To ExExPatriot, please allow me to clarify. It was former mayor Steve Brown that led the movement to ban public smoking in public places. McDonoughDawg is correct, the ordinance was passed under Brown.

The current mayor Harold Logsdon, prior to becoming mayor, went to the working meetings on the smoking ban conducted by then-mayor Brown. Logsdon stood before the crowded room several times and spoke in opposition to the then-proposed smoking ban law.

It is important to note that Brown, against the wishes of myself and others, did allow in the law certain provisions that could permit public smoking. For example, any establishment that wouldn't allow anyone under the age of 18 onto the premises. I will now admit, hindsight being 20/20, that the exemption was a great move because it won universal appeal from both sides of the argument (except for Logsdon) permitting guaranteed approval, and it later became the rational used to create an identical state-wide ban.

The time Brown spent on the issue has provided some tremendous benefits for our state's health, especially all our children. As to McDonoughDawg's opinion of smoking being an individual "right", I can't find evidence of that in the Constitution, nor do I think his view takes into account the billions of federal and state dollars (our tax dollars) that go into treating their supposed right. In theory, if all cigarette smoking could be stopped all at once across the country, it could, theoretically, result in one of the largest tax cuts in our nation's history.

My favorite aunt died of lung cancer and never smoked a cigarette in her life. My uncle believed, and her doctors agreed, that she probably developed the cancer from all of the second hand smoke from her co-workers in the office where she worked (for 35 years) in a little rural South Carolina town.

On another subject, bad_ptc makes an interesting point regarding suicide in a post further below this one. Although I think some states have changed their laws. Suicide is generally associated with being mentally incapacitated in some way, severe depression for example, so the consequences are more often some form of mental health assistance rather than jail.

Vote Republican

Thanks for the info, Spear Road Guy.

My father-in-law, a long time smoker, died just before Christmas 2004 of pneumococcal meningitis. One of the things I found Googling it was a CDC telephone study done in Atlanta showing many more smokers in the ill group as in the control group.
There is probably a plethora of diseases associated with smoking that most people don't realize besides cancer and heart disease.

Consider this:
- Smoking kills about the number of people that fit in a 747 EVERY DAY. Every other product with such results would be banned and locked away immediately
- Smoking is the ONLY product that is documented to be deadly even when used as recommended
- Smoking has no positive effect besides reducing the addicition symptoms from the previous cigarette.
- Children of smokers are much more likely to smoke than children of non-smokers.
- A huge proportion ( >90% ) of smokers begin before their 18th birthday.

Like you I also like the idea of over 18 smoking establishments as a comprimise, but I would like to see the age raised to over 21 to match the alcohol age (or has that changed again?) and to prevent young people from any possible legal contact with tobacco products.

I think we as a society are on the correct path to the cessation of smoking. If we want to accelerate it I think the best way would be to give smokers the same kind of rights and lawsuits awards that other victims of dangerous and deadly products have. Lets put the health costs of smoking onto the people that have profited most from the product; the tobacco and cigarette producers.

===

In summer of 2004, my wife (an ex-smoker) and I drove an RV from Miami to Denver via the Grand Canyon and Seattle. Very little was more disgusting than the first restraunt we visited in Georgia. Despite separate smoking areas, the smell and clouds were really disgusting.
I was very pleased moving here to find the situation changed.
In contrast, a recent business trip to North Carolina was another "disgusting" experience.

for the smoking. Makes sense to match the drinking age.

As to North Carolina, the Tobacco Lobby is very strong there, they will probably be a long holdout in this issue.

and I realize I'm in the minority here. I never meant to say it was anyone's right to smoke anywhere they choose, (I still don't think I said that). The people have spoken on the issue, and the people determined that they wanted to Govt to make the decision for them. The issue is over.

I'm sorry about your Aunt, smoking more than likely took my Grandmother at an early age. We know so much more than we did even 30 years ago about the dangers about smoking, my Father took his office non-smoking 20 or so years ago, to the dismay of many. But at least he had the choice, and the employees had the choice to work there or not. Slowly, that choice is being taken away from us.

I'm quite sure the law in PTC was in place before he was Mayor.

I'm all for less Government and more private rights, however, I'm intrigued by your logic when it comes to this matter. The Constitution says that we are entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Owning and doing with our properties is a true freedom.

However, where does the rights of others become a consideration? Do you object to say, the health departement inspecting the theater for rat infestation? I mean, its their property, if people don't mind paying $7.50 for a movie with a rat as a bonus, then why stop them?

You object to DUI's because they "affect" others on our roads, well, smoking "affects" me and my health. So at least in public we should do something about it. (Ex-smoker since 1986)

But not only that, we should tax the holy HE double toothpicks out of it, not just because of the health problems, but because smokers are nasty people. Look at any corner and you will see cigarette butts. We should tax them extra to clean up their mess. This includes resturants that have drive-thrus. If their customers routinely throw the trash on our public highways then its a health issue and we need to over see it.

Logsden was absolutely wrong and arrogant for opposing the smoking ban, and he was wrong for running on no taxes and then falling back on his promises. I'll remember that when he runs again. Steve was very bombastic, but I didn't think his positions were deceptive or unclear. I didn't support Steve, but I respected that he was upfront with his opinions. I am now worried that we;ve got a mayor that was nothing more than "anyone by Steve".

Those are a few of my humble opinions.

We totally agree. I will say that I'm in favor of Communities and their ability to enact zoning regulations, etc. You don't have to live in said Communities if you don't agree. So it seems we mainly agree.

Exactly when did Logsdon vote on the smoking ban? Is he on record being against it? If so, he and I agree there. But again, I don't think he ever voted on it. I could be wrong. I will add, I've been a non-smoker all of my life, 43 years so far.

I NEVER said that DUI's should have no penalty. I can see the difference in sitting in a golf cart with a glass of wine than barrelling down Peachtree Parkway in a 3 ton SUV while drinking the same glass of wine. To me, the penalties shouldn't be the same. We don't treat the carts the same as cars, why are the penalties the same?

That’s like saying that there should be a dereference in punishment if someone robs a store with a gun verses a knife. In either case, it’s “armed” robbery.

It makes no difference if you kill someone with your 3 ton SUV or a 700 lb. golf cart.

The net result is the same.

So why is it you think there should be a dereference?

It's gone on probably too long now.

I think there is a HUGE difference in the way that PTC treats golf carts and cars. 12 year olds can drive the carts. Not so with cars.

Sitting in a parking lot with a glass of wine on a golf cart is not the same as killing someone with said golf cart.

I didn't realize that anyone was killed recently because of a golf cart being driven by a person with a glass of wine.

You guys act like I want a free for all, I just want common sense applied. Just like at schools, "no tolerance" is a joke. Kids can get suspended for having nail clippers etc. What's wrong with a little common sense?

Oh yeah, I'll add that the "Little River Band" show last Friday night was excellent.

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/PEOPLE/injury/alcohol/impairedjuly/legislation.html

In October 2000, Congress passed .08 BAC as the national standard for impaired driving as part of the Transportation Appropriations Bill. States that do not adopt .08 BAC laws by Fiscal Year 2004 would have 2% of certain highway construction funds withheld, with the penalty increasing to 8% by 2007. States adopting the standard by 2007 would have any withheld funds returned. This bill was signed on October 23, 2000. Ten states have passed laws or have a law pending the Governor's signature since this bill was passed by Congress (Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Maryland, Missouri, Nebraska and Oklahoma; Alaska and Louisiana- pending Gov. signature). This brings the total of states with .08 BAC laws that comply with section 163 to 28 states (two state laws awaiting the Governors' signature), the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. Seventeen (17) states and DC received incentive grant funds in 2000 for having a section 163 complying .08 law.

NHTSA has developed many resources for states and national organizations on .08 including: Setting Limits, Saving Lives: The Case for .08 BAC laws (revised in May 2001), legislative fact sheets, and numerous published studies on the effectiveness of .08 laws in reducing alcohol?related fatal crashes. In addition, other federal agencies have worked to make .08 the national standard on federal lands. The Department of Defense, U.S. Coast Guard, and National Park Service initiated changes to establish .08 as the standard on military installations, U.S. waterways, and national park lands. In addition, the Indian Health Service promoted .08 laws as the standard for all Indian reservations (currently 37 tribes have passed a .08 BAC law).

I seriously doubt that the state of Gerogia is willing to give up potentially millions in Federal money so you can cruse around on your Golf Cart buzzed.

I agree with you here. I must be rubbing off.

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.

there's a rumor going around that there was a big confrontation between you and the Watts, ie, Marilyn and Lane, to the extent that it got mean and violent.

Care to share that story with us?

If you have had a falling out with the Watts then I applaud you for the fine adjustment you've made in your circle of friends. Perhaps you've learned as many have that there are dire consequences for disagreeing with the self proclaimed queen of Fayette County Politics. That is one nasty and vindictive woman and you had better tow the line with Marilane and her puppet son. They are one example where "two for one" is not a good deal.

Get rid of the he/she and you will witness a rebirth of the Fayette County Republican Party.

I have chosen to use my real name rather than to have anonymity. I had another name, but felt I should just let it all hang out there.
However, my personal experiences shouldn't become food for foder for this blog, merely because I use my actual name. So, unless the topic is on point to a specific subject, please lets not talk about me, except and unless its a comment or topic that is relevant.

Having said that, and not wanting this conversation to continue, I will say this final point.

When I became a board member of the Republican Party 5 years ago, I believe we worked our fannies off to make it a better party for all true Republicans, not just the johnny come latelys. We built a website, which is now fortunately, being updated more regularly than ever before, we started a Phone tree, an email notification system, training classes for candidate wannabees, and even created our very first permanent office headquarters where we have been for about 4 years. I could go on, but the many things that we have done is too many to mention. (An Annual Reagan Tribute Dinner is one of my favorites.)

The reason I believe that the Republican Party is not as strong in this County is mainly because we are complacent. We have no real Democratic opposition in November for any local offices and so that means the only real elections in which candidates that are personally known by the hard core election folk, are those running in the primaries. This pits Republicans against Republicans. So hard feelings can surface when we always are in contests against each other and never have to combine our forces in November to win against a Democrat.

This is good that we are so popular, but bad, in that we unfortunately need the challenge of an opposing party to keep us from become lazy and complacent. Instead, we turn that energy against others from our own party.

So, as it were, the Republican Party is still strong here, but like on the National scale, maybe we need to lose to the Democrats so that we can remember why we deserve to lead. The National Republican Party has become so much more like the old democrats, with the exception of National Security, that I'm at a loss. I'm truely sadded that since 1994, we seem to have lost our way.

And finally, as to the personalities that you have issues. I will say only this. So much work is done behind the scenes for which these individuals have done so much and recieved so little attention. Perhaps, personalities have on occaision caused some difficulties, as it does in any organization, but no one, save a few, can fathom all the work that has been done by these persons. I only mention this in hopes that this matter will not be publicized in this forum. Although these forums have some merit in informing the readers on various subjects, it will do nothing but be a gossip sheet for this topic and cause nothing but hurt. So please, lets just leave it at that.

thank you.

You view the issues as if there are only two sides in the fight, Democrates and Repulican.

But have you noticed there are more independents than Repbulican and Democrats put together? There is a reason.

It is you guys want to tell us who to vote for what our choices are. We don't want that.

We want people running who are not foced into your mold or judged by party loyality.

When I became a board member of the Republican Party 5 years ago, I believe we worked our fannies off to make it a better party for all true Republicans, not just the johnny come latelys.

Sums it up nicely why the Republican Party is loosing membership.

Not true Republicans are not worthy of office.

The elite egotists will tell us what we need and who to vote for. And, or course, they must by 'True Republican' who have 'earned' the right to the office they wish to run for.

What arrogance. And it showed when party leaders said Dole had earned the right to be President.

The reason I believe that the Republican Party is not as strong in this County is mainly because we are complacent. We have no real Democratic opposition in November...

No. It is because you guys believe you are the Republican Party. That you define it exclusively.

Until you learn to listen to what the people want you will continue to loose membership.

I am a Moral Conservative. Not conservative as the Republican Party defines it. But I am most assuredly not a Democrat.

The little guy gets stomped on by Repulbican thinking.

We can spend billions upon billions, overseas, to try to gain political points. But, at the same time, are letting those in need go in the toilet, here at home.

I am not talking people who just say, "give me," without having done squat to earn it.

But people who are trying to retire, but getting the age raised higher and higher. They need to retire for physical and other reasons, but they cannot.

But there is a glass age ceiling at 40. So those who cannot get jobs but are not old enough, are screwed.

It use to be disability did not check what you earned. Now it does. It means tests and age adjusts.

What does the guy at 55, who cannot work most jobs, due to physical injury, and cannot get hired because of age, do, when he has some assets, but not enough to make it through.

Who has been dumping billions of wasted money overseas, as in AIDS for Africa, but at the same time been adding means testing to US residents who are in trouble?

Your wonderful Republican Party.

Moral Conservatives consider people. The Republican brand does not.

So, it irritates me when you speak of True Republicans in one sentence and then bemoan the demiss of the Republican Party in the next.

Seems the people you need are not 'True Repulbicans,' as defined today.

Why should we be 'Republicans' as things are now?

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.

You know the cat fight part would have been more news worthy and exciting.

But I can handle the fact that it is none of our business. Thanks for your efforts Richard.

Nothing annoys me more than trial lawyers who put on an air of superiority in that they somehow think they know the law. Any law...

Richard------no where in the U.S. Constituition or the Georgia Constitution are we given the rights of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." You and the other trial lawyers ought to at least learn the cornerstones of our legal system. "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" is a term found only in the Declaration of Independence, as a result of Thomas Jefferson's plagiarism.

I was on Ambien for a while, and it fried my memory cells.
You are correct, I mis-stated where that came from. I've taught Con-law too, so I should have known, but I was just replying to the basic principles about the superior "rights" of smokers to pollute the air that I have a "need" to breath, and I didn't really think about that particular footnote.

The fact is, the Government has been given the burden of ensuring that basic health rules be followed. In our hospitals, our schools, our resturants, our hotels, etc. And to suggest that smoking is a private right that shouldn't apply to public places of businesses is the debate. I recall that up until about 20 years ago, you could actually SMOKE as a patient in a hospital. But societial MORES have changed, and with that the standards and to some degree the freedoms that we have in being left alone have changed as well.

I don't know where the line will eventually be drawn, but I for one, applaud not having to tolerate the obnoxious smell and choking clouds of smoke when I'm out enjoying a meal with my family or at a movie, . . . no thanks to Mayor Logsdon.

I agree we need to protect personal rights.

Smoking is an issue where the impact is not restricted to the smoker, though. The smoker infringes upon the personage of others. Thus violates their rights.

An example is smoking bars people from using eateries because it destroys the meal for them. A smoker who cannot get through a meal and get out before smoking has a personal problem then need to deal with.

The key is who is impacted and how.

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.

I'm quite sure of it. The issue is over, I'm not arguing for or against it.

Question is, what do they ban next? How far are we as citizens prepared to let the Government run our daily lives?

Many have been forced to leave restaurants because of the smoke.

Smokers and non-smokers can both eat were there is not smoke. But that is not true in reverse.

Smokers are forcing their howl habit on others, both as smell, that ruins food flavor and as unhealthy smoke.

Next is not the issue here. This has reasonable reason behind it.

Next would be more in the area of where they want to tell businesses what color and design a business can be.

Many have not built here because they would look totally different than how they do everywhere else in the country.

To me, that crosses the line when the esthetic senses of the few rule all.

I guess, by your thinking, laws should revert to where being drunk and spitting on the street are again legal

After all, a woman has the right to chew. And thre is no such thing as second had mouth and throat cancer from a good chaw.

-----------------------------
Keeping it real and to the core of the issue, not the peripherals.