Sioux City Journal

Steps toward socialism

Posted: Thursday, March 13, 2008

SIOUX CITY -- I'm not proud of the fact that I'm a smoker, but that's not the point. The point is the only property that can be called public is places like streets and parks that aren't owned by a citizen, a partnership or a corporation. A restaurant or a tavern would be a citizen-owned property that is open to the public with the premise of doing business with people that want what he or she has to offer.

If he wants to have a nonsmoking establishment, that is his right. If you don't want to work there, don't. If you don't want to go in there, don't. That's freedom of choice, or it used to be. Seems every day some people try to protect us from ourselves by taking away more of our freedom of choice and citizens' rights. Every move in this direction is a move toward socialism. This country is getting a real soft underbelly. What could be next?

Too much noise - hard on ears or nerves. Too much cologne or perfume - too strong or may affect allergies. Waitress may have a slight cold - might make you sick. Doesn't look healthy - might have disease. It's too dark - might trip and fall. Door opens too hard - might pull a muscle. Bar stools too tall - might fall off. Overweight person might step on your foot or crowd you too much at the bar or booth. Maybe you would like to eliminate all these people.

You could rehab or build a restaurant or tavern to your liking for nonsmokers. It seems to me that there must be many of you who crave a nonsmoking environment, so you should have yourself a gold mine. What's stopping you? But you better have the place inspected for asbestos, formaldehyde, radon and lead paint or else you might walk through the door and drop dead. -- D.M. Wright

Story Comments

Keith wrote on Mar 14, 2008 7:55 AM:

" FMC - You never fail to disappoint. Such a tax would support the kind of cottage industry that we saw during prohibition and lead to the same kind of results. Nebraska is already reaping the reward of the last tax imposed upon tobacco in Iowa. If the majority of Iowan's actually oppose smoking this strongly you should ask why your legislature doesn't have the goanies to simply ban tobacco products in the state. This kind of half hearted sniping at an issue is unbecoming to their offices and portrays them as being underhanded and afraid to take a direct stand on the issues. I don't think that there is a large majority of citizens supporting the anti smoking hysterics, and only the stigma attached with results based research is keeping many silent. "

Non so blind as he who will not see wrote on Mar 14, 2008 7:53 AM:

" FMC - Be careful what you wish for!! Once you give legislators the ok to raise big bucks in the name of protecting us....you may see all kinds of bans and tax increases in your future. You could be paying $100 for a hamburger that you will only be allowed to eat inside your house. Notice how the smoking ban can't get passed unless Casinos are exempted. It's not your health they are looking out for....it's their source of revenue!!! "

FMC wrote on Mar 13, 2008 11:19 PM:

" There is another solution to this, if this does not pass, or even if it does. That is raise the price of cigarettes in Iowa so high, by raising the tax, again, it is very expensive to purchase them. I am talking $10.00 a pack & over $100.00 a carton. As it is a pack is around $5.00 & I've seen cartons as high as $60.00. This is not high enough, raise it again. I can almost guarantee you a lot of people will stop smoking because they will not be able to afford it. "

pisko wrote on Mar 13, 2008 4:47 PM:

" how bout making a smoking bar ,,or a place just for smokers,,,,,its a thought "

Keith wrote on Mar 13, 2008 2:05 PM:

" There are many ways to solve the dilemma of second hand smoke that don't involve stepping on someone's property rights. Areas can be isolated to exclude air movement between them. It is only the hysterical anti smokers that choke up at the sight of a cigarette across a parking lot that are driving this. Is this who we want influencing public policy? There are more than enough smoking workers to allow an owner to shift his work assignments around to satisfy his customers. I seriously doubt that the legislature is very concerned about the welfare of the workers. One only has to look at Iowa's employment laws to see that. When this bill finally becomes law in some form there will be much discussion about what constitutes "public" and smokers will not be allowed to smoke inside or "outside" of areas they don't personally own. "