Database of Ohio Smoking Ban Violators

[GOTV]

http://www.smokechoke.com/

[rurallib]

1. I feel sorry for those who must work in smoky conditions

[Redstone]

2. Busybodies, much? But I wish someone would do the same for CT to I could find a bar

and rellax.

Redstone

[MeDeMax]

3. man these anti-smokers are unsatisfied a**holes

[realisticphish]

4. yeah, those fuckers

wanting a law enforced... downright unamerican

[MeDeMax]

5. you will have plenty of time to whine when the ban gets overturned

99.xx% of the businesses have complied, instead of being happy about it,
the anti-smokers are whining about a handful of businesses, among tens of
thousands, that are not in compliance.

It is the kind of persecution that would piss off someone enough that they
would raise the money and get the whole thing overturned in court on appeal.

Suit yourself, Enforcers !

(on a personal note)

I have been enjoying the +ve changes from the ban, but this kind of persecution
of the smokers and establishments really turns me off.

[realisticphish]

6. honestly, i don't give a fuck

I go to bars where people still smoke all the time (which aren't even on that list)

But THE LAW IS THE LAW, and there's nothing wrong with wanting 100% compliance. I'm not reporting them, but there's nothing ethically wrong with doing so. It's not "persecution" to require businesses to comply with a state law.

For me, it's the same as the drinking laws. I think it's asinine to have a drinking limit at 21, but I don't quibble when people get arrested for it. They knew the law, they broke the law, and regardless of the fairness or logic of the law, it's there.

We can't just arbitrarily decide which laws everyone should follow, and which ones it's ok to ignore.

[MeDeMax]

7. neither do I, about your views on the subject

[GOTV]

8. They say they're just providing a way for non-smokers to avoid smoking bars....

... what's wrong with that?

Being listed on that site doesn't count as a complaint. It doesn't trigger an investigation. It just allows non-smokers to avoid the bars that are still allowing smoking.

Then, everyone is happy.

[Kolesar]

9. Next we need a list of bars where the employees don't wash their hands after using the bathroom?

:evilgrin:

[AngryOldDem]

11. That would be of more use, in my opinion.

[GOTV]

14. I would love a list like that. Those are places to avoid as well n/t

[MeDeMax]

10. I wish it would trigger an investigation

then someone gets to challenge the constitutionality of this ban.

I would like to see the ban amended to where establishments can opt.
to be smokey or smoke-free. With a HUGE sign posted at the entrance
indicating one way or the other.

I can then choose to frequent the smoke-free establishments while bar
owners and patrons that like nicotine with their air, water & food
can have it their way.

[GOTV]

13. But there are other ways to trigger a investigation...

... which are open to people.

And don't worry about challenging the constitutionality of this law - it's already in progress and a date's been set.

[johnnie]

12. What gets me is...

What gets me is that people were ok with the fact that they passed a law without it really being written yet.

[GOTV]

15. This is common actually....

... laws usually have grey areas that are worked out by the courts and regulatory agencies.

[Kolesar]

16. It was a constitutional amendment that triggers the agency to write "enabling rules"

...or for the legislature to write "enabling legislation".

That is what Reform Ohio should have done with the election laws instead of trying to put the details into the Ohio Constitution.

[johnnie]

17. So what are their limits?

How much can they bend the "rules"? What is stopping them from adding something like, if you smell like smoke, the proprietor from a non-smoking establishment can make you leave?

[GOTV]

18. Only the courts and fear of reprisal from voters...

...with the smoking ban there's a good example of rules possible changing the law. The rules added a provision not in the law, that is, that private club employees are not really employees if they are also members. This could allow some bars to allow smoking where the actual law might not have allowed it.

As a consequence the Cancer Society is taking the state to court to try to prove that the rules violate the law.

We'll see what the court says about it.