Blumenthal calls for casino smoke ban

Blumenthal calls for casino smoke ban

There are 209 comments on the Connecticut Post story from Jan 8, 2009, titled Blumenthal calls for casino smoke ban. In it, Connecticut Post reports that:

Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal says he's going to urge legislators again to ban smoking at the two casinos in the state.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Connecticut Post.

First Prev
of 11
Next Last
ct citz

Brooklyn, NY

#1 Jan 8, 2009
why wasnt smoking banned in casino's back when it was banned in all other buidings in ct??? oh, that's right! the state got paid off by the casino's not to..

“Registered & Dangerous”

Since: Jan 09

Milford, CT

#2 Jan 8, 2009
How about we reduce truck emissions on our major interstates?

Guess no one thought about the CO2 they inhale on their way to work. Smokers are much easier to target than environmental pollutants.
Asbestos Head

Elmhurst, IL

#3 Jan 8, 2009
YESSS wrote:
How about we reduce truck emissions on our major interstates?
Guess no one thought about the CO2 they inhale on their way to work. Smokers are much easier to target than environmental pollutants.
Just think when the idiots put the tolls back in place. Nothing would be funnier than to see these liberals engulfed by diesel fumes.

“Registered & Dangerous”

Since: Jan 09

Milford, CT

#4 Jan 8, 2009
Asbestos Head wrote:
<quoted text>
Just think when the idiots put the tolls back in place. Nothing would be funnier than to see these liberals engulfed by diesel fumes.
I love how they are all about "freedom this" and "freedom that" yet they have made more laws restricting freedom than anyone else.

Let's go buy a pack of cigarettes together and blow it in some liberal's faces as they walk into Starbucks.
nothing better to do

Fairfield, CT

#5 Jan 8, 2009
back in the day there was smoking everywhere and now people have nothing to do but complain about smokers if you dont like the smoke go to the non smoking casino. They will never ban smoking in the casino the 2 go hand in hand and they would lose way to much money if people had to go outside to smoke cause that would mean that more people would leave if they got a chance to think about what the hell they are doing losing all there money

“Fredneck County Md”

Since: Feb 08

Small Town

#6 Jan 8, 2009
YESSS wrote:
<quoted text>
I love how they are all about "freedom this" and "freedom that" yet they have made more laws restricting freedom than anyone else.
Let's go buy a pack of cigarettes together and blow it in some liberal's faces as they walk into Starbucks.
My wife and I do that occaisionally... LOL!

“Fredneck County Md”

Since: Feb 08

Small Town

#7 Jan 8, 2009
ct citz wrote:
why wasnt smoking banned in casino's back when it was banned in all other buidings in ct??? oh, that's right! the state got paid off by the casino's not to..
No, it's because the state knew they wouldn't make squat off of a non-smoking casino.

“Registered & Dangerous”

Since: Jan 09

Milford, CT

#8 Jan 8, 2009
Happy Contented Soul wrote:
<quoted text>My wife and I do that occaisionally... LOL!
So do I when people give me dirty looks :)

I can smoke if I want to, just like I can drink if I want to. Especially when I am OUTSIDE. Trust, you aren't getting cancer from me exhaling in open air.

People have NOTHING better to do than pick on other people. Maybe they should try getting laid, it may occupy some time and release some pent up tension.
Tax and Spend

Shelton, CT

#9 Jan 8, 2009
I hate smoking. I cannot stand to even sit near a smoker and the smoke would keep me out of the Casino.

However, the state is in an economic disaster position. So, lets drive customers out of the Casinos which pay the state millions every year.

We stop smoking and take a 50% state revenue hit. Great idea.

“Registered & Dangerous”

Since: Jan 09

Milford, CT

#11 Jan 8, 2009
Guy Gadbois wrote:
"Blumenthal says a smoking ban is the best way to protect people's health."
Why stop there? Close the casinos: problem solved. That way, no one will die of gambling win/loss induced heart-attacks or car accidents heading to/from on I-95.
Idiot.
I'm an ex-smoker (over 8-years cold-turkey and I still miss it!). Although I love being able to go to a bar to hoist a few and not come home stinking of anything but beer, I always felt it unfair that such a venue couldn't at the very least OFFER smoking customers a comfortable area to drink and smoke. It's part of the culture, just as it is in gambling culture.
At a club I went to in Canada they provided a smoking room which was a closed, self contained area for smokers to enjoy their beer, socialize and have a cigarette without being relegated to the outdoors.

“Registered & Dangerous”

Since: Jan 09

Milford, CT

#12 Jan 8, 2009
Tax and Spend wrote:
I hate smoking. I cannot stand to even sit near a smoker and the smoke would keep me out of the Casino.
However, the state is in an economic disaster position. So, lets drive customers out of the Casinos which pay the state millions every year.
We stop smoking and take a 50% state revenue hit. Great idea.
If you play high stakes bingo at Foxwoods, the non smoking section is actually self contained in a seperate room so the two never have to mingle, unless a non smoker wins of course and has to come up front and go in the money blower :)

“Fredneck County Md”

Since: Feb 08

Small Town

#15 Jan 8, 2009
YESSS wrote:
<quoted text>
So do I when people give me dirty looks :)
I can smoke if I want to, just like I can drink if I want to. Especially when I am OUTSIDE. Trust, you aren't getting cancer from me exhaling in open air.
People have NOTHING better to do than pick on other people. Maybe they should try getting laid, it may occupy some time and release some pent up tension.
Awww come on now, who besides an unscrupulous close blood relative would assist an anti-smoker in that activity?
Peter

United States

#16 Jan 8, 2009
In a business that depends on people traffic- why give people a reason not to come-- theis business like every other business is off-- the state depends on the tax revenue and this will just be another cause in downward income-- I am a non-smoker- The casino is doing a good job offering non-smoking area's leave them be-- when times are better review it-
Sierra

Littleton, CO

#17 Jan 8, 2009
ALL casinos should be non smoking regardless of who has ownership--tribe or not.

Secondhand smoke has 4,000 chemicals, 50 of which are cancer causing. This is toxic air!
Breathing toxic air should not be a condition of employment.

Women increase their risks of breast cancer by 68% and when they are pregnant, the baby is ast risk for lung complications, i.e., asthma.

You can choose your job...but you can't choose to breathe!
Taxpayer

Farmington, CT

#19 Jan 8, 2009
These casinos are not obligated to obey stupid non-smoking laws because they are a tribal nation. There are non-smoking areas. I think if the state really starts busting their b*** about it, the casinos should tell the state they won't give them revenue from the gambling in the non-smoking sections. hell, that might be enough to make Jody Rell light up.
Taxpayer

Farmington, CT

#20 Jan 8, 2009
YESSS wrote:
<quoted text>
I love how they are all about "freedom this" and "freedom that" yet they have made more laws restricting freedom than anyone else.
Let's go buy a pack of cigarettes together and blow it in some liberal's faces as they walk into Starbucks.
Sounds like a plan. Yeah, freedom and equal rights all ways around, except for smokers that is. If everyone in CT stopped smoking, this state would fall flat on its a** financially.

“Registered & Dangerous”

Since: Jan 09

Milford, CT

#21 Jan 8, 2009
Sierra wrote:
ALL casinos should be non smoking regardless of who has ownership--tribe or not.
Secondhand smoke has 4,000 chemicals, 50 of which are cancer causing. This is toxic air!
Breathing toxic air should not be acondition of employment.
Women increase their risks of breast cancer by 68% and when they are pregnant, the baby is ast risk for lung complications, i.e., asthma.
You can choose your job...but you can't choose to breathe!
Your car traveling at an average of 12,000 miles per year doing 27 miles to the gallon emits 9,076 pounds of CO2/year ( http://www.greenprogress.com/carbon_footprint... )

I calculated this placing zero in every other category so it was not included

Let's times that by the millions driving up I-95 ALONE daily NOT to mention the trucks WHO DO NOT HAVE TO GO TO EMISSIONS!

Please tell me which is more harmful to our oxygen and the earth as a whole. Please tell me which battle we should be fighting and THEN please tell me which is easier.

Point made.

“Registered & Dangerous”

Since: Jan 09

Milford, CT

#22 Jan 8, 2009
Taxpayer wrote:
<quoted text>
Sounds like a plan. Yeah, freedom and equal rights all ways around, except for smokers that is. If everyone in CT stopped smoking, this state would fall flat on its a** financially.
Not only our state but our failing country as well.

The south lives off of tobacco as a major cash crop and the taxes on tobacco in New York are bringing in major money.

Which is why us smokers will always win :) Money makes the world go round.
Get Real

Farmington, CT

#23 Jan 8, 2009
I smoke and I enjoy having a drink and a smoke when I'm out. They should have a smoking room in every establishment and not force smokers outside like 2nd class citizens. Cigarette taxes in Connecticut are just plain off the charts, they survive on that tax money and they still p*** and moan. And I also beleive its true that Indian casinos as a tribal nation do not have to abide by non-smoking laws that they imposed on us everywhere else.
Get Real

Farmington, CT

#24 Jan 8, 2009
YESSS wrote:
<quoted text>
Your car traveling at an average of 12,000 miles per year doing 27 miles to the gallon emits 9,076 pounds of CO2/year ( http://www.greenprogress.com/carbon_footprint... )
I calculated this placing zero in every other category so it was not included
Let's times that by the millions driving up I-95 ALONE daily NOT to mention the trucks WHO DO NOT HAVE TO GO TO EMISSIONS!
Agreed, I got your point. Good post.
Please tell me which is more harmful to our oxygen and the earth as a whole. Please tell me which battle we should be fighting and THEN please tell me which is easier.
Point made.
Agreed -good point, and a good posting.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 11
Next Last

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.

Health Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Trump gets Obamacare reform started 13 min Retribution 61
Hangover Alternatives? 16 min SummerBB8 1
News Harbor-UCLA Medical Center cited for safety vio... (Oct '11) 18 hr Human 252
News Pro-Trump states most affected by hisa 18 hr WasteWater 1
News Analysis: How Trump is unraveling Obamacare pie... 21 hr Retribution 17
News Pro-Trump states most affected by his health ca... 21 hr indecentproposal 1
Hospice Care or Murder? (Jan '13) Mon Blind lady 18
watching wife get pregnant by another man (Jan '17) Oct 8 Mike 21
More from around the web