Kansas House Ducks Debate on Smoking Restrictions
Associated Press - Fri 11:59 AM 05/04/2012
The House voted 62-49 on Friday to send the smoking measure to its Health and Human Services Committee rather than debate it.
The Kansas House has ducked a debate on loosening the state's restrictions on smoking in public places.
The House voted 62-49 on Friday to send the smoking measure to its Health and Human Services Committee rather than debate it. The bill would create an exception to a statewide ban on smoking in bars, restaurants and other public places for businesses catering only to adults 21 or older.
Rep. Bill Otto, a LeRoy Republican, said he returned the bill to committee even though he supports it partly because the Senate isn't likely to approve it this year.
Public health advocates pushed for the 2010 law, but critics contend it has hurt businesses and that restrictions should be left to cities and counties.
Comments must stay on topic and be respectful. Comments that are personal attacks, make unfounded accusations, or are for the purpose of "trolling" or inciting others will be removed. Offending users will have their profile suspended.
Post a comment Log in or Register to comment
billybob67401
Friday 4 May 2012 14:21 Report this comment
I support no smoking in public places, period. We are not stopping you from smoking, go outside and smoke. People need to look at the statistics and they will see that business has not been hurt any where near as bad as most were saying it would. People that want to go out to the bars are not going to stop because they can't smoke. I have the RIGHT not to be subject to it.
CORRECTION
Friday 4 May 2012 14:43 Report this comment
I'm betting the poor economy had more to do with bars loosing business than a smoking ban did. People just did not have the money to go out (especially smokers who spend x amount per pack). At this point it would seem counter-productive to pass this. You're not going to bring more smokers back (they've already adjusted) but you will run off more non-smokers (such as my wife who is allergic/asthmatic). Personally, I don't mind the smoke, but it is nice to be able to bring my wife out for a drink or a local band without her having an attack.
memorex63
Friday 4 May 2012 15:28 Report this comment
What makes all the non-smokers think they have the "right" to force a business to only cater to them. It is (or used to be) a free country and the business owner should decide who to cater to. If you don't like that they allow smoking then don't patronize their business! Same applies to all of the employees that are "harmed" by second hand smoke. Feel free to apply for a job at an establishment that does not allow it.
billybob67401
Friday 4 May 2012 16:06 Report this comment
Memorex63, if we allowed business to cater to who they wanted we would be back to the way things were back in the 60' and earlier with regards racism and segregation. Non-smokers are not asking to be catered to. Like I said before, go smoke outside!!! The law will not be changed, so don’t get too excited. Yes, we a free country, but that doesn’t give you the right to do whatever you want. This is why we have laws, to protect the public. If all the non-smokers were to cease from going to these establishments, they would be out of business in no time. There are a lot more non-smokers than smokers in this world.
RONNIEMUR
Sunday 6 May 2012 07:51 Report this comment
@memorex, people shouldn't be allowed to pass on second hand smoke in an encolsed structure for the same reason people arentallowed to randomly start punching people within arms reach. If a smoker is so addicted to cigarettes that they would rather consciously pass on their deadly second hand smoke rather than going outside, that person should seek help to gain so.e self control over their addiction. You say non smokers are trying to control you but smoking is not a necessiy to live, it is a recreational habit. Besides, who second hand smoked and made you king?
BigKenSucka
Monday 7 May 2012 14:00 Report this comment
ronniemur you sir are lame
RONNIEMUR
Monday 7 May 2012 20:47 Report this comment
@bigkensucka, I wouldn't care to be admired by you. If you don't like intelligent input, why bother reading the news? I'm sorry but until you say something worthwhile, I just have to laugh that you wasted your time logging in just to have your comment be an epic fail.
BigKenSucka
Tuesday 8 May 2012 16:19 Report this comment
epic fail ? Lol that is very original.....NOT !! lame
RONNIE
Tuesday 8 May 2012 20:28 Report this comment
I feel like bigken is from Saint Helena. His comments are strictly juveline and unproductive, having nothing to do with the actual topic of the article. Has anyone heard anything informative or intelligent from him? Bigken, I hope you find peace so that you don't have to find your only joy in trying to pick on those with actual thoughts on the articles and not just teenage digs.