We have too many people living in Las Vegas, who do not belong to this city. Las Vegas is to be kept smoky, wild, free, entertaining, lawless, nude and all that 24/7.

Comment by Mika Koponen — December 4, 2006 @ 2:06 pm

I love it! I only wish all the Casinos would go totally non-smoking throughout the entire Hotel and Casino areas too.

Due to working in the Casino industry for 20 years, I will carry my years of second hand smoke as Asthma for the rest of my life,

Comment by florence cowan — December 4, 2006 @ 2:19 pm

I think Nevada should stay off the smoking bans bandwagon and leave well enough alone. Most smokers have the common sense to not smoke at schools or in the grocery stores–unless gambling (and only in the video slot section only). To impose smoking bans in taverns will only limit the consumers ability to find decent food in the wee hours of the morning–since most tavern owners are going to go with gaming and throw out food service altoghether. I thought this was Sin City and not an extention of California?

Comment by Rhonda Harvey — December 4, 2006 @ 4:32 pm

Whats next…. Sin City is now on the edge of Mormon Country. Why should tourists even come to vegas anymore??? They can gamble at any indian reservation… There is nothing special about comming to Vegas anymore… Now if the Casino’s Get together and pass the marajuana bill…. Then Tourism would INCREASE and once again There is something you can do in Sin City that you can not do anywhere else!!!

Comment by Mike DeMeere — December 4, 2006 @ 5:22 pm

I quit, so kiss off to smoking better for their health and mine

Comment by steve — December 4, 2006 @ 7:20 pm

Finally!! It seems as if every arrogant, dirtbag smoker takes great pleasure in blowing smoke in the face of others who try to sit in the pointless smoking sections, or when they are walking by you in public. Haha, now you can’t!! You are providing a service that KILLS people. If you want to do that , lock yourself in a windowless room and smoke your yellow self into a hole. Nicotene stays on you, your clothes, your skin and everything you own. It’s about time that it’s against the law for you to quit “sharing” with the rest of us.

Comment by Kendra — December 4, 2006 @ 8:22 pm

Big deal! So what if there is no smoke inside a building?!? Eventually, we’ll have to step outside and breathe in that rust-colored toxic slime that is constantly hovering over the valley. Look at the big picture folks, less smoke indoors will not make us more healthy when we are surrounded by that Las Vegas “Cloud-of-Death”!

Comment by Marty — December 4, 2006 @ 9:40 pm

I am so glad!!! to be able to go into a place and not have that place filled with second hand smoke that I have to breathe into my body. Places like that are RANK…and I leave immediately.
Thanks for more of a SMOKE FREE NEVADA!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Comment by Rhetta — December 5, 2006 @ 12:54 am

Good job Nevada! I, for one will now drop 10-20 bucks in the grocery store slots! No more smokers blowing butt-fumes in there.I would also like to drink a glass of beer and play the bar top poker games without the smoke!. The establishments that comply will find the profits growing for a number of reasons:Non-smokers have more money,less sick employees and so on.

Comment by R.Daniels — December 5, 2006 @ 5:47 am

Your information is incorrect. Clark County residents DID NOT approve Question 5. It did not receive the majority of votes in Clark County but it did in the rest of the state. Secondly, Las Vegas IS NOT like other cities that have smoking bans. Other cities don’t have so many bars and taverns that rely on GAMING to pay the bills. Food is a money loser that is offered to customers. Now, we will have taverns with no food available to those who drink and we will have good TAX PAYING citizens out of work. Give all sides of the story.

Comment by Joe — December 5, 2006 @ 9:13 am

EVERYONE IS WORRIED ABOUT SECOND HAND SMOKE, AND THE STUFF THAT GIVES ME THE HEADACHE IS FROM POLLUTION. THAT DARK GRAY HAZY STUFF YOU SEE LINGERING OVER THE CITY AS YOU TOP THE HILL. NO ONE IS WORRIED ABOUT THAT.

Comment by Wendy — December 5, 2006 @ 9:26 am

Why don’t we just sent all the Bleeding Hearts BACK to California where they came from. I for one smoke, and at times like to relax after a meal with a cup of coffee and a cigarette. Although I don’t always do this, I would like to have that option available to me, and not dictated to by bureaucrats.
1984 and Big Brother have arrived!

Comment by E. D. Zuck — December 5, 2006 @ 9:54 am

I think it should be up to the business owners to decide whether or not smoking should be allowed in their establishments. The bigger picture here is government attempting to control our lives. Believe me it won’t stop here. This is a very dangerous precedent in regards to citizen’s liberties.

Comment by Jack — December 5, 2006 @ 10:18 am

This will cost many local bar/restaurants to go out of business, but will help the big casinos in the long run as the smoking gamblers are forced to go to their places. Stupid law.

Comment by Cole — December 5, 2006 @ 10:44 am

Part of the fun for me going to Las Vegas was that I could smoke without feeling guilty. Now I don’t know if I will be going there anymore. I will just go on the boats in Illinois where I can smoke and save the airfare.

Comment by John Aaron — December 5, 2006 @ 10:47 am

I say “HALLELUJAH!!!!” I’m a non-smoking, and I couldn’t be happier!

In fact, just two nights ago, my family and I went out to eat at a fancy restaurant, but they had a bar near the entrance, which allowed smoking. Even though we were in the non-smoking section, we could still smell the stench, and we thought about how anxious we are for Dec. 8th to come.

Thing is, if smokers want to pollute and rot their lungs, that’s their choice. However, for those who choose a healthier lifestyle, LET US HAVE HEALTHY ORGANS!!! Why should non-smokers have lung cancer because of other people’s addictions? Screw their whole “I’m a tax-payer, I have rights” crap, as we have rights to live longer and healthier WITHOUT breathing in that cancerous stench.

In fact, I went to Bodies: The Exhibition at Tropicana in Vegas over the weekend, and they had a real-life smoker’s lung alongside a non-smoker’s. The smoker’s lung was totally black and rotted, while the non-smoker’s was nice, clean, and pink. Kinda gives you a perspective of what your lungs look like if you suck on the cancer sticks.

Comment by Kim — December 5, 2006 @ 11:31 am

First smoking can still take place in casinos so enjoy. For some reasons people around the country think they wont be able to smoke in casinos.

I personally am tired of getting a non smoking table at a restaurant and having to still deal with smoke from two tables over.

RESIDENTS of Nevada passed this law, so be it, live with it. It does not matter where they came from or where they were born, the largest majority of people in this state want this law. That is the way it goes.

Who in their right mind came up with inhaling a non oxygen material into your lungs that turns them black, causes cancer and is addictive?

I would not mind smoking if it just did not have the habit of drifting away from the smoker 5 tables away and to my lungs.

Nevada will not collapse, food will taste better.

Comment by Vegas Resident — December 5, 2006 @ 12:20 pm

I think it’s great that good smoking laws will be taking effect in our city (Las Vegas)! It’s about time that us “non-smokers” have rights! As for the “smokers” who are complaining about this, they can smoke smoke themselves to death wherever they are allowed to smoke! Why not for once call our city “clean city”, instead of “sin city”? I’s so tired of the negative image given of our wonderful city of Las Vegas!.

Comment by Susana — December 5, 2006 @ 12:40 pm

I personally think it sucks. Las Vegas was the last place you could be where you were treated like an adult. Now, we might as well be in California. And we all know that California sucks. They want everybody to look like Arnold & Maria. All the goodie two shoes are ruining Las Vegas.

Comment by ron — December 5, 2006 @ 12:49 pm

I can see not smoking in restaurants but children should not be in bars/taverns whether they serve food or not. Nevada was a state unlike any other state until now. We’re California’s puppet!

Comment by Marti — December 5, 2006 @ 1:39 pm

I work at a resturant in a casino and I am a cashier. Where do they draw the line when it comes to customers lighting up in front of my face/register. Will the owner of the resturant make a sign that will say “No smoking beyond this point”? I don’t think so. I smell like an ash tray every time I go home.And I’m sick to my stomach. Yea, get another job they all say. Now that the bill has past, maybe I will look for a job where the resturant is not in a casino. The only problem is I’ll make less money, well that’s the sacrifice non-smokers have to make? Smokers have no consideration for others! Maybe there own child will die of second hand smoke, maybe not.

Comment by dee — December 5, 2006 @ 2:02 pm

The worst part of this whole law is the Double Standard that has been created between the smaller gaming establishments and the Casinos. If this law included the Casino floors as well, we would not be talking about this today. If Q5 goes through for sure, there will be alot of people out of work, just in time for the holidays!

Comment by Paul T. — December 5, 2006 @ 2:08 pm

I am so glad the smoking ban passed. It is about time! I cannot stand walking around the supermarket or eating out and having to smell nasty smoke.

Comment by Brittany — December 5, 2006 @ 2:14 pm

You can whine and moan about it but this entire lawsuit comes down to sour grapes. This measure was put forth to the voting public and it passed. Grow up and deal with it.

Comment by Kelly — December 5, 2006 @ 2:34 pm

If kids are allowed to enter an establishment then smoking should be banned. But when it comes to places such as bars with food, then children have no business being there and it is up to the customers to choose to go to a place that allows smoking. If you don’t want to be around 2nd hand smoke than go to family dining areas and stay out of bar & grill establishments. It isn’t all about the people who are non-smokers and don’t want to be bothered with the smell. Think about the people who will be out of work because a bar has to pick gaming over food service.

Comment by Wendy — December 5, 2006 @ 2:53 pm

All of us at work, mostly non-smokers, agree that Question 5 is a downfall for Nevada bar owners. All the passage of this law did was put small business owners of gaming establishments in financial trouble because of the hoops they will now have to hop thru to keep in the black. Most of the owners I have spoken with are going to put up a wall, separate door and ventilation system to in effect, make two establishments out of one. The bars will all eventually still have smoking, but the cost to these owners will be high. The food doesn’t make these guys any money anyway as they give most of it away in comps and certainly the non smokers who have said they’ll now come in for lunch and play the slots are NOTHING compared to the regulars who pump thousands into the coffers all the while, drinking, smoking and gambling. These regular patrons will now go to casinos, who by the way, I believe, created Question 5, as they have nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Comment by Carol — December 5, 2006 @ 2:59 pm

This smoking ban is not for the Las Vegas area, I hear them say this is sin city. This ban is for the state of Nevada, the people have spoke their peace on the matter so lets not get some liberal judge involved and go against the voters of this great state:

Comment by George E. Rowe — December 5, 2006 @ 3:30 pm

It wont be okay to smoke in a restaurant because it affects the health of others, but any dirtbag gambler can blow smoke in a dealers face all day? KISS OFF! let em smoke!

Comment by BJ — December 5, 2006 @ 3:45 pm

I agree with most of the poster that most of the people that voted for Question 5 came from Calilfornia, they should go back. This makes it hard on everyone epecially the small bars. I think the companies should decide for themselves. CHILDREN DON’T BELONG IN BARS ANYWAY. A separate section should be allowed for smokers - we are being decriminated against. The air we breath is a lot worse than cigarette smoke and OSHA has proven it in Minnesota.

one smoker

Comment by Elizabeth Kleinman — December 5, 2006 @ 4:02 pm

There are a few people out there who bitch and moan about the smoking in bars with foodservice and yet at the same time take advantage of the tremendous value of the food that the establishment has to offer. Some of these people don’t even play the machines. They don’t seem to realize that their reasonably priced meal is because of mostly smoking slot players.

Comment by Ray G — December 5, 2006 @ 4:30 pm

I second Dee, if this law was effecting casino floors it never would have passed. This is a way to attract even more poeple to the casino floors where they can smoke freely. I dont smoke and I understand people’s frustration but what happens to the thousands of waitress’ in bars, bartenders etc. who will suffer job cuts or a decrease in income from tips. This is Las Vegas a place people come to do things they cant do elsewhere. Keep things the way they are!! Nobody is forced to live here so quit complaining.

Comment by ashley — December 5, 2006 @ 4:31 pm

So the voters saw thru the “smoke screen” of question 4 that the Tavern Owners aka Terrible Herbst tried to push over on us. Now they want to cry foul. Why did’nt they challenge question 5 before it was put on the ballot? I’ll tell you one thing, if question 4 would have passed and I went to court to challenge it THEY would be yelling all over the media “the people have spoken” Guess where I’m no longer buying my gas? Maybe if the other hundreds of thousands of voters who supported question 5 followed suit Terrible’s would get the point! THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN!

Comment by Greg R — December 5, 2006 @ 4:35 pm

When the plaintiffs in this lawsuit are fully identified, I suggest that everyone who voted for Question 5 boycott those businesses.

Since Question 5 passed with a majority, that should prove to be more of a financial incentive for those businesses, that fighting to allow smoking.

Comment by Smokeless — December 5, 2006 @ 4:47 pm

I have mixed emotions. I don’t want to give the government more control over us citizens yet, I have a lung condition due to Lymes Disease and Valley Fever and get sick every time I have to walk passed a group of people smoking in a doorway of an office building. Sometimes I can get away with holding my breath and walking as fast as I can passed them, but that doesn’t always work. Or if I want to go to a buffet with my kids. Sorry guys but your smoking is hurting others.

Comment by Diana B. — December 5, 2006 @ 4:53 pm

I was born and raised in Las Vegas and have spent over 40 yrs here. I do believe that is healthier for people not to smoke.
I think the ban should reflect areas where kids are at and resturants (providing they have a patio area-outside for smokers). No casinos or bars should be forced to tell their frequent customers (who gamble,drink & smoke)that they can no longer smoke.
Those who don’t what to breathe second hand smoke- should probably frequent at some open/well aired bar. Smoke is gross and unhealthy, but smokers have rights too. They just choose to die quicker than most.

Comment by Ronda Young — December 5, 2006 @ 5:04 pm

I’m a bit annoyed that although with in their rights, that though the people spoke and voted by an overwelming majority for this to be law (and they have a right to–personal rights end at the point they affect the health and well being of others,) that Herbst and other companies who couldn’t buy the election with their cash and putting their weight behind it, will now try to force their patrons to do what they wish.

I’ll vote too. I’m not going to any more Herbst stations, or to any place that doesn’t comply with the smoking ban. I’m tired of having my children and myself wade through smoke to eat a nice dinner, or to shop in a grocery store, or to use a convenience store.

I hope the courts see quicky through this ruse–and note that equal protection does not apply to acts that can harm others.

Comment by Concerned Citizen — December 5, 2006 @ 5:05 pm

Smokers are selfish! It is obvious they have no regard for their health or the health of others. The voters have spoken - no smokin’!

Comment by Debbie — December 5, 2006 @ 5:05 pm

38 years ago when I moved to Southern Nevada, there used to be a little cloud over the plants in Henderson. We locals called it the “Henderson Cloud.” Now after all you people came from near and far the whole damn valley is covered by one big cloud…inside and out!
So, why don’t you all go back to where you came from!! This used to be a NICE place to live.

Comment by Jerry — December 5, 2006 @ 6:05 pm

Why must there be a new law against smokers? The majority of people do not smoke, good healty choice, BUT what gives them the right to dictate to those who do smoke? The smokers, or any other minority group, will never have a chance to beat a law directed at them. It is simple math.
Besides that, why should the government tell you where to smoke. I belive businesses, day cares, restaurants & such have policies in place already that seem to work fine.
I hate the smell of broccoli, but I do not believe all broccoli eaters should be banned from having it at their favorite restaurant.
Just wait until there is something you enjoy that a majority of people do not enjoy… how will you feel when that is taken from you? Maybe you will lose your job because of it? Just think.
(For the record, I am a non-smoking registered voter.)

Comment by Dennis — December 5, 2006 @ 6:05 pm

If the nonsmokers would have gone out and voted for this question not to pass they would not be complaining now. They should have all gotten together to say no this is not going to happen and then voted against it. Becuase they didn’t and more people voted to pass this question they are now mad at what they could have stoped but didn’t.
This question is not saying smoking is completely banned, no one in Nevada may ever smoke again. It is protecting those people who decided not to make the same dumb mistakes the people who started smoking did. We don’t want to have bad health because of the people who wanted to smoke. It was their choice not ours to smoke. Everyone had the same oppotunity to go out and vote on this question and apparently more people voted yes.
This also was not just a clark county question, it was a nevada question, which is why it was located under the NEVADA questions and not the NORTH LAS VEGAS questions!

Comment by Ashley — December 5, 2006 @ 6:10 pm

I want to know why the casino’s aren’t affected by #4 and #5..gee..I wonder! I am a smoker and I am mad as hell. I smoke cause I am so addicted..but I am not ready to quit yet. It is my choice..when I am ready. I don’t smoke in my home..but I would like to be able to be ready to chose my fate. I have lived here 27 years..raised my “non-smoking” children. Who are upstanding working with families..own homes and contribute to the community. Me too!. I am aware of people around me and I am a very polite person..but this law makes me so angry to take more of our “rights” away. Kid’s shouldn’t be in bars anyway..and I think that the CALIFORNIA influence has changed our state. I am originally from California myself). I moved here to be away from their smog. My children couldn’t have recess in the 70″s cause of their smog. Why are they moving here and trying to make Nevada..California? Thank you for letting me vent..as there are not many venues to help on our side too. Help us not choke us!

Comment by Jayne LaFavor — December 5, 2006 @ 6:23 pm

Last time I checked the United States of America was a democracy you know land of the free…since when did this become a dictatorship, I personally feel that MY RIGHTS have been violated by the ever increasing bans on smoking that are invading communities across the country.

Comment by SMOKER AND PROUD OF IT — December 5, 2006 @ 6:24 pm

This issue has already been decided! Voters have chosen health over the selfish desires of the minority smokers. Citizens are sick and tired of smokers total disregard for my health or the health of innocent children. These Taverns should be totally ashamed of themselves figting for smoke over health.

Comment by John — December 5, 2006 @ 6:26 pm

If something I’m doing is directly affecting the health of those around me, I don’t expect it to be my right to continue to do it. I’m not allowed to drink and get into my car…I’m not allowed to smoke marijuana and do, well, basically anything…..what makes this smoking ban so different from anything else?

Comment by Susan R — December 5, 2006 @ 7:18 pm

I enjoy going to resturants that have smoking, There is going to be alot of business that are going to close because of it. I am a smoker and alot of time I have to go to the non smoking section because the smoking section has a wait, I feel the business should decide for themselves where or not they want smoking there.

Comment by sandy — December 5, 2006 @ 7:26 pm

“wake up americia”
we are losing are freedom and are rights as United States citizens.
while your all caught up in your ha,ha’s
and your the people have spoken crap. “WAKE UP” our lives are changing fast.we are soon to be totally under control.just keep voting against each other and thinking we the people have won ,
we the people have fallen into thier hands and done excatly what they knew we would. vote another one of our rights away giving our government another win. So don’t be
so foolish look around. Ask your self what can we still do thats not been voted on. and watch
how much time it is tell it’s not legal.
we need to stay alive and free
or very soon we won’t
be.

Comment by nancy — December 5, 2006 @ 7:33 pm

I think the pollution that we are breathing in, due to half of California moving here, is much more dangerous to children than SMOKE IN A BAR OR CASINO where children shouldnt be anyway. If im banned from smoking in a bar then Californians should be banned from Vegas. We have to breathe the air outside!!! You have a choice not to go in a bar where there is smoke.

Comment by stacey — December 5, 2006 @ 7:35 pm

What are all you non smokers going to do when they force us to stop what is legal, and they raise your taxes. I bet then you will learn that in the USA we all have rights. I dont like perfume, makes me sick, lets ban it. I dont like green, ban it, I dont like blue cars, get them off my road. So people, whats next, you gonna tell me when I can go to the bathroom and when to brush my teeth too. Look around you, your goverment sure didnt clean the air that you voted for with the clean air act now did they.

Comment by Castle — December 5, 2006 @ 7:51 pm

I enjoy a good cigarette, but the thing I can’t stand is the smell of alcohol, either from the bottle or second-hand on the drinker’s breath. The only good thing about alcohol is that it is a faster killer! If you don’t believe me, just check out the deaths from car crashes driven by a drinker, and not just the alcoholic, either. It’s even worse when I have to fly. As for the ‘majority of voters’ rule, then why in the world can’t we say ‘Merry Christmas’ and have the ten commandments in public places when the majority of the public would vote in a heartbeat for those rights. It doesn’t make it any more right or wrong than smoking or drinking alcohol. I stay away from drinkers, and you can do the same when it comes to smokers, just go somewhere else. There are plenty of ‘upscale’ places that don’t allow smoking in their establishment, and that’s the way it should be…let the owner decide if he wants to lose my business or yours.

Comment by Janet — December 5, 2006 @ 8:40 pm

I think this smoking ban is going to be the worst thing that can happen to Las Vegas. I think that a lot of small business/bars will be going out of business and as one person said Las Vegas did not vote yes on question 5 the whole state did use a number. I enjoy a smoke after eating a good meal. Look like business are going to fight this stupid law.

Comment by Bob G — December 5, 2006 @ 8:40 pm

Hey I think the smoking ban is great.Too bad they did not do it sooner. I worked in the casinos for almost twenty years in nevada and I’m glad they finally banned in somwhere.I wish they would do it in the casinos too.

Comment by patti Kalambakal — December 5, 2006 @ 9:03 pm

some bars and mini markets will feel the loss in customers. the bars will lay off the cooks and waitresses and keep gaming and smoking. who wins? they should be given a dead line to comply or be grand fathered in. 30 days is not enough time to build seperate areas for non smoking customers. gw

Comment by gw — December 5, 2006 @ 9:08 pm

Check back in six months when people are complaining about the rise in unemployment, lack of convenient places to eat and $20 meals! Agreed family restaurants and grocery stores should be smoke free, but guess what…. kids do not belong in bars, and in some cases, certain restaurants! People eat at bars and taverns because the cost of the meal is less; it costs less because it is subsidized by gaming. MOST gamblers smoke while gambling and they pay the bills, not the family coming in for dinner! Families and kids do not have a right to eat in bars. Gamers and smokers do have a right to light up. Non-smokers (like myself) and do-gooders do have a right to not patronize or leave. So, for the rest of you age of majority idiots, you forfeited your right to choose thinking everyone will choose the right! I don’t know who is more stupid, the smoker trashing his life or the non-smoker trashing his rights. “Those who would give up ESSENTIAL LIBERTY to purchase a little TEMPORARY SAFETY, deserve neither LIBERTY nor SAFETY” – BENJAMIN FRANKLIN

Comment by Troy Bulloch — December 5, 2006 @ 9:32 pm

Im so tired of this myth that jobs would be lost,because some places would be forced to close there kitchens.That`s nothing but a bluff,and it was called by the voters.Most regular bar patrons are regulars because they don`t want to deal with the big casinos.I gamble just as much as a smoker does.and how many bar owners have taken a survey of how many smokers they have gambling compared to non smokers on a daily basis.(and who spends more)bottom line is that most smokers show no consideration when lighting up right next to you letting the smoke just bellow in your face,having me come home to my kids and wife smelling like a pack of menthol lights.what`s next,the weed advocates will sue over there question not being passed.

Comment by G. — December 5, 2006 @ 9:33 pm

If people hate second hand smoke so much, why do they go places that allow smoking? I go to smoke free resturants,grocery stores,pharmacy’s and I pay at the pump. Guess what, no second hand smoke. This smoking ban will be devastating for Las Vegas.

Comment by Kelly — December 5, 2006 @ 9:45 pm

Non-smokers outnumber smokers 10 to 1. Those who wish to continue smoking can step outside or switch to smoke-less tobacco. The majority of us can finally go out to our favorite tavern and enjoy a beer with our meal while we gamble

Comment by bob — December 5, 2006 @ 10:02 pm

I am glad, very glad. I hate smoke filled bars, most of the time I don’t go play pool or eat at local bars because I get all my clothes smelling like smoke.
Same at restaurants you get a non smoking table and the guy next to you is smoking what’s the point?
I hope it gets enforced and if it does I’ll go out more often.
The thing with smokers is they don’t notice how annoying smoke is until they quit and get all those toxins out of their lungs and taste buds.
Then they notice how their house or car smells : nasty.

Comment by L C — December 5, 2006 @ 10:23 pm

I’M SICK AND TIRED TO HEAR THIS IS LAS VEGAS WHERE YOU CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT…WRONG!!!
SMOKERS HAVE NO CONSIDERATION. THEY LOVE TO BLOW SMOKE ON PEOPLES FACES LIKE ITS FUNNY. I WORK IN THE CASINO AND JUST BECAUSE YOU LOSE MONEY YOU THINK ITS FUNNY TO SMOKE 2PACKS AND BLOW SMOKE IN YOUR FACE NOT COOL.
SOOOOOOOOO HAPPY QUESTION 5 PASSED. LONG LIVE NON-SMOKERS!!!

Comment by TONY S. — December 5, 2006 @ 11:15 pm

The people have spoken! Let the law go in effect! Why can’t the Pro Question 4 camp understand and accept it? It was the Question 4 camp that ran those deceptive ads and now they lost. Learn to accept it.

Comment by Sincity — December 5, 2006 @ 11:17 pm

I’m so glad it passed and can’t wait for it to go into effect. It is totally disgusting to walk into a restaurant for breakfast and be hit by the stench of smoke. I was shocked to find it was legal when I moved here and glad to see it fixed.

The average Nevadan is about as bright as a small appliance bulb, trashy morals, low education, low wage jobs, self destructive habits, and seemingly proud of it. No wonder no self respecting knowledge based industries like finance, electronics, etc will headquarter here. There is no work force worth hiring. I can only hope that as the migration continues the place keeps changing for the better. Maybe someday there might be more than casino and construction jobs here. There may be hope yet.

Comment by Len — December 5, 2006 @ 11:35 pm

Well, I am a smoker, and that does not make me a second class citizen. I have lived in Nevada for 34 years, and it was a great place to live. All of those who are here now, should go back where they came from and stop bringing their issues to what was a free city. Oh yes, I could smoke 3000 cartons of cigarettes in my gagage with the door closed and walk out. But if I turn my car engine on and close the garage door, I am dead in less than 3 minutes!!! All of you wonderful non smokers better look outside and realize the air pollution is the problem but no one is addressing that. You have all been brain washed by the medical profession. Genetics plays the biggest part in many illnesses, including heart and cancer. Bottom line, we are all going to die, and only God knows how and when. My final thought is I have as much right to smoke as you do to not, I thought that is what made America great choice! Guess we have lost that. For all those that don’t like smoking, go back to where you came from we didn’t ask you to come. Maybe my taxes would be a lot less.

Comment by Mary Manna — December 5, 2006 @ 11:55 pm

So let me see if I have this right, bars will not be able to serve food to customers that have been drinking all night, the drunk customers will then get in their cars and drive home with nothing in their stomaches except booze. Humm good idea, why would we want people that have been drinking all night to eat some food and soak up all that booze and help sobber them up, lets not feed the bar patrons, I want my fellow drivers on the road to be really really drunk and the best way to do that is not feed them.
Besides, I want all those kids that hang out in bars all night long to stay healthy,, cuz as we know, its always about the children.
Anyone remember a casino on the Strip called Silver City ????, Years ago they went ALL Non-Smoking,,, the casino became empty almost overnight and about 6 months later they went back to smoking cuz they lost so much money,, a few months after that they went out of business.
Another point,,, most of the folks that voted for the smoking ban DONT GO TO BARS.
Another point, on the ballot, question 5 listed all the places smoking was going to be banned, Malls, Schools, Resturants ect, and “other places”,,, guess what the “other places” were,,,????
Other places were bars, why did the ballot refur to bars as “other places”.
As a smoker I will NOT go to any bar or eating place that does not allow smoking.

Davyo

Comment by Davyo — December 6, 2006 @ 12:40 am

You can never stop people from doing stupid things. However, no one should ever have the legal right to hurt another person. No other law in the U.S. allows this other than smoking. I’ve never heard any person ever fight for the right to continue using lead-based paint, or any other once legal product that’s been banned due to undeniable proof of it’s harm. Hurting an innocent person with 2nd-hand smoke is a selfish act by smokers, as of Dec. 8th in most places in NV, it will be criminal.

To the argument that smokers have the right to smoke anywhere they want, and if non-smokers don’t like it, they can leave. It is no different than allowing gangs of thugs to shoot guns in public parks, and if you don’t like it, you can leave. After all, you have a choice not to go there. However, what if it’s your job to mow the grass at these parks?
What if you have to drive past a park to get to school or work? The answer is not to take away the guns either, you create laws where shooting them protects everyone as much as possible.

Once a person fully understands
the nature of addictions, most would understand why the people on this great blog say what they do in protest of smoking bans. Most of it is completely irrational, just like the act of smoking itself. Not a human in the world can possibly enjoy the act of burning weeds, mixed with cancer-causing chemicals and inhaling them deeply into their lungs. The chemicals are then distributed through the blood stream to other vital organs all throughout the body. More important to show it’s unbelievable irrationalality, is that this addiction robs people
of their self-respect, respect from others, their health, their money, and often their lives. To top it off, then they act as lobbyists for these very wealthy casino corporations, tobacco companies, and “Big Business/pharmaceuticals”, who profit immensely from their addiction. Smoking is stupid, no one can argue that. Everyone knows it.

How about the argument of letting business owners decide what’s best. If they can decide
whether the chemical make-up of cigarette smoke is acceptable for their customers, then I suppose they should also be able to decide everything and anything else. They’ll be no laws or regulations. We’ll also let business owners decide who is too drunk to drive. It makes no sense. The one product (cigarettes) that is the most deadly and destructive legally
consumable product in the history of our country, is the only product that doesn’t have to list it’s ingredients on the package. It’s crazy I’m telling ya, crazy!

Comment by Bob — December 6, 2006 @ 3:18 am

I am a former smoker of 28 years and understand the insidious addiction of cigarettes. They really do control a persons life in ways a person who has not smoked can never understand. So I sympathize with the incredible need smokers have to continue their habit. However they do not have the right to subject Casino workers like myself to their habit and toxic smoke. We will never be protected by our employers because of the bottom line, our health is never considered over profit. I have always understood this but since I have quit it is a matter of life and death. Poker rooms are thriving and growing every day and the majority of them are smoke free. The Casinos will survive a smoke free enviornment, and I believe a compromise of an enclosed smoking section can be made available to smokers. How many dealers and casino workers have to die before a law that is inevitable and morally correct is put into place.

Comment by 30 year casino worker — December 6, 2006 @ 3:52 am

For you non-smokers praising this and saying you can finally go out to a bar and gamble or have a drink without anyone blowing smoke at you are dead wrong. Many local bars will just drop the food service in those establishments and keep the smoking. Another idea I’ve heard was “eating areas” outdoors and smoking indoors. That’s right, Cali has their smoking areas outside…. well in Las Vegas, NV, there will be designated eating areas outside. The bars don’t want their gamblers to take a smoking break and head outside for a cigarette and second think the gambling they’re doing. Think about it, use your damn heads. You’re either going to eat outside or not at all if this stays a law.

Comment by Justin — December 6, 2006 @ 6:49 am

Quit whining! Your butt-fumes are deadly. Go outside and suck your butts,then come back in and gamble or eat or both!It’s not politics, It’s the health of the majority of Nevadans!Grow up!

Comment by R.Daniels — December 6, 2006 @ 7:11 am

I don’t want to breathe cigarette smoke. If people want to smoke… fine! But I DON’T want to, so do it at home where I don’t HAVE to! Why is it that some people seem to think they have a bigger right to smoke cigarettes than I have to breathe clean air???

Comment by Isabel — December 6, 2006 @ 8:09 am

I DONT SEE THE BIG DEAL. IM FROM CALIFORNIA AND WE HAVE HAD THE LAW FOR SEVERAL YEARS NOW. I AM A SMOKER, AND I, ALONG WITH OTHER SMOKERS JUST SMOKE OUTSIDE. I HAVE A DAUGHTER THAT LIVES AND WORKS IN VEGAS AND HAS HAD TROUBLE BREATHING IN THE ESTABLISMENT SHE WORKS IN. GLAD IT PASSED, NO BIG DEAL!!!!!

Comment by PAT SCOTT — December 6, 2006 @ 8:10 am

Well, #1 if its so “dangerous” why is it legal? Smoking is legal get over it.

#2 every restaurant that has a bathroom, is going to get the same wakeup call that they got in NYC.. lol the bathrooms become the defacto “smoking section”.

It wont solve anything, just make more people sneak around as I too plan to do.

Ban it all you want.. if I want to smoke there is always the bathroom.

Besides, it does not ban it in casinos or hotel rooms.. (not that it would stop me from smoking in a hotel room that was “non smoking”)

Sorry anti smokers, I used to follow smoking rules, I tried to be polite, but you decided to throw me into the same bag as some of the “Dirt bag smokers” who blew smoke in your face. Now, its my turn to be a “dirt bag smoker”.. and make it my business to shove it in your face at every turn.

Go back to California if you want smoke free. Nevada will fight this and.. will win in the end.

Comment by Joe — December 6, 2006 @ 8:45 am

Nevada’s Different - In other states, where restaurant smoking bans have been instituted, the restaurant owners had two choices … comply or close. In Nevada their choices are … comply or close the restaurant and keep the gambling open for smokers.

Comment by Dave Bryan — December 6, 2006 @ 9:23 am

Stop it! I am NOT a smoker, but I believe in free enterprise. This is AMERICA. Let the business owner decide for himself to stay in business or not. Leave smokers alone. This WILL change Nevada forever. Don’t do it. Minnesota did, and lots of businesses failed because of non-smoking activists.

Comment by Lois — December 6, 2006 @ 10:00 am

It is about time!!!

Comment by Wendy — December 6, 2006 @ 10:06 am

To all the smokers who are complaining about the recent smoking ban and to all of the Nevada businesses who are threatening to file a lawsuit regarding the new law hear this: All of us non-smokers who like to enjoy breathing should all get together and file a Class Action Lawsuit against all the cigarette companies and name all of you smokers who willingly blow smoke into the faces of other innocent human beings, knowing all along that smoking is a known carcinogen. We have most of you on camera anyway! You are all committing more harm than those of us who want to do something about YOUR ADDICTION!

Comment by D. Cordero — December 6, 2006 @ 10:22 am

First of all, I want to say that I think that there are too many bars and taverns in this city (Las Vegas) contributing to people’s deadly habits (drunk driving, smoking, etc.)! The passing of Question 5 is not telling these businesses to stop serving food! It is simply stating that if food will be served, no smoking allowed. The customers can go outside and have a smoke if they want. An average person that may want to stop by and just have a drink (not necessarily leading to drunkenness)or a meal cannot even enjoy a drink or meal without the smoking blowing in their direction, sometimes even at their face! The other day, I had an emergency with my vehicle and I had to go inside a tavern to use a pay phone. I couldn’t stand the stench and odor of the cigarette smoke! I thought to myself, how can the employees and the smokers breathe! It smelled so horrific in there, and I actualy felt sick when I stepped back outside! Thank God I’m not a smoker!

Comment by Suzanne — December 6, 2006 @ 10:35 am

Mahalo All Who Voted #5 Smoking is a choice so take that choice and enjoy it where it doesn’t infringe on the air space of others,for we have rights as well.Enjoy your cigarrett in your own space.

Comment by Shirl Lewis — December 6, 2006 @ 10:37 am

I think this smoking ban is going to put a lot of small business out of business, they just are not going to make it with one or the other (eat or drink) and for the people of Las Vegas I feel sorry for them. I myself like a smoke after a good meal and now it is eat and get out. Looks like no more eating out. The people of Las Vegas did not vote for this band the state did us a number so good luck to the small business if you can keep going. I hope that the law suit files be looked into real good and just maybe we can smoke where we want too.

Comment by Robert G — December 6, 2006 @ 10:51 am

So what are we the people protecting? The food or the workers. What about all the other workers that don’t serve food? As a Bartender the law is going to kill my tips. And now I’ll have to leave my bar and go out in the cold to smoke and feel like an outcast. Smaller taverns that sell food are going to close their kitchens rather than tell their customers thay can’t relax, play the slots and have a smoke. People are going to lose jobs and income. Either ban ciggerettes or ban these stupid laws that don’t make sence. It should be left to the establishment. The way it’s always been in Veags (I feel) works best…. “Smoking or non-smoking?”

Comment by Lew W — December 6, 2006 @ 11:33 am

Nevadans are in far greater danger from second state smoke from California fires than these Californians will ever be from my second hand smoke.
If anyone thinks that now there will be more non smoking places to eat. You are sadly mistaken. There will simply be longer lines at the places that are already non smoking, as they will be the only places to eat. And thats a FACT.

Comment by Ken Brown — December 6, 2006 @ 11:50 am

And in response to all of the people whining that business will suffer, look at the facts. Everywhere else that smoking restrictions have been implemented, business has improved. There is a short term hit as businesses adjust to new rules, and then everyone starts to benefit. Well, except for tobacco companies, but that’s an acceptable loss.

Comment by R.Daniels — December 6, 2006 @ 12:30 pm

This whole thing stinks!!! It isn’t even abut smoking anymore. It is about control from the state and gaming industry. Do you see children and food along with smokers in the casinos? Of course you do - they are out side of movie theatres in casinos, by the food courts in the casinos and of course casino owners will tell you different but they are also on the casino floors. This isn’t about children its about revenues taken away from small business owners, minimum wage workers in kitchens loosing their jobs because the tavern owners will opt to keep smoking and do away with their kitchens.(Not to mention the drunks on our roads because they couldn’t get a bite to eat while drinking).
What ever happened to the freedoms which our great country used to stand for. Where each and every individual had a choice in how they lived their lives, including how they can run their business. I AM DAMN MAD AND SO ARE A LOT OF OTHER PEOPLE OUT THERE!!
PS: What does banning smoking at the airport have to do with children and food, there are neither of those two elements in the smoking areas. It’s all just big brother trying to control.

Comment by Deborah Bousquet — December 6, 2006 @ 1:47 pm

I feel horrible for voting for yes on question 5. I believe it was unclear on how strict it really is. I would prefer a smoke free Las Vegas, but as long as there are smokers this will never be. I feel terrible for the cooks that will be laid off due to this policy. I also feel tricked because now I get to go to a smokey bar and not be able to get food. I thought the law protected everyone that had gambling, not just the casinos.

Comment by Angela — December 6, 2006 @ 1:59 pm

I smoked for over 30 years and quit about 15 years ago now. I never had a problem with people smoking in public places until I moved to Nevada.

It seems the folks who smoke here have absolutly NO CONSIDERATION for non-smokers. I love to gamble and love to go to bars, but truely do not appreciate it one bit when a smoker deliberatly blows their smoke in my face.

I was at Terribles Lakeside Casino in Pahrump NV and had a couple of incidents with smokers, one was I asked a smoker if he could move his ashtray to the other side. He hollered at me and called security and said I was wrong because this WAS A SMOKING FACILITY the security guard told me that if it bothered me maybe I should move, which I did because this smoker was then getting even more annoying and making it a point to blow his smoke in my face.

The second time I had a smoker sit next to me once again blowing his smoke in my face, I said absolutely nothing but waved my hand in front of MY FACE as he was blowing his smoke right at me, he also found it necessary to call security on me and told them “I WAS EMBARRASSING HIM” by waving my hand in front of my own face to get his smoke out of my face. Once again I was chastised by security and then the manager,and told “THIS IS A SMOKING FACILITY” I was very angry that nothing was said to either smoker like maybe you could be a little polit with your smoke. NO NOTHING WAS SAID TO THEM, in other words smokers can be as rude and nasty as they want and non-smokers have to put up with it.

Another time I was at a bar and a smoker sitting next to me put his ashtray of course right under my nose so that his smoke would go in my face and when I finally had enough and moved he said ” HA HA MADE YOU MOVE” With this attitude from smokers constantly I believe this new law is the right thing to do, as smokers think only they have rights and no one else.

I don’t believe for one minute that bars that also have food and restaurants can’t do something that would not be so costly to keep both the bars and restaurants happy and keep their business going strong. They probably will pick up more customers because non-smokers would also feel welcome and spend more time in their establishments as well.

I think that the entire ADULT population making such a hugh fuss over to smoke or not are being entirely childish and should spend their energy trying to make it work of all of us instead of only one group or the other.

The people have spoken on question 5 and no where did I see any statistics that only NON-SMOKERS voted yes to the question. It may suprise you to know possibly how many smokers voted yes to the question.

Not every smoker wants to smell like an ashtray where ever they go either. Some actually have manners and care about other people not just their bad habit and their right to enfringe it on everyone.

Grow up and lets all try to work together as a community instead of continuing to try to make someone else responsible for short comings or bad habits of others no matter what the situation may be.

Smokers and people having to talk on their cell phones while driving are just as bad as someone who has been drinking, they all are an accident looking for a place to happen as they do not have complete control of the vehicle if they are doing other things besides driving so don’t even go with drunks will not get anything to eat before “driving home” as food does not make a drunk sober.

So lets put this animousity to rest and work to make it work for everyone. Las Vegas and the entire state of Nevada are always in the public eye. It is not good for any business to see constant fighting amoung the community.

By the way, I would not even mind smoke so much if they would BAN cigars and pipes in casinos and other public places. They really stink worse then any cigarette and the cigarettes today unlike years ago smell worse. Whatever they use to make cigarettes today is certainly not good for you.

But to smoke is the persons choice, where to smoke is the peoples choice.

Comment by Bonnie — December 6, 2006 @ 2:11 pm

Hopefully all the people that voted yes on question 5 go to the bar on friday night.

Comment by fred — December 6, 2006 @ 3:11 pm

Smoking has cost me a ton of money after giving up a career as a bowler about 10 yrs ago because I couldn’t take the 2nd-hand smoke anymore. All I ever heard was that it was legal, and until it’s banned, bowlers were allowed to smoke.
I still coach bowling, but only in limited settings, where smoke is at a minimum. Because I don’t allow students to smoke, most smokers do not come to me for lessons. I realized a few years after quitting bowling, that I was going to do something to help change smoking laws, attitudes, and to help the 83% of smokers who want to beat their nicotine addiction. I’ve now spent many thousands of dollars of my own money, given up a career I was successful at, and now that “We the People” have spoken, all we hear is how unfair it is. It’s very troubling to say the least. Apparently democracy and the Constitution may not mean that much if enough money is involved.

Big Tobacco and Big Business have always been very successful at pitting the smokers against the non-smokers. It’s truely ingenious, but unlimited amounts of money can accomplish most anything. Including the fact that some smokers believe their right to smoke and harm others, has a higher priority than a persons’ right to protect themselves or their family from physical harm. Everyone has the right to protect themselves. I would ask a smoker this….if someone was blowing smoke into the face of your child or baby, what would you do? We all know the answer, because everyone knows the dangers of 2nd-hand smoke. It’s been proved beyond any doubt. I’m always amazed at the majority of die-hard smokers who are ordinarily responsible, seemingly intelligent, hard-working, etc., and will argue their right to smoke in public. Many will even smoke in front of their own kids, and yet, they are the same people who wouldn’t ordinarily step on an ant.

This law does not in any way tell a smoker they can’t smoke, just not at someone elses expense, unless they’re in an adult-only strip club or a large casino (where life is less valuable).

Most people believe the Smoke Free Coalition (creators of question 4), created the question to confuse voters about the two smoking initiatives. Had question 4 passed, it would have allowed smoking laws to be more lenient than current law. How ironic would it be, to someday possibly see the Smoke Free Coalition actually fighting to ban smoking in the remainder of the establishments where smoking is allowed? Karma is a wonderful thing.

Let’s go bowling….after Friday that is.

Comment by Bob Duffy — December 6, 2006 @ 4:15 pm

I for one am a smoker and I am a considerate one as well. I don’t light a cigarette around children, I DO NOT blow my smoke in other people’s faces, I try to blow the smoke away from the person I am talking to. I work for several bar/restaurants and the majority of the patrons said “If you keep the food, we will go elsewhere to gamble.” Tell me how that’s not saying bars/restaurants will suffer.. Go into a random bar one night and see how many smoking gamblers there are versus nonsmoking gamblers.

Comment by Pixienvegas — December 6, 2006 @ 5:55 pm

It is politicaly incorrect to bash an African American, Hispanic American, or a homosexual. However If you smoke you are open game. Just read some of the thoughts here. I have never felt so hated as an American smoker. The arrogance to think that ones hatred is ok, is sad, at best.

Comment by Ken — December 6, 2006 @ 6:34 pm

If the tavern owners make all their money from gamblers that smoke all they have to do is close their kitchen.
They are lucky they have a choice.
Quit crying tavern owners. You’re making a nice living and will keep doing so after the ban starts on Dec. 8th.

Comment by John M. — December 6, 2006 @ 6:46 pm

Once upon a time, it was unhealthy for African-Americans to sit in the front of a public bus. It was quoted then that it was not only a social “no-no”, but for health reasons to be so close to “those” people. Instead we rose to the challenge and learned social tolerance. We learned to share the space. Rather than imposing on one another an absolute, we should attempt to find ways that BOTH can share this city equally. I have read the pros and cons posted here. I can understand non-smokers feel they are being denied clean air. Yet, I don’t see a lot of people giving up on gas guzzling SUVs that contribute to the haze you see hanging over the city. I have yet to hear a news broadcast telling the citizens to stay indoors due to increased cigerette and/or cigar smokers. Only certain people gave up on these polluting vehicles when they could not afford the fuel for them. What I can’t understand is why do our laws have to deal with absolutes. Smoking has been legal for adults in this country since before we were an independent nation. Non-smokers want the smokers to quit, but I have yet to see any law created to bring down the cost of products to help them to quit. $65 - $100+ to quit smoking. Perhaps, it is cheaper if you have the right insurance. So, try to figure out way to make quitting easy for even a homeless person with no insurance, instead we deal with absolutes and “ME” attitudes. So if non-smokers want to save this city and its people, do something about the over development. One day you might have a smokeless city, but not a drop of water to drink. We have built this beautiful arid area up to the point you can’t see the mountains anymore. We are allowing our historic sites to be destroyed, but the most important thing on a lot of people’s mind is the secondhand they may be exposed to during the 30 seconds it takes to walk by the gambling area in a grocery store. If you don’t like the smell of cigarettes, what about the gases that you are breathing that you nose can’t detect. Think of the possibility that many nevadans may lose their jobs to keep smoking in bars. It was said that they researched other states that voted for this type of law. Do they other states involved have gaming at the bar like we do? Will there be an increase of non-smoking patrons to cover the loss of smoking patrons? These businesses were doing well when the spaced was shared, now either or could be fatal.

Comment by Wayne — December 6, 2006 @ 7:03 pm

The more you allow the State or Federal Governments control over business such as smoking or no smoking, the more rules will come. While non-smokers might be happy now, the affected persons of the next law will be mad. Every inch or yes to a new rule WILL bring more. Give power now to the State powers, and we will all lose more freedoms later. Banning all persons under 21 in Bars, Casinos and places there is alcohol, smoking or gaming would be the best choice. If you want to protect kids, send them to Disneyland. If you want a town that is community, move. This is a fun adult city and it’s losing it’s appeal and maybe tourists. That will cost many jobs and we all will pay for the unemployed if the ban stays. I respect both sides of no smoking or smoking, but I feel that the law will hurt businesses. Why should they have to comply with foolish laws like this. Force people to be responsible for their children and keep them out of adult areas such as bars and casinos. I kept my kids out of there without laws making me. I had the sense to do that and didn’t need the state to impose rules on business because people with kids are too dumb to do the right thing. If you need to vote on a rule like this, then we have too many dumb parents with kids under 21 risking their children. Many businesses already have no smoking in place without the law. I choose them to be in a smoke free place, just like my home is smoke free. No law needed. Child care places and schools can pass laws for those buildings and rightfully so. Give business a break. I don’t want to fund the unemployed because voters made the mistake.

Comment by Dawn — December 6, 2006 @ 7:50 pm

Thank you Kalifornians! My home of 43 years is being choked out by migrant tourists who don’t smoke. Smoking is legal and now a bunch of people with the sniffles move to Las Vegas and use cigarettes as the new excuse. Atleast the smoke from a cigarette is contained to a bar or casino! Take a look at the cloud that hangs over LA, I’d move too. If you want clean air, move to the mountains just leave this city alone. When people lose jobs and small businesses close down we can thank the non-smokers for taking something legal and making it illegal. Now the selfish hybrid driving parents who voted for this will focus on finding something else to complain about. The buffets will be next, you see some of the people that go there, its bad for there health and the health of there children to be exposed to such risk. Things like Cholesterol and trans fat will ruin lives. Point is “if the smoke bothers you just politely move”…Anybody remember how long the 1st non-smoking casino (the Silver City)lasted?

Comment by Rick the smoker/voter — December 6, 2006 @ 8:10 pm

LAST I CHECKED WE ARE A REPUPLIC. WE THE PEOPLE OF NEVADA HAVE VOTED !! THE DECISION ON A INDOOR CLEAN AIR ACT, QUESTION 5 HAS PASSED.. IF THE BARS AND RESTAURANTS DONT LIKE IT THEN PACK-UP AND LEAVE….

Comment by John Holliday — December 6, 2006 @ 8:53 pm

I am pleased that a non-smoking law has not been passed. It’s about time, we have fresher air inside casinos and taverns. If Californians and New Yorkers were disciplined and smoke outside (even when it snows), Nevadans can too. Some people still want to live cancer free.

Comment by Guevara, MD — December 6, 2006 @ 9:14 pm

Having come from a midwest state that passed non-smoking laws I can tell you that the bar owners there had the same complaints that Nevada bar owners have. However, after the smokers started staying home and the bars got cleaned up they were busier and more profitable than ever after the non-smokers quit staying home and started going out. Imagine, those who don’t waste their money on cigarettes started spending it in bars and bar profits went up. Who cares if 20 smokers quit going to a local bar if the 50 non-smokers that stayed away because of the smoke start going. Get real people, non-smokers have just as much right to breath smoke free air as does anyone else. If you could keep your smoke just to yourself this would not be an issue. The problem is when you light a cigarette everyone in the area can smell the stench no matter where they are sitting.

Comment by Mark — December 6, 2006 @ 11:16 pm

The smoking ban isnt going to hurt any business it has in the other 4 states why would it here. People still have to eat and this is the best way for people with asthma to be able to go to placaes like Timbers and other good bar and grills that have good food. My wife has asthma real bad and we cant do any of that right now its working great in Calif. and no business has hurt at all same with New Jersey. PEOPLE just need to quit crying so much we still have to eat you people that smoke can go outside so the biggest majority that dont smoke can enjoy good meals. I thin this is the best thing that ever could happen in Las Vegas thank GOD that people finally got smart enought to vote the right way so we all have the right to anywhere, you smokers need to quit crying smoke in your cars or home leave smoking at home so people can enjoy there foor and not have to worry bout dieing because of all the 2nd hand smoke. Not good for you at all.
Judge to whom you ever are please vote the correct and keep it the way should be like how the people voted to happen. The same voters to help get his bill to pass also voted for you and it might hurt your future in the futre of ever wining another election. So please do the right thing and make it happen so people can start feeling better instead of always being sick

Comment by Brad — December 6, 2006 @ 11:21 pm

20% of the population smoke. It’s time for them to go back to the alleys and smoke with the crack addicts lighting up.

Smoking is stupid. They know it too, it’s the weak ones who are spineless in their attempts to stop, that squeel.

I love beer, and am sick of going home after a pint of Guinness smelling like an ashtray. I wish i could fart right on the nose of a smoker and let him feel how I feel.

Let those small establishments go under. Demolish those buildings and build a gym on it. Hire the laid off workers. There are plenty of non-smokers who enjoy slots and good food at a steiners. Or shooting pool with friends and drinking guinness at a Pts….

Shut up smokers and go away. You’re done. Go fall aslep in bed with your lit cig and light yourself on fire, sick of smelling you all and am now sick of hearing about you.

Comment by Kevin K — December 6, 2006 @ 11:22 pm

I am so glad this law passed the bar owners are just worried about the bottom line MONEY not your health so most of there money comes from smokers so just don’t serve food thats all.I like to play video poker now I don’t have to look over my shoulder anymore for a rude smoker blowing or just holding that cancer stick right in my direction also maybe some of these smokers will quit now and notice a big difference in there health like I can live without smoking I work in the Casino business I am praying for that day NO smoking in Casinos its the new way of life now more people are into health and most people are sick & tired of smokers I know I am so blow your smoke somewhere else.

Comment by Bruce — December 6, 2006 @ 11:24 pm

I believe the vote itself was worded so bad, that it was confusing, because if people meant to ban smoking all together, they would have voted no on #4 also, it was confusing to many people. But truthfully, each and every business in every town, city, state & the whole country has the power and choice to make his or her business smoke free, if they choose too! We don’t need to set rules/laws, it is each business’s choice, or did we loose the freedom of choice somewhere along the way? Sure lets protect the childern, no smoking in schools, daycares, librarys, sports events, ect… But kids don’t belong in bars & taverns! I know of quite a few bars that will give up the food, not the smoking, so we will have more people leaving bars with a higher blood alcohol level, because they were not allowed to eat while there! Is this smart? NO, and it’s a very scary thought!
Stop making rules that are unbenificial in the long run, let each business deside what they want to do, don’t make them pick smoking or food.

Comment by Patricia A Schwartz — December 6, 2006 @ 11:33 pm

First thing I am thankful I won’t have some idiot blowing smoke my way while I eat.Second thing is you idiots don’t get it…it’s not the Government that voted to ban..the people did…the Government wants you to smoke and drink all you want..it’s more money for them..if they cared for you it would never have been legal.People are worried over job lose…there are plenty of jobs out there and to think that some people think dying and killing is better than having to look for a job?Well that’s sad..all I can say is “GET A GUN AND KILL YOURSELF IF YOU WANT TO..I WON’T DIE CLEANING UP YOUR MESS AND YOU CAN GET IT OVER WITH FASTER”

Comment by Tony — December 6, 2006 @ 11:37 pm

As I see it, They are willing to trade your health for few dollars.

Comment by Pat Heinrich — December 6, 2006 @ 11:45 pm

As A Mormon and the wife of a man who works in a bar as a cook, I have conflicting alliances. I voted for question #4 and against #5 because of the wording in the questions. Question 5 will serve to put my husband and many others out of a job just before Christmas. We have had no warning other than a month between the election and the ratification.Question #4 would have left things much the way they were. Why is it necessary to legislate parental surervision? My kids don’t patronize bars, even when there is food. I won’t let them. They don’t go into casinos. There are non-smoking drugstores, grocery stores, etc. that an adamant consumer can patronize. It shouldn’t be an all or nothing proposition. Let those of them that want to smoke, smoke. The rest of us should be adult enough to realize that you don’t go into places that put us or our kids in jeopardy.

Comment by debbi cooper — December 6, 2006 @ 11:46 pm

Another “Big Brother” law is all we need. Just like probition in the 20s when drinking was banned the only thing it did was give birth to organized crime. I suppose we will have smokeasies instead of speakeasies.(knock 3 times tell them Joe sent you) This whole thing is a batch of male bovine manure.

Comment by Tom — December 7, 2006 @ 12:06 am

Silly. Every smoker knows there is no arguement for smoking. I just shake my head and grin when I read this stuff….and I smoked for 25 years.

Comment by Robert Ellis — December 7, 2006 @ 5:08 am

The majority of the voters have spoken. These smokers need to just deal with it. California restaurants and bars have not been affected by their smoking ban, and neither would Nevada. Arizona also recently passed a smoking ban. Obviously most people want to be in a healthy environment. It’s ridiculous that some are trying to delay the ban. Voters passed the act, so what’s the problem? Smokers can still inhale their toxic smoke in casinos.

Comment by Kelly Shad — December 7, 2006 @ 6:07 am

I don’t see anyone on here saying how much the SMOKERS settlement money has helped the State of Nevada. All I see is a bunch of people whining about how they have to breathe second hand smoke, how it smells, blah blah blah. I for one would rather sit in a smoke filled room without windows or an air filtration system than listen to the screaming monsters that seem to control their parents in every restaurant I go into.

Comment by racer x — December 7, 2006 @ 6:09 am

I can tell you this, Gaming inside of supermarkets, and local gas stations are going to plummet.

No smoking = no business.

The citizens didn’t “speak” Clark county spoke. THEY pushed this ban on everyone.

I can see bad bad news over this ban, people getting booted from jobs, people making less money.. just wait.

Besides, all that will happen is smoking will just hide in the bathroom stalls like it has in EVERY other place that smoking has been banned.

Unless they want to put cameras into bathrooms, they cant stop people from smoking there. Wait, I don’t want to give them any ideas..

Thank you Kalifornians is right.. this ban was financed by the anti tobacco kings of Kalifornistan.

Comment by Mike Anderson — December 7, 2006 @ 8:44 am

The locust from California have noticed over the last several years that they have depleated their resources and destroyed their state. Now Nevada and Arizona will be overtaken by those that consume and leave. Passing anti-smoking laws are just a beginning. UTAH BEWARE!

Comment by Ken Brown — December 7, 2006 @ 8:47 am

I feel that we smokers will abide by the law as with any law. And for those poor ignorant souls that keep referring to smokers as “dirt bags and arrogant”, you should be ashamed. This is a forum to simply voice a decent reaction to the passing of this bill. For all I know you (whoever you are) may be an alchoholic that drinks that nasty smelling garbage and drives or maybe a drug addict that has been hiding it from friends and family for years..whatever the case…we are not dirt bags. Simply people with a choice that they make in life that may not be the best but a choice never the less. I am a very considerate smoker and I don’t and never have cared for the arrogance of the non-smoker or the former smokers attitude. But that is your choice. I feel good that I don’t have that kind of malice inside of me and that I can find the humor in you. Have a very Merry Christmas and New Year that will hopefully be prosperous to you and yours.

Comment by Denise — December 7, 2006 @ 9:25 am

I am a smoker. I understand the people who want smoke free environments, when I quit smoking I couldn’t stand to be around cigarettes either. I chose to smoke, I chose the establishments I patronize, I have never refused to go to a business that allows smoking or doesn’t allow smoking. I see the smoking ban as bad for business because the restaurants and bars will have to close their restaurants to comply, thereby causing loss of income and jobs. The casinos will get more business because the smokers want to play and smoke. This will hurt the bars and restaurants further. It seems the large corporations again win over the mom and pop businesses and I don’t see where that benefits ANYONE. I’ve been in casinos, smoking and playing, and have had a non-smoker sit next to me and complain about my smoking…hey, I was there first! I don’t go out of my way to blow smoke in their direction but I also don’t stop smoking for their convenience. Last time I checked no one was ever charged with Driving under the influence of cigarettes. What’s next? Stop the free alcohol for the gamblers? At least that makes sense since drinking and driving is illegal. Can’t we all just get along?

Comment by Smokers are people too — December 7, 2006 @ 9:50 am

For all you readers out there, have you noticed that the majority of people who smoke can’t “spell” accurately? They need to “read” more about the dangers of being a smoker, and about the serious health effects of secondhand smoke! Get an education!

Comment by Susan — December 7, 2006 @ 10:33 am

WHAT’S NEXT, TAKING CHILDREN OUT OF HOMES WHERE THEIR PARENTS SMOKE?

Comment by Old Time Vegan — December 7, 2006 @ 11:08 am

Last I checked, the judged ordered a 15 day stay on the law saying something to the effect that some southern Nevadan businessmen could persuade him the law was unconstitutional.

Comment by Carol — December 7, 2006 @ 11:37 am

If I’m not mistaken, people “vote” with their wallets in a free-market economy. If the majority of customers of bars and taverns wanted a smoke-free environment, the bars would be smoke-free in order to appease their primary customers. The fact that the local bar and tavern industry has continued to explode over the decades speaks volumes about the preference of these patrons.

Comment by Neil Mayfield — December 7, 2006 @ 11:47 am

Owners don’t get it or probably don’t care. Smoking kills, whether first or second hand. Why must the majority accept this life threatening act. Smoking is an indivdual decision and should not be force upon those who seek a more healthty lifestyle. Some smokers say that they like to enjoy a smoke after a meal. I say, “I like to enjoy my meal without your smoke”. Laws are not always fair, but they must be obeyed. Thank God for this law that may give me a few more years of life.

Comment by Jay johnson — December 7, 2006 @ 12:30 pm

only 22% of all gamblers are smokers. It will not hurt a companys income in anyway. It will just allow non-smokers (88%) the freedom to enjoy their food and gambling in taverns as well.

Comment by jk — December 7, 2006 @ 12:39 pm

The business should allow or disallow smoking as they see fit for their business. If you don’t like going to a place that allows smoking in their establishment then DON’T GO. When we visit the resturaunt/bar/grocery ect we are guests to their establishment and should respect their rules being it not smoking or smoking allowed.

Comment by Rick — December 7, 2006 @ 1:12 pm

If the ban does eventually go into effect, it will not be good for the Las Vegas economy. I won’t bother going to Vegas any longer. It’s bad for the small business owners, and it’s bad for the perception of Vegas as being an ‘anything-goes’ kind of town. What I can’t understand is why Vegas ever appealed in the first place to the voters who voted for the ban. Did you move to Vegas just to try and change it?

Comment by Drew — December 7, 2006 @ 1:23 pm

The problem is that most of the voting public did not understand the question put before them. I am positive that if more Las Vegans had known that passage of question 5 would put 100,000 people out of work, they would have voted “no”. Smokers have been put in the position of separate but equal for years, we adjust, we will continue to adjust. Our economy relys on local taverns and bar & grills for income for our residents, sales of groceries, and sales of prepared meals as well as gaming. This is an economic issue and it is real. To the non-smoker, I am sorry but this is an imperfect world - adjust as the smokers have.

Comment by Karen — December 7, 2006 @ 1:34 pm

I call bull$@#!. I don’t believe for a minute businesses will suffer! The addictive personalities that smoke are NOT going to stop patronizing a bar and playing those gaming devices - they’ll be there. And in turn what WILL ALSO happen is those of us NON-SMOKERS that can’t sit at a bar and have fun due to the overwhelming suffocation of SMOKING WITHOUT A FILTER, will be there. We’ll be spending our disposable income dollars on food, drinks, gambling and tipping. I have made a personal commitment to spend signficantly more money supporting the businesses in my neighborhood that support this smoking ban. It’s time for Nevada to grow-up a little (that’s right, “just a little” is all we ask). The ruling today is another example of how our city is controlled by the influence of special interests, and NOT the general public.

Comment by Michele Hyden — December 7, 2006 @ 1:45 pm

As a former California Resident, I remember well the barrage of distainful comments slung at smokers during the vote to ban smoking in bars and restaurants there. As a current Nevada resident, I am not surprised at hearing and reading the same comments.

As a Smoker, I have always tried to be as courteous to those around me as possible. I will wait extended lengths of time to have a smoke when around non-smokers, I refuse to litter and will keep the butts in my pocket until a trash can or ashtray can be found and I avoid smoking around children as much as possible.

Many of the comments I have read and heard bash all smokers as some sort of hideous, dregs of society type group that is out to purposely end the lives of everyone who is not a member of this society. This idea, of course couldn’t be further from the truth. Many of us are simply hard-working, law-abiding, tax-paying citizens who at one point in their lives made a choice that would turn out to be one of the hardest ever to overcome. For me, it was a choice as a teenager that has haunted a lifetime.

One last note: for those who think that secondhand smoke is the only way non-smokers get lung cancer, a study released in 2002 in the Journal of the AMA, stated “But breathing very polluted air long-term can raise the risk of lung cancer as much as breathing second-hand smoke, he added.The largest effect of bad air on deaths from heart disease and lung cancer was on non-smokers. And, bad air increased all study participants’ chance of death by the same amount as if they were all “moderately” overweight, the report noted”

Something maybe we should all think about.

Comment by Nicol — December 7, 2006 @ 1:49 pm

Okay, here is the deal. No one under the age of 21 is allowed in a bar, so we are not polluting our children! If you don’t like smoking, don’t go in the bar! There are plenty of restaurants that are completly non-smoking and have been for years. Go there and eat! A bar/tavern is a bar/tavern. If you don’t like smoke, stay out!!!!! I think the rule should be that every bar/tavern owner should post a sign that states “We allow smoking”. That way you complaining non-smokers will know what you are up against before you even open the door and pollute your lungs. This a free country and we should ALL have the option of a choice.

Comment by Barb — December 7, 2006 @ 1:49 pm

This is more than just about smoking or non-smoking. It is about fairness in business. One segment of the gaming industry is “exempt” from this law, while another is not. As any business owner would say, regardless of industry, why should a competing business in a similar industry have an unfair advantage in the community. It’s ok to go to a casino and smoke and eat, but not up the street? Are all the “open” restaurants adjacent to the gaming area in hotels/casinos going to have walls installed? Of course not. It is not a level playing field, and the infancy of a monopoly. Also, those who smoke and drink in their neighborhood establishment, will not have food available, which may only increase the number of “impaired” drivers within the community. It is not just a smoking/non-smoking issue, there are many other underlying factors which can ripple through the community, both business and residential.

Comment by Ron — December 7, 2006 @ 2:05 pm

The people have spoken and I believe Judge Herndon was paid off.

I don’t think smoking should be banned in bars and taverns however there is no way around it. If bars were exempt then it would leave a loophole in the law.

The right to breathe clean air is more important than the right to smoke.

Comment by J — December 7, 2006 @ 2:24 pm

This is stupid. The measure was voted on and passed by a state wide ballot. Who the hell does this judge think he is to overrule the will of the people. Must be another one of the Bush fans who think that if you lose it is OK to just have a court give you what you wanted anyway. I will never spend another penny at any terrible locations anywhere. Everyone should boycott any business associated with this restraining order. Maybe if we can drive these assholes out of business we could get some business owners who can respect and obey the law. I am so pissed I don’t even know how to convey everything that I am feeling. Maybe it is time to move the civil war from Iraq to America. We had to have a civil war in the past to bring our country back in line and I think we are just about there again.

Pissed off in Nevada.

Comment by mark — December 7, 2006 @ 2:31 pm

Well, I happen to disagree with the judges granting of a TRO here in clark county (amazing, the rest of the state will be smoke free starting tomorrow, but ole clark county won’t be).

I guess smokers are so addicted to their habit that they can’t control themselves for 1-2 hours in a bar area without lighting up (seems the stuff is more addictive than crack cocaine).

If the courts strike down this law (and smoking bans have been upheld overwhelmingly in other parts of the country), I would suggest the voters remove Judge Herndon and the Supreme Court members who want to go against the voters of Nevada who did approve it (the government is the people folks, not the judges or politicians).

Comment by Bill — December 7, 2006 @ 2:50 pm

I agree with Michele and Nicole, the two comments before mine. I try very hard to not offend the non smokers, (and after reading some of the comments from non smokers in here, I am sorry I tried to not offend them). I have never read more obnoxious comments then on this site from the non smokers.
SO NO I DO NOT WANT TO OFFEND THE NON SMOKERS, however, as has been stated in previous comments, all restaurants have gone non smoking, so more power to you. Yes, we smokers, have chosen to smoke, which is our right, would like to have a place that we can go and not be offended by a non smoker, yes that is what I said, I have been offended by non smokers.
So leave the taverns/bar/grills alone, let us have someplace that we can go to enjoy ourselves. If you work there and don’t like it, there are plenty of places that you can get a job. I have a job that I can’t smoke at, which is fine, if I didn’t like it or the money I make I would find another job, that is my decision.
Besides the jobs that will be lost and the businesses that will go under, just remember the taxes that are being put on the cigarettes. The smokers in the state are paying for a lot of improvements that are happening in this state.
I for one will start buying my cigarettes on line OUT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA.

Comment by Linda — December 7, 2006 @ 3:01 pm

if Nevada can have prostitution legal in other counties but not Clark…. since a majority of Clark County numbers were a NO on #5, why can’t Clark county be smoking and the rest of the state that voted for #5 non-smoking ?

__”For all you readers out there, have you noticed that the majority of people who smoke can’t “spell” accurately? They need to “read” more about the dangers of being a smoker, and about the serious health effects of secondhand smoke! Get an education!”__

hey “Susan”, how old are you? You going to make fun of me next because I wear glasses?

See folks, this is what it’s come to, childish remarks like the one I quoted.

You want clean air but fail to ride a bike everywhere you go? Hypocrytes…. hey Susan, I spell that right?

Comment by justin — December 7, 2006 @ 3:13 pm

I am a 30 year old Native of Las Vegas. I remember the days when smoking was allowed in grocery stores. We celebrated the day when that was outlawed. The problem is that we still are forced to pass by smoky casino areas where smoking is still legal. That is until Question 5 takes it’s rightful place in law. I do feel, however that bars and taverns should have been left out of it. Unfortunately, we, as voters didn’t have a middle ground on the issue. Question 4 would have actually been a step back for anti-smoking regulations in several ways, whereas Question 5 is quite broad in it’s scope. As a father of a small child who has no vote, I felt compelled to protect her as best as possible. I understand the position of the bar and tavern owners and agree to a point. However, the health of my family takes priorty over the prosperity of those establishments.

Comment by Steve — December 7, 2006 @ 3:45 pm

I will not go to any bar or restuarant that hired these lawyers.

Comment by Bob — December 7, 2006 @ 4:26 pm

This is the age of idiocy. I guess we will be outlawing common sense. The voter does not have the right to ban anything at all. Where are the people who review these laws for constitutionality before they go on ballots. This nation is no longer a democracy. Say goodbye to liberty and hello to the tyranny of mindless, oversized government. I used to love America. I don’t know if I can if people are so stupid that they actually vote away their freedoms. Why have a constitution? This is really bad when we screw our economy over a cigarette. What a hell mongering thing this health crap is becoming. We used to test atomic bombs in this state for crying out loud. Now we are worried about cigarettes in bars?! Go eat somewhere else if you don’t like cigarettes in a food and gaming establishment. We are just helping non-Las Vegas gaming in their battle for customers. Use mechanical filtering machines in the businesses, not stupid laws to deal with second hand smoke.

Comment by Michael — December 7, 2006 @ 4:36 pm

Looks like that idiot judge Herndon is in the pockets of the powerful casino industry. Did you really think that this would go any other way? Makes you wonder why most people don’t vote.

Comment by David — December 7, 2006 @ 4:57 pm

How dare this judge over ride the will of the people!We voted on this issue and the people have spoken. No wonder why people dont vote. If what the people want in this state is denied why then vote? Outrageous!Communism here we come…..no more the land of the free or free will!!!Watch out I smell casinos in this dirty picture!

Comment by susan tyler — December 7, 2006 @ 5:21 pm

54% of the voters approved Question 5. 991,054 voters are registered. 283,598 of them actually voted. SO, when we’re talking about the majority of voters passed Question 5, we’re talking about 11,343 voters who tipped the scale. I call that a very slim majority. These stats came from http://sos.state.nv.us/nvelection/2006StateWideGeneral/VoterTurnout.htm

Comment by Jim Cutlar — December 7, 2006 @ 5:34 pm

If question 5 is so unconstitional then why did it go in effect for the rest of Nevada ? The bottom line is that the Indoor smoking clean air act is not unconstitutional. Its because of one of Nevada’s weak liberal judges ( Herndin ) getting in the way of Nevada voters…

Comment by Jalvin — December 7, 2006 @ 5:47 pm

WOW! Do you people not get it. This is not California, or any other state. Las Vegas doesn’t only have some of the greatest bars, they compete for the best food in their neck of the woods. This in turn draws more gamers to their bar. (Here’s a concept for those of you that think Las Vegas is exactly like California) What does your favorite bar in Santa Cruz serve at 4:00am in the morning? Can you wake up in California at any hour of the night and get a full meal deal? I have been there during those hours. Me, 1 cook, 1 waitress,and a bartender, nobody else. My bill: $2.75 for three hours.
(Still can’t do the math?)
The people of Las Vegas work shifts that are probably not anything you are use to. These bars and taverns are kind enough to keep their doors open to people like us. They not only take a loss of revenue to feed us that don’t gamble, they do it with pride. If this smoking law goes into effect, thousands of us can live off of fast food trans fat. Hey, it only causes cancer in California.

Comment by Ken — December 7, 2006 @ 5:57 pm

As a tavern owner and non smoker,It is important to point out a few issues here. This is not a smoking ban like other states because it has exemptions such as the casino floors. When you tell people that second hand smoke is dangerous ,then it is for everbody.Period. Then all smokers go outside or wherever and smoke and thats it. We are now all on a level playing field and there is no unfair competition matters. When you say it is ok for some businesses and not others,you now have your lawsuit. Taverns are over 21 like casinos.Taverns have gaming licenses like casinos. We pay our taxes like casinos. We should then have the same law as casinos. Either ban smoking everywhere or leave it alone.

Comment by bob — December 7, 2006 @ 5:59 pm

JK’s comment that only 22% of gamblers are smokers could not be more wrong. In fact, slightly more than 80% of gamblers are smokers - based on a study done here in Las Vegas. Not certain where JK got those numbers - Just trying to keep the record straight.

Comment by Gina — December 7, 2006 @ 6:24 pm

Concerning the recent complaint filed, I for one will no longer, buy any gas at any of the Terrible Herbst owned gas stations, nor will any of my family even if I have to drive a little further to another station. These people only have one interest at heart and it’s their wallets. I have waited for a very long time for this ban on smoking and feel that the owners of these businesses need to just wait it out. If there atmosphere was so friendly and had “loyal” patrons, when they need a smoke they can step outside and have one. And as for no smoking at the airport…my god, what do we do on a transatlantic flight….quit your crying and kick the habit before it kicks you…It is a filthy habit and it makes you stink.

Comment by Joe — December 7, 2006 @ 6:31 pm

After reading all the comments on this subject I’m amazed by the hatred that is directed at the smokers. Why don’t these same people apply some of that energy into something positive, like protecting the children who are placed in foster care and end up missing, abused or dead? Maybe work to improve the public school system? Maybe help drive the illegal aliens out of town? I moved to Vegas 9 years ago from a small midwestern town, which by the way began enforcing it’s own SMOKING BAN today and it is much harsher than Nevada’s and I’ve seen this town grow into an overcrowded, undereducated, non-english speaking place where I would not want to raise children. Every day is filled with wonder, no not good wonder, more like I wonder if I’ll get mugged, I wonder if I’ll be able to drive from point A to point B without being run off the road or hit by a driver who is too busy playing with the stereo volume, watching DVD’s or talking on a cell phone and I wonder if myself and my loved ones will make it back home safely. I agree with Barb who says the establishments should be able to put up signs saying they allow smoking or they don’t and the patrons can make their own informed decisions. I have been in casinos playing a machine, smoking, when a non-smoker makes a CHOICE to sit next to me and then make comments about my CHOICE to smoke. I can’t help it, but some smartbutt acting like I am commiting a sin, deserves every puff that blows their way. I don’t intentionally do it, but I enjoy when it happens! I guess the casinos will now be flooded with SMOKERS since it’s about the only place we will be allowed to enjoy ourselves, so the non-smokers can have the other places. Also, since we appear set to take over the casinos, we’re going to be getting all the free alcohol! It’s a win-win for us!

Comment by Alexis — December 7, 2006 @ 6:54 pm

Why bother to vote, if someone is just going to overturn what you voted in favor of? I am going to find out the business’s involved and will boycott them. I won’t spend one dime to benefit their business.People are sick of it and it is a health hazard. It isn’t just an annoyance.

I say lets stand together and boycott the businesses that have brought this lawsuit.

Comment by Martha — December 7, 2006 @ 6:59 pm

I am addicted to a habit that kills me and others around me. I can’t beat this addiction and don’t even want to beat it. I need everyone around me to allow my addiction to continue to exist. I care about me. My addiction is more important to me than what damage it may do to others around me.

This is what smokers broadcast to me (a non-smoker). This is about Selfishness vs. Self-lessness. If you care more about others than yourself, your whole perspective will change.

Comment by Marc Jenks — December 7, 2006 @ 7:57 pm

Smoking hurts not only children, but healthy adults. Ask any physician. Second hand smoke not only impacts the health of this community, but it drains our community of medical resources. Death and disease caused by second hand smoke is slow and painful. Let the voters’ voice stand. Give Question 5 alive to keep us alive.

Comment by Alliance — December 7, 2006 @ 9:05 pm

Get the judge thrown out of office for doing something so stupid and not obey the laws whtat kind of a judge cant obey laws for what he to upheld.

We dont need a judge representing us like this hes a harm to Las Vegas and needs to be out PLEASE GET Him out office

Please channel 8 whats his name so we can get this started he needs to be out.

Brad

Comment by Brad — December 7, 2006 @ 9:46 pm

I was born and raised in Vegas and just recently moved to Flroida. However, I still keep up to date with the happenings in Vegas and I believe that this Question 5 ordeal is a load of crap. Vegas was never meant to be a family orientated town. Vegas should be left alone, the way it was when I left: where smoking, gambling and all else go hand in hand no matter what!!

Comment by Jessica — December 7, 2006 @ 9:59 pm

I Guess the judge just does’t want his job because he is finished in this town. It’s not the letter of the law, but the intent of the law

Comment by B Ducaj — December 7, 2006 @ 10:23 pm

Having been both a smoker and a non-smoker in the past two years, I understand the complaints of those who are tired of putting up with smoke. When I wasn’t smoking, there were certain bars I stopped going to because the smoke bothered me. HOWEVER…I made that choice myself, I didn’t try to force the owner to ventilate the bar so that I was happy.
The constitution protects the rights of property owners. It says nothing about the rights of non-smokers to force others to bend to their will. If you don’t like the smoke, don’t go to the restaurant or bar. That is called free choice.
And by the way-I suggest you don’t take your kids to bars, at least until they’re 21!

Comment by Rick — December 7, 2006 @ 10:56 pm

It’s is now time to boycott all the businesses that signed on to this lawsuit especially their leader TERRIBLE’S and when this special interest judge comes up for election get rid of him. This could only happen in Las Vegas. No other judge in this country would dare to come up with a ruling like this.
Now I can see why people say “my vote doesn’t mean anything so why vote’.
Shame, Shame on the special interests as they have no regard for our health or their own.

Comment by David — December 7, 2006 @ 11:41 pm

OK, let me ask you something:

Wasn’t the question written the same way BEFORE the election as it is now? So, the bar and tavern owners clearly were able to challenge its constitutionality PRIOR to putting it on the ballot… correct?

The fact is, they did not… They were so certain that question 4 would pass that they did not challenge the wording or constitutionality of question 5 until they lost. Now that they lost, they are claiming it is unconstitutional. However, if it is written the same way now as it was then, why was it not challenged BEFORE they lost? I’m confused. Doesn’t this seriously hurt their credibility?

Another question:

Isn’t Nevada (including Las Vegas) still part of the United States of America? Last I checked all 50 states were governed by a democracy. This democracy is what makes us so great. We can vote and pass or not pass things as a people. So, saying Las Vegas should be exempt from this right of the people because its “sin city” means essentially we should not be governed by that same democracy… So, perhaps the next vote should be whether or not Las Vegas should break apart from the Union and become its own “country” with its very own governing rules. To say Las Vegas should be exempt from the laws which govern this great nation (i.e. the right to VOTE on issues) simply because it is the “last place on earth naughtiness is allowed” is absurd. Those who think we should be treated different because we’re “sin city” should try to get it on the ballot and decide if they’d like a dictatorship, communism, socialization, etc. in the next general election.

I think we’re loosing site of the fact this measure was put through the same legality at its inception as any other measure and it got on the ballot and it passed. What you think of smokers and non-smokers is beside the point.

This should have been challenged long before now if people had an issue with how it was worded or thought it was “deceiving” to the public. It is being challenged now because bar and tavern owners are upset it passed.

And, I may remind the general public that not all issues are clear and completely understood by the voting public when they go out to vote in any election. It is a sad truth that many voters are not entirely educated on every single consequence of every single issue. This goes for every state. There are always some people who will not completely understand an issue, yet still will vote a certain way based on how they PERCEIVE that issue. I am not advocating this, as I think we should all be well educated when we vote, but I think we can all agree some people do NOT have their facts straight when they go to the polls. With that said, should every side that does not win the vote get to sue because people “did not understand” the repurcussions of their vote? Please give the voting public more credit than that. My guess is you’ll always find people after something is put into law that say… “oh, I shouldn’t have voted this way or that cause look what it did”…. but the vote still stands in those cases. Why would this be any different?

Basically, this state (Las Vegas included) is a democracy and while you can bash smokers or non-smokers and say whether business will go up or down because of this vote, the vote is done and question 5 passed.

Comment by Sonia — December 7, 2006 @ 11:49 pm

REMEMBER HERNDON at the next ELECTIONS - this kind of judge we don’t want or need. The will of the electorate has been disregarded by this crooked judge. If club owners want to fill their premises with cancer, let them make them ‘private member clubs’ - then they can breath the same poison their preferred customers want to die by. Figures that our political system gets DISQUALIFIED in VEGAS. Who else is sick of it?

Comment by Greg — December 8, 2006 @ 12:18 am

So a judge decided to disregard the peoples choice on the smoking ban. So,why is it that we vote?

Businesses in the state of Washington when through this panic mode,only to findout that their business base increased.

Comment by Marilyn Allen — December 8, 2006 @ 12:41 am

I’m a smoker, and have been for about 45 yrs now. I voted in favor for the anti-smoking law #4, but against #5. As a smoker I’m very aware of what my second hand smoke may cause to others and make a conscious effort to not offend. I’d appreciate it if our non-smokers might be as thoughtful. But, it seems not. Is this how our local and national government is going to be run now? Will we eventually have fat police for those of us that are overweight?

Comment by Susan Surface — December 8, 2006 @ 1:19 am

I am sick of this debate. If you want to smoke, go outside. I am tired of suffering because of someone else’s disgusting habit. I would like to go out for once to have a good time without the sickening smell in my hair when I get home. Smoking is not a handicap but a conscious choice by the smokers themselves. We do not have to conform to meet their needs. If you don’t want to go outside to smoke…quit. Your bad habits should not be my problem. The people have spoken; get cigarettes out of restaurants.

Comment by Kristin P. — December 8, 2006 @ 5:51 am

I am amazed at some of the ignorant comments posted above by non-smoking, holier than thou, sanctimonious (Susan, did I spell that right?) MORONs. This is LAS VEGAS, NEVADA, NOT Santa Barbara, California, or anywhere else. You all moved here because of the cost of living and plentiful jobs, yet you voted to jeapordize that same way of life by putting small business on the line and thousands of people on unemployment. All you NON SMOKING HOLIER THAN THOU idiots, I dare you to throw your millenium scholarships back at the state, because they were funded by big tobacco i.e. RJ Reynolds. (How am I doing Susan, still spelling correctly or did you lose track because you don’t know the meaning of a few of my words?) Now I ask you one more question. How are you going to like waiting in long lines for your cheap meal at the one local bar/grill that kept food instead of smoking? OR (oops two more questions) How are you going to like waiting in line for that same meal, but it’s no longer cheap because they have to make a profit and they lost it because of a lack of revenue due to lost gambling business. My mother used to have a saying “His education went to his butt” and that’s what I feel some of the comments here.

Comment by Melinda — December 8, 2006 @ 6:30 am

If in my 48 years on this earth have I ever seen anything more devisive.Family values invade was a haven for adult entertainment!As a non-smoker,it sickens me when some self appointed “do-gooder”,whines about a smokey bar.People smoke in BARS!I have never smoked but I love to drink and gamble.If the smoke bothers you, do these 3 things for me.1.SHUT UP 2.Leave or dont but shut -up!3.Whine about something else, ’cause in a bar and people are smoking,or SHUT-UP!

Comment by Dan Harrison — December 8, 2006 @ 6:37 am

If smoking is an addiction then shouldn’t smokers be protected under the Americans with Disabilities Act? Where is the ACLU?

Comment by Smokers are people too — December 8, 2006 @ 6:52 am

I believe that business owners should have the right to clearly post signs that state that their establishm