Smoking ban a good thing
Hi, Recently we received the Gilpin newsletter/coupons, and there was an article from “Big T” who mentioned how many had stopped him and said they were never coming back after the smoking ban takes effect. I did not know how to contact him, but wanted him to know for every one of these militant smokers who wish to infect others lungs with their addiction, there are many, many more (we are the majority) who will visit more often and make up for the loss of these. The reality is they will be back, after their initial backlash, and we ALL will be healthier for it. Frankly, I was disappointed that the Lodge was making a smoking area. I hope it is a “box” and the smoke can’t get out of it.
We live a considerable distance from Blackhawk and enjoy the Lodge when we come, but will enjoy it much more, now and visit much more often, because, frankly, there have been a few times we wanted to visit and decided it would not be worth it because of how we feel after breathing all that secondhand smoke. Now, we can look forward (after January 1) to visiting.
Please don’t be put off by the smokers. They are a dying breed, literally. I am a former smoker who quit with great difficulty. I am not insensitive to the fact they are addicted. I am very offended they would infect other people so freely. If they were considerate, they would not have been smoking indoors around non-smokers and there would have been no need for legislation. Unfortunately, sometimes public safety much be legislated.
Also, I know that most of the good people working in the casinos in Colorado will be happier and healthier after the ban.
We can’t wait til the smoking ban takes effect. Thanks for listening.
This letter has not been edited.
Lynn and Susan are living in dreamland.
We used to go up about ten times a year and every casino had separate non smoking sections THAT WERE ALWAYS EMPTY.
If there were truly a call for it there would be entirely non smoking casinos thriving. There aren't.
Most gamblers smoke. Most smokers wont go gamble where they cant smoke.
The real winners will be the casinos in nearby Deadwood,S.D. or the many in New Mexico, who will get the lost Colorado business.
Hopefully, when the smoking ban takes effect Jan 1st tax revenues will drop dramatically enough that by the end of the first quarter they will repeal the casino ban and open the doors for a rightfull statewide reversal for all business.
Posted by Get Real on September 30, 2007 05:47 PMGet Real,
I agree with you except do understand that if the Casinos don't give enough money to the state revenues they can charge them up to 40% of their profits to make sure they get their money. They will "rape" the casinos and it will close some. Only 7 casinos in Blackhawk, Central City, and Cripple Creek are corp. the rest are mom and pop owned. The people need to realize the reason they are doing this is not only to make money off of nicotine replacement therapies "which only an average of 14% of people actually quit on" but also for corp. interests. They are trying to get rid of all the small businesses so everyone has to go to places like Chili's or Village Inn or Isle of Capri if it's a casino or a bar in an expensive restaurant. This is also corp driven coz most mom and pops can't afford a 20% or more loss. They will recover much quicker. We need to stop these bans and unfair tax increases. Not only will they be taxing more on cigs but also liquor and "junk food" and pop and whatever else they can tax all in the name of "health". We need to ban together and fight this now before it is to late and they continue to take away our rights and think they need to make decisions for us. We are adults and we can decide for ourselves. Maybe we need to have another Boston Tea Party!
Smokers won't go outside to smoke, but they'll go to South Dakota or New Mexico?
Talk about getting real.....
(there are many, many more (we are the majority) who will visit more often and make up for the loss of these)
So that's why there were so many non smoking casinos to begin with? I see, it looks like the casinos didn't want your money badly enough.
Posted by Larry on October 1, 2007 07:10 AMThe letter is just another example of the selfishness and exageration of tobacco control advocates. "--- every one of those militant smokers who WISH to infect others lungs with there addiction". No smoker wishes or wants to infect anyone with anything and the statement they do is a blantant Lie. The truth is anti smoke zealots need to instill propagada driven false ideas in the public psyche because any reasonable, rational dialouge would reveal the truth and where the truth is told zealots can not survive.
Then there is the Idea, which is also part of the tobacco control mantra, that somehow non smokers are involuntarily exposed to second hand smoke when they voluntarily choose to enter an establishment where smoking is allowed. Analyze that sentence for a minute, If it makes sense to you, you need many hours with a psycologist because you are delusional.
Then, of course, there's the old propaganda tactic that tobacco control has relied on for years.
Second hand Smoke is a killer. what they have done trying to prove that contention is the greatest scam foisted on the public since the disaster of prohibition. It's simple, OSHA did a seven year study, which was reviewed many times proving second hand smoke did not rise to a health risk in the wokplaces that had normal ventilation.
When OSHA's study was upheld despite ASH's the American Cancer Society's law suits by a federal appeals court, they withdrew there lawsuits knowing Osha would issue a much more damaging report if they didn't. That was when they united and got multi million dollar grants from big phamaceutical companies and there cohorts in deception to advance the mercantile interest agenda of their nonsmoke nicotine devices.
To do this, they had to resort to on demand, payed for studies, done by non governmental sources, that were purposely designed to support there second hand smoke claims which ignored and were directly contrary to the Federal Stautory Regulations of Osha's seven year study. Now, Osha is the preeminent fedreal regulatory agency charged with the saftey of workplaces and workers, so who are you going to believe OSHA which proved their findings in federal court or the on demand studies payed for by million dollar grants given for the express purpose of advancing the mercantile agenda of big pharmaceutical companies and the huge foundations that hold billions of dollars of their stock.
One more thing, just who the hell do tobacco control advocates think they are to decide for everyone, that their personal preferences and preconcieved ideas is what everyone should believe in and, that all businesses should be controled by governmental mandates that support their personal likes and dislikes in violation of the constitutional right of equal protection under the law.
Posted by Allen Campbell on October 1, 2007 08:07 AMPut that in your nonsmoke nicotine delivery device and inhale it. Oh, by the way those devices have been proven that they don't work well at all to help you quit smoking and, you do recieve nicotine directly into your system in quanties that greatly exceed the dose you would get in a the smoking environment of any bar or tavern or casino. It all boils down to a convoluted scheme to bann tobacco and replace it with the billion dollar mercatile interest in nonsmoke delivery devices and it should come as no supprise to you that the smoking ban was never about health, it is about the oldest of motivations, money and power.
Posted by Allen Campbell on October 1, 2007 08:25 AMAllen Cambell is a looney
Posted by on October 1, 2007 10:33 AMI love the convoluted messages states send smokers: Smoking is bad & you should all quit - so we are going to raise the taxes on cigarettes to make it cost ineffective for you to smoke. We are going to use the tax revenue for (fill in some initiative OTHER than smoking cessation programs & health care for lung related issues here). HELP - the cigarette tax revenue is down so we can't fund the initiatives we (the state) budgeted that tax money for, so we need to raise taxes on other things to fund those initiatives.
Now the Feds want to get into the act by using increase tobacco taxes to pay for the bulk of their proposed $35 billion increase in children's health coverage (which, among other things, will raise significantly, the income levels for those who qualify).
Here are some of the quotes from Representatives about it:
"I know there is very little sympathy for smokers these days," Rep. Jack Kingston, R-Ga., said during the House debate. "But it is still a tax increase on the backs of the smokers. And in order to get enough money to pay for this, it would require 22 million new smokers."
To quote one of the representatives on the issue: (Rep. Jim McCrery, R-La): "To propose funding a growing program with a declining revenue source is, I would submit, irresponsible fiscal policy".
And, per Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., who spoke against the bill in last week's debate, said: "The headline ought to read, 'Smokers in America to pay for middle-class welfare'.'"
By the way - as far as all the non-smokers taking the place of the smokers - that has proven to be a lie based on the number of "mom & pop" bars, taverns, etc which have closed since the statewide smoking ban in public places went into effect - I have heard numbers as high 70% are now out of business. The ban seems to have hit privately owned businesses which the public has access to harder than truly "public" places such as governmental offices, since they were already non-smoking.
Posted by Mary on October 1, 2007 11:01 AM10:33 I am deeply impressed with your ability to show how inept you are in so few words.
Posted by Allen Campbell on October 1, 2007 11:17 AMGREAT post,Mary.This is the kind of information that the anti-controlled media won't let see the light except in blogs like this one....I have a small criticism of us pros.It seems to me we're getting just a little hung up on enumerating the insults and clearly illegal discriminations heaped upon us every day.I for one believe that we've amply proven our case already and we should begin planning mass public actions to force the media to publicize our cause.
The Coalition For Equal Rights is ideally positioned to take the lead in this effort. As it stands now,COE does accept donations(I know-I've made a few) but one must do a little legwork to find someone to take the money. Allen,your crew should be taking out ads in major print and electronic media telling people how and where to contribute.
Here's another idea: The smoking ban has hurt country musicians very badly,as the venues where they play have seen business go down the drain,throwing them out of work as badly as the DUI laws have.If COE were to have a fundraiser,odds are there'd be a whole lot of top-flight local acts eager to entertain.
Jimminy,
Thank you for contributing to the cause, we really appreciate it! If you want to get ahold of us go to our site and you can contribute through there. www.stopthebans.com Thanks for the inspiration and support!
Clarence 12:16-
Read my post.
Gamblers who smoke like to smoke WHILE THEY ARE ACTUALLY GAMBLING.
If I cant smoke while I game I wont game there. Period. There are many others like me.
Wait and see.
Beyond my personal selfish reasons I wont even mention the trampling of business owners rights or Freedom of the marketplace.
Posted by Get Real on October 1, 2007 05:13 PMSmokers who are dumb enough to travel to South Dakota to smoke while gambling are an ever dwindling minority. No one will miss you, just wait and see.
I don't see you complaining about the Americans with Disabilities Act trampling on the rights of business owners; equating it to a vast government conspiracy to close down all the mom and pop stores in the country.
Clarence,
Oh but we will be missed, 80% of the gamblers for Colo. Smoke. I agree that I won't be gambling either because if I can't smoke I won't be comfortable enough to stay. Why bother.
Aw heck,Clarence.....Our only beef about the Americans With Disabilties Act is that even though the dumb*ss Left says we're addicts,as such presumably disabled,and presumably entitled to help thru the ADA,they don't seem at all motivated to come across with money for our alleged misery,despite past glittering promises to compensate the downtrodden.Uh,that'd be us smokers.We've sure been jumped on with both feet.
Posted by Jimminy on October 1, 2007 09:33 PMOh, I know. You're so oppressed, having to walk out side to smoke. It's almost like a second holocaust
Posted by on October 1, 2007 11:14 PMSo you're asking us to step outside? OK,let's step outside.
Posted by Jimminy on October 1, 2007 11:43 PMOhhh, internet tough guy!
Posted by Joey on October 2, 2007 12:09 AMLike I said elsewhere,the Net is the one place where it's safe to ignore the old saying "Never throw sh*t at an armed man".
Posted by Jimminy on October 2, 2007 06:29 AMWhat's the matter Jimminy, can't come up with an intellectual argument so you have to resort to violence?
Posted by Clarence on October 2, 2007 11:04 AMKinda sounds like Clarence got his ass kicked daily as a kid . I bet he throws like a girl too.
Posted by on October 2, 2007 06:50 PMOhh burn! You are the insult master!
So no one has anything intelligent to add to the discussion?
Posted by Joey on October 2, 2007 07:26 PMJoey,you may be right.Something as dumb and mean-spirited as the smoking ban doesn't really inspire much beyond an irresistible impulse to insult those responsible.Right now,us smokers are too P.O'd to do much more than trade insult for insult(although that's still better than our former Stepin Fetchit routine),but I'm pretty sure we'll figure out strategies more effective than getting mad.We'll be seeing you.
Posted by Jimminy on October 2, 2007 11:19 PM