Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | Home RSS
 
 
 

Expansion of Smoking Ban To Outdoors Begins Today

Board of Health places high priority on healthy environments for children

April 1, 2013

MOUNDSVILLE — Though the calendar says today is April Fools’ Day, the implementation of Marshall County’s expanded smoking ban is no joke....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(32)

CherokeeProud

Apr-03-13 1:35 AM

@Impact. They are trying to get rid of Jay Leno, so why don't you put in a resume. They are looking for a clown with your crescent and sourdough remark.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Apr-02-13 8:06 PM

Impacted "Cherokee, where is that right to smoke located in the Constitution?"

Under the 14th amendment Equal Protection clause.

Try Dulcolax, you'll feel much better. better.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Skycat

Apr-02-13 4:52 PM

Impact: Just because the Constitution doesn't say we have a right doesn't mean we can't have it...per the Ninth Amendment..."The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

walksabout

Apr-02-13 2:00 PM

shouldn't the CDC alert the FDA of the danger of chemicals in the food chain ? Shhhh. don't mute the sound of cash registers.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

impact

Apr-02-13 12:27 PM

Cherokee, where is that right to smoke located in the Constitution?

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Skycat

Apr-02-13 11:11 AM

When the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) says jump, Boards of Health ask "How high?" The CDC is headed by a former appointee of smoking ban, gun ban and calorie count zealot Mayor Michael Bloomberg of New York City. Need I say more?

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

oldmansvan

Apr-02-13 10:20 AM

If they really care about the poison in the air we breath they have to ban all internal combustion engines everywhere. This includes cars ,trucks trains,and planes. Don't forget motorcycles, lawn mowers and charcoal grills.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mikeyd

Apr-02-13 7:25 AM

this is just another way for our poor government to come up with some cash.while they can send you off to war to die for your country.take the cigs off the welfare recipients if you are so worried.those people puff more than anyone.we'll all have to start smoking something other than tobacco.forced by our government.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CTMountaineer

Apr-01-13 11:41 PM

This is a dangerous incursion into private rights by government. If the trend continues, we'll have fewer freedoms here than they have in some communist countries.

Every time they take away somebody's rights in the interests of "its better for everyone else", they put another nail in the coffin of liberty, and they don't take a law away every time they do something like this, it just adds up to one freedom taken away after another.

Business owners need to be free to decide whether or not they permit smoking in their establishments. A person is free to not patronize those that permit it if they choose. Even the mention of somebody's private home here should be cause for major alarm.

7 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

CherokeeProud

Apr-01-13 8:00 PM

@wvujeff. Wah Wah Wah! If they think my post is baloney, so be it. I could care less what you think about it. I am old enough to state what I think, and guess what? I will continue. They are taking are rights every friggin' day and you don't give a crap. You sure are no model citizen. How bout taking cars away from people? Then maybe I will not get run over and killed. Take all our guns away so only the bad guys have them and they kill us. Oh yea, take the forks away from us so we don't get fat. You are sick and tired of smokers complaining, did you read my post? I don't think so, I said I quit smoking years ago, over thirty years ago, so I am not lobbying for smokers, I am sick and tired of them taking all "OUR" rights. If you don't like it,"Tough!" Read the second line of my post again, it's what I mean.

7 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

impact

Apr-01-13 7:45 PM

Cherokee, when government plays the "roll of God", is that crescent or sourdough?

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

UNCOMMONSENSE

Apr-01-13 6:24 PM

AGAIN this is not for YOUR safety or benefit

No government cares about your health

Like the un-constitutional helmet and seat belt laws, this is driven by MONEY!!

The insurance lobby has BILLIONS available to grease palms!

7 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Shark88

Apr-01-13 5:00 PM

The left applauds smoking bans but celebrates the legalization of marijuana.

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

promo61

Apr-01-13 3:23 PM

I personally feel that muffin tops should be regulated because it interferes with my digestive processes. It can't be healthy if it makes me lose my lunch, right?

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

walksabout

Apr-01-13 3:15 PM

RACIST ," A person who drives one direction interrupted by left hand turns continous"

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

walksabout

Apr-01-13 3:12 PM

100,000 Californians Studied . no wonder the study was a mess. try another group of people.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

walksabout

Apr-01-13 3:10 PM

you are absolutely what you eat or fail to eat. only you can change you. a waste is a terrible thing to mind. take voting seriously.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

walksabout

Apr-01-13 3:09 PM

the long term danger of food source modification isn't fully known. health officials should protest the radicalization of nutrition choice.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

walksabout

Apr-01-13 3:05 PM

need law and signs prohibiting people withing 15 feet of regular people if you eat beans and cabbage or wear perfume.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

LogHog

Apr-01-13 1:07 PM

Cherokee your correct...personally I'm glad not to smell others smoke, but banning it outdoors is crazy. Taking a crap is already taxed in many places..some places if you flush to many times,use too much water, you have to pay a surcharge=tax that goes to Govt. coffers...Ain't it grand to live in the land of the "free" and home of the "brave"

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

LogHog

Apr-01-13 12:52 PM

What does one expect from the same group of people that support a ban on the unborn

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

impact

Apr-01-13 12:36 PM

Absolutely correct, Jeff.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DinoCrocetti

Apr-01-13 12:14 PM

Since high school athletic contest already have a rule, is there really an event in Marshall County where someone's outdoor smoke can bother someone? Other than possibly a Christmas Parade. Just a "feelgood" law where someone who already doesn't "like" someone can call the cops on someone for smoking. An overweight mother at a little league game will call the police on her "government issued" cell phone about the guy smoking a pipe, who is the grandfather of a kid on the other team. LOL

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Apr-01-13 11:30 AM

A 38-year study of Californians, begun by the American Cancer Society and concluded by the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA), has concluded that secondhand smoke has little if any negative impact on mortality.

The study, published in the May 17 issue of the British Medical Journal, throws cold water on the efforts of state and local governments to ban smoking in restaurants and other public places in the name of public health.

100,000 Californians Studied From 1959 through 1998, the American Cancer Society tracked a broad cross-section of more than 100,000 Californians, dividing the study participants according to whether or not they were married to smokers. In 1999, UCLA epidemiologist James Enstrom and State University of New York epidemiologist Geoffrey Kabat began analyzing the American Cancer Society data. According to their study, “No significant associations were found for current or former exposure to environmental tobacco smoke.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

daWraith

Apr-01-13 11:27 AM

Droops,

Your comments are very boring.

You are a racist.

Get a life.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 32 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

EZToUse.com

I am looking for: