Ohio Supreme Court to review ruling i...

Ohio Supreme Court to review ruling in smoking-ban case | The Columbus Dispatch

There are 72 comments on the Columbus Dispatch story from Apr 6, 2011, titled Ohio Supreme Court to review ruling in smoking-ban case | The Columbus Dispatch. In it, Columbus Dispatch reports that:

The Ohio Supreme Court agreed today to consider the legality of Ohio's 2006 statewide smoking ban in a case involving a Victorian Village bar.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Columbus Dispatch.

clcmrn

Nashport, OH

#43 Apr 6, 2011
For all those who hate smokers, i want to say i hate nonsmokers! This law has entitled people to take their hatred, insecurities, and general attitudes out on the smokers. Scapegoats for all the ill will of this country! If you don't like the smell of smoke, stay away from those places where smoking is happening. It doesn't require a rocket scientist to figure that one out..........
some people love to hate......why don't you put your energies into hating child abuse, poverty, and hatred in general and simply get a better life!
Live and let live.......please!
bludevl3232

Columbus, OH

#44 Apr 6, 2011
The absolute fairest law that could pass would be a law that provided for smoking bars and non smoking bars. The problem is, is that non smoking bars would go out of business, just as many bars, pool halls, and bowling alleys went out of business. Another HUGE problem is, is that many of the people who voted on the ban do not frequent bars, pool halls, or bowling alleys. Argue with me, but if you throw out "popular opinion" know that there are many places in this country that "popular opinion" would not allow blacks or women to vote. And don't even try to compare the two, because in America the comparisons are the same.
marbee

Janesville, WI

#45 Apr 6, 2011
hammer wrote:
if they don,t enforce the band shut the bussiness down save the tax payers money trying to proscute them./////////or put them in jail where they belong//////////
IT'S A BAN, NOT A BAND! NO WONDER YOU PEOPLE DON'T CARE ABOUT RIGHTS!
cols_resident

Westerville, OH

#46 Apr 6, 2011
miss magic wrote:
I am glad that the smoking ban is in place.
I HATE smokers!!!
You wanna smoke... smoke in your dam house... don't smoke in bars and restaurants and expect us non-smokers to put up with your cancer causing crap!
I am not a smoker, never have been, never will be...but if a business owner wants to allow smoking, it is THEIR establishment. Post it clearly on the entrance and let everyone who doesn't want to smell smoke go pound sand.
Archie Bunker on Steroids

Columbus, OH

#47 Apr 6, 2011
When will we learn that more democRATs means less liberty, less freedoms and more restrictions?
WAKE UP AMERICA! The nannies in New York are banning FRENCH FRIES! How long before they come for ours?
BarOwner

Reynoldsburg, OH

#48 Apr 6, 2011
lov to smoke wrote:
it brought in 1.2 mil in fines and cost 3.2 mil to enforce...yea lets keep doing that!!!
But wait...it didn't say they've COLLECTED that amount, just IMPOSED FINES in that amount.
Who knows

Plain City, OH

#49 Apr 6, 2011
miss magic wrote:
I am glad that the smoking ban is in place.
I HATE smokers!!!
You wanna smoke... smoke in your dam house... don't smoke in bars and restaurants and expect us non-smokers to put up with your cancer causing crap!
Hate us if you must but the bottom line is doing away with smoking isn't gonna make you live forever all those that are born will dye eventually from something.
BarOwner

Reynoldsburg, OH

#50 Apr 6, 2011
bludevl3232 wrote:
The absolute fairest law that could pass would be a law that provided for smoking bars and non smoking bars. The problem is, is that non smoking bars would go out of business, just as many bars, pool halls, and bowling alleys went out of business. Another HUGE problem is, is that many of the people who voted on the ban do not frequent bars, pool halls, or bowling alleys.
We bar owners have been waiting for FOUR LONG YEARS for those anti-smokers to grace our doorways. They've never shown up. All that happened was we were LEGALLY FORCED to throw our smoking customers out into the cold. Guess what? THEY STAYED HOME and they PARTIED at each other's homes.

State of Ohio records show that liquor permit holders bought and resold 3,274,881 LESS BOTTLES OF LIQUOR which resulted in $355,291,850 in losses for us and $24 million in lost sales taxes for the state since the smoking ban. The flip side is that retail (home and social gathering consumption) INCREASED by $14,649,150 more bottles since the year before the smoking ban (2006). Hardly a positive public health outcome.

Many good people not only lost their businesses, but they lost their homes as a result of the smoking ban. WE invested half a million dollars in our business and its building. We've drained our savings of $80,000 to keep the doors open since the ban. We had a hugely profitable business before the ban. People always had the ability to vote on their preference of a smoking or non-smoking establishment...with their feet and their wallets. Maybe if the American Cancer Society, who by the way LIED about the smoking ban not hurting our businesses, had to cover the losses of the bar owners they'd think twice about putting us out of business. They lied to voters that private clubs and family owned businesses would be exempt. Since the smoking ban, we've kicked their people out of our bar twice. They're in OUR bar, that is LOSING MONEY begging for donations? I don't think so! One more thing...the ACS claims on their IRS form 990 that they spend $0 lobbying...but give $11.6 MILLION to "others" to lobby. What? I'm over these people. And, I think they should pay property taxes for their millions in real estate. Right now, they pay NOTHING. How's THAT right? They care so much about protecting the kiddies that they give NOTHING to the school systems, mental health, the zoo and all the other things we pay for with OUR property taxes.
BarOwner

Reynoldsburg, OH

#51 Apr 6, 2011
correction...14,649,150 bottles of liquor (no $ sign)
BarOwner

Reynoldsburg, OH

#52 Apr 6, 2011
miss magic wrote:
I am glad that the smoking ban is in place.
I HATE smokers!!!
You wanna smoke... smoke in your dam house... don't smoke in bars and restaurants and expect us non-smokers to put up with your cancer causing crap!
Excuse me? But our bar IS ours...NOT YOURS. You're INVITED in. You're not forced to enter nor are any of our employees forced to work there. If there's "cancer causing crap" in secondhand smoke and it was imperative that we pass a smoking ban, how come NO WORKERS COMP CLAIMS have been approved for SHS in the nearly 100 years of BWC's existence?
something for nothing

Minneapolis, MN

#53 Apr 6, 2011
The Man wrote:
Why is it when the people vote on and issue and the majority wins there is always a way for the courts to overturn what the people wanted. Why vote.(For the and by the people) doesn't work. Sad for USA
The city of Columbus did the same thing with the casino. Didn't like it, and basically appealed it have to tossed out to the west side and away from the 'family friendly' arena district with all the bars and clubs.

Since: Nov 08

Small Town

#54 Apr 6, 2011
No one has the right to make health choices for others and no one has a right to demand rights to the detriment of others when they are based on the convenience of a lie, as we find in the “toxic effect of second hand smoke.” Chlorine is a carcinogen, but it is added to your drinking water! The owners,consumers and workers should decide concerning smoking bans, not the antis or non-smokers, and certainly not the "health" police!
Tony

Chillicothe, OH

#55 Apr 6, 2011
coinman1803 wrote:
Just a way for the State of Ohio to try to make Money, and the 1.2 Million should go to Cancer Resreach at OSU.
The 1.2 million is a miniscule fraction of what taxpayers have had to pay to enforce this stupid law (and no, I don't smoke).
Tony

Chillicothe, OH

#56 Apr 6, 2011
marb wrote:
No one has the right to make health choices for others and no one has a right to demand rights to the detriment of others when they are based on the convenience of a lie, as we find in the “toxic effect of second hand smoke.”
But government healthcare WILL give you the right to control others' habits, the food they eat, and the activities they partake in. You will have every right to DEMAND this right as a result of being FORCED to pay for the consequences of those habits, that consumption, and those activities.
Tony

Chillicothe, OH

#57 Apr 6, 2011
marb wrote:
No one has the right to make health choices for others and no one has a right to demand rights to the detriment of others when they are based on the convenience of a lie, as we find in the “toxic effect of second hand smoke.”
Oh, and it has been discovered that the cancer caused by second-hand smoke is indistinguishable from the cancer caused by radon, and since both tend to concentrate in the same sort of "underventilated" places... I'm just sayin'...
Liberty

West Liberty, OH

#58 Apr 7, 2011
Tavern owners and patrons can decide to enter a smoking or non-smoking bar. Duh. There should be that choice.
Bob

United States

#59 Apr 7, 2011
Many small working class neighborhood "adult only" bars are forced to ignore the currently existing bans to stay in business. Johnson and Johnson, the makers of Chantix and Nicoderm, is now finding it necessary to give new money to it's many tax exempt political action committees (PACs) to hire even MORE lobbyists for more enforcement measures. If more enforcement is needed, they themselves admit that the statement that their bans are good for business is obviously another myth. There's even a hint that THEY, the originators of the ban frenzy, might be considering amending their many bans. Many are wondering how much more oppression people will stand for.

Here is their "Smokeless States Program"

http://www.rwjf.org/pr/product.jsp...

Here are their tax exempt political action committees (PACs);

http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/CIA_Fundamentals....

And the new enforcement grant money;

http://www.rwjf.org/applications/solicited/cf...
mike

Columbus, OH

#60 Apr 7, 2011
Mush Rush wrote:
A great law. The people voting in favor of it and it should continue.
mush rush your an idiot'' i to went to the poles and voted like so many other voters nobody understood the ballad. you did not know if yes ment ban the smokeing or no ment ban the smokeing it was a deliberate trick to confuse the voter and even still it was almost 50 50 i for one beleave if the voteing was put to the voters in a clear layman way' it would have went the other way.
observer

Columbus, OH

#61 Apr 7, 2011
Archie Bunker on Steroids wrote:
When will we learn that more democRATs means less liberty, less freedoms and more restrictions?
WAKE UP AMERICA! The nannies in New York are banning FRENCH FRIES! How long before they come for ours?
Both parties have plenty of blame for the erosion of freedom and the downhill tailspin of our nation. To make this into a partisian issue is really silly. The Ohio supreme court has only one Democrat, but I wouldn't hold my breath for them overturning the smoking ban.
observer

Columbus, OH

#62 Apr 7, 2011
The Man wrote:
Why is it when the people vote on and issue and the majority wins there is always a way for the courts to overturn what the people wanted. Why vote.(For the and by the people) doesn't work. Sad for USA
Why would you get a "vote" on what someone else can do on THEIR property. The way you can vote is to not go there. This should have been left to the market to decide.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Columbus Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
America Held Hostage Day 35 5 min BizzyBee 8
What is happening in Sweden? 18 min They cannot kill ... 109
men who wear nighties (Sep '13) 21 min dattack 48
Trump Trio ofHate in Powa 25 min every troll here ... 2
High Crimes and Misdemeanors 31 min jonjedi 121
Keeps pushing and pushing.... 58 min Duke for Mayor 192
Who is the Biggest Liar? 1 hr jonjedi 105

Columbus Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Columbus Mortgages