Bettie: NV likely to go smoke-free

[Bettie]

If put to a vote today, a measure to ban smoking from school grounds, daycares, restaurants, and malls would pass with 57% approval. There are actually 2 measures to restrict smoking that will be put on the November ballot (one is definite, the other very likely), one more restrictive to the other. If they both pass, whichever wins by a higher percentage will be the one that becomes law. For more info, click on the link below.

Bettie

Nevadans strongly support bans on smoking

[samoht]

> If put to a vote today, a measure to ban smoking from
> school grounds, daycares, restaurants, and malls would
> pass with 57% approval. There are actually 2 measures
> to restrict smoking that will be put on the November
> ballot (one is definite, the other very likely), one
> more restrictive to the other. If they both pass,
> whichever wins by a higher percentage will be the one
> that becomes law. For more info, click on the link
> below.

> Bettie

Backed by the gaming industry, that initiative, which has already qualified for the ballot, would receive 57 percent of the vote if an election was held today.

Bravo! Bravo! Bravo! Bravo Zulu! A huge thumbs up to the NV's gaming industry. I like the industry's backing of the smoking ban. At least the industry wants to do the right thing to protect its workers & patrons from the poisoning 2nd-hand smokes.

On the other hand, a giant thumbs DOWN against NJ's gaming industry. It wants to poison everybody in AC casinos with 2nd-hand smokes. Its excuse: it's OK to poison AC people in order to keep smoking patrons happy so that the smokers don't go to LV's casinos, DUH! Now it looks NJ runs out of excuses!

BTW, the NJ smoke ban takes effect after this Friday midnight.

[samoht]

[Bettie]

> Backed by the gaming industry, that initiative, which
> has already qualified for the ballot, would receive 57
> percent of the vote if an election was held today.
> Bravo! Bravo! Bravo! Bravo Zulu! A huge thumbs up to
> the NV's gaming industry. I like the industry's
> backing of the smoking ban. At least the industry
> wants to do the right thing to protect its workers
> & patrons from the poisoning 2nd-hand smokes.

I think you need to read the article again. Smoking in CASINOS will still go on, but perhaps not in the restaurants within those casinos. It's not going to be so strict as to ban smoking from every indoor place, and I'm actually quite surprised that it bans smoking on schoolgrounds (which, I assume, includes the outdoor areas). I actually find this to be a murky issue; does the parent smoking while waiting for his kid by the car qualify?

Now, I'm not a smoker and I don't care for smoke blowing in my face, but I'm also not a fan on laws imposed on an individual's body. A motorcyclist should not have to wear a helmut, and motorists should not have to buckle up. If they don't and the get into a bad accident, they die, and I'm all for getting rid of stupid people. Smoking is different because it harms people around the smoker, which is why this legislation has my full support. I'll certainly be voting for both (assuming they both make the ballot) in order to help ensure some type of anti-smoking legislation passes.

Bettie

[Samoht]

[AutomaticMonkey]

> ...Now, I'm not a smoker and I don't care for smoke
> blowing in my face, but I'm also not a fan on laws
> imposed on an individual's body. A motorcyclist should
> not have to wear a helmut, and motorists should not
> have to buckle up. If they don't and the get into a
> bad accident, they die, and I'm all for getting rid of
> stupid people. Smoking is different because it harms
> people around the smoker, which is why this
> legislation has my full support. I'll certainly be
> voting for both (assuming they both make the ballot)
> in order to help ensure some type of anti-smoking
> legislation passes.

The flip (so to speak!) side of the helmet laws is that I am required to pay for the medical treatment of motorcyclists through my auto liability insurance, so I do have an interest in keeping his bills as low as possible. I wouldn't extend the same reasoning to other examples of controlling public behavior, but auto liability is the only form of insurance that a private citizen is forced by the government to buy.

Regarding the smoking bans, I could go either way. Many people believe that the smoke is harmful to bystanders, while other studies indicate that it is not. If it is really dangerous, then smoking indoors is no different than someone spraying any other poisonous chemical over me at a blackjack table and they are right to ban it. If it's just gross and annoying, well there are a lot of other things that are gross and annoying- vile perfume, BO, farting, bad breath, etc., and we've all experienced these things at the casino without any relief from the laws. So I would like more scientific data on whether this smoke is really impacting my health before I would call for a law.

But smoking is getting unpopular enough and casinos getting large enough that it really would be in their best interest to have an entire smoke-free wing. Maybe they believe non-smokers are more thoughtful and analytical about their futures, which is not exactly what you want in a gambling patron.

Does anybody else here get nervous when they see the old people with the oxygen bottles in the casino, with people flicking their matches and hot ashes around?