The Minnesota way around the smoking ban

  • After Iowa State won the Big 12, a Cyclone made a wonderful offer to We Will that now increases our match. Now all gifts up to $400,000 between now and the Final 4 will be matched. Please consider giving at We Will Collective.
    This notice can be dismissed using the upper right corner X button.

cmoneyr

Well-Known Member
Nov 8, 2006
8,422
343
83
39
Ames, Born and Raised
Could you answer the question without all of drama next time?

Since when does the law limit smoking in indoors? How about public parks, golf courses, etc? Those will be affected too.
Drama is part of the package.

I just said in my last post, but I don't necessarily agree with the bans to smoking in outdoor areas. But, if that's what it takes, so be it.
 

keepngoal

OKA: keepingoal
Staff member
Bookie
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jun 20, 2006
38,116
22,333
113
It's not my job to explain what the law makers were thinking, ask them yourself. I don't agree with the golf course portion of it, for the record.

I don't understand why you seem to always post chip on the shoulder comments. Your posts are littered with them like parks with cigarette butts. I would enjoy reading posts from you with more positive, argumentative substance then your current streak of negative nilly nonsense.

-keep.
 

DaddyMac

Well-Known Member
Oct 18, 2006
14,071
451
83
I'm not saying a smoking ban should extend to outdoor public places, but I will tell you that when my family helped in a city park cleanup in our neighborhood, the amount of cigarette butts vs. other garbage was astounding.

Why can't smokers put their butts in the appropriate place?

One of my top issues with smoking - not related to health.

The audacity of 99.9% of smokers, that the world is their ashtray.

BTW - I'm not really in support of the outdoors portion of this as well. Perhaps with the exception of truly "public" spaces such as city/state parks and such.

Edit: I AM in support of the outdoors in terms of patios and such, however. IMO, those are practically just as confined as inside. We've all sat next to a table on a pato with someone smoking
 
Last edited:

cycloneworld

Facebook Knows All
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 20, 2006
27,744
16,155
113
Urbandale, IA
You and I have been a couple rounds on this, CW. And I think we have a good understanding. I'm happy to see it, you're not. But I think most people agree that this is a wussy attempt to curb smoking in general (not just for the second hand issue), but gov't is too scared to take on the issue head on - that if it's such a health issue, it should be banned like just about any other illegal drug.

DM, I just don't think we'll ever agree on the smoking ban. However, we do agree on banning cigarettes altogether. If they are so bad for the smoker AND for other people, ban them. That just makes sense. The government doesn't have the balls to do this (because of money) so they exploit smokers. Where does it end? Will there soon be a tax on video games because they have been proven to warp the minds of some children?
 

keepngoal

OKA: keepingoal
Staff member
Bookie
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jun 20, 2006
38,116
22,333
113
I agree there. But there is already a law in place to curb that...it's just not enforced.

Me too.

Every spring after the snow and every fall before the snow, the staff that smokes, walks the grounds by the smoking area and parking lots for cigarette butts. It has helped on the littering.. but usually for just a week or so.

-keep
 

keepngoal

OKA: keepingoal
Staff member
Bookie
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jun 20, 2006
38,116
22,333
113
DM, I just don't think we'll ever agree on the smoking ban. However, we do agree on banning cigarettes altogether. If they are so bad for the smoker AND for other people, ban them. That just makes sense. The government doesn't have the balls to do this (because of money) so they exploit smokers. Where does it end? Will there soon be a tax on video games because they have been proven to warp the minds of some children?

now that I agree with... if it is SOOOOOOO bad ... ban them.

period.

otherwise, let the individual person AND business choose.

-keep.
 

bos

Legend
Staff member
Apr 10, 2006
29,669
5,255
113
Is this like taking the ball and going home?

-keep.


No its like arguing with a wall. Are you inciting an argument or having fun. Just need to be clear. Because I get called the troll if I make such comments.
 

keepngoal

OKA: keepingoal
Staff member
Bookie
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jun 20, 2006
38,116
22,333
113
I don't know how this bill would affect that, I'm sure there are restaurants all over that have indoor grills, so I don't know.

that was the counter to your outdoor grilling doesn't hold water. there is indoor grilling and smoke is bad (that has carcinogens), then why do we allow this to continue? What about the lolly line cooks health. they are people too.

sarcasm on purpose.

-keep.
 

DaddyMac

Well-Known Member
Oct 18, 2006
14,071
451
83
Let me ask this - how is the outdoor portion of this limited (legally)?

You can't smoke in parks, outdoor pools, golf courses, etc.

So what's to keep you from smoking in your front yard? Another person's yard?

What's the legal boundary?

Someone said a few weeks back that if you're a farmer and have a hired hand, you can't smoke on your own property as it might affect your employee. (I have no reason to doubt this). But with parks and such included - it's not limited to businesses.
 

cycloneworld

Facebook Knows All
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 20, 2006
27,744
16,155
113
Urbandale, IA
Let me ask this - how is the outdoor portion of this limited (legally).

You can't smoke in parks, outdoor pools, golf courses, etc.

So what's to keep you from smoking in your front yard? Another person's yard?

What's the legal boundary?

The law will ban smoking in public places. You can still smoke on private land...for now.
 

DaddyMac

Well-Known Member
Oct 18, 2006
14,071
451
83
The law will ban smoking in public places. You can still smoke on private land...for now.

I edited. It's not limited to public/private as most businesses are private. And the above example of the farmer with an employee thing..
 

cmoneyr

Well-Known Member
Nov 8, 2006
8,422
343
83
39
Ames, Born and Raised
now that I agree with... if it is SOOOOOOO bad ... ban them.

period.

otherwise, let the individual person AND business choose.

-keep.
I just don't get that thinking. Why does it either have to be ban then completely or do nothing?

I agree, they should be banned, I would support that completely. But in lieu of that, because I think we can both agree that won't happen in the near future, why not atleast make some much needed restrictions on their use?
 

cycloneworld

Facebook Knows All
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Mar 20, 2006
27,744
16,155
113
Urbandale, IA
I just don't get that thinking. Why does it either have to be ban then completely or do nothing?

I agree, they should be banned, I would support that completely. But in lieu of that, because I think we can both agree that won't happen in the near future, why not atleast make some much needed restrictions on their use?

I don't want to speak for keep but I think we would both agree that its a slippery slope. First heavy regulations on smoking, next will be something else, followed by something else, and it will never end.
 

cmoneyr

Well-Known Member
Nov 8, 2006
8,422
343
83
39
Ames, Born and Raised
that was the counter to your outdoor grilling doesn't hold water. there is indoor grilling and smoke is bad (that has carcinogens), then why do we allow this to continue? What about the lolly line cooks health. they are people too.

sarcasm on purpose.

-keep.
I was saying that your argument talking about people grilling outdoors had no bearing on this discussion. Should indoor grilling be banned? I don't know, maybe. Does this law specifically address it? I don't know, probably not. Lines have to be drawn somewhere and it's going to be subjective, but that doesn't mean that it's bad.
 

keepngoal

OKA: keepingoal
Staff member
Bookie
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jun 20, 2006
38,116
22,333
113
simply, if they are a health hazard... as we all know they are but are allowed to be sold becuase of the tax revenue, why continue to have them available? If they are as bad as the commercials, lobbyists, PACs, scientists, OSHA and others say.. why have them at all? If they are acceptable to sell to the public why severely limit their use. it is more rhetorical more than anything... but the point stands.. why not completely nanny us... instead of halfway nanny'ing us?

The gov't won't let me buy plutonium because of the severe health risks... why cigarettes? Maybe because plutonium isn't addictive? could be.. .but do know for sure it isn't?

-keep.