Tuesday, November 21, 2006

More Big Government Statism from the Democrats

From the Lansing City Pulse.

Governor pledges to approve a ban on smoking in bars and restaurants

It was the most definitive sign yet that Michigan could soon join a growing number of states that have banned smoking in bars, restaurants and other public places.

In the third gubernatorial debate against challenger Dick DeVos, Gov. Jennifer Granholm told Michigan voters she would make Michigan smoke-free if legislation to ban smoking was presented to her.

“I think the governor said it,” said Liz Boyd, press secretary for the governor, who was re-elected Nov. 8. “If legislation arrives on her desk, she’ll sign it.”

House Bills 4624 and 4625 and Senate Bills 394 and 395, introduced in April of 2005, would prohibit smoking in bars and restaurants. The bills, which stalled in committee, were aimed at reducing the third-leading preventable cause of death in the United States.

With Granholm entering a second term and Democrats now in control of the state House, another push to ban smoking in bars and restaurants could be on the way.

For the record, I'm not a ciggy smoker. This isn't about smoking to me. This is about property rights. This is about another push from big government to tell PRIVATE owned business how to run their establishments. I have no problem with business owners deciding on their own to ban smoking. The Copper Pickle in Howell is non-smoking on their own. That's the proper way to make a decision.

Nobody forces anyone to go into a pub or restaurants around smokers. That's an individual decision one makes on his/her own. Because an individual doesn't like how a business runs its establishment, he/she's now running to government to change how it runs it. That's unacceptable, and frankly - UnAmerican.


bluzie said...

Un American? My goodness, maybe you have not paid attention to states like California where these bans have been in effect and it has helped the businesses and the smokers go outside, where they go when they work and often when they are home as well.

You cry unAmerican way too often. What is your definition of being American? I would love to understand just how you come to these conclusions.
Smoking in public places and American just don't jive to me.

Dan said...

You missed my entire point, bluzie. Smoking is the side issue here. The main issue is big government telling private establishments what they can do on their own property. It's wrong. What is so wrong about the (GASP!) freedom of businesses to make their own decisions?

These are not public places as they are not owned by the government. This is all private propety owned by private individuals who should have the freedom to do what they want with their property. When government infringes on this, especially in matters they have no business being involved in - that's unAmerican.

I've read about bars going out of business since their clientle was banned from smoking in a private business which allowed it. Government at it again. Usually it's the ma and pop places that suffer the most since the big chains support these bans - as they aren't hurt, and many of them are smokefree. Government picking winners and losers.

As for California - as a general rule on anything which I'm not informed if California (outside of Orange County and the inland empire) is for it, I'm against it. Chances are when I become informed on those matters - I'm usually right.

bluzie said...

Well to the best of knowledge restaurants and bars still need to comply with public safety. While they maybe privately owned, because the public does go to these establishments, there are rules for public safety. Second hand smoke has been found to be most dangerous and having smokers go outside protects those who work there as well as the customers.
Smoking isn't the issue, public safety is the issue.

Dan said...

Every member of the public can make a choice. If I'm not in the mood to deal with the smoke, I can choose not to patronize an establishment that allows smoking by taking my business elsewhere.

As for secondhand smoke being dangerous, that's true. So is drinking and being around a bunch of angry drunks.

Everything is or can be dangerous. Crossing the street, driving (that's just with the deer, let alone other drivers), smoking, animals, power tools, stupidity around firearms and bows, drugs and even water.

All those things I've mentioned can be controlled as well by the individual, without the need for government.

I've seen an extremely scary trend in the past 10-15 years from government and its wannabe nannies. They are trying through regulation to eliminate risk and babysit everyone - not just smoking, but in everything, and I can go down the line. Meat, fatty foods, soft drinks (The Virg Bernero tax attempt), and in schools - even dodgeball - can't a kid get up from getting beaned in the head anymore - and get toughened up? Don't even get me started on zero tolerance.

With all the regulations nowadays, I wonder how past generations survived.

bluzie said...

Well air quality is important, if you knew the water was harmful to drink or wash with, you would correct the problem. Air quality is the same. If you don't consider the public, think of it as a work safety issue.

Luther said...

I think this may be good

Four American Contractors Reportedly Kidnapped in Iraqi Convoy Attack