What Is Going On In Colorado?

[kevmicsmi]

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/government/article/0,2777,DRMN_23906_4465148,00.html



Why does the government love nannyism sooooooo much? What gives them the right to ban legal behavior in private establishments?

 

[Mister Emu]

Mark Cloer

"I personally, absolutely hate this bill, but my constituents strongly support it."

:clap

 

[Valjean]

Interesting.
Republicans are always going on about too much government....

 

[No*s]

Interesting.
Republicans are always going on about too much government....

Yeah, they are. I've come to the conclusion that Republicans and Democrats are flip sides of the same coin, and the key disagreement is what part of our private lives they feel they should legislate.

 

[Pah]

....What gives them the right to ban legal behavior in private establishments?

Would you want them to ban "illegal" behavior?

Your concern about "private" establishments is touching and is completely ignorant of "public accomodation".

 

[Smoke]

Your concern about "private" establishments is touching and is completely ignorant of "public accomodation".

Are casinos private in a way that bars and restaurants aren't?

 

[kevmicsmi]

Would you want them to ban "illegal" behavior?

Your concern about "private" establishments is touching and is completely ignorant of "public accomodation".

Are you forced to go into one particular establishment? No. Please enlighten me on the pressing need for a smoking ban for the public accomodation

 

[kevmicsmi]

Interesting.
Republicans are always going on about too much government....

Yet they somehow find ways to regulate the stupidest things!

 

[kevmicsmi]

Are casinos private in a way that bars and restaurants aren't?

Yes because they generate more taxes

 

[Pah]

Are casinos private in a way that bars and restaurants aren't?

Nope! Casinios accomodate the public in the same way (and in the same services and products) as bars and restaurants

 

[Pah]

Are you forced to go into one particular establishment? No. Please enlighten me on the pressing need for a smoking ban for the public accomodation

Refer to the studies of second hand smoke.

 

[kevmicsmi]

Refer to the studies of second hand smoke.

So is loud music next to go? Who are you concerned about, the workers who know what they are getting into, or customers who choose to frequent an establishment? Are we done making aluminum products then, because sand casting them causes more problems than smoking, how about mining, thats pretty dangerous. The point is, in America it should be the option of the owner to establish rules on legal behavior period, any customer or employee has every right to either consume or work somewhere else

 

[Pah]

...The point is, in America it should be the option of the owner to establish rules on legal behavior period, any customer or employee has every right to either consume or work somewhere else

Nope!! First, I'll repeat myself, - it won't be legal when the law passes.

Second, the state has an interest in the health of workers and customers, delivery workers, and it's own inspectors and police force. All public establishements and industrial places of production are subject to regulation, privately owned or not. Private ownership carries weight when private access is involved and the interests of the state are not violated. Food service is still subject to government regulation even in private membership clubs, is it not?

Third, only a legislature can make something legal. J.Q. Public does not nake law.

You, of course, have the right to move should you not like the laws in force. Or you could exercise your right to petition the government to change the law.

 

[nutshell]

Washington State banned smoking in all public places and within 25 feet of entrances or air intake vents. It was a narrow defeat and a bitter campaign, fought hard on both sides.

Those who were against the ban called the state government fascist. Ironic, I thought, considering the people voted on it. I'm not sure how Colorado state government works, but perhaps they should take it to the people.

 

[kevmicsmi]

Nope!! First, I'll repeat myself, - it won't be legal when the law passes.

Second, the state has an interest in the health of workers and customers, delivery workers, and it's own inspectors and police force. All public establishements and industrial places of production are subject to regulation, privately owned or not. Private ownership carries weight when private access is involved and the interests of the state are not violated. Food service is still subject to government regulation even in private membership clubs, is it not?

Third, only a legislature can make something legal. J.Q. Public does not nake law.

You, of course, have the right to move should you not like the laws in force. Or you could exercise your right to petition the government to change the law.

The question is to what point should you go, should we ban all loud music in resturaunts? That is detrimental to the health of a customer, what about alchohaul? Liver disease is terrible, what about peanut butter, people allergic to peanuts can die from one exposure! Im sorry, but the state should not have the authoity to protect you from yourself and you realize that, or you would respond to my whole post, and not just one section taken out of the context of the entire post.

 

[kevmicsmi]

Washington State banned smoking in all public places and within 25 feet of entrances or air intake vents. It was a narrow defeat and a bitter campaign, fought hard on both sides.

Those who were against the ban called the state government fascist. Ironic, I thought, considering the people voted on it. I'm not sure how Colorado state government works, but perhaps they should take it to the people.

Im not calling it fascist, i am calling it nannyistic, and i dont care if the people voted for it or not, we live in a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC, not a democracy for obvious reasons

 

[Pah]

The question is to what point should you go, should we ban all loud music in resturaunts? That is detrimental to the health of a customer, what about alchohaul? Liver disease is terrible, what about peanut butter, people allergic to peanuts can die from one exposure! Im sorry, but the state should not have the authoity to protect you from yourself and you realize that, or you would respond to my whole post, and not just one section taken out of the context of the entire post.

When you respond to all of my points, when your posts have questions that have not been covered, when you ask pertainent questions - then I'll respond to your whole post.

The smoking rule was set to protect the workers that have no choice. Loud music would be the same and its prohibition would not directed to the customer. It seems you do not know where to draw the line of proper state interest.

 

[spacemonkey]

When you respond to all of my points, when your posts have questions that have not been covered, when you ask pertainent questions - then I'll respond to your whole post.

The smoking rule was set to protect the workers that have no choice. Loud music would be the same and its prohibition would not directed to the customer. It seems you do not know where to draw the line of proper state interest.

That is the weakest argument I've ever heard. Speaking as a fomer bartender I can honestly say that it insults me that people like you think that I need to be protected from myself. I knew before I applied to any bartending job that there would be people smoking at the bar and I CHOSE to work there. In fact, it has been my expieriance that the majority of folks in the service industry are SMOKERS. The passing of ordinances and laws like these aren't helping most of these employees but making a crappy job even crappier (for lack of a more appropriate phrase). When laws like these are passed, American citizens are handing over the rights the founders of this country fought and died for. If I want to open a restraunt and make it ALL smoking (as in not having a non-smoking section) then that should my right, just like its your right to not go in.

 

[nutshell]

Im not calling it fascist, i am calling it nannyistic, and i dont care if the people voted for it or not, we live in a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC, not a democracy for obvious reasons

that's right, and what are the first three words of that constitution again??? :sarcastic

 

[Pah]

That is the weakest argument I've ever heard. Speaking as a fomer bartender I can honestly say that it insults me that people like you think that I need to be protected from myself. I knew before I applied to any bartending job that there would be people smoking at the bar and I CHOSE to work there. In fact, it has been my expieriance that the majority of folks in the service industry are SMOKERS. The passing of ordinances and laws like these aren't helping most of these employees but making a crappy job even crappier (for lack of a more appropriate phrase). When laws like these are passed, American citizens are handing over the rights the founders of this country fought and died for. If I want to open a restraunt and make it ALL smoking (as in not having a non-smoking section) then that should my right, just like its your right to not go in.

Was the choice based on something more beneficial like higher compensation, the hours fitting your schedule, the availability of a job, lack of qualifications for another job? Even if not you, are you saying no others have competing motivations for accepting a job in a smoking environment? I'm sure you didn't choose to work there just because it was smoking.