Bill would ban smoking at federal buildings

Bill would ban smoking at federal buildings - The Federal Eye - The Washington Post:

Efforts to ban smoking at federal buildings have a long, complex history (but what federal personnel issue doesn’t?). In 1997, Bill Clinton banned smoking in most federal workplaces with an executive order that permitted federal buildings to establish smoking rooms.

At the end of George W. Bush’s administration, the General Services Administration published a new policy banning smokers from lighting up in the courtyards of federal buildings or within 25 feet of doorways or air ducts. In changing the policy, GSA cited studies that show secondhand smoke is harmful to co-workers or anyone else exposed to it and laws in dozens of states that ban smoking at state government and private office buildings.

Notably, federal union leaders said the regulation might create issues for workers addicted to smoking.

But of course.
No surprise here at all.

Smoking ban may soon spread to houses

Smoking ban may soon spread to houses - Wilmington Civil Rights | Examiner.com:

Yes, you have every right not to smoke in your home, but you have no right to tell someone else they cannot smoke in theirs. Or even on their outdoor terrace. Next will you tell people that if they have visitors in your smoke-free environment that their visitors cannot smoke in the parking lot?

The problem for the anti's in this case is that smoker's own their own condominiums.
And of course it's the usual game played with magic smoke the miraculous substance that defies the laws of physics by floating down power lines and floating through sealed brick walls.

The news is that this has spurred an idea.

I'm conflicted about this,I'm happy that the smokerphobes will get their own group of housing but I'm sad that the smokers are going to be shoved out and isolated even more than they already are.

And of course it will never stop at that,it rarely ever does.

If you've never had the misfortune to watch people addressing either their local boards of health or their local council's about banning smoking outdoors or in parks on beaches or on the town 's sidewalks or in multi-unit homes then you have never seen something as tragic as I have.

I watched this live.

And I have never been so sickened by the lies,misinformation and general propaganda spewed by the anti's.

This is what they are doing to us and how they are doing it.They are using children,making up their own statistics and yelling about being exposed to secondhand smoke outdoors of all places.

I wouldn't normally link to something this dreadful but it should be seen,smokers need to see what they are up against.

I don't believe the tactics change much from one meeting to the next but this is how these insane bans get passed.

This is how rights and freedoms get trampled,this is how we keep loosing ground.

The best part of this meeting was the older lady from the elderly housing complex who got up to speak,what she said about how far things have gone was the only ray of sunshine in this entire charade.

Tid Bits

Secondhand Smoke Ruling May Set Precedent - Greenbelt, MD Patch:

Fisher said the “smoking gun” in the case was when James Repace, the biophysicist hired by the plaintiff found the same level of cancer-causing particles with his monitor in the smoke-free courtroom as he had in Schuman’s living room while Darko Popovic was smoking outside.

“Shouldn’t that create a cause of action for everybody in here?” he asked.

The article is good and interesting reading.
I do think we will see more cases like this one,I can only hope that what I fear isn't the case.

Mental health smoking ban set to be lifted

Ms Morton said the total smoking ban was harming patients and hindering their recovery, as well as endangering staff who had to deal with patients desperate for a cigarette. She said there was widespread support from stakeholders in the mental health area for a lifting of the smoking ban, which she hoped to change by next year.

"I'm hoping (the submission) will be there (before cabinet) before December and I believe it will sail through cabinet and there won't be any obstacles."

Good,about damn time.

S.D.'s revenue from tobacco tax down 9 percent

A third of the remaining money went to the property tax reduction fund, and another third to the education enhancement tobacco fund. The remaining 34 percent is dedicated to the health care tobacco fund.

When the tobacco tax money decreases, those programs feel it. A decline in revenue hits health care and education the hardest because of the way the state law is structured

Two words for that piece  Laffer Curve

Trying To Quit Smoking? Don't Start With Chantix, Say Some Experts - - TIME Healthland

Trying To Quit Smoking? Don't Start With Chantix, Say Some Experts - - TIME Healthland:

"I'm for smoking cessation," he says, a former smoker himself. "But with a benefit so disappointingly low, and adverse effects that are piling up — blackouts, aggression, heart events, suicide and depression — the bad things outweigh the small good effect of the drug. So what we are saying is we should restrict its use."

Restrict it's use?
I can't even imagine they would recommend it's use for anything ever.
I know many people who have tried to quit from chantix/champix and were in worse shape after.I can't fathom why these people still say it can be used.
Oh wait ,yes I can,after all it's just smokers.

Will it be Tobacco-phobia next?

TODAYonline | Voices | Will it be Tobacco-phobia next?:

Banning tobacco will cause a dichotomy of smokers and non-smokers. The non-smoker majority undeniably already has a negative view of smokers, and if the State makes a stand, smokers would be at risk of becoming social deviants, or worse, outcasts.

Whether it is an outright ban, a gradual ban or denying only elective surgery, there would be a creation of "folk devils" or the Singapore version of a witch-hunt anxiety. 

Smokers would be judged because despite laws that protect non-smokers, there is no suggestion to protect smokers from non-smokers' moral, ethical, political or social "gazing".

This is more than a harmless stare. The gaze of an employer toward his or her employees or an institution toward its members involves an element of judgement. Previously, it was racism. Will it be Tobacco-phobia next?

It is heartening to see how our society has modernised and become health conscious. It is disheartening to see the constant attack on smokers and their way of life.

I guess I lack an understanding of the experience of smokers in Singapore.
I'm still confused by what the letter writer is trying to say,some of it I agreed with and some of it is regurgitated anti-smoking propaganda.
No other point of view will make me happy but my own I guess.
*Sigh*

Study identifies safety issues for hospital patients who go outside to smoke

Study identifies safety issues for hospital patients who go outside to smoke - Winnipeg Free Press

Patients often can be seen congregating outside the doors of a hospital even when it's -30 or -40 C, Schultz observed.

"This is somebody who's sick enough to be in the hospital. That's concerning because that means they're off the unit, and they're also exposed to this kind of weather condition," she said, adding that intravenous lines can freeze at low temperatures and need to be restarted.

Some hospitals are in parts of town that are not always particularly safe, she said, and patients build little networks so they can go outside in a group, especially in the evening so they won't be outside alone.

And there is if I'm not mistaken a real reason for patients to band together and take care of each other.
If you go to Smoker's Club you can find pages of stories just like this................
I don't blame patients for not wanting to trust the hospital with their own safety since apparently it's fine if smoker's have none.
What a world.

Goodwin looks to rewrite smoking ordinance Commission candidate proposes four changes

Bowling Green Daily News:

Goodwin has four specific changes he’d make to the smoking ordinance, the first being exempting the Veterans of Foreign Wars and the American Legion.

Those groups’ objections to the ordinance have been well-documented.

Secondly, Goodwin would allow for hotels to have 20 percent of rooms designated for smoking.

Goodwin also believes any business with fewer than four employees should be exempt.

Lastly, Goodwin believes all businesses that allow only patrons 21 and older should be exempted.

Mark Bradford said he’d be open to the idea of some type of exemption process for specific businesses.

For Robin Baldwin, she feels as if the people have already spoken.

“The people in the community had their say, and they chose at least three candidates who said, ‘I’m going to vote for a smoking ban,’ ” Baldwin said.

A Nov. 8 victory for Goodwin could go a long way in showing whether the issue of indoor smoking still exists to where it can decide a campaign.

“I’m going to tell you now, I want to address and it and write it right,” Goodwin said.

Hmm
I like this but I think it should go further even than that,allow the owners to decide.
People always vote with their cash.