BY DAVE PARRO
With the new statewide smoking ban set to go into effect Jan. 1, it'll be interesting to see how enforcement varies from one place to another.
In Kendall County, officials are advocating leniency. Some board members actually wanted to mandate that all cities in the county only give verbal warnings in the first year. State's Attorney Eric Weis wisely told them they couldn't do that.
While each community will decide how aggressive to be, non-compliance doesn't seem to be an option. It's up to our governments and law-enforcement agencies to enforce the law, not find ways around it.
It's also a little too late for the ridiculous and over-the-top rhetoric being spewed by some Kendall County elected officials at the 11th hour. County Board member Nancy Martin compared a smoking ban to Prohibition. John Purcell called the county's proposed extension of the ban to include all the property on government campuses, including parking lots, "onerous" and "Big Brother." This is not about government intrusion; it's about public health.
If Kendall County Board members would actually read the Smoke Free Illinois Act, they would see it says nothing about looking the other way.
From Section 40(a) of the Act:
The Department, State-certified local public health departments, and local law enforcement agencies shall enforce the provisions of this Act and may assess fines pursuant to Section 45 of this Act.
And Section 45(b) on the penalties:
A person who smokes in an area where smoking is prohibited under Section 15 of this Act shall be fined in an amount that is not less than $100 and not more than $250. A person who owns, operates, or otherwise controls a public place or place of employment that violates Section 15 of this Act shall be fined (i) not less than $250 for the first violation, (ii) not less than $500 for the second violation within one year after the first violation, and (iii) not less than $2,500 for each additional violation within one year after the first violation.
Will it be unlawful to sell cigarets and all other smoking products? If not, why? What would be the point in keeping them. I think that these materials should not be manufactured or sold at all.Why should the government continue to make money off smokers To be fair abolish it all. No sale, no users, no money and see where that goes.
Well, if you follow that line of reasoning, then it would follow that due to the fact that people are prohibited from engaging in sexual conduct in public places, condom, pregnancy tests, and libido stimulants would no longer be manufactured or sold.
It appears that there are still a number of things that people can lawfully do in private areas which are not permitted in public. We can easily slip into a viewpoint that says, my way or not at all, but we can't control other people (or even ourselves, for that matter.) Let's just take it easy. This is a big step already.
While I actually agree with the ban and see no corilation to prohibition, the actual rules of the ban are a little silly.
You must place 5 x7 inch signs on every door in your facility. For a small business that is not an issue, however, even your local municipal building are required to do this. The signs must include the web site and local health department phone number.
The sign size requirement is overkill and the best part is when I called the health department to inquire about getting some of the "free signs" they were having produced, I was told they will be ready to be picked up on on January 2nd!
So i would encourage Dave to think a little about how local units, (park districs, school districts, libraray, will be able to be in compliance with rules!
The original press release from the stat of illinois did not have sign requirements in them, several business when ahead and attempted to become compliant by purchasing signs and taking steps to move ashtrays, ect...now the new regs come out the week prior to Christmas and we are supposed to "try" to be compliant?
Btw...all local cop cars, firetrucks, village / city owend vehicles must have a 2 x 3 sticker on Jan. 1 too!
Tell me that makes sense?
This law may be good for most of the state but what about the veterans that belong to private members only key club organizations.We pay dues to belong to these clubs and dont think the state has a right to tell a private club not to smoke.Let the members decide!!WE have fought for this country and the right to make up our own minds.Cigarettes are a legal product and the state makes alot of money off of the taxes but they want to tell us where we can and cannot smoke.George Orwell was right.When state tax revenue goes way down because of this what are they going to tax next?
You're right, Randy. Seems a bit too "1984", doesn't it?
I agree with the smoking ban in some areas like a restuarant where you take small children. That being said I dont feel the ban should extend to bars and clubs. You make a choice to go in to a bar or club knowing there is smoking. There are people who dont smoke who tend to do so when having a drink and relaxing with friends. They said that when the ban went in to effect we would see more non smokers here it is the middle of Jan. and there is still no increase in patrons in our local bar. The truth is business is down considerably. Big cities might be able to survive with this but in a small town we dont have alot of business anyway now the ones who have been coming for years are not coming in because they cant smoke. Dont you think that it is going against our civial rights to choose if we want to allow smoking in the local bar?
I am not going against the government or state I just feel this is going a little to far in some of the places.