I guess it depends on what side of the fence you stand, whether you believe the smoking ban has had compromise.
Some write that Lantry compromised by putting in the smoking rooms. And proponents of the smoking ban say that this was the only compromise they were willing to make, and are now rescinding it, because some other communities passed a different version of a ban. Opponents of the ban want bars excluded with 50% or less food. The proponents of the ban won't even consider this to be voted on, so it had to be pulled. Seems to me only the opponents of the ban are talking compromise. Since any talk of ANY ban is a compromise to the opponents. So to me the only ones not willing to compromise and taking the low ground are the proponents. The proponents are taking an all or nothing stand. This may win, or it may lose. The next elections are going to be fun to say the least. So any talk of the opponents of the ban being unreasonable to me is totally partisan. The opponents are the ones making the biggest compromises by even talking about supporting/allowing some sort of a ban. Both sides need to take a step back and look at what is best for St Paul. This is not a public health issue as some want to say. It's an issue about some people wanting to control the behavior of others. That may not be a bad thing, but why ban smoking in bars and restaurants? Why not ban tobacco products all together. If this was a public health issue, it wouldn't be about smoke free bars and restaurants, it would be about a smoke free America. Even OSHA has said that the levels of carcinogens in second hand smoke in bars/restaurants is not above accepted levels. Where is the public health issue? It's not a public health issue, it's about controlling people's behavior. Until opponents of the ban start fighting back with the fact that this is not about public health, but behavior control, the opponents are going to continue to lose. This is the same as the gun control crowd. They said at first they just wanted to control certain types of guns. Then it became ammunition, then it became all guns. This is going down the same road. Let's just start at the end game. Either the proponents start going to go after making tobacco/nicotine products illegal, or let it alone altogether. Tom Thompson Como Park _____________________________________________ To Join: St. Paul Issues Forum Rules Discussion Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _____________________________________________ NEW ADDRESS FOR LIST: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, modify subscription, or get your password - visit: http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/stpaul Archive Address: http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/private/stpaul/
