The Argus Observer | Online

Comment Blog - Note: All Comments Subject To Approval

clean air wrote on Dec 10, 2008 3:38 PM:

" To sensemaker: See, once one puts there bias opinions to the side and starts really thinking about this, you will come up with a rational conclussion just like you did. I agree, the nerve of that smoker!!! "

Sensemaker wrote on Dec 10, 2008 10:20 AM:

" " So here I am, trying to get really drunk so I can drive home and have un protected sex with this stranger I just met, and some jerk is smoking near me." The nerve!! "

wrote on Dec 7, 2008 7:45 PM:

" Maybe they could do the outdoor patio and send the NON Smokers out there where the air is crisp and clean. I think this would be fair. More than fair. The air here is VERY fresh when it hits about 9 degrees. "

Secondhand Rose wrote on Dec 7, 2008 7:54 AM:

" Smokers have a self induced mental illness in the form of addiction to cigarettes. This mind set has the attitude that smoke from the wonderful habit they indulge in is nothing but a little bother to all of the unenlightened people who do not smoke. They also think that if you cant see it it has magically gone away which is all another illusion they buy into. This cigarette smoke in reality is a cloud of death...slow in acting but never the less robbing of anyones health who comes in contact with it. And just because it can not be seen does not mean it has gone away....nope, it has just embedded itself in everything it has touched and is still there with the same deadly poison... By the way a bar is a place where the public gathers so it is a public place. "

wrote on Dec 6, 2008 12:31 PM:

" The ban could be modififed: Bars that allow smoking can ONLY employ smokers and ONLY smokers can enter.....

Bars that are smoke free, ONLY non smokers can work there and ONLY non smokers can enter......

Non smokers get "their way" and smokers are left in peace.....Prolem solved....This of course will never happen, it's to easy.... "

smoker wrote on Dec 5, 2008 12:08 PM:

" To non smoker:
I think that we can agree that we are not the type of people that this law is directed at. I believe that there is just a better way to achieve the goal of making places safer and better then to just ban smoking altogether. Maybe a 50/50 split as to the days that smoking is aloud with one being a sat. or friday, provideing that there is good ventalation. It just seems to me that having someone stand outside in the elements to smoke would not make a good time. Soon there will only be two places that it will be legal to smoke 1) in your own house and 2) in your car. Both of which I do not do because of other people. We have seen the affects of banning different items such as prohibition. It is human nature that when something is banned we try to find a way to do or get that item.

I believe that you and I could get along just fine without this law,but unfortunately there are many smoker and non smokers who will not be polite to each other. "

Whos Bar wrote on Dec 5, 2008 11:40 AM:

" "Are we that out of line by agreeing with the new law and wanting a smoke free bar?"

But who should decide if the Bar is to be Smoke Free, the owner or the Goverment, That's the problem, more then Smoker vs Non-Smoker.

I would like to see a state ban on Rap music at Bars or any paublic place. "

Logic wrote on Dec 5, 2008 10:12 AM:

" What about the bartenders and the waiters/waitresses? They don't have the option of just leaving. I think the logic behind this bill is to make the WORKPLACE safe. "

non smoker wrote on Dec 5, 2008 9:50 AM:

" To smoker: Your point is well taken and I toatlly agree that you have the absolute right to smoke and if us non smokers are in a place that this is allowed then we either have to deal with it or like you said leave. My point is why do we have to make that choice when we are at places that we enjoy? I have several friends that smoke whom are very considerate when around us non smokers, as you sound to be. For me, it would be nice to go into bars and not have to deal with the smoke, yes I could leave but smokers could also enjoy the same place and just smoke outside, just like you do at your home. Are we that out of line by agreeing with the new law and wanting a smoke free bar? "

smoker wrote on Dec 4, 2008 9:22 PM:

" To non smoker:
I am a smoker but I dont even smoke inside my own house. I dont understand when you say "but when they make us non smokers breath it in" who MAKES you breath it in???? Normaly if I dont like what is going on somewhere I just leave.
Please dont think that I believe that you dont have rights. I go out of my way to keep smoke away from everyone else. I just hate it when people say that someone makes them do something when they have to option to leave.
As an example you would not goto a drag race and say they made me listen to the noise and complain about it, you would just not go or you would leave.
I believe in your rights and I am not here to argue but smokers have rights also and I dont believe that one persons rights should take away from anothers rights. "

non smoker wrote on Dec 4, 2008 10:25 AM:

" I frequent bars and hate the smoke! I think its about time this has taken place. It may actually increase busineess for the bars rather than decrease it. If people want to smoke, fine but when they make us non smokers breath it in which we dont like or want that is not fine. Get it now confused??? "

Confused wrote on Dec 4, 2008 7:50 AM:

" Your in a bar and your consuming alcohol that can harm your liver and can lead to cancer and your worried about smoke that can ultimatly do the same thing. "

Pete wrote on Dec 3, 2008 5:33 PM:

" A long as the noxious smoke is kept outside it won't bother me or any of the other 80 plus percent who don't smoke. I strongly approve of indoor public smoking bans. "

TERMS OF USE

Those who post comments are accountable for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they furnish. While we encourage writers to utilize this service on our Web site, we also strongly suggest they treat it as public forum where good taste counts. We reserve the right to decline for approval objectionable material from these blogs.

Writers that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments - such as racists language, threats or comments unrelated to the story - will not be approved for the blogs. Also, entries that are unsigned or "signatures" by someone other than the actual writer will not be approved.

While writers can still post anonymously, we strongly suggest that they do not do so.

Opinions, guidance and other information expressed in Argus Observer story blog comments and on the Argus Observer blogs represent the individuals' own views and not necessarily those of the Argus Observer. The Argus Observer furnishes this type of forum and does not endorse and is not accountable for statements or advice from anyone other than an designated Argus Observer spokesperson.