Jefferson Review

"Your Liberty is Our Interest"

Home /  Archives / Search / Links / Quotes / Book Reviews / Advertise /Contact us / Subscribe / Calendar

FREEDOM - UP IN SMOKE?

By Terry Gray

Thursday night was the first public meeting of the Louisville Freedom Campaign.  As this coalition was quickly put together, the name is likely temporary.  Nevertheless, I was impressed with the amount of organization that had already gone into the group.  Attorneys are working on finalizing the coalition’s structure.  Jeff Klusmeier, former Chairman of the River City Republican Association and Delegate to the Republican National Convention, led the meeting, which was covered by local television and press.

There will be a rally on the steps of Metro Hall on Wednesday, September 16 beginning around 4:30 PM.  All those concerned about individual freedom, including private property rights and smokers’ rights are urged to attend.

In case you haven’t heard, The Louisville Metro Council is in the process of introducing an ordinance that will outlaw smoking in public places in Metro Louisville.  Now, before you stop reading, for whatever reason, you should know some things about this ordinance and how it usurps your constitutionally guaranteed rights.  You don’t have to be a smoker to be directly threatened.  Please read on.

Many of the people in attendance are big supporters of Stop-the-Vet and other Constitutional issues in our community.  Senator Dan Seum sent his regards, his support and his apologies for not being able to attend.

Most who attended agreed that this issue isn’t about smoking.  It involves Constitutional rights that include personal rights and private property usage.  Most also agreed that this is a case of prohibition, plain and simple.

John W Dant, President of KLBA, pointed out that the data being used by anti-smoking activists are being twisted.  One intention of Smoke Free Louisville is to alleviate the hazards of smoking for workers in the food service industry.  Mr. Dant pointed out that, “…this prohibition will hurt jobs.  When a business in any industry experiences a 20 to 30% drop, employees are going to be looking for work.”  Twenty to thirty percent declines in business have been experienced in other cities where this ban has been put in force.  Everyone agreed that Louisville area restaurants and bars will suffer financially.

There is also the expense of enforcing the law.  How much does it cost to patrol all of our food and drink establishments, prosecute the cases, and fund the one-year jail sentences?  Will we need more police?  Will we need a special smoke-free squad, dressed in black and shouting through bull horns, “SIR, PUT DOWN THAT BUTT. GET ON THE GROUND NOW!”

Health Promotion International -- Parry et al. 15 (2): 125

Where restrictive policies do not accommodate reserved areas for smoking they may be less acceptable to smokers and, as a consequence, more difficult to implement. A small minority of smokers find it very difficult to comply with, or adapt to, smoking bans (Borland and Owen, 1995), and suffer negative side effects of daytime abstinence. These include symptoms of nicotine and/or psychological withdrawal and resentment, all of which may impact upon both attendance (at least in the short term), work satisfaction and job performance (Jeffrey et al., 1994; Wooden and Bush, 1995). One way in which smokers have been found to manage smoking bans at work is by periodically absenting themselves from areas in which smoking is restricted in order to smoke in other, unrestricted, locales (Brigham et al., 1994; Borland and Owen, 1995). Smoking bans may eliminate ETS in specified contexts and contribute to overall reduction in smoking levels, but they may have the unintended consequences of relocating the problem elsewhere. 

It was brought up in the meeting that Smoke Free Louisville feels that it is unfair that Councilman Doug Hawkins(R) has pushed this issue for a vote.  At an earlier press conference Dr. Robert Powell, Chairman of Smoke Free Louisville, said the City Council is trying to “…subvert the democratic process,” by seeking an immediate vote on the issue.  However, Smoke Free Louisville has yet to commit to a suitable timeframe for a vote. It seems to me that Dr. Powell meant he didn’t want the vote taking place until the Coalition pumped more propaganda into it.  he wanted it on the ballot and it’s going on the ballot.  Now he wants it on the ballot when He wants it on the ballot; otherwise it’s wrong.

Mason Rudd, Chairman of Metro Board of Health, said in an earlier media release that, “The Health Department protects the public from lead, asbestos and other dangers.  It is our duty to extend that protection to second hand smoke.”  Sir, let’s stick to analogies that make sense.  How many people take pleasure in lead and asbestos?  What would fall within your scope of “other dangers?”  Are you identifying all “other dangers” and what steps are being taken to protect our citizens from these lurking unknowns?  Have your actions involving lead and asbestos impeded the rights of private citizens and private property?  How long has this protection against lead and asbestos been going on?  Lead and asbestos haven’t been used in construction for years; why do we still need protection?  If you were doing your jobs, that battle would be over.

What about protecting diabetics from chocolate cake served in restaurants?  Are there restroom monitors forcing patrons to wash their hands after doing the deed?  How about hankies around the salad bar for customers with the sniffles?  Obviously your agenda doesn’t include protection of personal rights, only the rights of those you feel are in the majority.  “Well this is a Democracy,” you say.  No it isn’t.  Read your Constitution and underline the word “Republic.”

I would like to present you with the following link:  The EPA Report on Second Hand Smoke (SHS) - The Facts and a few excerpts as follows:

Fact: On page 3-46 the report the EPA estimates, based on nicotine measurements in non-smokers blood, "this would translate to the equivalent of about one-fifth of a cigarette per day."  (sic:  73 per year).

BUT

Fact: Studies that measured actual exposure by having non-smokers wear monitors indicate even this low estimate is exaggerated. Actual exposure (for people who live and/or work in smoky environments) is about six cigarettes per year. (See also the study by Oak Ridge National Laboratories.)

AND

Fact: In 1993 the EPA issued a report which claimed that Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS) caused 3,000 deaths per year.

Fact: ETS is commonly referred to as Second Hand Smoke (SHS). The two terms are interchangeable.

BUT

Fact: Even after excluding most of the studies, the EPA couldn't come up with 3,000 deaths, but they had already announced the results. So they doubled their margin of error. Let me repeat that, because it may seem hard to believe: After failing to achieve their pre-announced results by ignoring half of the data, they doubled their margin of error!

Facts: In review: The EPA ignored nearly two-thirds of the data. The EPA then doubled their margin of error to come up with their desired results. Even with all this manipulation, the numbers are still far too low to be considered statistically significant.

Fact: Anyone referring to EPA classifying ETS as a Class A carcinogen is referring to this study.

Opinion: You should seriously question the credibility of anyone who refers to this study, or any of the conclusions that it reached, as if they were facts. That includes everyone who refers to the EPA's ruling that ETS is a Class A Carcinogen. Once they do, every subsequent statement they make should be considered highly suspicious until it is thoroughly verified.

The hype that smokers, and more importantly, property owners face is incredible.  Taxpayer money is being used to convince the public that banning smoking from public places is the right thing to do.  Anti-smoking forces use any and all data that they can glean from biased studies.  Then they advertise and promote these data as fact.  Complex lies are presented simply as facts in public forums to convince everyone that the crusade is not only valid but crucial and desperate.  Dr. Gordon Tobin III, President-elect of the Medical Society said at a rally, “All Physicians strongly endorse this effort.”  Where is the supporting evidence proving that this is true?  If one physician is a hold-out Dr. Tobin then your statement is a lie.  I am not going to conduct a survey of physicians because the burden of proof is on you.  But I will say this; I believe that you are spreading a lie in order to further your cause.  I do ask that any reader with information to negate Dr. Tobin’s statement, preferably a physician that will go on record, please email me the information at: strider1@insightbb.com. 

Ethical Guidelines for Statistical Practice

Recognizing that statistical work must be visible and open to assessment with respect to quality and appropriateness in order to advance knowledge, and that such assessment may involve an explanation of the assumptions, methodology, and data processing used, statisticians should:

·         be prepared to document data sources used in an inquiry; known inaccuracies in the data; and steps taken to correct or to refine the data, statistical procedures applied to the data, and the assumptions required for their application

·         make the data available for analysis by other responsible parties with appropriate safeguards for privacy concerns

There are 300 restaurants in Jefferson County that are voluntarily smoke-free.  For a list of those restaurants please see:  Jefferson County Medical Society (JCMS) Home Page.  No one forced these restaurants to be smoke-free.  Should we force them to allow smoking?  That wouldn’t be right though, would it?  We would be forcing our own values on them, and that would be Un-American and Unconstitutional.

 I spent an hour on the streets Friday armed with petitions.  I really didn’t know it would be this easy to achieve hero status.  Not one establishment refused to accept the petitions, and in fact many business owners signed them on the spot.  I was very welcomed.  A bowling alley worker told me that if smoking is banned that they would have to shut down.  This is not a popular ordinance proposal, regardless of what the anti-smoking people tell us.

Downtown workers, the backbone of downtown businesses, will be hard pressed to find a place to smoke should this ordinance pass.  The ordinance calls for the smoking ban to extend outside public buildings for 25 feet; so much for finishing your cigarette in your car outside of your job.  And of course if you are a business owner and own the building, you may not smoke on your own property.

I’m very, very angry and not necessarily about this particular target of smoking.  I’m mad about the Nico-Nazis, just one faction of the Neo-Nazi regime.  Does everyone realize that banning smoking in privately owned public places is just a beginning?  Not only can this manifest itself in other bans in privately owned public places but in private homes as well.  “Ah, that’s ridiculous,” you say.  Really?  What is to stop a group of “do-gooders” from deciding that the smell of grilled steaks in restaurants must be eliminated?  And not just any escaping fumes that the grilling produces but the smell itself?  Then the target becomes backyard grilling of steaks; then grilling steaks in our homes with the windows open.  Why stop at steaks?  Why stop at open windows?  If you have an open party at your home, “Come one, come all,” would you have to restrict smoking to within 25 feet of your private home?

Am I exaggerating?  Not on your life.  The Jefferson County Smoke Free Coalition or Smoke Free Louisville Coalition, which ever they are officially calling themselves, started 3 years ago publishing a guide of local smoke-free restaurants.  And what are they doing today – expanding their Nazi tentacles!

I’m sure that there are some Jews in the anti-tobacco arena.  I’m not cracking on Jews, so relax.  I do have a question for you though; do you agree with anything that Hitler and the Nazi Party did in Germany?  The Nazis launched an anti-smoking campaign that would make its current American counterpart envious.  They did it to, “Save the Arian Race” while annihilating the Jews.   See:  bmj.com Proctor 313 (7070): 1450, “The anti-tobacco campaign of the Nazis: a little known aspect of public health in Germany, 1933-45.”

I refuse to be quiet.  You should realize that the smoke-free propaganda is mostly lies and self-perpetuating garbage aimed at nurturing the real agenda – Control.  We taxpayers, with the help of our Coalition of businesses and private citizens, are out to expose this smoke-free coalition for what they really are and put a stop to this suppressive agenda that they disguise with concern for their fellow man.  They can back off now and appear less foolish, but in any event we WILL dog them.  Our Constitution requires that we do our duty, and our forefathers would expect nothing less.

I want those who are concerned with their individual rights to realize a very important problem.  Those who push their controlling agendas on us have nothing to lose.  Should they not be successful, they will regroup and try again.  Should we, the citizens, be successful in stopping this, our accomplishment will only serve to keep what we already have - what someone else is trying to take away - FREEDOM. For the present, this must be accomplished, but we also need to be vigilant and tenacious and make inroads to stop this kind of blatant assault permanently. 

Terry Gray

Strider1@insightbb.com

Click to subscribe to upnsmoke

Weather (Louisville) / Mapquest / Search / White Pages / Business Search / CNN / Dictionary / E-card / MSN