8
MAY

Texas Smoking ban is diluted

Share this article: Share this article del.icio.us Share this article digg Share this article google Share this article netscape Share this article reddit Share this article myweb Share this article fark Share this article furl
AUSTIN – The House all but stubbed out a statewide ban on smoking in public buildings Monday, passing severely weakened legislation that allows property owners to exempt themselves – even in cities with bans in place.

The changes render the legislation meaningless and threaten to unravel city bans, though it's unlikely those changes will survive a conference committee – if it gets that far.

The ban passed 91-48, after a two-day clash between anti-smoking activists and local-control and property-rights supporters. The fight finally ended in an 11th hour agreement by the bill's author to just get the bill passed, in any form, before a constitutional deadline kills it later this week.

Full Article

May 08, 2007 10:02 am   Email to a Friend

Comments

Al Francees on Feb 09, 2008 10:31 am

Government continues to chip away our rights bit by bit. As a bar owner I feel that I have the right to refuse service to anyone, and manage my busines to the upmost of my ability. I do not need city leaders to micro-manage it. If 90% of my customers were non-smokers then my busines would cater to them, but it is not, so as owner I should have a say so as to wether to allow it or not. I'm in busines to make a profit and feel that my rights are being violated by a smoking ban, where do non-smokers right begin and ours end. In reference to Jim Grey's comment "I don't know why many smokers seem to feel they own the bar and that I can go somewhere else" The customer does not own the bar, I do and not the city officials.
Karen sums it up, kids do not belong in bars and I should make the decision wether to allow it or not. If, you ever attend one of those city hearings that are proposing to ban smoking, you will notice that most of the anti smokers are either city, county hospital, cancer society or heart society employees (you can tell by their white uniforms, stetescopes,or name tags). I know because I have attended those hearings. You do not see too many smokers there because they are at work and cannot afford to take off from work. The funny thing is that we're paying the anti smokers salary to take away our rights. They should put that in their pipes and smoke it.

Karen on Jan 08, 2008 12:38 pm

I am a smoker and I do understand that banning smoking where children are present does make sense. They go where their parents take them. They don't have a choice, but, CHILDREN ARE NOT ALLOWED IN BARS! WHY THE BAN ON SMOKING IN BARS? I think if a bar has chosen to be a smoking establishment, then the only thing I think they are required to do is put a sign up stating so:"WE ARE A SMOKING ESTABLISHMENT" Then, the non-smoking ADULTS have the choice to give patronage to that bar or NOT!!! It's as simple as that! Let the smokers have a choice as well as the non-smokers. We ARE Adults. We have brains to choose whether we want to enter a place (bar, restaurant, etc...)whether it be smoking or non-smoking but don't just take away one persons right to even have a choice! There are many many restaurants(where children are present)that have bars in them that don't allow smoking...let the non-smokers go there! My gosh, how simple can it be????

Jim Grey on Dec 12, 2007 11:55 pm

"every time a governing body passes smoking ban legislation, every American loses a little more of their freedom and liberty"

That's a joke, right? Being able to walk into a bar or restaurant and breath air not polluted by the self-destructive and inconsiderate habits of others somehow impinges on my liberty?

I don't think so. I don't know why many smokers seem to feel they owe the bar and that I can "go somewhere else". Maybe I enjoy the bar just as smokers do, but would like to breath freely and not smell like an ashtray afterwards. Or is it my "liberty" to be subjected to such airborne abuse?

LRPharm54 on Jul 20, 2007 10:29 pm

I am sorry that former smokers have such a problem and that their chemical makeup and genetic predisposition is such that smoking in some manner created a health matter with them.
However, does that mandate the rest of us to quit smoking because others don't or choose not to? I think not! Smoking is a decision made by adults who have chosen to purchase a legal substance for their personal use. Although, the government has done much to increase cigarette prices and mandate smoking restrictions in a number of public places, that doesn't make it right either. It infuriates me that others are so judgemental about smokers and trying to save the world. They are nothing more than whiners and most of them are 40 years younger than me and have no right to spout out their ranked opinions and directives to older persons who have smoked long before their parents were born. Who are these morons? These are the same ones, no doubt, who drink to excess, drink bottle water (what a waste of money and a major joke), drive SUVs because they are too fat to fit in a regular car, and spend hours on cell phones yelling in public places and interrupting my private space. Well, I will fight these people until my death, and I will continue smoking as long as I have the strength to pick a cigarette up and light it. I resent I can't smoke in public places..it is not a crime to do so, it is simply a quarum of anti-smokers dictating to the world what they want...well, sorry folks you are not my parents and my President, so save your breath. It is dangerous to confront a smoker, because some day you will end up injured from expressing your rights against the rights of the smoker..Heed.

c king on May 27, 2007 9:13 am

Second hand smoke hurts. I quit smoking after 33 years. Now when I am around second hand smoke, I am sick all night. Second hand smoke hurts and it kills. Anyone who says different is probably still a nicotine addict.

Write a comment

* = required field

:

:

:


2 + 8 =