I do agree the smoking ban foes have a right to challenge the validity of their petitions, but if SOS Chris Nelson invalidates the petition on Monday, I think the law should go into affect immediately (August 1);
The attorney general thinks that, “as a practical matter,” a judge then will enter a stay preventing the smoking ban from being implemented until the case is heard, which could take weeks or months.
I often agree with AG Long, but I think he is wrong on this one. If the state says something is ‘invalid’ then the law must go forward. If the courts find the petition legal, then they can reverse the law. This will be tied up in courts for months on end, trust me on this one. What irks me about the court case is that South Dakotans who overwhelmingly support a smoking ban have to wait around while lawyers have a pissing match. Like I said above, I am all for the match, the law needs to be clarified, but we shouldn’t put our lives and rights on hold while a couple of bar owners piss and moan they are being denied their liberty (that argument still makes me laugh my balls off). Bars don’t sell ‘smoke’ they sell ‘alcohol’ your liberties are not being taken away, STFU and deal with it. I also find it ironic that the same bar owners who say they will lose money if a ban goes into affect have all kinds of money for a lawsuit. Of course the tobacco industry is probably funneling money into the suit, but we will never know.
Man, L3wis, you are just blind on this issue.
Just… blind.
I can see their argument, but it is weak. I just look at it as a health code regulation.
I’ve lost count how many new and pathetic excuses people toss out in support of smoking in public. I tell you what – I’ll support smoking in public places as soon as they find a way to prevent smoke from infiltrating my airspace or the airspace of the workers who aren’t smokers.
Who was it that said your right to swing your arm ends where my nose begins? Yea…same concept applies here.
That’s my point Costner. It is basically health code, like requiring restaurants to wash dishes.
If a judge denies a stay on the law, I will bet anyone $100 that Larry Mann will drop the issue. I have said all along this is just a delay tactic. He and Done Rose know that this is a losing battle. They know the overwhelming majority support this issue. If the law goes into effect, this issue is dead.
I agree it is a health issue. Maybe I should quit trying to type. I have made three typos in this little space. lol
Voting is forbidden by the tobacco control activists. It’s on page eight.
http://www.no-smoke.org/pdf/CIA_Fundamentals.pdf
Bob, it doesn’t say voting is forbidden. It says voting is a last-ditch resort. Big tobacco has deep pockets and to run an effective campaign against the billions of dollars big tobacco has is expensive and not always a guarantee. It does however say losing at the polls is not an option, and I would have to agree.
Here’s an analysis of the tobacco control activists instruction book.
oops. The link http://www.davehitt.com/blog2/the-nicotine-nazi-handbook/
Nope – sorry… you lose all sense of credibility when the handbook includes the term nazi.
Yea – call me crazy, but controlling the carcinogens in our air just doesn’t somehow coorespond or fall on the same level as… you know …. the slaughter and genocide of millions upon millions of innocent people by a regime hell bent on ridding the Earth of anything or everything that didn’t fit their view of a utopian society.
So no, I’m not even going to bother to read something that uses such an idiotic comparison. It is lazy and shows a true lack of rational thinking.