Unlopside Things
By Mitch Berg
The MN House of Representatives is taking an online poll about HF 305, the proposed statewide smoking ban.
Much as I hate cigarette smoke, it’s a stupid bill and it needs to be stopped.
Of course, the power-grabbers have packed the polls.
That’s where you come in. Go here and vote. Vote your conscience, naturally; I know I did.
February 21st, 2007 at 5:24 pm
Sadly, the results are uninspiring.
Of course, there’s nothing to keep people from voting over and over and over again. That would be immoral though.
Here’s a question I couldn’t find an answer to (with 15 minutes of googling) – what the heck is the definition of a “private club” in Minnesota?
I understand the definition of the term is state specific and I found various references to what sorts of private clubs were covered or exempted by various laws, but I found no solid definition of what a private club actually is.
If you’ve got a roster and a place you meet, does that count?
February 21st, 2007 at 6:39 pm
Yeah, that was depressing. Here’s what I wrote in the comment section:
A free country should have no governmental ban on a legal substance in a privately-owned venue. I hate cigarette smoke with a passion, but will not expect a business owner to go under so I can go home not stinking at the end of the night.
February 22nd, 2007 at 2:10 pm
Thanks, Mitch!
Here’s what I posted in the comments:
A smoking ban is a dumb idea, and infringes on people’s basic rights. If a business owner, or an individual, wants to create a smoke-free environment, they can do that with their own money. People are not forced to go to a restaurant which allows smoking, and there are many establishments that already don’t allow smoking based on their own free will. Government intervention only spends money and resources on a non-issue, which could be better spent elsewhere, or not at all.
February 22nd, 2007 at 2:39 pm
I think a private club is anyplace that requires registration and/or a membership fee to enter. I have seen short tv clips of “private clubs” in dry counties down south that are allowed to serve alcohol. To gain membership to these “clubs”, a current “member” has to approve your enrollment, and then you pay a fee. These “Private clubs” are really just a restaurant, and a “current member” is someone who is already sitting inside the restaurant and has been approved and paid the fee. Basically, when you want to go in, a waitperson or other employee goes to some random table and asks the customer “hey, that guy wants to join, can he?” and the member says “sure”, and then the new member pays like $1 as the fee. It’s a very wink-wink-nod-nod process, but it is what is technically required to get around the no-alcohol laws.
Here’s what I wrote in that survey:
I find it abhorrent that the legislature in this state has the unmitigated GALL to trample over people’s private property rights, and the right of a business owner to serve the clientele he wishes to serve.
NO ONE is FORCED to endure cigarette smoke in a public establishment. They are there by choice, whether an employee or a customer. If they are afraid for their health, no one is stopping anyone from walking out the door or finding a new job somewhere else.
If smoking is so incredibly harmful, I wish the legislature would be intellectually honest, and have some intestinal fortitude, and just outright ban the practice all together. Forbid the sale, transportation, possession and consumption of any and all forms of tobacco.
But of course, that won’t happen. The state and federal governments are too addicted to the tax revenues. And as we have discovered from the early 20th century all the way through the present day, prohibition makes matters FAR worse.
And no, I am not, never have been, and never will be a smoker. But I am a staunch advocate of private property rights.
WordPress flags clientele as misspelled. har.