Comments on: Smoke ‘em While You Can http://www.showmedaily.org/2010/02/smoke-em-while-you-can.html Advancing liberty with responsibility by promoting market solutions for Missouri public policy Fri, 10 Feb 2012 02:56:48 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Tony Palazzolo http://www.showmedaily.org/2010/02/smoke-em-while-you-can.html/comment-page-1#comment-5266 Tony Palazzolo Mon, 08 Feb 2010 13:03:15 +0000 http://www.showmedaily.org/?p=13128#comment-5266 The Tobacco Control folk knew what they were doing when the put the issue on a low turnout vote. Look at Kirkwood that passed their very strict ban 70/30. In 2006 they turned down a ban by 55/45. Its not that suddenly 35% of the population changed their minds. For a majority of people this is a non-issue. If they are forced to make a decision more often than not they vote against restrictions. Its simply that tobacco control can turn out their voters. If it had been like the 2006 vote with a high turnout their voters would have been diluted. I would love to see this issue be taken to the city voters. If would be done it should be done in November. There should be a healthy turnout at the polls and I beleive that the city voters kill any ban that was put out there. St Louis has a far higher smoking rate (30%) which would put it right at half of all voting age residents. Look at Kansas City, they passed their ban by a 51/49 margin on a 12% turnout. If there had a been a slight uptick in voter turnout in KC - it would have failed. David Stokes mentioned about the county ban being similar to the city ban. The city ban is far more intrusive. The county exempts most bars, private clubs, VFW Halls, cigar bars and tobacco shops. The city on the other had only exempts tobacco shops and some bars (they haven't defined what constitutes a "incidental food service" yet.) A place like Brennen's Tobacco Shop in the Central West End will not be exempt. They are over the 2000 ft size space limit. Their alcohol sales are far to high to exempt them as a tobacco shop. In the city we have a business were a customer can buy a drink and enjoy a cigar in the same building. Next year, they will either have to move outside the city limits or go out of business. The Tobacco Control folk knew what they were doing when the put the issue on a low turnout vote. Look at Kirkwood that passed their very strict ban 70/30. In 2006 they turned down a ban by 55/45. Its not that suddenly 35% of the population changed their minds. For a majority of people this is a non-issue. If they are forced to make a decision more often than not they vote against restrictions. Its simply that tobacco control can turn out their voters. If it had been like the 2006 vote with a high turnout their voters would have been diluted. I would love to see this issue be taken to the city voters. If would be done it should be done in November. There should be a healthy turnout at the polls and I beleive that the city voters kill any ban that was put out there. St Louis has a far higher smoking rate (30%) which would put it right at half of all voting age residents. Look at Kansas City, they passed their ban by a 51/49 margin on a 12% turnout. If there had a been a slight uptick in voter turnout in KC – it would have failed.

David Stokes mentioned about the county ban being similar to the city ban. The city ban is far more intrusive. The county exempts most bars, private clubs, VFW Halls, cigar bars and tobacco shops. The city on the other had only exempts tobacco shops and some bars (they haven’t defined what constitutes a “incidental food service” yet.) A place like Brennen’s Tobacco Shop in the Central West End will not be exempt. They are over the 2000 ft size space limit. Their alcohol sales are far to high to exempt them as a tobacco shop. In the city we have a business were a customer can buy a drink and enjoy a cigar in the same building. Next year, they will either have to move outside the city limits or go out of business.

]]> By: David Stokes http://www.showmedaily.org/2010/02/smoke-em-while-you-can.html/comment-page-1#comment-5202 David Stokes Wed, 03 Feb 2010 22:33:19 +0000 http://www.showmedaily.org/?p=13128#comment-5202 In the interest of fairness, the St. Louis County ban is also a relatively mild one, as these things go. It is basically the same thing as the city ban. In the interest of fairness, the St. Louis County ban is also a relatively mild one, as these things go. It is basically the same thing as the city ban.

]]> By: John Payne http://www.showmedaily.org/2010/02/smoke-em-while-you-can.html/comment-page-1#comment-5198 John Payne Wed, 03 Feb 2010 16:03:15 +0000 http://www.showmedaily.org/?p=13128#comment-5198 I actually do find spite cool and calming on occasion. As Murray Rothbard used to say when asked how to write effectively, I "let hatred be my muse." I actually do find spite cool and calming on occasion. As Murray Rothbard used to say when asked how to write effectively, I “let hatred be my muse.”

]]> By: Jake Voss http://www.showmedaily.org/2010/02/smoke-em-while-you-can.html/comment-page-1#comment-5197 Jake Voss Wed, 03 Feb 2010 15:56:22 +0000 http://www.showmedaily.org/?p=13128#comment-5197 Nothing like the nice, cool, calming, draw of spite. Nothing like the nice, cool, calming, draw of spite.

]]> By: Rough 'ol Boy » Blog Archive » Smoke ‘em While You Can http://www.showmedaily.org/2010/02/smoke-em-while-you-can.html/comment-page-1#comment-5196 Rough 'ol Boy » Blog Archive » Smoke ‘em While You Can Wed, 03 Feb 2010 15:14:31 +0000 http://www.showmedaily.org/?p=13128#comment-5196 [...] Cross-posted at Show-Me Daily. [...] [...] Cross-posted at Show-Me Daily. [...]

]]> By: Joe Nonnenkamp http://www.showmedaily.org/2010/02/smoke-em-while-you-can.html/comment-page-1#comment-5183 Joe Nonnenkamp Tue, 02 Feb 2010 21:22:36 +0000 http://www.showmedaily.org/?p=13128#comment-5183 These people DO NOT go away. It's almost to the point where they believe people should be protected from the brutal horror of SEEING someone else smoking. At least with county bans, it leaves the option for St. Charles, etc. to cash in, and for the city and county to see the foolishness of their decision. These people DO NOT go away. It’s almost to the point where they believe people should be protected from the brutal horror of SEEING someone else smoking.

At least with county bans, it leaves the option for St. Charles, etc. to cash in, and for the city and county to see the foolishness of their decision.

]]>