Your argument for "clarity" fails because nearly EVERY ordinance passed by the city of Minneapolis (or any legislative authority for that matter) "limits choices"! Parking restrictions "limit my choices"; leaf burning restrictions "limit my choices"; waste disposal restrictions "limit my choices"; zoning restrictions "limit my choices" and so forth and so forth but you get the point I think.
Restaurants and bars are licensed by the city of Minneapolis which places conditions and restrictions on those licenses. Mostly those restrictions and conditions are designed to protect public safety or public health. The smoking ban was enacted only after persuasive evidence that the effects of second hand smoking on non-smokers merited action based on a public health issue of considerable consequence. Thankfully, the courts and lawmakers have recognized that public accommodations - like bars and restaurants - must in fact be public! That means that they must accommodate ordinances to protect the health and safety of the public who wish to patronize them. That includes people who do not smoke. There has not been any activity to ban smoking in Minneapolis (or Minnesota). There is no public support for such a move and it is questionable if such an ordinance could pass legal muster and would certainly be near impossible to enforce. Given the experiment with Prohibition in the 20's, and the widespread abuse of illegal substances like marijuana, banning tobacco is not likely to eliminate its use. So, like alcohol, like gaming, lawmakers have decided that if people want it then they will be taxed for doing it! In fact, there are some who advocate legalizing marijuana and prostitution not because those are "wholesome" or "healthy" activities but because they could be taxed if legal! Jim Bernstein Fulton -----Original Message----- From: Michael Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 6:30 AM To: Jim Bernstein; 'Andy Driscoll'; 'Minneapolis Issues'; 'St. Paul Discuss' Subject: Re: [Mpls] Re: Smoking ban: Night One One more time for clarity: the smoking ban limits choices. It takes choice away. Before the ban everybody had a choice to patronize businesses based on their comfort with the smoke there. Businesses had a choice to run a smoking or non-smoking establishment. A business could choose to let the market dictate the smoking environment in their establishment. And all of us could make an informed choice whether or not we patronized such establishments. Now there is no more choice. Nobody has a choice.... patrons or business. Smoking ban advocates trumpet this as some sort of victory...... but it's not, even for them. Winning the battle may feel really great now, but losing the freedom to make ones own choices (especially choices one doesn't like to make) will eventually lead to a lost war. For all of us. Like it or not, everyone had choices before the ban. If you didn't like smoky bars, you could stay out of them. If you wanted a heater with your beer, you stayed out of the smoke-free establishments. Now there are no more choices. That simply is not good overall for all of us. As for the mental gymnastics our legislators play: you really need to pay attention. It's not all about regulation. They are taking HUGE amounts of tax money from a product that they are trying to ban because it's sooooooo bad and sooooo evil and is promoted by "BIG tobacco". If the product is so damn evil, ban it!!!! Please!!! Legislators are as addicted to tobacco revenue as smokers are to the leaf, and they talk out of both sides of their mouth concerning the substance. Smoking may be a "vice" that they believe they have a right to regulate, though they sure make a hell of a lot of money on it. Mike Thompson Windom ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Bernstein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Michael Thompson'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "'Andy Driscoll'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "'Minneapolis Issues'" <[email protected]>; "'St. Paul Discuss'" <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 2:34 AM Subject: RE: [Mpls] Re: Smoking ban: Night One > No "situational mental gymnastics" are required! Smoking - like alcohol > and gaming - is a regulated "vice" that is both tolerated and taxed. > Smoking - like consuming alcohol and gaming - is not banned but rather > limited to specific places and forbidden in others. > > Smoking in a public accommodation is not a right subject to ones > "choice"; never has been. The problem with smoking is the residue(the > smoke)which imposes a well defined, potentially hazardous situation on > other people who wish to enjoy that same public accommodation but who > choose not smoke. > > Prohibiting smoking in bars and restaurants does not limit ones "freedom > of choice" any more than driving, drinking, hunting, or having sex. All > of those are legal activities but citizens(as government)impose some > limits on where you can do them. > > Jim Bernstein > Fulton > > > --------------------------------------------- > And what about the hypocricy of the city council and state legislators > who > take in millions of dollars (in the form of tax revenues) from a product > they are publically admitting is a health hazard and are banning > (despite > it's legality). That type of situational mental gymnastics should make > all > of us queasy. > > I've read the entire thread about "Smoking ban: Night One". The smoking > ban > proponents were going to paint whatever rosy picture they needed to make > the > first night sound like the greatest thing since hot water. I have no > doubt > the atmosphere everywhere was different. But an n of one means exactly > squat. Even if the smoking ban is a resounding success the far greater > damage done is to everyone's freedom to make a choice. Voluntarily > abdicating one's freedom to make a decision does exponentially more > damage > to all of us than second-hand smoke will ever do. > > Mike Thompson > Windom > > > > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.1 - Release Date: 4/1/2005 > > > > -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.3 - Release Date: 4/5/2005 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.9.3 - Release Date: 4/5/2005 REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[email protected] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
