www.mozilla.com Hot Stories Weather Central

Temp: 30.0°F

Wind: CALM

Sky: Fair

Headlines

Some horrors conveniently excused -11/20/2009, 11:11 AM

The art and economics of cheek turning -11/20/2009, 11:11 AM

Seeing red -11/20/2009, 9:05 AM

A moment, please, for Gen X memories -11/19/2009, 2:30 PM

Fort Hood: Terrorism or tragedy? -11/19/2009, 2:30 PM

Back to the box -11/19/2009, 1:34 PM

Too complex? -11/19/2009, 1:34 PM

Muslim-American generalities are unfair -11/18/2009, 9:20 AM

'Dear Hays High' a shocker in Biloxi -11/18/2009, 9:20 AM

There are reasons -11/18/2009, 7:50 AM

Without limits -11/17/2009, 7:50 AM

State cuts will ripple through every budget -11/17/2009, 10:09 AM

Never forget -11/17/2009, 9:05 AM

Day-brightener -11/17/2009, 9:05 AM

The U.S. House of Presumptuous Meddlers -11/17/2009, 10:09 AM

Appreciative -11/17/2009, 9:05 AM

A lost message and a lost opportunity -11/16/2009, 2:24 PM

A father, a daughter and a clash of cultures -11/16/2009, 2:24 PM

Who do you trust? -11/16/2009, 7:04 AM

Garton's legacy -11/16/2009, 7:04 AM

Hovering on the edge of disaster -11/15/2009, 2:25 PM


Voices

View this site in another language.

SPOTLIGHT
[var top_story_head]

Meddling

Published on -11/10/2009, 11:36 AM

Printer-friendly version
E-Mail This Story

Recently, I got a call from Clean Air Kansas and agreed to answer a few questions, starting with, "Do you think that employees in bars should be protected from cigarette smoke and smoking in bars should be banned?"

I am assuming they were primarily looking for donations as they abruptly hung up after the first question when I answered, "No, that barkeeps  aren't in need of protection as they certainly knew  smoking was allowed  when they took the job and they won't have  that job when the bar closes down after a ban forces customers  to drink  while smoking at home. Customers can choose to  support  non-smoking bars as well, and I'm certain non-smoking bars hire employees also."

It's been years since I have been in a smoking bar, but I'll guess the activities are about the same. Beer drinking, cigarette smoking  and complaining to anyone coherently or not, about, well, interlopers like Clean Air Kansas.    

According to Clean Air Kansas, "there isn't a constitutional right to smoke," so I guess there isn't a specific right to drink or complain about meddlers either but if you were to take away any one of those pastimes  there isn't an incentive  to spend  money at a bar. There isn't a constitutional right to telemarket or require a bar to be smoke-free -- but that's beside the point.  

It seems meddlers could spend their time and the un-pocketed donations on a needed regulation but for the life of me I can't think of anything else that isn't already regulated or planned to be regulated. Every thing conceivable already has a rule, law or regulation. There are so many regulations it's tough not to break any on a typical day, some are simply ignored like those signs in public bathrooms telling you to wash your hands  or enforcing illegal immigration. Others seem to be too confusing, even though they write them, many politicians and their buddies can't seem to follow  the tax laws. Others require a lot of diligence as teenage thugs are having a tougher time making a living beating  and robbing people as they have to  distinguish the  less protected  targets from  minorities and gays.

Maybe when these interlopers get done regulating the air we exhale, CO2, we'll finally have all the laws imaginable finally subjected on us, but I doubt it. We certainly don't need any more ridiculous  and  dubious  regulations and the politicians that support them. I'll bet the  founding fathers of this country would agree, and as they were smoking away  while writing the constitution they never dreamt that we would wind up with a stack of regulations that would reach the moon. If they knew, they would turn over in their graves, if the cemetery  didn't have that new green regulation:  "No  Rolling Over, it  disturbs  the earthworms."

Flint Campbell

Ransom

1 comment(s) found
Too many laws: 11/11/2009
I agree. We don't need more law, rules, & regulations. I don't smoke, don't like smoke, and don't like it when I'm eating at a restaurant. However, I don't want to enforce my feelings on others. Next they may regulate something that I actually DO enjoy. Like maybe no coffee at work as someone doesn't like the smell. Or maybe no wearing of unmatched color clothes as it offends the more 'fashion conscious' coworkers. Laws making it illegal to steal or kill are one thing. Laws to regulate every action of our daily life are not needed. Although I try to live life morally and legally, I'm sure I'm breaking some law each week just going about my normal routine.
(Posted by: Hays cititzen)

COMMENT ON THIS STORY

Subject:
Comment:
Poster: (your name)
captcha 57ab28a429af453989439f23523c5737
Enter text above:

All comments are subject to approval before being posted. Please keep comments constructive and relevant. Opinions certainly can be expressed, but comments that are rude, abusive, slanderous, threatening, sexually oriented, contain profanity or are vulgar will not be tolerated. Comments will not be edited. Any comment that violates the above-listed rules will be deleted.

Discuss this story at MyTown

digg delicious facebook stumbleupon google Newsvine
More News and Photos

Associated Press Videos