After the property tax bills come out later this month, what Charlie thinks won’t matter much. He’s toast.

What is she thinking? This should come from the State…. and why give St. Charles one more leg up on the region. BACK OFF LYDA!!

After finding out about Doolie’s position on this serious health issue, everything I ate just ended up all over my keyboard, mixed with gastric juices.

I deon’t know what property tax bills has to do with smoking. Anywho I don’t smoke and never have BUT I feel that eliminating it at bars and restaurants is wrong. In most establishments it is severly restricted so there wan’t be much of a change for patrons who don’t smoke. BUT we should give the smokers an area to relax and enjoy themselves as long as they are in their own section. If it’s an unlimited smoking facility then the non-smokers can avoid it altogether.

Doolie - For putting your interests ahead of my family’s health & safety, we will make sure you do not get one vote from family, friends, and neighbors. Way to go bud! Now you deserve take a smoke, and be sure to blow your fumes in everyone’s face.

BNB - uhhhhh, you’re a smoker.

This is just ridiculous - how, in a time period when we know so much about the detrimental effects of smoke and second-hand smoke, can this even be a discussion? If people want to smoke, let’em - but not out in public. Because you were stupid enough to pick up a bad habit that will inevitably shorten your life, why should I suffer? I’ve stopped going places that allow indoor smoking, and I would imagine others would be doing the same thing. The fact that our idiot leaders (and Dooley most definitley fits that mold) are too scared to take the initiative on this and institute shows just how good a leader he is. If Columbia, MO can institue a smoking ban, there is no reason St. Louis and St. Louis Country cannot. If you smoke, and want to continue to smoke, do it someplace else, but don’t blow it in my face claiming that it;s your right, because it most assuredly is not.

I don’t smoke either but banning smoking everywhere is riduclous. It is a LEGAL substance. Start by making it illegal first - ever hear of Prohibition?

Then make it illegal, it won’t bother me at all. To compare to prohibition is like comparing apples and oranges. You could drink all you want to right in front of me, get so wasted that you pass out and vomit on yourself, but it doesn’t affect MY health at all. So long as smoking interferes with my personal health, then I could care less what our government does to curb this substance. Ultimately, businesses will lose more, long term, if they don’t ban it themselves. And look at Columbia as an example - business owners complained and complained and complained about losing business, and after almost a year or being implemented, business has gone up in most local bars.

I also don’t smoke. And I agree with BNB. Let the restaurants decide for themselves. And if this was such a serious health issue, why don’t we have a generation of flight attendants on respirators?

Sounds like “non-smoker” is probably a lot of fun when s/he goes out. Get yourself together and find a place where there isn’t smoking instead of trying to impose your personal proclivities on everyone else. Speak with your dollars.

Sunday evening my family and I were eating at a restaurant in NW St. Louis Co. They did not have a smoking vs. non section and it was horrible. The lady at the table next to us was a chain smoker and had 6-8 cigs in the 45 min. we were waiting on our pizza. It was disgusting. Her son (12-14) was sitting next to her and had to deal with it as well. She did not care if it affected anyone else.

We set up laws to protect the rights of the minority all the time. Why can’t we set up some for the majority once in a while. Missouri needs to ban smoking in all public places. The Restaurant and Bar owners will adjust. See IL, CA, and others. Fast Eddie’s still does a great business and it is now a much nicer place to go.

I am a cigar smoker, but, only outside and away from anyone who is not a smoker.

Hampton,

Why do those who do not care about their own health get to dictate the rules to those of us who do? Smokers are a huge minority in the country yet they still want to do it their way. They can still smoke in states that ban it, they just have to do it outside.

Yeah, b/c I don’t like smoking, I must not be any fun. Good call. Very intuitive of you. And by get yourself together, do you mean that b/c I don’t like smoking, I’m somehow unsuccesful and a drain on society? That I should come around to your way of thinking? Is that how you define “get yourself together?” Because, if that’s the case, I’ll let my life rot in shambles. The point is that I DO enjoy going out, just not coming home smelling like I spent an afternoon with the Marlboro Man. Instead of making rude cracks at someone (which is always the sign of a person who doesn’t know what they’re talking about) why don’t you contribute something meaningful to the debate?

non-smoker: amen. I hate coming home after being out for the night and smelling like a Marlboro. It just begs one to imagine what that crap that does to your lungs..

BNP,
It means he will soon be irrelevant because he is going to be voted out of office. Get it?

Did anyone read the news last week that the air quality in St. Louis is very poor? Why don’t you all start there and try improving the air quality. My circle of friends and myself will not patronize a non-smoking restaurant or bar. Someone cited Illinois, have you read how business in that state is suffering due to the smoking ban? I read last week that the city of Ballwin is also having financial problems due to their smoking ban. If you don’t like to be around smoke, do not patronize those businesses. It seems that non-smokers just like to be around us smokers because we are where the fun is.

Keep St. Louis Free has been talking to big St. Louis labor unions all last week, informing them that this ordinance would ban smoking in all current designated workplace/jobsite smoking areas, in work vehicles/enclosed machinery, and in union halls.

County Executive Dooley, a real union guy, knows that Alderman Krewson and President Reed have received calls from the heads of the AFL-CIO and other St. Louis unions in opposition to the smoking ban in its current form.

For our current flyer against the smoking ban, e-mail us at:
keepst.louisfree@gmail.com

I won’t be voting for Dooley when he’s up for re-election.

I love the way you supposed health nuts think if you ban cigarette smoking that all health problems will be solved. If you care so much about public health how about complaining about the salt available in restaurants. Why not run up to someone heaping salt on their food and say, “Don’t you know that could kill you!” I could get excited about banning twinkies and other extremely sweet treets that are making our children and ourselves obese. We should also ban huge calorie and colosteral portions served by fast food restaurants. If you think being around a smoker is offensive, what about being around some gigantic whale of a person who is a fast food junkie. Then there is garlic eating in public, Whew! Susie Do-Gooder and Dick-Decent please tell me where this stuff ends? There are way bigger things to worry about. Oh yes…then about those people who butt in line……

Less anger, “non-smoker,” and more stay-the-heck-away-from-private-property. Impose non-smoking restaurants on yourself by not going to smoking restaurants. If enough of you do it, then eventually the smoking restaurants will change. Don’t impose it on others, including non-smokers. “My clothes smell like smoke, wah” isn’t a sufficient answer.

Or are you just more interested in how you feel over what rights restaurant owners have?

Ophelia-

If you put sugar on your food, it affects YOU. If you want to eat 5,000 calories per day, all in ice cream form, it affects YOU. If you want to go eat McDonalds for breakfast, lunch, and dinner, it affects YOU. If you want to drink alcohol, and get plowed out of your mind, it affects YOU. If you want to smoke right next to me, in public, as I’m walking down the street, or in a restaurant, it affects YOU and ME. It’s the “me” part I have a problem with. I could care less what you do with your body, but why should I be subject to your bad choices? Your argument doesn’t hold water here, again, like comparing apples to oranges.

And Hampton, you, like a few of my friends, have turned this into a Republican/Democrat issue in that it involves more or less government. I am a conservative Republican, and typically cannot stand government intervention in ANYTHING because they inevitably screw things up. This is not one of those issues. Government, specifically the FDA, can look out for our safety. Take the labels on the sides of boxes that we eat. That was them looking out for us. Some government intervention, if done in moderation to protect citizens (a mojority of citizens I might add) if not a bad thing at all, in fact, it should be. It’s not enough to put higher taxes on cigarettes and expect that people will stop. People do stupid things, and will continue to do stupid things. Smoking is one of those stupid things, but why should the rest of us be subject to the smoker’s poor decision?

Oph,

I could careless what other people to to there bodies. I am concerned about what smoking does to my body and that of my kids. Second hand smoke is the problem. If some lard a$$ wants to eat fast food and weigh 500 pounds, let them. If someone wants to kill themselves with Cigs, who cares, but, when it affects others(non-smokers), that is when I have an issue with it.

This smoking ban is really about individual rights, specificially property rights in this case - those of the restaurant owner. The eating public can always just not go or they can leave if smoking is allowed - or someone can open his own restaurant that does not allow smoking on the premises. This is the proper way to do it.

To Donnastl who said: “nonsmokers must want to be around us because we are more fun.” You must be smoking more than just regular cigarettes. Me and my many NONSMOKING friends would love to be able to go to a bar or restaraunt and not have to deal with your “fun” smoking friends and come out smelling like the bottom of a full ashtray. I’m sure you believe that you all look sexier while you’re puffing away, too, don’t you? You’re wrong on both counts. Let’s keep the smoke outside where it belongs.

Thank you Ophelia!

I’m trying to figure out how all your determined anti’s claim smoke affects you.. let me see, SOME restaurants, SOME coffee houses, bar’s, casino’s and bowling alleys.. is my list complete??? Because the last time I looked, you can’t smoke in almost any other establishment already. ???

The business owners have the right to decide what is best for their business, if it is posted at the public entrances, then the patron makes a choice, very simple.

We do not need more government telling people what to do. To those that point to other states/areas that have bans, it would be great to see your health statistics that show there has been any improvement, because there hasn’t.

Until our ‘good for you’ goverment stops acting in the interest of corporate profits, which will never happen, health problems will continue to increase and no ban will change that.

Does Mayor Slay also support an income tax ban? What are his opinions on fair tax, and what are yours?

This link is very informative:
http://mofairtax.com/2009/05/01/ed-emery-explains-the-missouri-fair-tax/

Smoking affects us all. Those who choose to smoke should be able to in the confines of their own home, but I don’t want to smell it or inadvertently suck it into my body. Smoking bans may cause businesses to suffer at first, but if we do the right thing and stop the smoking in public places, eventually business will rebound. The non-smokers also need to get out and actively patronize those restaurants that do offer smoke-free zones. Perhaps patronize ONLY those that offer smoke-free zones until the message is heard.

Yes this is a personal freedom issue. It’s about giving people the personal freedom to eat and drink anywhere they like without being personally assaulted by someone elses bad habits. If you serve the public you are legally required to provide a clean environment, clean glass wear, and clean table service. It’s common sense that they be required to provide clean air as well. The easiest thing to do to clean the air in bars and restaurants is to ban smoking indoors. Smokers have had it their own way for too long. It’s high time the non-smoking majority was served.

Connecticut went smoke-free in 2004 after the usual outcry from businesses claiming they would be hurt by the ban. Well, all those businesses are doing a booming business, with none having gone out of business. Don’t buy their complaints. They have no facts to back it up. Note at the bottom that there are exceptions to the law. Native St. Louisan living CT country.

CONNECTICUT’S SMOKE-FREE AIR LAW

The following information on Senate Bill 908: AAC Secondhand Smoke in Work Places was obtained from the Connecticut General Assembly (www.cga.ct.gov/2003/act/Pa/2003PA-00045-R00SB-00908-PA.htm) and “Statewide Smoking Ban: OLR Research Report” posted on the CGA website: (http://cga.ct.gov/2003/rpt/2003-R-0466.htm) The bill has the following provisions, effective April 1, 2004:

* Bans smoking in all restaurants, cafés and taverns (bars) after April 1, 2004.

* Private clubs (i.e. VFW Hall,s, Knights of Columbus, etc.) with liquor permits as of May 1, 2003 are exempt from this bill.
* Tobacco bars, as defined as an establishment with permit pursuant to Chapter 545 (liquor permits) that made at least 10% of its gross annual income in the year ending December 31, 2002 on tobacco products, are exempt from the bill.
* Bans smoking in establishments with the following liquor permits: university, hotel, resort, restaurant, juice bar, railroad, airline, coliseum, special sporting facility, nonprofit theater, nonprofit public museum, bowling establishment, racquetball establishment, and airport restaurant.
* Bans smoking in any business (other than food establishments) with 5 or more employees, except that there may be a designated smoking room for employees.
* Businesses with fewer than 5 employees must provide a smoke free environment upon request from an employee.
* Continues the ban on smoking in retail food stores, in hospitals, buildings owned or operated by the state or any political subdivision of the state, school buildings during school hours, elevators and dorms in public institutions of higher education. Adds ban to private institutions of higher education.
* Exemptions: correctional facilities, smoking areas of psychiatric facilities, public housing projects, classrooms where smoking is part of medical or scientific research, smoking rooms provided by employers, any area of a business that is engaged in the testing or development of tobacco or tobacco products, outside seating in a restaurant where at least 75% is non smoking, outside seating that is not used on a permanent basis (ie set up for a special event or occasion.)

Get a clue, “non-smoker.” Smokers aren’t going to your house and smoking. They’re going to the premises of a third party and doing what that third party allows. You, on the other hand, want to go to the third party’s place and tell her what she can do with her establishment.

If you don’t want your children inhaling smoke, then you shouldn’t be irresponsible and taking them to smoky restaurants. Take some responsibility for yourself and yours, and leave others and theirs’ alone.

While we are banning offensive smells could somebody please include hazelnut coffee. It makes me sick to my stomach.

As a lifelong Californian, when they passed the no smoking laws I couldn`t have been happier. It didn`t hurt businesses at all. When I visit Missouri, I`m shocked anyone would dare light up indoors. It`s gross! Hopefully, you`ll wise up enough people like we did here and indoor smoking will be a thing of the past. Indian casinos still allow smoking indoors here. I`ll never enter one though. Cough cough……… (GO RAMS!)

I should not have to tolerate the smell of hazelnut coffee when I take my children to Bread Co. I hate the smell of hazelnut coffee sticking to my clothes. But I’m going to keep going while demanding that the government makes Panera remove the smell of hazelnut coffee from its restaurant, because I said so, and because I have no other coffee choices.

I’m sick of hearing how “smokers” are a pox on society. I’m sick of non-smokers deciding that every single public establishment has to serve only their needs. There are, and should continue to be, some establishments that still allow smoking. Many, many restaurants have gone totally non-smoking all on their own regardless of any county or city ordinance. I choose not to go to them. I do NOT condone taking more and more freedoms of choice away from us (and that’s not a political issue for me).

If that’s the direction the “majority” wants to go, then let’s ban all fast-food places. Why? You think they don’t affect you? You’re wrong. The health care costs alone have skyrocketed due to the increase in diabetes, heart disease, and other issues associated with being over weight, high cholesterol, and on and on. You’re affected because you are assisting in care for all citizens who can’t afford health care through your taxes - whether they’re retired on Medicare, a child on Medicaid, or simply on Welfare. Better yet, rather than increase taxes on a select set of people, such as we have on cigarettes, let’s put a tax on all fast food. As for “cleaning up the air” - let’s get rid of all airplanes, factories, etc.

Most of you have the idea that you don’t smoke and shouldn’t suffer second-hand smoke. Well, I don’t use airplanes, so why should I suffer from their contribution toward the depletion of the ozone layer?

My point is that ya’ll need to stop blaming the smokers for things that don’t really mean all that much to you and figure out where the bigger issues lie. The detriment of your health is affected much more your food choices and by the air quality you breath daily than my cigarette you might encounter sitting in a restaurant 50 feet away from me. So you go to a different restaurant than I do … big deal. Let me have my select few to frequent and I’ll stay out of your majority non-smoking establishments. It’s not necessary to take choices away from everyone just because you think your opinion is the only one that counts.

The airline stewardess filed a class action lawsuit against the airlines in the 70’s for their statistically significant rate of breast and lung cancer!!!! They’re not on respirators because they’re DEAD already.
Do you get the point now Hampton? Second-hand smoke is a HEALTH issue, not political or economical.

Jeanie, please read the literature and cut out the hyperbole.

This entire issue is appalling. I’m one of the lucky non-smokers who is now suffering from COPD as a result of exposure to secondhand smoke. I chose NOT to smell like an ash tray & spew toxic fumes on everyone and their brother who happened to be in my vacinity, but I’m a victim of a chronic illness which will most likely result in my premature death from emphysema or lung cancer. And I spend about $300 on medications a month so that I can breath on a daily basis! Thanks so much to all of you smokers who insist that polluting indoor airways is your right! My pulmonologist tells me that the incidences of non-smokers with this smoking disease is skyrocketing and in many cases, non-smokers have more problems because their subjected to the toxic particulates which the smoker is protected from by the filter on the cigarette. It’s also appalling that Kansas City and Columbia are saavy enough to see the forest through the trees, but St. Louis is not. It’s also appalling that business owners claim that they are going to lose money when there is absolutely no statistical information to back up that claim. No revenue has been lost in any of the cities who have gone smoke-free. And it’s appalling that the AFL-CIO would put the rights of the minority (yes, today smokers amount to about 20-25% of the population) ahead of the majority. So, addicts, put that in your pipe and smoke it in your car, in your home, in your yard, but not in public! And you’re right, I’m damn angry! I’m 51 and thanks to your noxious fumes, I’m going to be dead in about 15 years!

I don’t smoke…but I did and I resented places that wouldn’t let me smoke.
But that is neither here nor there. If I owned aplace not matter it be a bar or rest. or what, if I am paying for the building and the bills and TAXES on that building just what gives ANYONE the right to tell me who can smoke or not smoke in it. If you don’t like smoke DON’T COME IN.

Almost every economic study Smokefree St. Louis City sites was performed not by economists by rather by public health advocates and published in a public health journal, not an economics journal. When real economists look at this issue, they find that smoking bans always cut bar employment up to 16 percent.
http://www.bepress.com/bejeap/vol7/iss1/art12/

I’m surprised: Slay is actually more progressive than Dooley on this issue!

Let ‘em smoke, and let ‘em choke, I don’t care. But when I go out to eat, and there’s smoking in the restaurant, I leave. I don’t even go in. I will NOT patronize any place that is a health risk to me and my family. And if you really want to make me vomit, let me see some idiot puffing away while eating dinner. To have a designated “smoking” and “non-smoking” section is like having a “pissing” and “non-pissing” section in a swimming pool.
Funniest thing that I saw today was some woman going into the smoking section of a restaurant, while wearing one of those oxygen masks up her nose. I wonder if the moron ever figured out what caused her to need that oxygen mask.

You non-smoking honks are a laugh riot! If you don’t want to be around smoke, pick a different bar or restaurant, period. I love going by smoking demonstrations and giving those people a pice of my mind…wait a minute, they never have any of those! Non-smoking advocates are the kind of peolple who like to whine and complain about anything and are looking for anything, no matter how small, to make them feel better than someone. I love how they have feebly attempted to refute the arguments comparing their stance to prohibition. “Oh, you can fall over drunk and it doesn’t bother me!” Oh really?! Well what if I get up and drive home after that! idiots….

Why do you think your right to inhale smoke is more important than my right to not inhale smoke? I don’t object to you smoking, as long as you smoke in your own home, your own car, or outdoors. Yes, restaurants/bars are private property, but they are also public places. As such, I have every right to go into these public places without being assaulted by tobacco smoke or any other noxious fumes. Just as I expect the government to protect me from poisons in the workplace, I expect them to protect me from poisons in public places.

SmokefreeUSA - Your argument just doesn’t hold water. Bars and restaurants may be out in public but they are private businesses - period. They can request or even call the police to remove you from their property for any number of reasons and they refuse service to you for anything other than race/sex discrimination reasons. I’m allergic to cat/dog hair..so are many people. Do we get all in the faces of pet owners about how they are harming us when their pets are around? No we don’t..because unlike this issue, we choose to display some level of civility. Non-smokers love to cite all these health studies and this-and-that…Hogwash and BS I say to all of you. As others have said, this countries eating habits, way of disposing of waste, over-construction, radiation, these things will all take you out 10 times faster than breathing in 10 minutes of second hand smoke a week in some restaurant or bar. Yet there you are…still waving your fists like some decrepit old man chasing kids from his lawn at the big bad smokers…you people are sad. Get a life, get out of mine, when I see you, I’ll be blowing smoke rings in your faces…

I work at a private business that is NOT a public place. We are not open to the public. Yet, the government has the right to send OSHA into our private property to protect our employees (who are here voluntarily, just like restaurant/bar patrons) from toxic fumes. If we’re going to allow smoking in restaurants/bars simply because people patronize them voluntarily, why not step back our progress about 50 years and let private businesses fill our workplaces with toxic chemicals? Let the companies do whatever they want since the property/business is privately owned.

People…People…People…If places of business want to ban smoking, that is OK with me. If I want to avoid business’ who allow smoking, I can. If people smoking does not bother me, then I can vist these business’ if I desire. If there is a busines that the public MUST go into, make it smoke free. Otherwise we should keep our noses out of their business.

I used to live in the St. Louis area. I couldn’t stand the choices of non-smoking restaurants. They’re limited to fast food. I am told that has improved slightly. So now we live in Florida where all restaurants are smoke free and guess what, they are still open! In fact they thrive! I don’t live in the tourist areas and they are even doing better. Bars on the other hand not so good. They fought to keep their smoke and they are paying the price. That’s right, people are going to restaurant/bars to drink. Business has not suffered from the ban in Florida.

Wake up Charlie Dooley, look around you. Wait, look in the mirror, you have COPD (emphasema) and guess what did that to you? Cigarettes did it. Shouldn’t you protect the people of your community and you own family from getting that and other horrible diseases?

It is time!

The discussion has turned to argument and insults and guess who is doing the insulting…2020vision and his kind. He simply wants to protect his right to smoke. No one wants to take that right away. Except me, if I am within 150 feet of him.

Wait until there aren’t any public places to smoke and he’ll understand. He’ll probably quit and that’ll be a good thing cause then he’ll be louder than any never-smoker.

It is so nice in Florida, come visit, bring your money and breathe our clean indoor air. And when you walk into a restaurant just tell ‘em how many and you’ll get a breath of FRESH air.

2020vision you can stay in the back woods where you belong. Oops I think I might have insulted him.

Are you kidding me…..Its not such a bad health risk. Tell that to my 70 year old father who smokes. He is bent over in a chair trying to suck air into his damaged lungs. Now his wife has health issues that are related to smoking. Oh, and she is a non-smoker. Has been her whole life. I was a medic. Everyone who smokes around others should take a ride along with an Ambulance and see what it is like to watch someone slowly suffocate from damaged lungs from smoking. It’s a horrible site. The worst part is watching the family members as their loved one is turning blue. I would not wish this on anyone. It’s a horrible site. Wake up! It is time to go Smoke Free!

Those politcal idiots are nuts.So they are promoting cancer and an easy way to get it.How about if one of their family members were on a breathing machine,got breast cancer,had a heart attack etc etc etc.Well we all know both are selfish arogant so and so.I remember years ago when my dad and brother were cops they hated Slay.He is a bit crooked.

Economists Chad Cotti and Scott Adams attempt to explain the loss of employment in bars following smoking bans:

“Bars, on the other hand, sell environment and atmosphere first, with perhaps drinks second and food third. Given that a smoking ban fundamentally changes the environment of an establishment, the observed negative impact on drinking establishments that we find is not surprising. Moreover, part of the bar environment is the fellow patrons, which in many
cases attract customers to a particular drinking establishment. It is therefore possible that a smoking ban may alter the environment for
non-smokers, leading them to shy away from bars following a ban as well. This perhaps explains why the smoking ban’s negative impact on bars hits all types of counties, whether warm or cold or whether smoking prevalence is low or high, although the impact is strongest in the latter.”
http://www.wpri.org/WIInterest/Vol15no2/Cot15.2.pdf

As I said in my previous post, as non-smoker who is currently dealing with an incurable and potentially fatal illness (COPD) which I developed as a direct result of exposure to second hand smoke, I feel that I have a right to say that smokers are merely addicts in denial, spouting the same monotonous excuses for their inexcusable behavior. Any business open to the public is required by law to protect their patrons from hazardous conditions, which is why buildings with asbestos are closed until the problem is solved and why health inspectors routinely check for health code violations. Every study under the sun cites secondhand smoke as toxic to humans! No exceptions. Since when do the addictions of the few outweigh the health risks for the many? How can you possibly justify the health risks to children? How pathetic you smokers have all become. I’m going to end this now because it’s time for my nebulizer breathing treatment! Smokers/Addicts: Again, thanks so much for giving me this disease which will rob me of my life but not before it robs me of ability to work, walk across the floor, or pick up my grandchild!

Why would anyone want to do anything that may damage business at this time? Also, why is having the choice to go or not go somewhere not good enough? Why does our government feel taking choice away from the owners and patrons of establishments is the way to handle this issue? 2nd hand smoke is expected to kill approx 3000 people per year. The normal yrly flu kills 30,000. Why isnt there a ban on working or being in school while sick? I rather have choice and some risk than no choice and a tiny less risk. Hey Lyda been to Ill? see how well the smoking ban works there? was in a bar staring at a sign that said no smoking while everyone was smoking. The no smoking ban is just another waist of time. oh and who would inforce it? Cops? Plan on hiring more or just adding to their duties? I know I want my police spending time writing tics and hauling in smoking offenders instead of those pesky thieves and murderers. Oh, wait, a smoker is a random serial murderer - shouldnt they be eliminated from society entirely? lol to all those who feel their life is shortened by the few hours they may be exposed to 2nd hand smoke. Hey if you cant get a contact hi from sitting in a closet for hours while someone smokes pot, how can your health be affected in any perminant way by sitting 4 feet from a smoker? I think the stress of worry will take those mins off your life faster. Lord knows the coughing person next to you is more dangerous.

I would like to see proof that your copd was cause by second hand smoke and no other cause. Also, why would you want to restrict smokers to smoking in their home? What about the kids there? Why not insist on smokers smoking only in smoking places where an adult can choose to be or not? If your concern is the kids and the public, doesnt it make more sense to allow smoking in areas where people can choose to be exposed or not? Who do you really care about? What do you really care about? Choice is everyones. Public bans should coinside with illegal activities and not preferences that restrict choice.

Anywhere, USA June 25th 2017-In the aftermath of the tragic fire that killed 47 people last week fire investigators have concluded that two patrons got stuck in the doors, preventing anyone else from escaping. Alderman Igota Bigmouth today introduced legislation requiring all public facilities in the city to install garage doors as their main ingress/egress points and as fire escapes. “If the doors had been of sufficient size to accomodate normal size patrons, this tragedy could have been avoided,” alderman Bigmouth stated”

Fiction? Maybe so, but no less an authority than the Surgeon General is on record that obesity is the biggest health care crisis facing this country. The health risks are much the same as those from smoking, with one critical difference: obesity has been linked to the near epidemic rise in diabetes. Diabetes alone accounts for more health care dollars than any other disease in this country. Let’s see the mayor and alderwoman Krewson tackle one of the biggest health care problems we face.
Of course since less than 25% of the adult population of the country smokes, and over 33% of the population is obese, I douby that they’ll take this issue on. Besides not being politically correct, it might alienate too many voters and campaign contributors. Still it would be nice to think that in 20 years fat people would have to pay ruinous taxes on their super-size fries and have to stand out in the rain to eat them!

I have never smoked in my life. Both parents did but finally wised up and quit. Dad lived to be 83 but knew it was because he quit smoking 30 years earlier. Mom is now 82, lives in Missouri again, and quit 40 years ago. No doubt smoking kills people and cuts short their lives. Why would anyone want to be near someone whose breath could kill them?

Living in California, we have some wierd laws. But passing the no smoking indoors law was awesome. I don`t leave the restaurant smelling like I need to change clothes and shower. Common sense prevails! People just adjust to it. Businesses do to. And the employees don`t have to breath that toxic smell 8 hours a day. Think they`re not happy? The stink that covers every square inch of a smoking business makes it a very dirty place to be in.

Where I live, houses are very close to each other. When my neighbor lights up his cigar, by the time I notice it, my house stinks inside. I close most windows and turn on the fans to blow it out. Lysol helps too. Moving isn`t an option now. Point is, most smokers don`t care where their poison smoke ends up. In your lungs or home. At the least, Missouri residents deserve clean air to breath. Like everyone in America.

Go Rams! Go Angels! Go Lakers! Illegals GO HOME!

The “stink” is not dangerous so why bring it up when your trying to make a case for health? Would you eat in a restaurant that has candles burning? Its about the smell, not the fear of harming your health. The whole issue is fueled by preference not protection.

The “stink” IS the poison I`m talking about. As long as people are smoking, their poison breath just adds more into the air. Smokers can`t smell how bad it is. Example, a friend that quit smoking couldn`t believe how much better food tastes and how much better they could smell things. Now when they are near smokers, it makes them gag. They had no idea what they smelled like before. Secondhand smoke kills. Check the facts. Don`t worry, you guys will understand it one day!

I’m looking for local places to travel to for mini vacations that don’t cost a lot. Knowing that St. Louis doesn’t offer a smoking means it is off of my list of places to visit. Sorry, folks, but I’m not interested in battle with dry mouth, watering eyes and smoke-filled hair and clothes just to eat out at a St. Louis restaurant.