke too and inside enclosed areas where smoking is allowed. You're not saying anything new. And no, this is not even close to under my skin. Kinda boring actually cause you don't seem to get it that secondhand smoke is deadly. Period. Nobody is arguing that auto exhaust is good for you or the planet. Do you smoke? Is that it? Hell, I don't really care but education is the key and unless your parents married a sibling you too may have a clue someday.

ok little Bitch here's a few facts for you

The Arkansas Legislature turned its back on public health when they did away with vehicle inspections. Every day people are in traffic surrounded by cars emitting higher than necessary toxic fumes that they wouldn't breath in the levels they do if a simple emissions test needed to be passed. this law you are so proud of does nothing to fix that. if your inbreeding prevents you from understanding that then so be it. These fumes are breathed in day after day after day and no amount of removing smokers from a few restaraunts changes that. I went to the River Market Saturday - yesterday - they are still smoking away in Pokey D's, Flying Saucer, and they were smoking away on the patios of several other places, but you have people convinced that you've acually stamped out smoking. You havent. You are proud of an ineffectual law that wont save anyone and you seem to turn a blind and show a remarkable lack of knowledge when it comes to an issue that all Arkansans are faced with, poor vehicle emissions - I'm not a smoker, and I fully accept the scientific evidence that it's dangerous - my point is - and i know your limitations have prevented you from understanding this - but I'll try again - you breath in far more toxins due to out unwillingness to insist on vehicle inspections than you do from the miniscule amount of second hand smoke you encounter in your average day.

Smoking at Willy D's too - they even have a sign warning that you WILL be subjecteed to second hand smoke if you enter - they were full

I hate to interrupt a good boost in the blood pressure, young'un, but you're just incorrect about the effect this law can have. Go back and check out that Repace site again. And while you are at it you might note that the first people who started regulating tailpipe emissions and leaded gas (before the feds), the California Air Resources Board classified not 6 months ago secondhand smoke as a Toxic Air Contaminant and as such subject to regulation outside citing studies showing a 68% increased risk of breast cancer in primarily pre menopausal women. Research done in Helena, Montana and Pueblo, Colorado demonstrated a 20 to 40% drop in heart attacks with the implementation of smoke free ordinances. Should Arkansas see a quarter of that kind of result over 1,000 heart attacks will be prevented.
Auto emissions are simply another issue. Worth your time or at least frenzy for now it seems but Act 8 will challenge an industry less regulated than the auto industry , will protect nonsmokers, help smokers quit, become the example to children that tobacco smoke is always dangerous, and will save lives.
Not so hard to grok

By your own admission, many of the same toxins in cigarettes are also in auto fumes - another issue? No once again you are wrong and are showing your ignorance and unwillingness to deal with an issue that faces all Arkansans. your previous rant shows you are beyond reason - but hopefully thinking people - not just angry idiots like you - will read and understand that we could improve - and I mean actually improve - public health and safety by improving everyones air quality - your own numbers show that non smokers out number smokers - but how may of them drive cars.

"you breath in far more toxins due to out unwillingness to insist on vehicle inspections than you do from the miniscule amount of second hand smoke you encounter in your average day."

Please cite your sources.Thank you.

Listen Quasimodo, I just spent the last couple of weeks monitoring air for a before and after Act 8 study and without exception, even where there was no tobacco smoke at all, the air quality inside was worse than outside. Go back to Repace. He does this for a living. Americans spend more time inside than out. Unless you can afford, like the casinos, to blow straight oxygen on the craps tables, smoke free air is cheaper than not. Auto emissions are not good, but the acute effects on our society are from where people spend most of their time, inside.
This is like real old news. The effects of secondhand smoke are not miniscule only your unwarranted and uneducated estimation.

here's an article for you if your not too angry to read

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2002-07-29-automobile-exhaust_x.htm

among other things it says

The results provide the first "biological link" between exhaust particles and sickness and death from coronary heart disease, lead researcher Juha Pekkanen, of the National Public Health Institute in Kuopio, Finland, and his colleagues say.

Their study appeared Monday in an online version of the journal Circulation.

Previous studies have explored the relationship between car and truck pollution with heart disease.

"It's a novel exploration, and it has opened new avenues for thinking about air pollution and heart disease," says George Sopko, a cardiologist at the National, Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

"The problem of particulate air pollution is pervasive and growing," add Richard Verrier, Murray Mittleman and Peter Stone of Harvard Medical School, in an editorial in the medical journal.

http://chemeducator.org/sbibs/s0008006/spapers/860353jg.htm

note these real numbers

The steady reliance on the automobile for transportation over the past several decades has resulted in a dramatic decline in our nation's air quality. Over 50% of all United States air pollution is generated by motor vehicles, and transportation accounts for over 75% of U.S. CO emissions, nearly 50% of U.S. oxide of nitrogen (NOx) emissions, and 40% of the volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions [1]. Ground-level ozone, the most problematic constituent of smog, forms when volatile organics combine with NOx in the presence of sunlight; urban areas having sunny, warm climates are particularly prone to ozone problems [2]. A strong correlation between breathing smoggy air and an increased incidence of respiratory and cardiopulmonary disease is emerging. In general, slower lung growth in children appears to be associated with exposure to constituents of smog [3]. These findings continue to prompt new legislation associated with motor vehicle emission controls.

In cities across the globe, the personal automobile is the single greatest polluter, as emissions from a billion vehicles on the road add up to a planet-wide problem.

http://www.alphanutrition.com/environment/carsepa.htm

http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2003/s982879.htm

DAVID HARDAKER: A group of environmental health scientists is today highlighting the dangers of car exhaust fumes and wants the Federal Government to legislate for greater use of alternative fuels.

The scientists say that coarse, as well as fine and ultra-fine particles, are contributing to lung cancer and other tumours, increased cardiovascular disease and a host of other ailments, such as viral asthma.

No. I'm not angry at all. I have a commitment to education, even for the least among us. I'm still waiting on something new. What I really wonder is what is your ulterior motive? Just stubborn? That's cool. But people will pay more attention to a consistent logic supported by coherent research. You cite reporting the "first" and "novel" research from that bastion of legitimacy USA Today. Can you say Rupert Murdoch?
Where was it you said had the required signage for smoking exemptions that was so full, Wiggles? Hell, squeeze on in there. Tell 'em how clever you are. You might get laid.

real numbers don't do it for you, real science not good enough - one of several sources with actual science irrelevant to you - a pathetic attempt at discrediting the argument by slaming USA today which only printed scientific studies in an article - and again - that was one of several sources given. you asked for sources - I provided them and you showed what your made of - an angry old man with nothing new to say who can't be made to understand that the legislature could do far more to improve our air quality if it reqired an emissions test than the anti smoking law. so beat off with your wafflew house is saved t-shirt old man - I'm done talking to a brick wall. people like you are why Arkansas wont have clean air and will continue to add to the run away problem of Co2 emissions from automobiles. I'd recomend you catch Al gores film an inconvenient truth - but it wouldn't do much use - you'd be far more concerned with whether or not one guy was smoking within 100 feet of the theater

good night moron

Co2 is carbon dioxide. Co1 is Carbon monoxide. Hows it feel to be a dupe of the tobacco indsutry?
Change lubfricant, honey, it won't give you suck blisters.

Yes...I can see how easy this smoking ban is going to go from right here. P may be right, we all might live 20% longer because of this smoking ban.

It will seem like living 40% longer because life will be just a little more boring and dull. Tight ass people who lay in bed at night counting up all the things that bothered them the last time they left the house also make the most boring company. So, remember I told you so next Saturday when geeky Ralph from your old AV lab corners you in your smoke free eatery and tells you about his vacation in Phoenix for 2 straight hours.

Of course I could be wrong about living longer. If we can find about 12 more ways to divide into warring groups, war will come to America and shooting your neighbor will become an Olympic sport.

I remember how tired I got of my Mama always on my back nagging and bitching and she only had about 5 rules she expected me to follow. Little did I know the '00s were going to be an endless bombardment of rules and regulations, spys, snoops and do-gooder groups following people around with cell phones.

At times I can't breath and it's not because of cigarette smoke or car exhaust....we're so frightfully busy with how to live correctly, that we've forgotten how it felt to just live and let live. Being turned into clones of each other has sucked all the fun out of life. I won't mind leaving this world behind when I go. Jesus Herbert Walker Christ, just listen to yourselves.......

Personally, I'd rather spend a few hours at Midtown or any other smoking bar than in a garage with a car running...
Banning smoking is just a way for politicians to look like they are doing something good for us all. It's an easy sell.
"Smokers are like a pus-filled boil on the health care system, who raise the costs for everyone else with their disgusting habit"...Lets not forget about people with bad diet habits and sedentary lifestyles. That might have a little to do rising health care costs. Just maybe. OK, so now the next step, I guess, is to to dictate to restaurants the food they sell and who they sell it to in order to keep everyone healthy.

Some fuel for the fire: http://www.forces.org/

No. I'm not angry at all. I have a commitment to education, even for the least among us. I'm still waiting on something new. What I really wonder is what is your ulterior motive? Just stubborn? That's cool. But people will pay more attention to a consistent logic supported by coherent research. You cite reporting the "first" and "novel" research from that bastion of legitimacy USA Today. Can you say Rupert Murdoch?
Where was it you said had the required signage for smoking exemptions that was so full, Wiggles? Hell, squeeze on in there. Tell 'em how clever you are. You might get laid.

Posted by: P | July 23, 2006 11:03 PM