Sunday, December 17, 2006

County says no to smoking ban......

As I write this post our local Minnesota media is pushing a smoking ban agenda in the hopes that they will steer state lawmakers toward that end. Many argue that a smoking ban is inevitable "....everybody is enacting a smoking ban......" the activists tell us.

Well, not everybody, in fact only a small percentage have enacted bans......the rest are rejecting them on a regular basis. St. Louis County, MO. is only one of the latest to reject a smoking ban in favor of freedom of choice and free market forces. When a smoking ban is rejected, bar and restuarant owners can still elect to go smoke free on their own.......if going smoke free will increase business, I guarantee bar and restaurant owners would do so voluntarily in a heartbeat.

Apparently however, there is not much of a demand for smoke free establishments in the free market, and those areas which have enacted smoking bans offer the proof to that theory. Nearly 1,000 establishments and tens of thousands of jobs have been eliminated since smoking bans have taken effect. Here is Minnesota, even though the are only a few small local smoking bans, nearly 100 hospitality establishments have gone out of business.

So again if the media and Nicoderm interests have their way, there will be another push to enact a statewide smoking ban, and again I will be there to discuss the facts with lawmakers that the pharmaceutical nicotine profiteers conveniently leave out of their testimony. If Minnesota lawmakers have any common sense and ability to reason as well as the backbone to stand up against the pharmaceutical nicotine interests , which fund all the pro-smoking ban non-profits, then the state of Minnesota will be the latest to reject a smoking ban in favor of freedom of choice, afterall air quality testing and even the World Health Organization have proven that secondhand smoke is not a health hazard requiring government action, because OSHA regulations already safeguard our health.

Also visit our sponsors at bottom of webpage
  • Why a Non-Smoker Fights the Pro-Smoking Ban Lies
  • Is RWJF, a 501(c)3, violating IRS rules by funding pro-smoking ban lobbyists?
  • RWJF funds and promotes universal healthcare policies which are the basis for and primary objective of Obamacare
  • Boycott these special interests (J & J) who destroyed the hospitality industry & jobs
  • Is the smoking ban movement fueled by pharmaceutical nicotine interests?
  • Now that smoking bans have been implemented, what can be done?
  • How do smoking ban lobbyists profit from smoking bans?
  • Pharmaceutical interests project the alternative nicotine marketplace to be $4.6 billion +
  • WHO report secondhand smoke doesn't cause cancer
  • Do smoker's cost society more money than non-smoker's? NO
  • Do smoker's cost society more money than non-smoker's? Part 2
  • Why does UCSF researcher Stanton Glantz support smoking bans?
  • OSHA standards prove SHS is not a health hazard
  • Tired of the nanny-state, big, socialized, corrupt, government legislation coming out of our state and federal capitols these days? Vote Republican in November 2010 & 2012

    Thousands of Deadly Islamic Terror Attacks Since 9/11


    "Though we may not be able to protect your business property rights, we certainly support your Second Amendment Rights"

    Shop for Aircleaners

    Combustion Engine Emissions Eliminator (CE3)