New smoking ban

[AlohaKine]

Re: New smoking ban

The results of the election pretty much speaks for itself. There's not going to be any roll-back or easing up on the smoking ban, as it now stands. That's for sure. If anything, there might be an increase. Right now, hotels are allowed to designate up to 20% of its rooms as permissable for smoking. But there's been talk about a total ban. Already, some chains like Marriott and Sheraton do not allow smoking in any of their rooms, period.

Never say never. A break through could happen at any time.

[Amati]

Re: New smoking ban

The results of the election pretty much speaks for itself. There's not going to be any roll-back or easing up on the smoking ban, as it now stands. That's for sure. If anything, there might be an increase.

I'm not so sure about that. There is a picture in the article, AlohaKine is it you?

http://pacific.bizjournals.com/pacif...10/story1.html

Quote from Pacific Business News: "Two years after it took effect, Hawaii’s anti-smoking law is going unenforced. While most business owners, employers and smokers voluntarily comply with the law, which banned smoking in nearly every workplace, business and building, the state is still writing the administrative rules that would give the state Department of Health the authority to cite and fine offenders.To date, only one Honolulu woman has been cited by police for smoking in a bar and was fined $25.A small contingent of bar and lounge owners have remained defiant by continuing to allow smoking, establishing safe havens where smokers can light up in peace."

Sounds like whoever passed the law does not care if it is enforced. Is the legislature responsible for enforcing the law? Maybe the legislature did not care if it was enforced, but just "did the motions" to LOOK like they cared, but left off the important enforcement part?

[Frankie's Market]

Re: New smoking ban

The results of the election pretty much speaks for itself. There's not going to be any roll-back or easing up on the smoking ban, as it now stands. That's for sure. If anything, there might be an increase.

I'm not so sure about that.

A 35 year trend in ever-growing restrictions on where smoking is permitted hasn't convinced you? Gee.

Never say never. A break through could happen at any time.

On what basis in reality are you making that statement? Can you name enough legislators who are willing to ease up any kind of restrictions? Or are you just blowing smoke? (Sorry, couldn't help myself! )

[Amati]

A 35 year trend in ever-growing restrictions on where smoking is permitted hasn't convinced you? Gee.

My point is that making laws is a step, but without enforcement the law is not worth the paper it is written on. 35 year trends might be working elsewhere, but not in Hawaii. 2 years later and still no enforcment? I'd say that is a NON-law.

[Frankie's Market]

My point is that making laws is a step, but without enforcement the law is not worth the paper it is written on.

No enforcement? Could've fooled me. I don't see people lighting up to smoke inside Blaisdell Arena anymore. I don't see people lighting up to smoke inside the State Capitol Building anymore. If there is any illegal smoking going on inside state/city facilities, it is always hidden and not out in the open for everyone to see.

Spout off whatever nonsense what you want. I would say there's been plenty of enforcement.

35 year trends might be working elsewhere, but not in Hawaii. 2 years later and still no enforcment? I'd say that is a NON-law.

"No enforcement?" Where specifically? Care to substantiate and elaborate on this?

[Amati]

Re: New smoking ban

No enforcement? Could've fooled me. I don't see people lighting up to smoke inside Blaisdell Arena anymore. I don't see people lighting up to smoke inside the State Capitol Building anymore. If there is any illegal smoking going on inside state/city facilities, it is always hidden and not out in the open for everyone to see.

Spout off whatever nonsense what you want. I would say there's been plenty of enforcement.

"No enforcement?" Where specifically? Care to substantiate and elaborate on this?

Go back to posting #887 for the link. One ticket so far in 2 years. The article states, "Two years after it took effect, Hawaii’s anti-smoking law is going unenforced". Don't get all pi&&ed with me, I'm only stating the FACTs as reported by Hawaii Business News in their article.

[timkona]

Re: New smoking ban

Check the Kona side. Sam's, Sea Monkey. Smoky as ever. Walk into Teru's and burn a joint or roll the ice pipe. Smokers won't say anything because they know they are breaking the law already. It's way out of control.

But smokers have a different way of looking at law. So no big deal to me.

[AlohaKine]

Re: New smoking ban

I don't care. If they don't fix the I will break it. Ban the Ban! Adults on private property,

[Amati]

Re: New smoking ban

I don't care. If they don't fix the I will break it. Ban the Ban! Adults on private property,

Huh? What you been smoking tonight?

[timkona]

Re: New smoking ban

If they don't fix (law?) then I will break it. Is that what you meant?

Alohakine could not have said it better. The law against smoking in bars gets broken by anybody who chooses to. Same is true with any drug. Addiction is more powerful than any threat law can bring. Just another blistering truth that so many would ignore.

It's like this. And it's real simple. If anyone who smokes or drinks, or used to smoke or drink, and carries a favorable opinion of the War on Drugs, or a disparaging opinion of anybody who is high on any substance, then those people reveal a basic lack of logical intelligence that is tragic.

And Leo, in retrospect, I admit this list includes John McCain.

[Amati]

Re: New smoking ban

It's like this. And it's real simple. If anyone who smokes or drinks, or used to smoke or drink, and carries a favorable opinion of the War on Drugs, or a disparaging opinion of anybody who is high on any substance, then those people reveal a basic lack of logical intelligence that is tragic.

OK, another "huh?" moment for me with that posting.
HUH?? If someone has "a disparaging opinion of anybody who is high on any substance, then those people reveal a basic lack of logical intelligence that is tragic". Let's see, does that mean we should condone Ice usage, and that toying with ... say ... animal tranquilizers is acceptible ..... how about illegal usage of street-sold prescription drugs? That is all OK? Holding a negative opinion of users makes someone show a "lack of logical intelligence"?
KT, your statement is just fricken nuts!

[Menehune Man]

Re: New smoking ban

I don't see people lighting up to smoke inside Blaisdell Arena anymore.

And what a bummer that is!
Oh, you mean cigarettes. My bad.

I understand the infringement on non-smokers, but...

[Leo Lakio]

Re: New smoking ban

OK, another "huh?" moment for me with that posting.
HUH?? If someone has "a disparaging opinion of anybody who is high on any substance, then those people reveal a basic lack of logical intelligence that is tragic". Let's see, does that mean we should condone Ice usage, and that toying with ... say ... animal tranquilizers is acceptible ..... how about illegal usage of street-sold prescription drugs? That is all OK? Holding a negative opinion of users makes someone show a "lack of logical intelligence"?
KT, your statement is just fricken nuts!

Actually, Amati, I believe what Tim is saying is that anyone who was or is a user of any addictive substance has no place condemning anyone else who uses any addictive substance, be it drugs (legal and not), tobacco or alcohol. Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

[timkona]

Re: New smoking ban

Very good Leo.

I may be reaching here, but, Amati, do you smoke ciggy's?

Ask anybody. I'm all FOR smokers rights. Including in bars. But I do not smoke ciggy's myself.

[Leo Lakio]

Re: New smoking ban

New tobacco product alarms some health officials

They're discreet, flavorful and come in cute tin boxes with names like "frost" and "spice." And the folks who created Joe Camel are hoping Camel Snus will become a hit with tobacco lovers tired of being forced outside for a smoke.

But convincing health officials and smokers like Ethan Flint that they're worth a try may take some work.

Snus — Swedish for tobacco, rhymes with "noose" — is a tiny, tea bag-like pouch of steam-pasteurized, smokeless tobacco to tuck between the cheek and gum. Aromatic to the user and undetectable to anyone else, it promises a hit of nicotine without the messy spitting associated with chewing tobacco. Just swallow the juice.

"I think I'd rather throw up in my mouth," says Flint, an 18-year-old West Virginia University student, emerging from a convenience store with a pack of Winstons and a coupon for free Camel Snus. "I'd rather not swallow anything like that."

Reynolds America Inc., the nation's No. 2 tobacco company, can also expect resistance from the public health community. Experts wonder whether snus will help wean people off cigarettes and snuff, or just foster a second addiction. While snus has been around, it hasn't been prominent in this country.

Full story here.