Smokers head for sidewalks to puff, vent

HA HA I love it. Get used to it cause it is here to stay. Cant wait to laugh @ the fools outside this winter. This is the best change we have seen in our lifetime. If you dont like it stay home as all us non smokers have done over the years. Enjoy this clean air !

What were you a hermit or what stay home all these years give me a break.

We have had the ban in Lincoln for some time and I always hear people saying how great it is that you can go to bar and not smell like it! Bars offering food said that the business increased due to the cleaner air. This will pass with the angry smokers and life will go on!

I LOVE the fact that everywhere is non smoking....not only because I enjoy clean air but now children dont have to be exposed to it in a restaurant.

I agree with Smarty Jones. The funny thing is that smokers will tell you it's bad for them to stand out in the cold. GET A CLUE!

I appreciate the smoking ban. I live in Lincoln, and every time I went to a bar in Columbus, I couldn't stand it. I usually left early because the smoke was so bad, especially 4 jokers. I'd stink after leaving that ash tray.

I know I'm going to go to the bowling alleys and the Maximus pool tables more often now.

Omg, what a bunch of big babies! Cigarettes kill! They are worse for the people that are forced to breath it, it's about time smokers have to take there nasty choice outside away from those that do not smoke!

Finally maybe ppl can get some service at stack in steak instead of all the workers sitting around smoking.

To Awesome: Maximus has been smoke free for quite sometime now!

If smokers had any brains they would step a little farther away from the entry. I guess this is what is meant by: "IQ of a smoker"

How about an alcohol ban?? Drunk driving kills. Alcohol fueled fights hurt people.

Bars should be excluded from the ban because in order to go into the bar you have to be 21. Therefore you're an adult. You can make the choice to smoke or not to smoke. If you chose to go into a bar where people smoke...then don't complain. YOU made the choice.

I work at a lounge here in town and yesterday being the 1st day of the ban I saw a HUGE decrease of the number of customers that came normally come in. There was no "dinner rush" like normal. Only 1 customer all day said something about the place being smoke-free and liking it. Most of the customers we have come in there come in to eat their meal, then sit and relax, drink, smoke, and play pool for hours. None of that happened yesterday.

Non-smokers make the choice to go around where they KNOW people smoke, aka BARS! Why should smokers rights be taken away when smokers aren't the ones complaining??

Just wait and see...our government is going to end up telling us what kind of cars to drive (see the new MPG ratings that auto makers have to comply to), they're gonna tell us what to eat, how to dress, and so on. It's coming people! Yay for our elected officials!!

All of the posters so far (mostly seeming to be non-smokers) come off as a bunch of sanctimonius, rude, overbearing cretins. Smokers have often been accused of being disgusting and rude because of their habit, and yet I don't hear them calling the non-smokers names and questioning their intelligence. I think judging from these initial posts we all know who the truly rude and disgusting people are around here. You can't wash hatred, mean-spiritedness and disgusting personalities away like you can the smell of smoke. I'll take a kind-hearted, generous smoker over one of you jerks any day.

as i posted on the other smoking ban article:

i myself am a smoker. it should probably come as no surprise to the rest of you that i happen to disagree with the new law. the way i see it, before the law was instituted, there were smoking and non smoking bars alike. don't like to smell the smoke? fine, go to pawnee or maximus or what have you. want to smoke? that's fine too, you can go to the 4 jokers, sahara, westbrooks and the list goes on. if a bar like pawnee, for instance, as a business decision (not as a result of a law) decides they don't want me to smoke in there, fine, i'll go out side. i've got no problem respecting the business's decision.

however, i do find it to be total B.S. that i should have to go out in 10 degree weather and windchills of -30 to get my nicotine fix just to walk back in and find that my seat is re-inhabited and my drink is gone. i think that the non-smoking advocates are not looking at this from a multi-point perspective.

i know smoking is bad. most days my system is fine, and i'm not about to sit here and lie to every one of you and tell you i don't take a hit b/c of it when i get a cold or the flu etc. i know that 2nd hand smoke is bad. don't like it? then don't hang around me. i know its costly, but lately it seems to me that the government is willing to help out the tobacco chewers (and u ppl think smoking is gross?) and continually stick it to us smokers. smoking doesn't mean there is a 100% chance that i'm goin to die of cancer, but i cannot deny that it raises those chances, and i'm aware of that, these are consequences that i'm willing to accept as a result of my actions, shocking, i know. and besides, have any of you seen the cost of patches? at 70 bucks a pop, i think they're the ones shooting smoke up our rears.

people, what i'm getting at here is what ever happened to the term "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?" i understand that some of you don't like the way my cigarette smells and i'm no one to disagree with you, but if i wanna make the decision to do it, then who are you to tell me i can't? to me, it seems that the government is telling us more and more every day that we can't do this, and can't do that. this is a decision that needs to left up to the bar owners, not the government, period. it isn't something like child pornography, or theft or murder(tho i kno some of you are going to beg to differ) as some of you suggest. this is me choosing to do what makes me happy. it just so happens that smoke does, deal with it people.

so please, bring on your self righteous speeches and lectures about how i'm such a bad person for having this opinion. go ahead and tell me i'm killing millions around me as well as my self in an effort to preserve my "happiness" and deny you of yours. things were fine the way they were before, it was at least a two way street then. now i'm told i need to act and think this way. you people (the non smokers) are too stubborn to see this for what it is. and then on top of it all, i get threatened by people like "smoking COP" to mind my P's and Q's.

RIDICULOUS!

i know i'm probably out gunned in this debate, but o well. i'll just sit here under my shade tree, puffing away on my cigarette (until they tell me i can't do it there anymore, either) and wait for the next right they take away from me. and the way things have been going, it shouldn't be a long wait either.

Very well said Embarrassed to be a Non-Smoker. I was thinking the same thing as I read some of those posts. There seems to be an enormous amount of anger built up in those folks.

I hate cigarette smoke, and smoker's breath, but Government intrusion and socialism is a dangerous path. I would take millions of stinky, yellow toothed citizens over Stalin and Hitler any day. I can steer clear of the smokers; the Government, I can not.

Brian,
You must have never been to any other bars in Columbus. 4 Jokers is one of the few bars here with the high ceiling and a venting system to draw the dirty air out.

my point exactly, Label Maker. like i said, i have no problem obeying a non smoking establishments rules if it was the establishment that wanted it, not the government.

Its about time us non smokers can enjoy some fresh air in a bar.

Embarrassed to be a non smoker, you can't understand why non smokers question the intelligence of smokers? I personally don't assume that smokers are stupid, in fact I've known some that were highly intelligent. I can only speak for myself and not other non-smokers, but I just question the intelligence of their decision to smoke. What kind of logic goes into the decision to give a large corporation the monetary equivalent of a 50 inch plasma tv every year, to slowly poison them? To make their hair and clothes stink, to age their faces prematurely, and to foul their breath and discolor their teeth. Maybe the person who has made that decision is not a stupid person, but I will argue they've made a stupid decision. As for your assumption that smokers are the friendly fun lovers and non smokers are all a bunch of arrogant jerks, I have to argue that point with you. Most smokers have for years cared little about non smokers and their quest for healthy air, and now that the shoe is on the other foot, the jubilance of the non smoker is being misinterpreted as arrogance. But as Smarty Jones said in the very first post, it's here to stay.

Speaking as a non-smoker living in Lincoln, I think the state missed an opportunity (starting here in Lincoln 2 years back) to profit off this situation.

Instead of forcing tax-paying businessowners to not allow a legal product in their establishment, I think lawmakers could have used this as an opportunity to bring additional revenue into the state.

If a barowner wants to sell a legal product like alcohol, they need to purchase a liquor license in order to do so. Why couldn't the same have been done for a smoking license. Make the price something steep, like $25k as an example, and at least give barowners an opportunity (at a cost) to continue allowing smoking in their establishment.

My guess is, some would pay it, some wouldn't. The ones that pay it would continue to service the smokers while non-smokers would frequent the ones that don't pay it. Either way, the city/state makes some money and no one's freedoms are forced upon them by government.

Smokers you will get over this. And the non-smokers will eventually stop talking about it too.

I've smoked briefly and not smoked most of my life. It's a personal choice because the government didn't tell me to stop. They tried that with alcohol, prohibition, and it didn't work.

So you are still able to smoke, just not in non-smoker's space. Smoking and food just do not go together in my book. The smell of good food is part of the eating enjoyment. Smoking while drinking is a major cause of oral cancer. Yes, not everyone will get it, but it's not easily treatable. Even the Marlboro Man died of lung cancer.

Please try to kick the habit, and if that doesn't work, I hope you will understand that others do not want to condem you. They just want to enjoy the restaurant or bar too. I don't know all the regulations, but maybe private clubs do not have to follow the new rules.

If the government is so interested in our health, then why don't they just go ahead and make smoking illegal in the first place?

Obviously the answer is because big tobacco companies have a huge lobbying presense in Washington. Those same politicians telling us how they are cutting out smoking for our safety (except in cigar bars at the country club) have no problem keeping the product legal while their pockets are being filled by lobbyists.

Simply put, if government doesn't want us smoking, then make it illegal. If not, then don't make it illegal to do something at a business that is perfectly legal to do at your home. Let the businessowners decide what to do with their own business!

If customers don't like it, they don't have to patronize the place.

Snowman, we aren't out gunned in the debate. Liberty is always the correct answer. We are just out numbered by people who would rather take someone else's Liberty, than exercise their own.

Other than when I was a child, my times in cigarette smoke were my choice. Nobody forced me to go in, and nobody forced me to stay. Evidently, that is not good enough for these other non-smokers. Anyway, keep up the good fight; just don't expect me to sit at the table with you.

Then we have JB, sending up the old second hand smoke signal. The smokers are far more endangered than the bystanders. To believe otherwise, is not logical.

The last time I checked, we as human beings are not natural born smokers. At some point in life, a person has to make a choice to pick up a cancer stick and put it in their mouth.

The output of such a device causes harm to people around them, the air they breath as is their right to breath last time I checked as well.

Let me know if I am wrong on this one as well, but since we live in America we have a free-will to go where we please, whether thats out to eat or for a drink.

So for someone to say that nonsmokers are self righteous for wanting to stay healthy and breath clean air is flat out dumb. Why should our rights be taken away because someone that lets a stick a few inches long have that much control over their life?

If this law helps someone stop smoking then more power to the law. I would think smokers would be appreciative of that, most smokers I know want some incentive to stop. Well isnt saving money on those cancer sticks incentive enough? Wouldnt one want to save on health care costs, or do smokers just drive up the cost of my health insurance?

If you smokers have to smoke, then smoke in the privacy of your own home. At least then I dont have to encounter the rudeness of some smokers that find no issue with blowing the poisen right in my face. I have never really understood why someone would find that appropriate. Also, why do some people see no issue with lighting up in a nonsmokers hosue or car? Not all smokers do that, but some have no consideration at all.

So since I have never heard the constitution say we need to protect those that harm the environment and health of others, THIS LAW IS LONG OVERDUE!

THANK YOU Embarrassed to be a Non-Smoker AND The_SnowMan710!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THIS ISN'T ABOUT SMOKERS VS NON-SMOKERS, THIS ABOUT GOVT DICTATING OUR LIFES!

AND ALL OF YOU THAT WILL NOW BE GOING TO THE BARS CAN DIE OF LIVER CANCER!! DRUNK DRIVERS!! AND STUPID S**T DRUNK PEOPLE DO!! ALSO PLEASE DON'T COMPLAIN TO US SMOKERS WHEN ONE OF YOUR FREEDOMS ARE TAKEN AWAY NEXT

Calm down smokers and take a deep breath (if you can). Your anti-government, personal freedom, liberty, etc..rants don't make any sense. This law is not about taking away your rights; it's about protecting the rights of others. We live under hundreds, if not thousands, of rules and regulations that are in place to protect and promote a civil society. Our lawmakers have decided that your right to enjoy a cigarette is not greater than the right of another to enjoy clean air. Personal rights extend only as far as anothers personal rights. I have the right to play music as loud as I want to but I can't do it at 2 AM because it is interfering with my neighbors right to peace and quiet. Is the government infringing on my rights by not allowing me to drink and drive? This law was also put in place to protect employees, who's right to work in a clean, healthy environment is greater than your right to smoke. All businesses are subject to laws that protect customers and employees; this one has just taken a lot longer to enact.

To What about bob:
More liberal jibber jabber. Wait until the Obamanation government tells you what doctor & hospital to go to. This was once the home of the free, not the over govern!

Get use to it all you complainers, seriously....EVERYWHERE is going to be smoke free really soon. Crying about it is not going to make it go away. It is a way to make sure 2nd hand smoke does not kill innocent people everyday. I am a smoker and im glad they went smoke free.

Doc:

I'm about as far from a liberal as you can get. I don't like government interference anymore than you do but I think you're missing the point on this one. When the Telegram gets on the right side of things and starts printing articles exposing our Marxist/Socialist president and his agenda, I'll tell you what I really think.

“I don’t care for (the ban) too much, but it made me quit smoking,” Zulkoski said, because “I can’t smoke while working.”

^^^ THIS is the best thing that can come from the initiation of the ban. Please smokers, care enough about your own bodies to quit. I promise you will feel 1000x better.

The government has banned the use of lead and asbestos among other things to protect your health. Is this an infringement on your rights also or just looking out for your best interest?

You wouldn't eat lead or mercury everyday knowing that it would slowly kill you so why smoke? I guess I just don't get it.

I'm curious how many smokers wish they would never have started or wish they could quit without any side effects.

What about Bob:
You are correct on the socialist approach our government has taken. I don't feel I missed the point on this topic. Understand the rhetoric on the health issue. However I believe a private business has the right to run their business as they please. If smokers chase away business then the owner has a decission to make. As a customer you also have the same decission to make concerning your patronage. I agree that places one must go, such as City & Government office need to be smoke free.

Whine, and wheeze, cough and complain, it's all very entertaining. By the way, don't forget to pick up your cigarette butts that you throw outside, litter bugs. I smoked for years, and yes, I do feel alot better since quitting, it's not easy, but worth it. Don't litter!!! I hate to see cigarette butts on the ground.

One of the problems with smoking besides the obvious health reasons is that many that can't afford it do it. For example I have relatives that can barely pay their bills and provide for their children and they still smoke away. I have a hard time feeling sorry for them when they are spending their money so foolishly!!!!!!!!!!

To all the people that cant smoke at the hospitals,nursing homes etc. Please consider not smoking at all when you are working. I live across the street from the old hospital and now the workers are getting in there cars and parking it front of our houses and smoking in the cars. we all have children and we dont want them to be outside an have to watch you people sit in your cars with smoke rolling out. Please be considerate of others. we didnt make the ban so we shouldnt have to deal with that

re: Jokes on you Brian

4 jokers ceilings aren't high enough and their 'venting' system must have been terrible. What vents, the front door? Look at any photos from that place and it looks like people are in cloud cover or they have a smoke machine running constantly.

I do laugh when it's -10 and there's 10 people huddled around the front door of bars sucking on their cancer sticks.

Columbus bars like 4 jokers are so funny, it's one of the few places where you can go hear gangster rap followed up by some lame pop country song. Did you hire the D.J. from Little Bo's or something? They were just as bad. I like a bar with an identity, not 'lets be everything to everyone'. I repeatedly almost go into musical shock when I go there.

Well said, "what about Bob". One mans liberty to do as he pleases is restricted by the effects of his action on others. This is not liberal garbage "Doc"(do they award phds for ignorance?), this is constitutional law backed up by two centuries of case law. You can't yell "fire" in a crowded theatre, and you can't swing your arms wildly in a crowd. However, you can do either of those things to your hearts content out in a cornfield or in your living room. It's the same with smoking, do it all you want, but when it effects other people, the government has the right and even the responsibility to step in. One last thing, the whole "what are they going to take away next" argument is weak indeed. We are talking about smoking in public places, not drinking or anything else. Every law has to stand or fall on its own merits.

"After the first day of being forced to leave his drink inside and step out for a smoke, Wurdeman said he is more inclined to stay home where he can enjoy both at the same time."

Who forced him?

Worldwide, between 80,000 and 100,000 kids start smoking every day.
Every eight seconds, someone dies from tobacco use.
About 15 billion cigarettes are sold daily - or 10 million every minute.
About 12 times more British people have died from smoking than from World War II.
Cigarettes cause more than one in five American deaths.
Among young teens (aged 13 to 15), about one in five smokes worldwide.
Evidence shows that around 50% of those who start smoking in adolescent years go on to smoke for 15 to 20 years.
About a quarter of youth alive in the Western Pacific Region will die from smoking.
Half of long-term smokers will die from tobacco. Every cigarette smoked cuts at least five minutes of life on average - about the time taken to smoke it.

Smoking is the single largest preventable cause of disease and premature death. It is a prime factor in heart disease, stroke and chronic lung disease. It can cause cancer of the lungs, larynx, oesophagus, mouth, and bladder, and contributes to cancer of the cervix, pancreas, and kidneys.

More than 4,000 toxic or carcinogenic chemicals have been found in tobacco smoke.

One British survey found that nearly 99% of women did not know of the link between smoking and cervical cancer.

At least a quarter of all deaths from heart diseases and about three-quarters of world's chronic bronchitis are related to smoking.

Smoking-related diseases cost the United States more than $150 billion a year.

I hope and pray that the non-smoking ban stays in effect.
To "To smarty jones": Yes, I stayed away from smoking places a lot which resulted in straying home or going home early. One reason I quit office work and went out into the manufacturing shop was cigarette smoke. I would not be surprised if many people really suffered from the smokers.

Doc, I have to disagree with your comment that these are "private" businesses. Restaurants and bars are places of public accommodation. (Check Nebr statutes 20-133 and 20-132) The significance of this is that both smokers and non-smokers enter into places of public accommodation on equal footing. In other words, both smokers and non-smokers have an equal right to be present inside of these places of public accommodation. Once inside, we know that smokers and non-smokers cannot peacefully co-exist when both groups exercise their rights (non-smokers want smoke free air, smokers want to light up). It's obvious that designating a non-smoking section in a restaurant is meaningless, at least as far as the non-smoker is concerned. If it is not possible to fully accommodate both groups, which group's rights should be protected? Should we protect the right of the smoker to consume a legal product? Or should we protect the non-smoker's right to clean air? I think the answer is obvious. If you choose to protect the smoker, you can only do so by subjecting non-smokers to a hazardous product, thereby infringing on the non-smoker's rights. On the other hand, if you choose to protect the non-smoker, the only infringement you are imposing on the smoker is that he cannot smoke inside that restaurant or bar. If he or she wants to smoke, he or she can do so - he only needs to walk outside of the building. When compared to the other result - subjecting non-smokers to secondhand smoke - asking a smoker to walk a few feet to smoke a cigarette is clearly the lesser imposition.
Please keep in mind that you cannot protect the rights of both groups. One group's rights will be infringed upon, whether there is a smoking ban or not. Without a ban, the rights of non-smokers to breath clean air will continue to be violated.
Finally, please recognize that there is no product available to consumers other than cigarettes (cigars too), which, when used as it is intended to be used, will cause harm to the health of those in the presence of the user. So, the argument about being exposed to drunk drivers fails, as that is not how cars are intended to be used. If there was a way to confine the smoke to the person who chooses to smoke, then we obviously wouldn't be having this debate. Unfortunately, those who choose to remain smoke-free are subjected to the habit of others in places of public accommodation, which the non-smoker has as much right to patronize as does the smoker.

Let's just let our gov't take full and complete control over everything!! Then no one will have any right to complain about anything! YES! LET'S DO IT! (wait, it's already in progress)

Smokers and non-smokers alike should be weary of the gov't telling private businesses how to be ran. But, they're not, so let the chips fall where they may.

I'm moving to Mexico!

Chicago Mike & PWT:
Wrong you are. If these places are NOT PRIVATE but PUBLIC then does the PUBLIC have an investment in the business and share in the profit and losses? How can a store refuse service to someone who is not wearing shoes or shirt. What about their rights? Having the government tell you how to run your business is the same as telling you what color you have to paint your house.
CM: PHD in ignorance??? I don't waste my time having a battle of wits with an unarmed man. If your best way to make your point is to cast remarks such as you are known for, your blogging has the same use as Charmin to me.

Let's us not forget our freedom of choice. You CHOOSE to go where you want. If you don't like smoke stay out. Who suffers, not you. We sailed to this country to get away from tyranny only to have it raise it's ugly head hundreds of years later.

TO: PWT
I hate to tell you this but even though your reasoning, facts and arguments are spot on, the smokers don't seem to be able to comprehend them. I am going to print out your comment and post it wherever I can. I would add that if a non-smoker was asked to leave the premises while the smoker enjoyed his/her cigarette the non-smoker would not be able to re-enter the building after the cigarette had been extinguished and expect clean air but the smoker could return to the same air quality as when they left.

You all are too funny; a year from now you won't remember what it was like to be in a smoke filled room and you won't want to go back to it either.

I actually can see both sides and personally think bar owners should be able to have a smoking and a non smoking bar as long as thehy are separated by walls and heating/cooling units and ductwork. I am an ex smoker and I know that it is not good for you and am glad I don't do it anymore, not to mention the high cost of cigarettes. My allergies and many other thins have improved since I quit and if I go to a happy hour for ever 15 minutes, I have a horrible headache for the next 24 hours or so.

I've always heard that alchohol offsets the effects of smoking.
Non-smokers are just jealous because they can't blow smoke rings.
I don't need a nicotine patch, I need a Saturated Fat patch!

Brian,
4 Jokers, along with semi-non-smoking Pawnee were the only places that I could spend a full night in. My eyes would burn in a lot of bars in this town. Pawnee was the worst back in the day.

I think 4 Jokers did a good job with the smoke and sounds like they will have a nice beer garden now.

Princess...you're funny. Go to Mexico if you want, but then we'd probably have to hear about how no one in Mexico speaks English.

Beer gardens and coats are the answer. Then you have the freedom to be a slave to nicotine and drink booze at the same time. Problem solved.

Doc,
I'm not "wrong" re "private" vs "public accomodation." I'm simply telling you what is provided for in the Nebraska statutes. Go ahead and look it up -- sections 20-132 and 20-133. "All persons within this state shall be entitled to a full and equal enjoyment of any place of public accommodation, as defined in 20-132 to 20-143, without discrimination or segregation on the grounds of race, color, sex, religion, national origin, or ancestry."
That would include non-smokers.
The definition of "places of public accomodation" is long, but it includes any restaurant, or other facility principally engaged in selling food for consumption on premises. It includes a lot of other places as well, but I'm not going to try and list everything here. Bars that don't sell food may be included in the general definition of "all places or businesses offering or holding out to the general public goods, services, etc."
This means non-smokers have the same right to be in these establishments as do smokers.
You may argue that they are privately owned, and that is true. But that doesn't mean they aren't subject to regulation by the Nebraska legislature, and it clearly doesn't mean they are not places of public accommodation per 20-132 and 20-133.

PWT:
Read your statute one more time and tell me where allowing only smokers is discriminating? The statute covers discrimination. Last I checked smokers and non-smokers were not a race, color, creed, sex,religion, etc. What you all seem to be missing is that if someone owns a business and there is an activity at this establishment that offends someone, then find a place that doesn't offend them. It's alright to allow establishments that cater to say homosexual patrons. This may offend some. As a stretch one could also surmise if you were to go there you might contact a deadly disease.
I get really confused as to what attraction these facilities have that once smoking is not allowed you all are going to flock to them? Again I don't smoke, but I do believe in personal freedoms and not have a sect of the population posing it's will on a private business owner. Christ if I don't like Mexican food I don't go to Taco Johns and insist stop serving tacos!

Doc, I make a lot of good points, but you ignore them. You are wrong on this, your argument has no basis in law, common sense, or logic on any level. But I can call you ignorant all day long, you call call me witless, but at the end of the day you still can't go into a bar or restaurant in Nebraska and light up. I guess you'll just have to figure out another way to appear more macho, sophisticated, cool, tough, or whatever it was that the tobacco company used to con you into smoking. Have fun outside this winter!

all i can say is WAAAAAHHHHHHH!
It's ABOUT TIME!!!
Non-smokers have had to put up with your toxic death gas, now deal with our CLEAN AIR!!!! hahahahahahahahahaha

CM:
I don't smoke. Also I do not drink. If you could read you would have seen I stated my non-smoking status. Maybe it is the comprehension skill you are lacking. I know, you just assumed that. Well take away the "umed" and that pretty well describes what you made of yourself! Oh, and please don't call me names, it hurts so bad. The only point I can see you made is the one on the hat you wear.

oh boy...where to begin?

Mama T: go back and re-read my original post and see if your response to it makes sense.

now the rest of you...

i think this would be a little easier if some of you people would quit gloating about it to us smokers. if you guys can't make a response w/o the use of insults (Chicago Mike, Dee Dee Dee, Brian) then don't bother. i'm sure we're all old enough here to choose whether or not we want to be smokers, lets all at least debate like it, shall we? Furthermore, stop telling us to quit smoking, we know the risks associated with it, and i for one will stop on my own terms if i ever decide to.

so, what i've got so far is that people like myself feel our rights are being violated and the non-smoking part of the community feels as if theirs where before the ban. tell me now, was it really that difficult for you people to simply go to a different bar if it bothered you that much. go on down to pawnee where there is no smoking AND big windows so you can watch all of us freeze just so we can enjoy our LEGAL recreation, Brian.

PWT, you make a strong arguement. but, don't we live in a society where nobody's rights should be violated? i don't think that a compromise would have been that difficult in this case. at the end of the day, smoking is still a legal action, hazardous or otherwise. i can understand family places such as restaurants and the bowling alleys being smoke free, but why not just let us do it in the bars, if the owner decides s/he wants to permit it? i think that sounds like a fair trade, doesn't anyone else?

the way i see it, in a sense, there are 2 parties here with their rights being violated now as a result of the new law. the rights of the smokers, and the rights of the business owners.

you guys pushed and pushed and pushed for this law, but i'm not so convinced that some of you will end there. how long will it be before i see a proposal to stop people from smoking while walking down the street, driving their car, or even in their own homes if they so desire? did it occur to anyone that you're more than likely not going to get many people to quit? the result of this is going to be displacing us to different places, and i'm sure will here about it when our welcome is wore through...

You knew for a year now (while Bush was the one in office) that the smoking ban was coming, and yet, it's Obama and his administration's fault?

Get real, losers.

Yes...this smoking ban is GREAT! The bars are empty. Those of us who work as waitresses in the bars and rely on tips are the ones suffering. THANK YOU NON-SMOKERS!! Wanna pay my bills now???

To all smokers who think this isnt the end...well its probably not. Nebraska is already way behind in banning smoking indoors! A lot of states already have a smoking ban in place. And for those of you who have been outside of the town of Columbus would know this! I actually just was in Scottsdale and you cant even smoke on the sidewalk within 20 feet of the entrance of a bar or restaurant there because of the effects of secondhand smoke that WILL kill a person overtime. Some other smoking bans include NYC, California and AZ etc. So once again crawl out of your hole and open your eyes and realize its not just NE.!!

For all of you whining non smokers that think that smoking is so bad and your going to die from it. Well why don't you google for the oldest person to ever live (Documented) she was 122 years old and 164 days. Guess what she was a SMOKER (must really shorten your life span huh. She quit smoking 3 years before her death only because she couldn't light her cig. Dang smoking is just so bad. God will Take you when he wants you.

I think this is just hilarious! I am an ex smoker that still struggles with the addiction every day. I have friends that still smoke and every time they light up it is tough for me to not grab one from them and light up too.

Quit being immature about this though. You can't be labelled intelligent because you don't smoke just like you can't be called unintelligent because you do. All of us have rights! Smokers- would you light up in Church? Or, the grocery store? Or in a Library? I don't think you would although there are bad apples in every crowd. Non smokers- would you deliberately do harm to yourself and/or someone else in Church? Or, the grocery store? How about the library? All too often it is about the individual and their sense of integrity as well as if they can find a balance between their needs and how their needs may affect others.

Once again, I struggle with the addiction every day. But I also know that the reason that laws are put into place is to protect the people that have had their rights infringed upon. When I was smoking, I would always say, "What about the smokers rights?" You have the right to smoke. Although it may not be in every place you wish, you still have the right to go buy your cigs and smoke them as long as you do not infringe upon the rights of the non smokers.

Everybody feels like they get the short end of the (cancer)stick. If you want to complain about it or just play the victim, that is your right too. We do know that second hand smoke can kill. Been proven over and over. If you want to do something about it, I encourage you to lobby for what you believe in.

I really don't believe there will be any bars or restaurants closing down because of the smoking ban so the economy will not suffer. I do believe however that the town of Columbus will see a different crowd of people going out and enjoying themselves now that the ban is in place. Might actually be a good thing for the local economy.

Smokers don't worry- the government makes too much money off the taxe$ it collects from selling cigarettes so they will NEVER ban smoking. You may just have to find a different place to enjoy your right to smoke.

Princess- that was a funny comment. Good luck with your smoking down in Mexico and beware of the cartel.

You're right Princess, drunk driving DOES kill... hence the reason it is ILLEGAL.

Alcohol is one of the most regulated substances known to man. They dictate when, where, and how old you have to be to ingest it.

And why do smokers such as this "Princess" character love to make the jump to "Let's ban alcohol!"?? 1) Nobody made smoking illegal, you simply have to go outside... 2) the big difference between alcohol and smoking is that I can sit down at a bar and drink a beer, meanwhile, you can sit within three inches of me and not feel any effects from it... 3) if for some crazy reason they made it illegal for me to drink a beer indoors of a public place, I'd simply go outide to drink it! I'm not lazy.

Columbus is in it's usual status with this smoking ban, years behind the rest of the nation.

Pawnee didn't make an independent "business decision" as you say to not allow smoking. After their fire, adding the equipment to handle the smoke would have added 40k more to the remodel. Doing this wouldnt have made any sense as the equipment would be useless once the ban was in place. So they infact decided to go non-smoking because of the inevitable ban.

Also, if the particular bar you work at happens to be empty it is not due to the lack of smokers. More likely it is due to the lack of service by the people working there.

Doc;
You're right, the quoted statutes cover discrimination. I think my point was lost in the way I wrote that post. My point is that restaurants and bars are places of public accomodation, subject to regulation by the legislature, and that when a nonsmoker walks into one of these businesses, he does so on equal footing with smokers and/or anyone else that enters the building. Therefore, per my earlier post, a decision must be made as to which one of these groups (smokers v nonsmokers) you wish to protect. They cannot occupy the same space in harmony, so only one group can be protected. The legislature and a majority of the Nebraska people support the protection of the nonsmoker over the smoker. I think, for the reasons I gave in my earlier post, that this result is just and right.
Snowman, I personally agree with you that there should have been some room for compromise on this. I personally couldn't care less if a bar that does not serve food wants to allow smoking. Restaurants are a different issue in my mind, and should always be smoke free. I could be wrong on this, but I think the Lincoln city council tried to find such a compromise and they couldn't get it worked out because the devil was in the details. Does a bar serve food if it sells only chips and peanuts? That kind of thing. But if you have an establishment that serves alcohol and alcohol only, then I say "smoke your brains out" and I'll go enjoy a beer at the smoke-free restaurant around the corner.

PWT:
Point is the business owner is being dictated on how to run his business. By your own admission you would not go into a bar where there is smoking to eat but would go to a non-smoking resturant. Bottom line is that be it smoking, alcohol, shoes, shirts,etc, the business owner should be in control of what type of atmosphere they wish to have. If it repels customers, then they fail and will change to meet their customer base. I wouldn't take my grandkids into a smoke filled environment. Therefore I do not patronize establishments that allow smoking, plain and simple. However I am strongly against making them change to fit my needs. We need to keep the "FREE" in free enterprise. Too much government is not good! As government tightens their grip on other facets of our daily lifes, even the non-smokers who championed this cause will be crying out.

Doc
Forcing people not to kill themselves and others is hardly government control.

20 per pack:
So it must have been the Tooth Fairy that instituted the smoking ban and not a branch of the government.
You can put a dress on a pig but it's still a pig! Now don't take that personal;)

Doc
Since you've kept your sense of humor and have remained cordial throughout this I'm going to sign off and let you have the last word.

to, "to snowman": sounds like that was a business decision to me. they at least had the CHOICE to make it one way or the other. the fact that they chose to be smoke free is irrelevant to this, my point is that they could choose how to run their business.

PWT: now that you say it, i think there was a big stink (no pun intended) raised in Lincoln over the food thing. i can't remember all the details about the Lincoln deal, but if someone could come up with a clear cut line-in-the-sand definition of what a restaurant is and what a bar is, then they could make that compromise to let the smokers back in the bar pretty easily, in my opinion. unfortunately, its probably now going to take a big effort by the smoking activists to get the compromise to the ban.

now, to those of you who might support an outdoor smoking ban: if someone thinks for a minute that if there is a law that says i can't smoke on the sidewalks, parking lots, street corners, or even within 20 feet of any public building, and i'm going to obey it, i must say you're sadly mistaken. the government has successfully pushed us smokers outside, but as long as i'm outside, i'm going to smoke where i damn well please. i would urge other smokers to do the same.

I as a smoker have been treated like a 2nd class citizen. I'm dirty and disgusting and I stink. Now, I'm "Killing children with my habbit". when is it going to stop? I can appreciate the fact that non-smokers would like clean air to breath, but to be perfectly honest, that's never goin to happen. People get cancer. It's not just because of smoking, or second hand smoke. everything now can give you cancer, even stepping outside your house. Are we going to outlaw that too? Come on, this government that we love oh so dearly is screwing with our lives. When are we going to band together and stop this? It's not just the smoking, it's everything. Let us live our lives the way we want and choose to.

Proud Smoker
Seriously? Your proud to be a smoker like it's some kind of accomplishment?

"as long as i'm outside, i'm going to smoke where i damn well please"

This is the smokers attitude that has always upset me. They smoke in front of store entrances without any regard for anyone else. I would rather have them smoking in bars than outside.

The_SnowMan710

Would it kill you to just stop smoking?

TO: The_SnowMan710
It's your whole childish attitude that created problems in the first place. Why do you think you have the right to stand outside of a business and blow smoke in my face? What did I ever do to you? Even when there weren't any smoking bans and people smoked everywhere smokers would stand at the entrance to a store or business and blow smoke at people coming in or leaving. If I did something to you as you were walking by would you put up with it?

The_SnowMan710 and other inconsiderate smokers.

Hypothetical situation. Let's just say I went downtown shopping. I'm walking down the sidewalk and you walk by smoking. I get a face full of smoke. I stop at a crosswalk and you're standing there, smoking, waiting for the light to turn, I get a face full of smoke. I'm going to enter a store and you're standing outside talking to someone and smoking, I get a face full of smoke. I leave the store and you're still standing there smoking, another face full of smoke. I get in my car and stop at the red light, you're stopped next to me smoking and it blows into my car, I get a face full of smoke. This whole time I have been minding my own business not bothering anyone but I have to breathe in all of your smoke. I can't understand why you think you have this right. Would it be so hard to make sure you're downwind when smoking or don't stop in front of doorways? That's all I'm asking.

wow, u guys took me way too literally on that one. honestly, none of you know who i am, so how can you make such assumptions? what would make you guys think that i'm going to go around blowing smoke in your faces intentionally? Smokers are not bad people, despite popular belief. when i smoke outside, i try to stand down wind of my group, blow my smoke away from the group, and try to properly dispose of the butt where butt cans are available. what i'm saying is that i'm basically kicked out of the bars now if i wanna smoke, so since i have to go outside, then i'm going to smoke on the street, on the sidewalks, in front of the door of the bar, anywhere i want to outside, BUT i will do it in the fashion that i've always done it. respectfully being mindful as best i can of who is around me.

now as far as you guys crying about the smokers hanging out in front of businesses smoking...what did i just get done saying about the law just displacing the smokers? you got it the way you want it inside, so you're just gonna have to live with our "smoke screen of death" hanging out in front of the door before you walk in. it seems to me that some of you want to have your cake and eat it too. i'm not the one having the childish attitude about this, there's plenty of reasons why i think something with this law needs to be changed legal and otherwise.

and about the hypothetical situation with the smoke blowing into the car, trust me pal, if you knew what was in the emissions blowing out of the exhaust pipes of all the cars, a waft of cigarette smoke is the least of your problems.