Norfolk again seeks path to smoke-free dining scene

is why so little has been learned from comments such as yours. Seriously, try to have a nice day. Maybe read a book or 2. You may be pleasantly surprised. Adieu!

You can't grasp knowlege from one who has very little to begin with.

is often a sign of inability to grasp knowledge contrary to what one had always perceived as knowledge.

You're boring me to tears.

can be rescinded. In fact, a vote was taken this decade, to renew the act, so we could continue to have the right to vote. Notice, they are the Voting & Civil Rights Acts, not privileges. So, the 2nd Amendment, being a part of written additions to the Constitution, therefore legislation, written by a governmental institution, can also be rescinded, since it's only a right to the degree of the Civil Rights & Voting Rights Acts. Or are you insinuating your "right" to bear arms is supreme to our rights as full fledged humans? The 13th, 14th & 15th, Amendments, decided abolition of slavery, citizenship & voting rights for most US citizens. John McCain, couldn't run for President, if not for the 14th Amendment.

Give me a break sir. I didn't say The 2ND Amendment was a privilege. The current government these days (in my opinion) assumes your mere existance is a privilege as there are very few people in government who have never read the document or choose to ignore it. GOVERNMENT writes legislation and privileges. The 1964 Civil Rights Act and The Voting Rights Act were grants of privilege from government, that could be recinded too right? If you TRULY had the rights of a natural person, these acts wouldn't have been necessary.

are you now saying the 2nd Amendment doesn't give you a "right" to carry guns but only a "privilege"? I wrote that govt wrote amendments & legislation. You're now telling me you don't have the right to be free? It's only a privilege that can be rescinded? If this is so, then the ability to carry arms, can be rescinded. You may have a good knowledge of "His Story" but by the lack displayed in your many varied posts, you don't seem to have too much grasp of history.

Government grants privileges sir... not rights. I am well aware of this nations history. I question your knowedge of history.

that had to write & pass laws outlawing slavery. It was government that wrote & passed amendments ensuring the people freedom of speech & the press. It was government that had to pass the right to vote to persons other than White male property owners. Either you were attempting to be facetious or you truly are unaware of this nation's history. These rights didn't drop from the sky.

Submitted by twomiler2 on Tue, 09/30/2008 at 4:43 pm.

"Without government control we wouldn't be able to express our varied ideas, anywhere, least of all in a free press. Women still wouldn't be able to vote. I would be a slave, we'd all have to be Christians or face death as withes etc, etc, etc."

You're kidding right?

problem with allowing a business owner to make this decision. Who will pay the cost of his nonsmoking employees' health care, due to problems arising from 2nd hand smoke exposure? Many small business owners don't offer health insurance to their employees. Many national & international chains don't offer health insurance to their low level employees. Adults, too old to be carried on their parents health care plans, who work in many of these places, don't earn enough dineros to pay their health care expenses as is. The argument "they can work elsewhere", is naive, if not downright silly. Many people in low paying jobs would definitely leave them if they could. RdhdRN, as a medical pro, you're aware there's no direct correlation to an obese person eating fries & another adult person's health. Yes, indirectly, it can affect heath care cost in group health care plans.

I do undersand, but in this case I think he buiness ower should have the right to make that decision, and simply placing a sign on the door is all that's neded. We aren't going to get people to quit smoking as long as tobacco products are legal. If we banned, or made illegal smoking products it would would be devistating for the Commonwealth. Just my thought!

As a healthcare provider in one of Norfolk's hospitals I have noticed that there are FAR more patients admitted with problems directly related to obesity than smoking. I find it interesting then that if the government is so worried about everyone's health and rising healthcare costs why aren't there warnings posted on the doors of fast food restaurants reading "French Fries Permitted Here"? A perfect stranger has no problem walking up to a smoker and telling them that smoking is a disgusting habit and bad for their health but no one would dream of walking up to a 500 pound person in a fast food joint and telling THEM that eating a burger is a disgusting habit and bad for their health...

we wouldn't be able to express our varied ideas, anywhere, least of all in a free press. Women still wouldn't be able to vote. I would be a slave, we'd all have to be Christians or face death as withes etc, etc, etc.

is that what you want?

Blacks & all people of any other racial & ethnic groups, don't have any say on where & to whom they were born. Even when adopted by someone of another race or ethnicity, they still remain who they were, ethnically & racially. Smokers have a choice, to take the first puff. They have the choice to get help in defeating their addiction. It's not selfishness to have concern over the health of others & the increase in cost of group plan health care to all employees due to a few smokers being within the group.

And, I respect the right of people to make their choices. However, I choose not to be exposed to second hand smoke. I think putting a sign on the restaurant (either smoking allowed or smoking not allowed) is a fair thing to do for all concerned. That way we can ALL make our choices.

I hate to say this, but contrary to the popular belief, the majority DOES NOT rule. Our system of government was set up to prevent the majority from forcing thier tyranny over the minority, in this case, smokers. Can you imagine the uproar that would happen if any other group were treated the way smokers were? It use to happen to jews, blacks as well as other minorities and now they're protected under law, so I suppose that since Americans have this pathological need to hate someone, smokers have become the target. Cigarettes are a legal product that generate billions in tax revenue that provide services for all, you complain about higher health care costs, but if smoking disappeared tomorrow, your health care won't cost any less. Oh, but since government never does with less, you can bet the taxes lost will be made up by non-smokers who will have something new to whine about.

A license to smoke is another tax Norfolk City council seeks to impose.
too many taxes not enough services.

would you walk into a burning fire and breath the smoke. If you answer no, then why bring the fire to your lips? Just wondering.

Why can't she just let it go? People don't need government to tell them what is good for them and what isn't. Next thing we'll have the cheese burger police checking patrons cholestoral. You can't protect people from themselves.

I'm very considerate of non smokers, but this is getting old. How about passing laws to do something about people that don't know how to wear their pants.

"Smokers, are in large part, inconsiderate, selfish & obviously so addicted that not only don't they care that they're killing themselves but others as well."

As a general rule I agree with most of your comments, but this time I see it the other way around. I've always found the non-smoker to be the selfish one in that banning smoking from restaurants isn't enough and they won't be happy until they attempt to eliminate smoking all together. Think what they would do to the economy of the Commonwealth.

Sir, and I use that term extremely loosely, even though I do not always agree with Don, at least he puts some thought into what he has to say. Apparently you do not. I am just utterly amazed at childishness of your comment. As to the overall composition, sir (again -- loosely), if you are going to insult somebody, at least put together a decent sentence.

Most on this forum can't differentiate between "public" or "private." Any resuturant from a Taco Bell to a high end establishment is "public", and smoking, being dangerous and gross, should be banned by Government. A "private" place is like a club for members only, where annual dues are paid, for instance the Princess Anne county Club is private, and a smoking ban would NOT affect them as it's not open to the "public." Therefore, an owner of a "public" restaurant, does not/should not have any say in the matter as they are doing business in a particular city.

Don't like working/eating at a resturant/bar that allows smoking? Don't go! There problem solved.

Jeez, people, Is this all you have to complain about? City Council, is this the only problem that is facing your city???

How about we move on to something a bit more pressing like the economy about to crash, the presidental election, or maybe even the war!

I have never tried smoking in my life and think it is a disgusting habit. That being said as long as it is a private restaurant they should be able to make the decision themselves on whether or not they want to allow smoking. What's next having a scale at the entrance and not serving people that are over a certain weight? I can see it now I'm sorry Mr.Smith we are not going to be albe to seat you tonight, our scale has you at 253lbs and we can't serve anyone over 250lbs; hope to see you next week. Take some personal responsibility for yourselves.

permeates the clothing, hair & skin of the smoker. These toxins are still dangerous to any one having to come into contact with said smoker & his clothing, including the dry cleaner, spouse, children, friends, etc. Smokers in public places, such as the sidewalk & street, have no problem throwing their used cancer sticks on the public sidewalks or their neighbor's yard or out their car window, letting the often still lit stick of toxin become a danger of another type. Drug addicts, other than smokers, have enough decency to deal with their addiction in private. Why is it that smokers don't seem to have at least that much self control? Smokers, are in large part, inconsiderate, selfish & obviously so addicted that not only don't they care that they're killing themselves but others as well.

I read in the newspaper this weekend that Greenies Resturant had some of the best steamed shirmp in Hampton Roads. Unfortunatly, I (and many others I know) don't eat at resturants that allow smoking reguardless of how good the food is. Too bad, I really like shrimp. Sorry Ronnie.

P.S. someone give jimmyf his medication

Gotta love our City Council. A national banking crisis is going on, and this is what they are discussing at their retreat?