Is there more to this story?

The fat headed Kansas legislature and the Komrade in the state Governors office have decided to ban smoking in bars. But not in private clubs. Since my plan is to NEVER EVER frequent a public bar again, I almost wonder if that is the plan they had in mind. Are they trying to drive public bars out of business too?

As an ex smoker, I have no problem with making all public businesses non smoking. If it is that big of an inconvienence to actually go outside to smoke then by all means then stay home. I have no problem with that decision at all, it is a disgusting habit that I am glad I no longer am a slave to. All it took was Walking Pnuemonia to make me quit 16 years ago.

Oh and I see you'll still be able to smoke in "State owned" casinos. God damned two faced bastards in our government don't want to lose "their" customers.

I'm glad for you komrade slider.

Oh I'm sorry komrade slider. Maybe the government should banish me to Siberia since my opinion differs. But of course you should be rewarded for agreeing that the state should allow smoking in "their" public casinos while outlawing it in public bars.

If you can't see the hypocrisy of the state in this I really don't care. Just go park in your handicapped spot and tell everyone that walks by how special you are.

Ratzilla wrote:

If you can't see the hypocrisy

You do realize you're talking to slider, right?

Point taken nitro.

I agree that it is hipocritical that they exempt casinos, I don't think you should be able to smoke there either. Back in the day I used to HATE going to non-smoking bars, but these days I actually prefer it. When we come back to Hays we're much more likely to go have a drink at one of the FEW non smoking venues than one where smoking is allowed.

I believe they should put a $15 tax on a pack of cigs

Smokers should have no more rights than those who play the system to get parking privileges. The point of this topic is hypocrisy by the state.

And, slickjay, in that case they should also level the same tax on the Extra Value Menu.

[quote="nitromaxx98"]Smokers should have no more rights than those who play the system to get parking privileges. The point of this topic is hypocrisy by the state.[quote]
Yet again, you make a smartass remark about me of playing the System to get my placards, God you are one ignorant SOB. I have proof through 7 doctors, 11 surgeries, 2 medical files 3 inches thick and enough x-rays to make me glow in the dark. So cry me a fricken river

nitromaxx98 wrote:

Smokers should have no more rights than those who play the system to get parking privileges. The point of this topic is hypocrisy by the state.

And, slickjay, in that case they should also level the same tax on the Extra Value Menu.

you may notice the stick poking and the beer cheering it was a joke

dz724 wrote:

I agree that it is hipocritical that they exempt casinos, I don't think you should be able to smoke there either. Back in the day I used to HATE going to non-smoking bars, but these days I actually prefer it. When we come back to Hays we're much more likely to go have a drink at one of the FEW non smoking venues than one where smoking is allowed.

I'd like to read the state's reasoning on allowing "state owned" casinos the non-smoking exemption. Sounds like crap, to me. Also, the state doesn't need to stick its nose in whether the owner of a bar chooses to allow smoking or not in his or her establishment. Same goes for the county and city administration. Just because a business serves the public doesn't mean that it isn't a privately owned business. People seem prone to forget that.

slider wrote:

I have proof through 7 doctors, 11 surgeries, 2 medical files 3 inches thick and enough x-rays to make me glow in the dark. So cry me a fricken river

Yet you can walk. Took 7 doctors to finally give it to ya, huh?

It isn't about smoker's/non-smoker's rights. It's about property/business owner's rights. They should be able to decide whether their establishment is smoking or non-smoking. Gov't should not be involved.

This is not a smokers rights issue. This is like if the state said drinking causes death to non drinkers so we're going to allow bars to sell alcohol but nobody can drink it. And then adding a clause that says you can drink alcohol if you buy it in a bar ran by the state.

Being a smoker I'll be the first to admit it's a bad habit for me, and can annoy those around me. But alot of things are unhealthy and can be annoying or even dangerous for those nearby.

The government has decided that the smoker is the leper of the modern era and that those who provide a publically accessible place for smokers to socialize are to be punished. Unless of course you are the government, then it'll be business as usual.

YOU SUCK DOG YOU FRIGGIN CORRUPT TWO FACED ASSHOLES IN KANSAS LEGISLATURE!!!!!

There is of course, one other possibility. Might be the state legislators realized that the law giving exemption to the state would be so absurd that the courts would strike it down. In this way they could appease the anti-smokers by saying they tried, but yet knew that logic would prevail.

What am I saying? Logic and modern government?

Ratzilla wrote:

There is of course, one other possibility. Might be the state legislators realized that the law giving exemption to the state would be so absurd that the courts would strike it down. In this way they could appease the anti-smokers by saying they tried, but yet knew that logic would prevail.

What am I saying? Logic and modern government?

What the hell were you thinking, Ratz?

here is another stupid law the state is pushing down our throat. they want to make it a primary violation if I don't wear my seatbelt and fine me if I don't. Yet motorcycle riders don't have to wear a helmet even tho any accident involving a cycle is far more dangerous to the rider(s). I am far safer from in my car with or without a seatbelt. My CHOICE to NOT wear a seatbelt puts no one at risk but me yet our state leaders want to fine (tax) me for not have that seatbelt on. Click it or ticket...... STICK IT !!

I wish I could find actual facts to back this up, but I think the bars in towns like Lawrence , which has been smoke free for some time, are doing pretty good. I don't see them all shutting up shop because their patrons can't smoke inside.

So those who think it hurts the business and its not fair to punish them, should probably think again, because it probably isn't really hurting them. I, myself, actually would rather go to a place that is non-smoking, so that business is actually increasing its customer base.

Actually, all businesses customer base goes up with this law. People no longer have to worry about it being non smoking or not. And for the smokers, how many of them are actually not going to go to a bar and stay home, just because they can smoke? I'm betting the number is pretty small.

I wish I could find facts to back this up, but it's just my opinion and I don't want to spend a bunch of time looking for the facts.

It is BS that casinos are not part of this law.

I don't agree with the bias in seatbelt laws and alot of others, but Luke, to be honest I can picture a grin crossing your face when you heard smokers got hosed. kinda sad, I'll never be able to drink a beer with you again unless it's in my front yard.

Oh, I'd still go to a bar if the non-smoking rule was the owners choice, but it's not in this case, so I simply cannot go. My apologies to bar owners, but I will not accept the states hypocrisy. I'll also never go to a state run casino again either.

A lot of the bars in Lawrence have outdoor smoking porches in back,So there is a little acomodation for smokers.. It isn't much but it's better than an outright ban.

Ratzilla wrote:

I don't agree with the bias in seatbelt laws and alot of others, but Luke, to be honest I can picture a grin crossing your face when you heard smokers got hosed. kinda sad, I'll never be able to drink a beer with you again unless it's in my front yard.

Oh, I'd still go to a bar if the non-smoking rule was the owners choice, but it's not in this case, so I simply cannot go. My apologies to bar owners, but I will not accept the states hypocrisy. I'll also never go to a state run casino again either.

Well, actually I didn't laugh about it , or even grin when I read any of this because it is just another example of how messed up things in this country are becoming. There is a double standard of laws that apply to us the commoners, and a lot of those rules are contradictory , and then there are the rules that apply for government. I agree it is complete hipocrisy and as far as I am concerned, they can take the casinos and shove them in their dark odiferous spot. They won't be seeing my money there because all gambling is is a tax on stupidity.

slider wrote:

Your continued smart ass remarks are a true vision of just how big of an asshole you are.

only to you, sugar, only to you..

slider wrote:

It was their decision not my begging to try to be qualified as Disabled jackass.[/b][/i]

Just how much is the social security benefit for Disabled jackass?

Blackie Kuhn wrote:

A lot of the bars in Lawrence have outdoor smoking porches in back,So there is a little acomodation for smokers.. It isn't much but it's better than an outright ban.

I think if it's a forced ban, the government should give owners tax breaks to put up some sort of shelter from cold and rain. They aren't helping prevent illness by sending smokers out in the cold.

As far as bars prospering by bans, I doubt places like the Horseshoe will profit from it since it's one of the few places lots of smokers still go. Sure the college bars and sports bars won't be much different, but some bars tend to have alot of smokers. I did go to non-smoking bars on occasion, but I would never stay long unless it was nice enough outdoors that I didn't mind stepping outside.

Luke, I was just razzing you because we've debated the smoking verses non-smoking bars several times. I think a balance between both smokers and non-smokers would be nice, but outright bans don't do that, and allowing the state to defy it's own laws is hypocritical in the worst way. The fact the state isn't going to risk losing casino goers is all the proof I need that the state thinks smoking bans are bad business in certain places.

HDN is posting opinions on this. Hays Daily News

I was talking to a guy at work who used to drive truck. He got a $200 ticket for smoking in his truck parked on a weight scale in California. He could sit there with diesel fumes filling the air, but couldn't smoke in his truck. A woman from Belair CA told me she could be fined for smoking on her own front porch, but from that same porch she could see factory smoke stacks spewing into the air 24/7.

Kansas banned smoking in bars, and marijuana substitutes for cancer patients at the same time. Pretty bad when California at least supports cancer patients.

Government = mongolian cluster fu*k

The future of Kansas? Following the lead of places like California and New York? What other bad health practices shall we ban? Alcohol, caffiene, chocolate? How bout car racing with all that burned rubber and fumes?

Oh, and fireworks. That evil practice that Americans use to celebrate a number of events including our most patriotic day of all. They cause fires, injuries, and make noise. And they make us breath SMOKE!!!! Ban them I say!! Ban them now or we are all doomed!!!!

MSNBC wrote:

Three years after New York City banned smoking in restaurants, health officials have voted to prohibit something they say is almost as bad, artery-clogging artificial trans fatty acids found in many fried foods.

Story Here

You really should just quit smoking, Ratz. It'll lower your blood pressure.

My blood pressure is within normal range. And high blood pressure does not cause one to become outraged. My tolerance for corrupt government is not within normal range. It's a shame most of the country is willing to always knuckle under and do as the government orders.

It's also a shame fine old traditions like tar and feathers are no longer practiced.

Ratzilla wrote:

It's also a shame fine old traditions like tar and feathers are no longer practiced.

Just smoke a cigarette and eat at Al Chickenette. There's your tar and feathers.

The Other One wrote:

Just how much is the social security benefit for Disabled jackass?

About 15K a year plus free "Socialized Health Care!"

The Other One wrote:

Ratzilla wrote:

It's also a shame fine old traditions like tar and feathers are no longer practiced.

Just smoke a cigarette and eat at Al Chickenette. There's your tar and feathers.

Not sure why you argue with robert so much. You sound like a model Pelosi leftist on the smoking issue.

By the way, you can't get better chicken in Hays than the Chickenette's deep pan fry.

Ratzilla wrote:

The Other One wrote:

Ratzilla wrote:

It's also a shame fine old traditions like tar and feathers are no longer practiced.

Just smoke a cigarette and eat at Al Chickenette. There's your tar and feathers.

Not sure why you argue with robert so much. You sound like a model Pelosi leftist on the smoking issue.

By the way, you can't get better chicken in Hays than the Chickenette's deep pan fry.

It was a joke. Cigarette=tar. Chickens have feathers. Nothing against Al's. It could have been KFC, JD's or Popeye's. Quit being such a baby.

I'm not the baby who suggested I and or other smokers were part of some diabolical plot to lure his diabetic wife and (insert sad violin music here) asthmatic child into bars to kill them with our cigarette smoke.

You can sure be cruel when you want to

Blackie Kuhn wrote:

You can sure be cruel when you want to

If you refer to my comments, it was in reference to this EP commentary in another thread. Didn't figure his assumption that smokers were mentally inferior individuals who didn't care if his family suffered was a very nice thing to say either.

The Other One wrote:

Guarantee you that a higher percentage of trailer park residents smoke than MENSA members.

But like I said before, I don't give a flying Philadelphia fornication if you smoke. Just don't expect the taxpayers to pay for your treatment when you get cancer, and stay the hell away from my asthmatic kid and my diabetic wife.