Most read
- HOW MICHIGAN MEN ARE MADE: A look inside the timeless tradition
- Breakdown: Michigan football vs. Ohio State
- Heisman Trophy winners Archie Griffin and Desmond Howard reflect on both sides of the Michigan-Ohio State rivalry
- Prof. once denied meeting with MSA execs about DPS Oversight Committee, airs issues at meeting
- Advertise with us
On the Blogs
-
News
Special Report: DPS Oversight Committee may be in violation of state law
-
The Statement
-
The Statement
About Campus: The law student "party" house behind West Quad
-
The Statement
-
News
Prof. once denied meeting with MSA execs about DPS Oversight Committee, airs issues at meeting
-
The Statement
-
Men's Basketball
-
Bside
Printmaker Takeshi Takahara: mixing metal and acid to make beauty
-
Bside
Lila Kalick: Hippie hash, spunky clientele and greasy spooning at Fleetwood Diner
-
Men's Basketball
Comments
Phoenix Suns Shirt | Wholesale Utah Jazz Jersey | Replica Atlanta Hawks Jersey | Orlando Magic Shirt | Dallas Mavericks Jersey | Portland Trail Shirt | Chicago Bulls Jersey | Cleveland Cavaliers Shirt | Miami Heat Jersey Wholesale | Replica Toronto Raptors Jersey | Official NBA Shirt | New Orleans Hornets Shirt | Orlando Magic Shirt | Cleveland Cavaliers Shirt | Phoenix Suns Shirt | Dallas Mavericks Jersey | San Antonio Spurs Shirt | Orlando Magic Shirt | Cleveland Cavaliers Shirt | Wholesale Utah Jazz Jersey
Barcelona Soccer Jersey Wholesale | China Soccer Jersey | Italy uniform | Wholesale Czech Jersey | Switzerland Shirt | Soccer Jersey Jersey | Holland uniform | Replica Feyenoord Jersey | Soccer Jersey Wholesale | Wholesale Man City Jersey | Soccer Jersey Wholesale | MLS Soccer Jersey Wholesale | Wholesale Czech Jersey | French uniform | Bayern Munich Shirt | England Jersey | Soccer Jersey Wholesale | Japan uniform | Inter Milan Shirt | Villareal uniform
Replica Rolex watches,Chanel,IWC Watches - Over 20000 replica Watches items
What is Geneva Replica Watches Seal Christian Dior Ladies Watches Chopard Luxury Watches Geneva Bvlgari Watch TAG Heuer Mens Watches print Breitling Replica is Omega Watches Replica made IWC Watch Replicas by the "Geneva Replica Watches Franck Muller Watches A Lange & Sohne Replica law" Replica Watches Trade IWC Ladies Watches Vacheron Constantin Watch Hublot Fake Watch in 1886.
"Geneva Fake Watch Montblanc Replica Watches Fake Citizen Watch law" Bulova Watches Replica intended Fake TAG Heuer Watch Replica A Lange Sohne to Replica Watches Raymond Weil Fake Watches IWC Luxury Watches protect A Lange Sohne Mens Watches Omega Watch the Chanel Replica Watches real Rolex Watches Replica Longines Watches production Bvlgari Watch Replicas of watches in Christian Dior Fake Watch Omega Fake Watch Geneva, Replica Watch Oris Ladies Watches so Bvlgari Watches Swiss Ladies Watches Luxury Louis Vuitton as Replica Watch Shopping Replica Watch Raymond Weil Replica to Replica Watches Movado Watch Jacob & Co. Replica Watch Mont Blanc Watch Replicas avoid Emporio Armani Watch Replicas other Fake Accutron Cartier Wristwatch Rolex Fake Watch inferior Luxury Emporio Armani products Baume & Mercier Luxury Watches marked Replica Watches Collection with Concord Watches "Geneva Audemars Piguet Replica made" Chopard Watches Replica being Fake Louis Vuitton Watches sold. Replica Brand Watches
So far, Movado Wristwatch it has been Rado Watch Replicas Franck Muller Watch revised Oris Watches Replica Replica Longines Watches Breguet Replica Watches several times Fake Rado Watch to meet Fake Watches Piaget Mens Watches Franck Muller Watches the Chanel Replica changes of the Swiss Army Wristwatch Replica TAG Heuer Watch times.
For example, Watches Replicas Accutron Watches all Michele Watches Luxury Rado acute Replica Handbags Longines Replica Watch Roger Dubuis Replica Watch angle must Replica Watch Fake Rolex be Replica Swatch Watches Chopard Fake Watch cut Fake Ebel into Panerai Watch Fake Bedat & CO Watch slope, Citizen Replica Watches Movado Fake Watches further Fake Watch Patek Philippe Watch polishing; Audemars Piguet Watches Replica Montblanc Watch and Replica Watch Cyclovirobuxine Replica Patek Philippe Watch gear Wholesale Replica Watches Fake Watches Piaget Wristwatch is Replica Watches decorated Oris Watches Luxury Breitling Luxury Swatch artificially and Jacob & Co. Replica Watches polished with Jacques Lemans Watch Replicas wood.
Detroit’s casinos are taxed at a rate bordering on a revenue sharing model, & so are veritable cash cows for the Michigan Legislature. Exempting them from the indoor smoking ban is a tacit admission by the Michigan House that the ban is bad for businesses, & may run up the state’s already double-digit unemployment rate.
The Nanny State is on steroids now that the Democrats are in power - how's that working out for all you so-called "liberals?" I thought that liberals were for personal freedom and civil liberties? I guess I was terribly wrong. What's next, a ban on fast food? Single motherhood? Airline travel?
The bottom line: If you don't like second hand smoke, don't enter an establishment that allows smoking, either as a patron or a worker. You have absolutely no right to tell others, especially owners of private property and businesses, what they can and cannot do with their personal property. You do not have the right to tell an employer how s/he must run their business. What's so hard about all this to understand?
There is a great deal of confusion here as to who has a right to choose or infer management over their own body. A woman has a right to choose and regardless of how you would vote on the abortion issue, no one can deny the number of children who's lives end with a conscious choice to terminate a pregnancy. So to, would a non smoker have a right to choose to enter a place where smoking is allowed or enter the many more places where smoking is prohibited. Choices are made by the business owner who has made the investment which created the business. A lobby of Bigots and divisive scolds relying on cult beliefs and parroted ad agency buzz words, has no right to interfere or imperil the investments of that owner, or the clients he chooses to serve, who simply want to have a smoke with a beer and enjoy their right to be left alone in the process. A choice made after a days work with the investment of legal tender, to purchase a legal product, in search of some quiet time after a hectic day at the rock pile.
A person who seeks employment who smokes is not endangering himself or others when they choose to work in a smoking allowed environment. A non smoker who chooses the company of others who smoke and enter a smoking allowed environment has made a choice and all the twisted numbers in the world can not find a good reason why he shouldn't. The 53,000 figure bandied about has absolutely nothing to do with a patron entering a bar who has no level of elevated risk due to short term exposures, because as they tell smokers; if you quit the exposures by smoking and second hand smoke initiated by smoking, in time all smoking related risks will be mitigated to a level as though you had never smoked. How do they sell this danger of second hand, third hand and fourth hand smoke, when a supposedly weakened body of a smoker can heal and see complete recovery, why too can't a non smoker who is believed to be healthier?
The bottom line is; we are being sold a bill of goods and the unconscionable part of all this delusion and incoherence? The promotion is being purchased by out government, in accordance with a World Health Organization agreement. Signed without debate or public agreement as one of the two dozen free and democratic countries among a cabal of 150 countries, who detest us and our freedom.
Punishing smokers drinkers and the obese to subvert their rights of choice, is supported by the medical institutions and charities we have all grown to trust. The integrity and trust lost by smoking bans and taxing what is described as medical dependency or addiction incredibly described as sin taxes, are choices they made, to degrade and divide us all.
In a recent poll it was declared that 60% of those polled supported a smoking ban in public spaces. We see these type of polls all the time in crafted ad agency news releases, without ever considering who is paying to promote the news? Despite what the lobbies are promoting, a bar is not a public place it is a private property where you are invited to enter if the atmosphere suits your tastes.
The story within the story here is the fact that only 20% of adults smoke and almost double that amount consistently vote as opposed.
The good news? There are still some out there not caught up in the anti-smoker, anti fat, anti person, Bigot Bandwagons with enough sense to see oppression for what it is. No one and no community gains by a government protecting us from ourselves.
By hired lobbies billed as "grass roots" who dictate political correctness from the top down. Mercenaries and terrorists armed with twisted numbers and statistical pseudo-realities, generously paid with our tax dollars, the Government is toying with a divide and conquer strategy taking charge of our lives and the relationship that would have them working for us.
Regulations of this form take on the presumption of guilt reverse the right to a trial and reverse the onus of proof. Punishment without conviction is a profit center, once only permissible in places where we have no other avenues, such as the freedom of informed consent protected with a sign on the door.
If you have a peanut allergy you are protected from an immediate danger with signs and packaging yet a sign on the door of a bar is not even an option on the table here?
Surely if there is any need to protect freedom and equal rights, we can do much better than promoting hatred to excuse this opportunistic ignorance, by the useful idiots we pay dearly to manage our affairs.
What an idiotic response. I have rarely seen the ability of one to talk in circles as you have. I'm not quite sure what your point is here. The "grass roots" lobbyists are in response to the lobbyists for the tobacco company. Most of the grass root lobbyists are supported by non-profits such as the American Cancer Society who receive the majority of their support through donations from other Americans.
You're callout of the ban as oppressive seems shallow when you think of the majority of laws that are out there that can be deemed just as oppressive. Why have speed limits? Why have drunk driving laws? Why is moonshine illegal? Why do you not show the outrage over these equally oppressive laws and attempt to get these overturned.
I lived in New England, where there was a ban on smoking in bars and restaurants. Amazingly, people still went out to both, and in fact, it was shown that more people went out and the bars made even more money. This has shown equal results in the mid-western state just to the south of us, which is a red state.
This ban will also save everyone in the long run. You can say that second hand smoke is negligible and that they are only hurting themselves all you want. But towards the end of their life, the rest of America will be responsible for their healthcare costs when they get sick and have cancer. If you aren't aware of the costs of cancer treatments, then you may want to look it up. It isn’t cheap.
So with statistics showing that businesses have made more with the ban and healthcare of non-smokers is far less, I have yet to hear a good reason why this ban should not go through.
By your thinking, places that ban smoking should make more money, and thus encourage places that allow smoking to follow suit. Guess what, that's not the way it is. Why can't an individual restaurant owner make his own decision? If you are afraid of second hand smoke, go to smoke free establishments. As for the long term monetary effects, smokers do far more to help the economy than non-smokers. While they may have health problems, they die earlier, and someone who is very healthy and is living on life support till 80 costs far, far more to the American tax payer than the smoker who dies at 55. Shut up, grow a pair, and learn to make informed decisions for yourself instead of having the government force you to do so.
Way to make up a fact about smokers costing less that is obviously complete bullshit and telling me to make an informed decision. Even by making up your own facts to support your argument you still fail to even answer half my points. And by the way, one of my points was not a huge concern for second hand smoke. Well done, asshole, well done.
Editorial writers write nonsense like this for one of two reasons: either they’re giving their vent to their own biases, or they’re pouring out their ignorance. Of course, they may be giving vent to someone ELSE’s bias, such as that of the publisher. But at least you got the math right.
Indeed, if 1,300 people die from smoking induced causes each day and 11 percent of them die from secondhand smoke, the math comes out right, since the “official” figures are 400,000 deaths due to smoking each year and 53,000 from secondhand smoke exposure. The only trouble is, the 53,000 figure is manufactured baloney.
Does anyone with an ounce of sense believe that for every eight smoking deaths in the United States there is one for secondhand smoke exposure, even BEFORE considering that smokers inhale the smoke deeply into their lungs and non-smokers breath in the secondhand smoke only lightly? When 80 percent of the dozens of epidemiological studies made over the past quarter century show only a weak or statistically insignificant association between secondhand smoke and either lung cancer or heart disease?
Expert witness: Dr. Elizabeth Whelan, anti-smoking crusader, world-class epidemiologist (Harvard/Yale) and president of the American Council on Science and Health, who, speaking for herself and her Council of 380 scientists, made the following statements when the New York City ban went into effect: “There is simply no convincing evidence linking secondhand smoke to lung cancer and heart disease.” “There is no evidence that any New Yorker – patron or employee – has ever died as a result of exposure to smoke in a bar or restaurant.” “The link between secondhand smoke and premature death is a real stretch.”
Instead of simply parroting what the CDC says, you should do some research on that 53,000 deaths figure and find out where it came from. And especially read the March 23, 1994 letter from Jane G. Gravelle of the Congressional Research Service to C. Stephen Redhead, which states that the Wells estimates (A. Judson Wells, who seems to be the initial source of these figures) “are so high relative to measures of physical exposure that they seem implausible. It also suggests that the absence of controls or the inability to control for other factors may be a major problem in relying on epidemiological estimates of the effects of passing smoking.”
Do you really believe that a person who, say, smokes a single cigarette a day is in any long-term danger? And yet you’re buying into this secondhand smoke scam when studies have shown that people married to smokers only take in the equivalent of a very few cigarettes in an entire year?
And as for your statement that bans don’t hurt business ... well, another time.
Post new comment