Advertisement

Archive for Wednesday, May 2, 2012

Bill seeks to allow smoking in Kansas bars

May 2, 2012

Advertisement

— A House committee has approved a bill that would allow smoking in Kansas bars.

The bill approved Tuesday by the House State and Federal Affairs Committee would allow smoking in any private business that has only patrons and employees who are at least of legal drinking age.

Bel Aire Republican Rep. Steve Brunk, chair of the committee, said it's unlikely the bill will become law this year because it was introduced so late in the legislative session.

Brunk, who doesn't smoke, told The Wichita Eagle he supports the bill. He says it is consistent with state law that allows smoking in state-owned casinos and it protects private property rights.

Kansas banned smoking in most private businesses in 2010.

Comments

Lateralis 1 year, 11 months ago

Fat is a known contributor to high cholesterol and heart disease. Is serving a hamburger with 42 grams of fat harmful? Will it contribute to high cholesterol and heart disease? I would go so far as to say that heart disease kills more people than lung cancer. I know this because it’s a fact.

0

gudpoynt 1 year, 11 months ago

I'm not allowed to put known carcinogens in the food my customers eat. Violation of my property rights? Nope.

I'm not allowed to put known carcinogens in the beverages my customers drink. Violation of my property rights? Nope.

I'm not allowed to put known carcinogens in the air my customers breath. Violation of my property rights? Yup.

Please explain.

0

Cant_have_it_both_ways 1 year, 11 months ago

George Carlin said: "Is having a smoking area in a restraunt like having a peeing area in a swimming pool"?

0

Liberal 1 year, 11 months ago

Boooooo... What the Bill should do is treat casino's like every other business not have every other business be like a casino.

So I have a bar and grill. So since I have a bar I can now allow smokers in the restaurant?

0

Lateralis 1 year, 11 months ago

Just another example of property rights violations. It really is this simple:

Don’t want to breathe the smoke…..don’t go. It’s not public property. My RIGHT to my personal property supersedes your DESIRE.

Next!

0

thuja 1 year, 11 months ago

Free State Brewery isn't a bar. Go have a smoke-free drink there.

0

mom_of_three 1 year, 11 months ago

So the state can have smoking in casins, but business owners cant make the decision about their own places? doesnt seem right

0

jayhawklawrence 1 year, 11 months ago

Another reason we have to stop electing repubs in this state.

There are so many reasons to get rid of cigarettes it is not even worth talking about anymore.

0

JayhawksandHerd 1 year, 11 months ago

Jobs. Period. Seriously, stop with this foolishness and get to work on real issues.

0

cheeseburger 1 year, 11 months ago

It's not a matter of rights. We're talking about a known carcinogen, and for that reason, it should not be allowed anywhere. If we want to debate the right of people to wear a green hat or drink water or some other benign activity, fine. You do not have the right to negatively affect my health.

0

eighthstreettaproom 1 year, 11 months ago

jeesh, smoking outside is way better.

0

cozborn 1 year, 11 months ago

I dont understand, if you dont like smoke dont go to a place with smoking. It seems pretty simple, dont legislate my morality.

0

observant 1 year, 11 months ago

See the tobacco companies sent all the checks promptly, and in large enough amounts apparently.

0

Carol Bowen 1 year, 11 months ago

Doesn't Rep. Steve Brunk have anything better to do during the extended session?

0

Quantrillsghost 1 year, 11 months ago

In Amsterdam you can smoke hashish legally in their businesses, think Lawrence might pass a bill for that? Anyways..puff away! Oh yeah, well this is the USA, where the morals are pushed onto others by others and others think they know what is best for free Americans.

0

Jayhawk1958 1 year, 11 months ago

This is so ridiciulous I can't believe they are trying to do this. Must be some lobby money coming from somewhere. One more thing to be ashamed of would I travel out of state.

0

JayhawkFan1985 1 year, 11 months ago

As a diabetic who takes excellent care of myself, I'm appalled by this bill. Second hand smoke raises blood glucose levels and blood pressure. As such, it is an assault against my health. I shouldn't have to stay home because stupid people want to destroy their health and mine. The GOP in this state is out of control.

0

jafs 1 year, 11 months ago

Maybe we could do it proportionally - ie. if 25% of the population smokes, then 25% of bars, restaurants etc. could allow smoking?

0

jhawkinsf 1 year, 11 months ago

Let the market decide. Allow each bar owner to have a smoking bar or a non smoking bar. Those that want to go to a non smoking bar may do so. Those that want to go to a smoking bar are free to do that. To encourage non smoking, have two different types of licenses, the smoking license being somewhat more expense to the owner, who will then have to pass that cost on to his customers.

Of course, in the good old days of smoking in bars, each owner was free to have a non smoking establishment. I suspect there were very few, precisely because it was a bad business model. But as attitudes about smoking have changed, and with a price differential, it might be a business model that would work now.

0

jafs 1 year, 11 months ago

Wouldn't it be more logical to say it's allowed in places where all of the employees, customers, etc. were of legal "smoking" age?

This could include much more than bars, as it could now, given the current wording.

The original argument that isn't addressed by this idea is that employees working in such an establishment may suffer ill health effects due to the second hand smoke, even if they don't smoke themselves.

I hate cigarette smoke, having grown up with two heavily smoking parents, and generally like the non smoking ordinance, but I do think there should be some sort of exceptions, so that smokers who want to go out and be with other smokers can do so. I just don't know how to frame the exceptions so that we don't expose those employees to those health risks unwillingly (ie. if they smoke, and are willing to inhale everybody else's smoke, fine by me).

Overall, I urge everybody not to smoke - it's terrible for your health, costs a lot of money, is perhaps more addictive than heroin, and makes your breath and clothes smell disgusting.

0

TinmanKC 1 year, 11 months ago

Hmm. Same kind of bill with similar language introduced in Missouri on the same day. Sounds like ALEC at work again.

0

Flap Doodle 1 year, 11 months ago

Make a law that in order to buy a pack of 20 cigarettes, a user has to turn in 40 butts. Every 6 months, the toll rises by 5. That's my $0.02.

0

FalseHopeNoChange 1 year, 11 months ago

Yeah.... Let's legalize "maryjane" too cuz it's good for you. Then the government can tax it like cigs to pay for the children's education to not smoke cigs cuz they're bad for you and the taxes lost from not buying cigs can be replaced with taxes on "maryjane" cuz it's good for you.

yeah...

0

Shane Garrett 1 year, 11 months ago

Although tobacco use rates generally have declined over the last 40 years, some 4,000 individuals become new regular smokers every day. Given that more than 85 percent of smokers drink alcohol, and that drinkers are 75 percent more likely to smoke than are abstainers, the public health ramifications of joint use of alcohol and tobacco may be substantial indeed. From: KENNETH J. MUKAMAL, M.D., is associate professor of medicine at the Department of Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. He had a whole paper on the subject of heart disease and smoking.

0

jonas_opines 1 year, 11 months ago

This is just posturing. Anyone who believes that this bill has ANY chance of passing or being implemented is a fool. We've had this fight already, non-smokers won. Property rights and everything else, you can give the argument if you want, but it fades in front of the simple truth of strength. Non-smokers have the strength of numbers, by a large margin. They used that strength, and they got what they wanted.

The end.

0

its_just_math 1 year, 11 months ago

I went into a bar one time that was really more of a pool hall and the smoke was so thick, you literally could not see well to the other end of the room---app 100'. I woke up the next day sick as a dog and did not shake that cold/bronchitis for the rest of the winter. That being said, I think the gov't. is too intrusive and a responsible bar owner can install effective "smoke eaters" and they keep the smoke out. I used to base where I went in STL on that.....some bars were awash in fresh air and some were just lousy with smoke-----and it mattered where I went based on that. Having just a "smoky smell" and just being thick--hanging in the air are two separate things.

0

brutus 1 year, 11 months ago

I have a new bill to propose-outlaw smoking in casinos.

0

Kirk Larson 1 year, 11 months ago

I have a simple compromise: smokers can smoke in bars, but non-smokers get to spit in their drinks.

0

cheeseburger 1 year, 11 months ago

Did cigarette smoke suddenly lose its designation as a known carcinogen?

Yeah, didn't think so.

If the legislators spend one second considering this bill, they are dumber than the people who stick those nasty cancer sticks in their mouths in the first place.

0

Jayhawk1958 1 year, 11 months ago

Dear Bar Owners-You just lost 80% of your business.

0

gatekeeper 1 year, 11 months ago

I smoke and don't want smoking in bars. Smokers can go outside for our fix. I'm disgusted by how bad it gets inside bars when it's allowed. I want to smoke my cigarette, not everyone else's too. I go outside at home because it's just too gross to smoke indoors.

0

RDE87 1 year, 11 months ago

I love coming home from the bars NOT smelling of disgusting smoke! I hope this bill does not pass. People who smoke are just fine outside on the patios.

0

BABBOY 1 year, 11 months ago

Crap, that should be going to bars without disgusting smokers.

ljworld should have edit functions like mosts sites do...

0

BABBOY 1 year, 11 months ago

Nah, I like go to bars with disgusting smokers.

I have gotten use to bars without smoke and if they bring back the smoking bars then yeah I will not go......

I usually drink at sporting events football or baseball games and smoking was banned there a long time ago because of non-smokers kicking the crap out of people who blew smoke on them......

So, this does not affect me that much ....

0

weiser 1 year, 11 months ago

Let them smoke, collect the taxes and give the money to me for free.

0

jackbinkelman 1 year, 11 months ago

"Bill seeks to allow smoking in Kansas bars" Terrible idea for Kansas. Smoking patios work just fine. Smoking is a miserable thing.. I quit 9-10 years ago and STILL have strong urges to smoke. Seems to me the chemicals in cigarettes have gotten more potent over the years causing worse addiction, just my opinion from off and on smoking for decades. I would never smoke now, the addicting chemicals are probably even worse. I certainly never allow myself to breath second hand smoke. The government should be focusing on raising cigarette taxes, expanding the distance from front doors of businesses smoking is allowed and smoking around children. I wouldn't be opposed to banning smoking all together.

0

obamasocks 1 year, 11 months ago

Time to make tobacco smoking illegal. Idiotic that its not since other less harmful substance ARE.

0

gsxr600 1 year, 11 months ago

The fact that our legislator would spend one second of time on this is the worst part. It's fine the way it is. Oftentimes I still come home smelling like an ashtray anyway because people smoke 3ft outside of bars.

I agree bar owners should be able to choose the rules of their own bar. If any bar owner is stupid enough to allow smoking in there private business they'll see their profit margins decline.

0

JackMcKee 1 year, 11 months ago

I'm surprised the Kansas House members can tie their shoes in the morning. Worst group of legislators in the country.

0

patkindle 1 year, 11 months ago

i always felt the bar owners should make the rules and tell the world what customers they prefer but they do not want to burn any bridges so they let the law be the bad guy

the downside is many smokers will sit all nite and drive home drunk , while the non smoker, just drinks and leaves after a couple of shots the bar owners want both of them for covering thier overhead

0

hitme 1 year, 11 months ago

Yes, let's return to the days of stupidity.

0

Hooligan_016 1 year, 11 months ago

I also like to go out and not come back smelling like an ash tray. I know the defenders of smoking in bars are going to say to take my business elsewhere, but if it's allowed in all bars, then I pretty much can't go anywhere now, can I?

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.