Ding Dong, The Witch is Gone...

deek · Post by **deek** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 6:09 pm

Garr wrote:I, due to sleep deprivation...

You should put that in your signature instead of typing it out all the time:)

=^-..-^= · Post by **=^-..-^=** » Wed Nov 07, 2007 6:23 pm

The people (that cared) have spoken. No government wanted to save us from ourselves.

Crawford overstepped his bounds as a public servant, and it bit him in the butt. . . GOOD RIDDANCE

It's not a health issue; it is question of government infringing on private property rights. You are free to find a job (waiting or playing music) in another smoke-free workplace if the OWNER of the business makes the CHOICE they are entitled to and says it is a smoking environment. Customers are free to assess the risks and make the CHOICE to attend a smoking or smoke-free establishment. No one is forcing anyone to be there, so no one is forced to breathe smoke..

MrSpall · Post by **MrSpall** » Thu Nov 08, 2007 9:33 pm

conley wrote:At least Crawford had the balls to do something that wasn't the popular choice....he felt strongly about something & stuck to his belief. Not a "yes-man".......the last thing we need is a city council full of "yes-men/ women"......Like him or not, diversity is good - for that reason, I think it was a huge loss.

I guess I take issue with this. The people we elect should do what we ask right? That's why we chose them to begin with. We elect people based upon their campaign promises and beliefs that we believe to be similar to our own. In this case he clearly went against the wishes of a great number of his constituents. That's why he lost the election. It's not a huge loss, it's exactly what he should've known was gonna happen.

bassjones · Post by **bassjones** » Thu Nov 08, 2007 9:42 pm

exactly. these guys are our representatives. They do our bidding. Not, they get elected then do what's "Best for us". They do what we want them to do. At least that's the goal. So, when the Senate tries to secretly pass Amnesty for illegal aliens, talk radio catches wind, concerned citizens flood the senate with emails, phone calls and letters, and somehow talk radio is the bad guy. WRONG! The senate is the bad guy(s)

poopstains · Post by **poopstains** » Thu Nov 08, 2007 10:02 pm

I have a legitament question for you all. If they begin to discuss retracting the smoking law and the public overwhelming disagreed and wanted to remain. would you all, using the logic of doing the peoples bidding, be fine with that or would you fight it.

This is a real question not a set up, or a trap I am just curious.

sevesd93 · Post by **sevesd93** » Thu Nov 08, 2007 10:50 pm

poopstains wrote:I have a legitament question for you all. If they begin to discuss retracting the smoking law and the public overwhelming disagreed and wanted to remain. would you all, using the logic of doing the peoples bidding, be fine with that or would you fight it.

This is a real question not a set up, or a trap I am just curious.

That the problem poop, we don't know whether the majority of the general public in Fort Wayne would be for or against smoking in bars and private clubs 21 and up, because we never got to vote on it.

Some dickheads just decided it would be best for us...

sevesd93 · Post by **sevesd93** » Thu Nov 08, 2007 10:52 pm

Also, I am in Ohio right now and you can't smoke anywhere, which really blows since I have been drinking, luckily I have my trusty Skoal....

bassjones · Post by **bassjones** » Fri Nov 09, 2007 9:11 am

I would oppose it if it came up for a public vote. If the public voted affirming the ban, then I'm done arguing about it. However, I want ALL of the options listed in the vote. Smoking okay in all public places. Smoking banned everywhere. Smoking banned in family restaurants, but not in bars. ETC... Crawford's commercials made it seem that we want to go back to having smoking legal in Chuck-E-Cheeze. Just be honest about it and let the people make an informed decision.

conley · Post by **conley** » Fri Nov 09, 2007 11:36 am

Tracey Warner, from the Journal Gazette, pointed out:

While Crawfordâ€™s loss was probably due largely to his support of the smoking ordinance and Harrison Square, Brown, ironically, has the same position as Crawford on those issues.

Keltyâ€™s presence on the ballot didnâ€™t help Crawford, either. Not only did Kelty lack the coattails to help the GOP ticket, he ardently criticized both the smoking law and Harrison Square, a position that all but encouraged Kelty supporters not to vote for Crawford.

As aforementioned, the person who narrowly defeated Crawford, Liz Brown, also supports the smoking ban & also supports Harrison Square.....So, did this really reflect how the public feels? If so, then I guess the public supports the smoking ban & Harrison Square....maybe? maybe not? What do you think?

conley · Post by **conley** » Fri Nov 09, 2007 11:55 am

Michael Brightbill, William Larsen, Doug Horner & Marty Bender......those are the 4 at-large candidates that openly opposed the smoking ordinance......Yup, the people spoke loud & clear...........2 of the 3 at large voted in - Schoaff, Brown & Bender support the smoking ban......Bender says he'll do something about it; but, we'll see how sincere and passionate he really is about the issue in the January.

conley · Post by **conley** » Fri Nov 09, 2007 12:01 pm

Say what you will about the "Nazi", John Crawford, but let me ask you this.....If you, like Crawford, were a doctor that treated cancer patients - what do you think you would have done? Think about what he sees every day.....people on their death beds because of this horrible disease......you can't tell me that you wouldn't have taken the same position as he did on the smoking ban.

I think Crawford would have been a terrible person, knowing what field he was in, had he not supported the ban.

Just some food for thought.

Garr · Post by **Garr** » Fri Nov 09, 2007 3:59 pm

Regardless of his own personal opinion, though, he does not have the right to take away others' rights to make their own decisions. That's what this is about. It's less about smoke than it is about civil rights here. People choose to where they apply for jobs and ultimately work. People choose to which locations they frequent. They should have the right to choose one that allows them to smoke in the same way that they should be allowed to choose to go to one that doesn't.

As a singer, I HATE smoky bars. Can't stand it. Makes my eyes itch, my throat dry, and a host of other uckies that I think are because of my OCD. Hate the way my skin feels after sweat has been permeated with smoke and then absorbed and dried.

Regardless of that, I have chosen to perform in places where there is smoking. I could have kept all my gig choices to places where there was not smoking. The point is that it should be MY right to choose that, not his. I'm glad he has his opinion, but that's the same as saying, "I'm John Crawford and I've had a revelation and I have been given intimate proof that Buddha is real and is the only true divine. You must all be Buddhists now because I know it's best for you."

It's bull sh*t.

poopstains · Post by **poopstains** » Fri Nov 09, 2007 5:14 pm

I heard quite possibly the dumbest argument against the smoking ban on the radio today, some jackass actually tried to equate the ban to a potential rise in domestic violence, claiming that now that people cant smoke at the bar they sit at home and drink far more than they would, which could lead to domestic violence, I nearly shat my pants.

I don't really like Pat White that much, buy I'll try to stomach him sometimes, but he just let this line of bull sh*t pass by like there was nothing to it, now I really can't stand him. Than the same ass tried to site Elco Tap as a victim of the smoking ban that is when I knew for sure he was a dumb sh*t.

=^-..-^= · Post by **=^-..-^=** » Fri Nov 09, 2007 6:31 pm

poopstains wrote:I have a legitament question for you all. If they begin to discuss retracting the smoking law and the public overwhelming disagreed and wanted to remain. would you all, using the logic of doing the peoples bidding, be fine with that or would you fight it.

This is a real question not a set up, or a trap I am just curious.

Good question:
If the people of FW are overwhelming for the smoking ban, repeal it anyway â€“ here's why:

Let the OWNERS of the businesses pay attention to what the people of FW want and act accordingly. It is NOT the gubbamint's job to make that decision for private property owners. If those businesses that are non-smoking start thriving, Believe me, you will have all the smoke-free places you want.

Al Quandt · Post by **Al Quandt** » Mon Nov 26, 2007 4:16 pm

Exactly...

Bottom line, it is the business decision to allow it, your decision to occupy, work, or entertain the business.

One bar in particular (which will remain nameless to not further hurt their biz) has suffered to the point were they can only pay us half of what they could before and offer us a few free pitchers to compensate.

We now play more to support them then to make a profit, how backwards is that??? This is the case for a few other places we play too.

I will admit that I (even as a smoker) really do enjoy coming home smelling 100 times better after a show then I used to before the ban but my god now with the weather changing the inconvenience of going outside is getting unbearable. Regardless I have an addiction and I still go outside and smoke as often as I would before the ban and freeze my ass off, but that in fact is a vice I chose to obtain.

If you really care about everyone's health, then make cigarette illegal.

I myself refuse to smoke around my child or any others children. I also respect non-smokers by trying not to be in their way while I do it (even at a bar I would never blow my smoke at someone).

Now there are always going to be assholes that smoke in front of children in public, enclosed places (just witnessed it in New Haven a few weeks ago). Banning it wont change stupid people. However, I wonder how many of those assholes are now drinking at home with their children while they smoke.

I don't plan on living here much longer anyway, I used to love this city. f**k it. I will still support the reversal of the ban when I leave.

Smoking didnt hurt the entertainers in Fort Wayne by any means. Non Smoking has had an obvious effect.

Now for my shameless plug.

Pleasing Melani has and will continue to have smoke breaks during our sets. Not sure if any other band does this (not including cover bands that have to take breaks each hour). You can always expect 1 or 2 breaks in an hour set. We appreciate you coming to see us and we don't want to you torn between hearing your favorite P-Mel song or going outside, f**k it we will have a smoke with you, hell we will light it for ya!!!