Arizona Sports Fans Network  

Go Back   Arizona Sports Fans Network > Other Stuff > Politics and Religion


View Poll Results: How will you vote?
Yes 13 40.63%
No 19 59.38%
Voters: 32. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old October 22nd, 2006, 09:04 PM   #1
krepitch
Moderator
 
krepitch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Phoenix
Age: 36
Posts: 13,626

206: Smoking


PROP. 206 -- SMOKING

The issue: Non-Smoker Protection Act. Would ban smoking in some indoor public places. Exceptions include bars and separately ventilated bars within restaurants and other establishments.

The impact: If approved, the measure would take precedence over local smoking ordinances, such as the ban in Tempe. Health groups say that would be a setback in their anti-smoking efforts. Many businesses believe smoking never should have been banned in bars.

The players: Backers include former Arizona Gov. Fife Symington and Bill Weigele, president of the Arizona Licensed Beverage Association. The main financial backer is a tobacco company, R.J. Reynolds.

Pros: Those who favor the Non-Smoker Protection Act say it would respect property rights of small-business owners, particularly bar owners.

Cons: Critics say it could end up damaging the health of many Arizonans.

http://www.azcentral.com/specials/sp...ot2006-ON.html
krepitch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 23rd, 2006, 01:08 PM   #2
jenna2891
potential get-away driver: go!
 
jenna2891's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: on the run from johnny law... ain't no trip to cleveland
Age: 32
Posts: 9,352
i'm the only one who voted yes for this?
__________________
We all need more Izzard in our life. - Gaddabout

I'll try to be more observant from now on. - dogpoo32
jenna2891 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 23rd, 2006, 01:11 PM   #3
dreamcastrocks
Chopped Liver Moderator
 
dreamcastrocks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Age: 35
Posts: 35,451
I voted Yes too.

You have to be an idiot to not know that smoking is harmful to you and everyone around you. Millions of people still do it. Yes without a second thought.
__________________
'Just to reiterate, Derek Anderson isn't hurt.... he has just been benched.'
-Sam Rosen
dreamcastrocks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 23rd, 2006, 01:21 PM   #4
jenna2891
potential get-away driver: go!
 
jenna2891's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: on the run from johnny law... ain't no trip to cleveland
Age: 32
Posts: 9,352
i hate smoke and everything about the concept of smoking, but telling people what they can and can't do with their own property is ridiculous. now, don't get me wrong, i love that i can go to a bar in tempe and come home without reeking of smoke. i would miss that if it were gone, but i can't vote against it just because i prefer it.
__________________
We all need more Izzard in our life. - Gaddabout

I'll try to be more observant from now on. - dogpoo32
jenna2891 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 23rd, 2006, 05:50 PM   #5
Linderbee
Goodbye, Sir. Thank You
 
Linderbee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: MESA! :thud:
Posts: 24,863
Quote:
Originally Posted by jenna2891 View Post
i hate smoke and everything about the concept of smoking, but telling people what they can and can't do with their own property is ridiculous. now, don't get me wrong, i love that i can go to a bar in tempe and come home without reeking of smoke. i would miss that if it were gone, but i can't vote against it just because i prefer it.
I don't understand your reply. If you vote no for this, then smoking would still be legal in public, aside from any local laws against it. Voting yes bans smoking in public places. By your statement, I would have guessed you'd vote no on both propositions.
__________________
dreamcastrocks--My Hero!!
Linderbee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 23rd, 2006, 08:21 PM   #6
Chris_Sanders
Super Moderator
 
Chris_Sanders's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Scottsdale, Az
Age: 42
Posts: 19,274
Send a message via ICQ to Chris_Sanders Send a message via AIM to Chris_Sanders
Quote:
Originally Posted by jenna2891 View Post
i hate smoke and everything about the concept of smoking, but telling people what they can and can't do with their own property is ridiculous. now, don't get me wrong, i love that i can go to a bar in tempe and come home without reeking of smoke. i would miss that if it were gone, but i can't vote against it just because i prefer it.
I was at a bar today and I saw a sign from the bar owner begging people to vote No on 206 and yes on 201.

The caption was "Hospitality workers deserve a smoke free work place as well. Without a level playing field where all smoking is banned, this simply isn't feasible."

This is why the restraunt and bar industry supports 201 and the tobacco companies support 206. The tobacco industry is hoping to confuse voters.
__________________
Oh, I am sorry. I don't know how this machine works.
Chris_Sanders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 23rd, 2006, 08:28 PM   #7
Linderbee
Goodbye, Sir. Thank You
 
Linderbee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: MESA! :thud:
Posts: 24,863
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_Sanders
The tobacco industry is hoping to confuse voters.
We have a winner!

NO on 206, YES on 201!!
__________________
dreamcastrocks--My Hero!!
Linderbee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 24th, 2006, 08:39 AM   #8
DKCards
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,302
How about NO on both.

I can not stand smoke and will even leave a place if the smoke is too bad. But I don’t think it is right to tell business owners that they can not allow smoking in their place. Especially bar owners, because most of there customers smoke when visiting their bars. Besides, how are we going to replace all that tax revenue we get from people buying cigarettes? So 201 is out for me.

Prop 206 states that it will only allow free standing bars or ones attached to restaurants that have adequate ventilation systems installed. The problem with this proposition is that there is absolutely no teeth in it. The only enforcement of this is against the smoker themselves. There is no punishment for the owner of the establishment. So they can ignore any part of this that they want to. And I really can not see the police force enforcing this on the smokers. Prop 206 will also preempt any city, town, or county laws. So once voted in that is the way it will be until it can be voted out.

If they both fail then it will stay the way it is now where the local municipalities will have control over it.
__________________
There will never be enough questions answered to eliminate faith
DKCards is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 24th, 2006, 08:44 AM   #9
NEZCardsfan
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,389
I vote YES. Of course.
NEZCardsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 24th, 2006, 03:51 PM   #10
Derm
slippery when wet
 
Derm's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe - home of the AZ Cardinals
Age: 62
Posts: 2,113
between 201 and 206 which will I choose?
Derm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 24th, 2006, 03:53 PM   #11
Chaz
observationist
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Wandering the Universe
Posts: 10,313
How about none of the above?
Chaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 24th, 2006, 06:39 PM   #12
RedStorm
Next NY Gov
 
RedStorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Gilbert
Age: 53
Posts: 9,618
I will probably vote yes on both 201 and 206. That way I will not be splitting my vote as a proponante of non-smoker rights. You know all those bad smoking people won't be splitting there vote. They will vote no on both so we good non-smoking people should vote yes on both.
__________________
Yeah, Stormy's probably on to something. - Rivercard

Sense MAKER!!!
Blasphemer!!!
Burn him!!!!

He speaks in tongues of logic and common sense, this troubles us and must be dealt with swiftly. - conraddobler
RedStorm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 25th, 2006, 12:32 PM   #13
AzCards21
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: What?
Posts: 16,811
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_Sanders View Post
"Hospitality workers deserve a smoke free work place as well. Without a level playing field where all smoking is banned, this simply isn't feasible."
I'm sorry but that is just moronic.
AzCards21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 25th, 2006, 12:41 PM   #14
Chris_Sanders
Super Moderator
 
Chris_Sanders's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Scottsdale, Az
Age: 42
Posts: 19,274
Send a message via ICQ to Chris_Sanders Send a message via AIM to Chris_Sanders
Quote:
Originally Posted by AzCards21 View Post
I'm sorry but that is just moronic.
No it is the nature of free enterprise. If some bars take a stance that they will not allow smoking, then they will lose business elsewhere. The restraunt and bar industry is highly competitive and no one wants to make the first move. Thus, you don't see any bars that don't allow smoking unless the city demands it.

While you may think it is moronic, the Hospitality industry overwhelming supports this measure. Places like New York and Colorado have passed similiar state wide bans and have seen no real loss in business. Smokers just go outside and smoke.

In the perfect world, smokers would go outside on their own instead of polluting a confined area...but that doesn't happen.

In a perfect world, you wouldn't find more cigarette butts on the ground than in an outdoor astray, but that also doesn't happen.
__________________
Oh, I am sorry. I don't know how this machine works.
Chris_Sanders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 25th, 2006, 01:45 PM   #15
AzCards21
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: What?
Posts: 16,811
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris_Sanders View Post
No it is the nature of free enterprise. If some bars take a stance that they will not allow smoking, then they will lose business elsewhere. The restraunt and bar industry is highly competitive and no one wants to make the first move. Thus, you don't see any bars that don't allow smoking unless the city demands it.

While you may think it is moronic, the Hospitality industry overwhelming supports this measure. Places like New York and Colorado have passed similiar state wide bans and have seen no real loss in business. Smokers just go outside and smoke.

In the perfect world, smokers would go outside on their own instead of polluting a confined area...but that doesn't happen.

In a perfect world, you wouldn't find more cigarette butts on the ground than in an outdoor astray, but that also doesn't happen.
If the bar attending public wanted a non-smoking bar it would flourish in a free enterprise system. You're basically telling me there is no demand for non-smoking bars, so in order to get the wish of people that don't go there anyway, we need to pass a law so nobody can have a bar allowing smoking. It's moronic.
AzCards21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

 
Similar Searches

People searched for this, also searched for these:

smoking health care bill in arizona


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Sitemap:1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38
 

Latest Threads
- by Brak
 




All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2002 - 2014 ArizonaSportsFans.com
Inactive Reminders By Icora Web Design