By Ann

December 28, 2008 6:38 PM | Link to this

I love the idea of the smoking tents. All the smokers can inhale their cigarettes as well as the second hand smoke. Keeping it all to themselves :)

By jeff

December 28, 2008 7:05 PM | Link to this

The pole inside the butt hut looks big.

By North

December 28, 2008 7:28 PM | Link to this

I am a nonsmoker,but I go to the “butt huts” to be with people. Many times there are few people in the bar, most are outside smoking. Nonsmokers….where are you?

By b rogers

December 28, 2008 7:57 PM | Link to this

Boston’s Bistro would not survive without the smoking clientele. Thanks for accomodating us.

By Barry

December 28, 2008 8:06 PM | Link to this

I have to agree with North here, where are the legions of non-smokers that were going to start going out when we ran the smokers out of area restaurants and bars? looks like they are kind of imaginary to me.

By kybriar

December 28, 2008 8:08 PM | Link to this

No thanks, its really comfortable in KY and Indiana where smokers are treated with respect

By KJ

December 28, 2008 8:10 PM | Link to this

When the smoking ban is repealed, some bars might decide to keep these tents. At least it would be the business owners choice rather than the government. This law is so unconstitutional.

By JS

December 28, 2008 8:33 PM | Link to this

I think people lose site of the bigger, long term issue with smoking. I do think that smokers have the right to smoke. However, I also think that I, a non smoker, have the right to have to refuse to help pay for their future health care for issues relating to smoking. Also, I don’t feel that I should have my health compromised because someone else decides to polute the air I’m breathing. In regards to where are the non smokers - has anyone noticed we are in a recession????

By DL

December 28, 2008 8:43 PM | Link to this

Excuse me JS but I believe that I am the one paying for my own health care. I am self-employed and no one contributes but me. Bars should be able to make the choice and you can choose not to go there. You non-smokers get on my nerves

By b rogers

December 28, 2008 8:50 PM | Link to this

California has had a smoking ban for 10 years. The healthcare costs have not gone down one cent. The state, in fact, is bankrupt. I suppose that JS is upset that smokers are actually enjoying themselves outside.

By DL

December 28, 2008 8:57 PM | Link to this

I’ve never been in a smoke hut because I don’t go out much but I’ll bet they are fun with all the crazy smokers. They really do have more fun. All crowded together breathing each other’s different smoke lol

By Chris

December 28, 2008 9:07 PM | Link to this

The smoking ban is silly. I like the idea that the smokers are smarter then the politicians and showed it when they opened ‘smoking huts’…. I’m an ex-smoker.

By Karen

December 28, 2008 9:31 PM | Link to this

Smoking and drinking typically go hand and hand. Pretty obvious since most people are in the butt huts leaving bars half empty. Nice to have the option. I love to smoke when I drink - and only do that a few times a year. So I am glad there are options. And oh ya, I have my own insurance and no one is paying my bills. And don’t bother to respond I won’t be back to read any comments for you obsessive people who like to leave 20 argumentative comments with nothing better to do. I’ll drink to that - and smoke too! LOL

By amy

December 28, 2008 9:57 PM | Link to this

i just wish smoking killed faster than it does so that people who are stupid enough to start would die before they reproduced LOL!!!!

By null

December 28, 2008 10:04 PM | Link to this

too bad we can’t ban alcohol too.

By jon

December 28, 2008 11:17 PM | Link to this

Well thanks to this stupid article Im sure that fire and building inspectors will be out tommorrow and find a reason to make these establishments close their smoking tents.

By nyc

December 28, 2008 11:32 PM | Link to this

if smoking is bad for your health…and the environment…why is it legal??

By kb

December 29, 2008 12:33 AM | Link to this

We are in a recession because some ingnoramous jackass group of people cannot read a ballot and the other ignoramous group the Lawyers and politicians want it that way. Rome was destroyed by this very thing, Lawyers and Politicians. Waiting for martial law to take effect next..

By History Buff

December 29, 2008 1:28 AM | Link to this

The radical non-smokers should be the ones in the ‘butt’ hut! Isn’t that outside air reported to be clean (oh what a joke)?!!! What is the next ban upcoming to help kill the economy?

By Kitty Cat

December 29, 2008 1:48 AM | Link to this

Nightlife In Ohio = A Hut. Who the heck would come to this state to visit and spend money?

By KC

December 29, 2008 2:11 AM | Link to this

Amy is 6 years old, and still believes the government sanitizes the air for her protection, so she can reproduce safely. La-la-la….

By truthdoctor

December 29, 2008 7:10 AM | Link to this

Since our state legislators would not address the smoking issue in the first place, they allowed the citizens, not the government, to ban smoking in bars. Now some legislators feel brave enough to repeal the smoking ban. This is a good lesson in the difference between a democracy and a republic. As a republic you must now contact your representative to let them know your position on the smoking ban. After they vote up or down then you can blame government.

By Paul

December 29, 2008 7:41 AM | Link to this

When I was ion the navy I saw a cure for smokers that really worked. When a smoker was caught all the cigarettes on him were put in his mouth, fired up, and then a bucket placed over his head. Out he came with the prettiest shade of green on his kisser! Go for it smokers! Can’t wait to see your kisser!!!

By Roscoe

December 29, 2008 8:43 AM | Link to this

To DL. Get a CLUE. Insurance rates are based on groups of insured people. Everyone in that group subsidises your healthcare so don’t act like you pay it all yourself. It’s a medical fact that as a group SMOKERS cost more in insurance benefits used than non smokers. So yes the rest of us end up paying for your habit by higher insurance premiums and hospital costs..

By squirrellygirl

December 29, 2008 8:46 AM | Link to this

I think that a minority of people got together and pushed a law through that the majority of voters don’t agree with. I don’t think we should be wasting taxpayer money (especially in these dismal times when a lot of us are looking for a job or getting laid off) on issues like this. If you don’t like the bar, go somewhere else instead of trying to make everyone do what you want them to. This is supposed to be a free country.

By squirrellygirl

December 29, 2008 8:55 AM | Link to this

Has anyone else noticed that we are legislating our rights away? The more laws “we” or the vocal minority pass, the less rights we have. First telling people they can’t smoke in public places, then place huge taxes (as punishment) on those cigarettes…what’s next? Outlaw liquor? Okay, that’s been done already. I don’t smoke cigarettes, but I do see my personal rights diminishing—remember, your privacy has already been invaded and is up for sale by loose moral government imps. They know they won’t lose their jobs. If they do get caught, they only lose a couple of weeks pay, and then they get their comfy jobs back so they can do even more damage with our private information gathered by our own government. We have no privacy anymore, folks!

By MW

December 29, 2008 9:12 AM | Link to this

Squirrellygirl, the vocal “minority” cannot pass a law - it takes a MAJORITY of votes to pass a law. It doesn’t matter whether it’s the legislature or the voters, if only 49.5 percent vote FOR something it will not pass. The majority (over 50%) of Ohio voters spoke, and wanted to be breathe clean air in indoor establishments. Thank you for your intelligence.

By steve

December 29, 2008 9:18 AM | Link to this

as sad as it is… The non smokers pushed this legislation on the state and now everyone must pay. I would contend that 75% of those that voted don’t go to bars, yet they felt it their partriotic duty to vote for the ban. I suggest we have all smoking bars.. if you work there you must smoke if you visit the bar you must smoke.. Someone hit it on the nail, Were are all the non smokers??? and don’t blame it on a recession.. that’s crap.. it’s just a group of do gooders imposing their believes on others.. I say they can get bent..if I want to smoke I will.. so GET BENT sorry bags of crap

By john

December 29, 2008 9:50 AM | Link to this

You non smoking Nazi’s should take lesson from history. The bar owners should have a right to say what happens in their bar that is legal. If they want a smoking bar, it should be posted on the front door, a great big lit cigarette hung above the door ought to do the trick. Employees should be screened, if they don’t like smoke they should be offered the door. If a person who doesn’t smoke but still wants to enter they should be allowed to enter but should be told to STFU about the smoking. A smoker shouldn’t go into a non smoking business and demand that everyone light up, same deal here, if you don’t smoke, hate smokers, feel you are the elitist yuppie jerk that so many non smokers appear to be, don’t go into the smoking bar. Its really, really simple. Non smokers and smokers alike do not have a constitutional right to enter into ANY private business, the state in normal non communist states does not have the right to dictate what a private business owner does of a legal nature in his own establishment, but this is the state of ohio and with the current socialist legislature it is what we have. The little screaming baby non smokers with their “I’m paying for the health care, the second hand smoke crowd etc.” all think they have the right to dictate their opinions on others. What about the crimes and damage done by alcohol? I’ve never seen someone light up a cigarette and go kill their family, happens all the time with booze doesn’t it? Germans win right to light up after court ruling on smoking December 30, 2008 The puff has been taken out of smoke bans, writes James Norman in Berlin. IN BERLIN, it is not unusual to walk into a city cafe or bar and have to find a table through a haze of acrid cigarette smoke. In stark contrast to Australia — where smokers have become a much maligned social group — the German High Court has just overturned smoking bans in small bars and restaurants, making Germany one of the last havens for smokers in Europe. The ruling came after the owners of two small bars claimed their businesses had been unfairly hit by the smoking ban. They claimed that because of their bars’ small size, they were unable to provide a cordoned-off smoking area, which created a competitive disadvantage. The constitutional court agreed. In Berlin, many bar owners complain that their businesses may have to close if they are forced to stop patrons from smoking. So the rules are regularly ignored, which has led some bar owners to put up signs stating: “Smoking policy: Don’t ask, Don’t tell!” History may play a role here too. The Nazi Party was strongly opposed to smoking and, after 1945, smoking became a symbol of postwar freedoms and progressive values.

By Me

December 29, 2008 9:57 AM | Link to this

I only go to the bars that let you smoke. I don’t care what the rest of you do.

By squirrellygirl

December 29, 2008 10:06 AM | Link to this

You have to go out of the state of Ohio to go to a bar that lets you smoke, unless you want to sit outside under a canopy, and in the middle of the winter, that ain’t so nice. So nonsmokers have more rights than smokers because why? Because someone else is making their own moral opinions the law for others. No wonder you have people lighting up cigarettes in bars AGAINST the law, because they know, deep down inside, that their rights are being invaded.

By squirrellygirl

December 29, 2008 10:11 AM | Link to this

John, thank you for your thoughtful and articulated post. We need to THINK about what we are doing every time we pass another “law” or amendment. Honestly, this smoking ban was snuck through our voting system, and many people are left out in the COLD smoking their freaking cigarettes at a freaking BAR, and those nonsmokers are still not coming out to the bars—so now we have yet another drag on our economy, the bars trying to stay afloat because of some minority of people who want to tell everyone else what to do when they go to a freaking BAR!

By ecp3886

December 29, 2008 10:19 AM | Link to this

Smoking is good for one thing. It kills people off. It also kills 2nd hand smokers off. I am part indian. My people gave tobacco to the white man. The white man pushed us off our land and put us on reservations. Smoking is a slow death for the white man. SMoking also kills off my people. But the indian people are glad we gave tobacco to the white man. We killed yellow hair at the battle of Little Big HOrn. Custer was a facist and indian hater. Custer deserved his death. Many braves lost their lives to the great spirit. Smoke on white man. Death will soon come to you,in throat cancer,lung cancer,and pancreatic cancer. Hail the great spirit. Vengence of the indian people.

By Mark

December 29, 2008 10:46 AM | Link to this

Troy, Oh closed the huts last year due to the fabric being a fire hazard and not meeting building codes. Surprised Dayton, Montgomery county and the local cities are allowing this!

By Ohio1488

December 29, 2008 11:01 AM | Link to this

“I love the idea of the smoking tents. All the smokers can inhale their cigarettes as well as the second hand smoke. Keeping it all to themselves :) ” Ann, you are an idiot. “i just wish smoking killed faster than it does so that people who are stupid enough to start would die before they reproduced LOL!!!!” Amy, you are a moron. Let’s see…smoking is not allowed indoors, yet they have smoking “huts” which make smoking - INDOORS! Yeah, you non-smokers and your “law” REALLY got us there! LOL puff puff - ahhhhh

By smoke

December 29, 2008 11:42 AM | Link to this

How much tax revenue have we lost from cigarette sales? From those folks not going to bars,resturants?? Looking at the news, it seems we did not plan well for that loss in the states revenue. Those indian comment above were not made by an indian person. That person is an idiot and should be scapled for being a dork. The smoking law was wrong, not just. Lots of good points in this thread! People worry about 2nd hand smoke, but seem to ignore the emmisions from their car other machines they own. Ignore all the crap that goes into our food, water supplies. The fact folks actually argue against smoking is amazing.

By David

December 29, 2008 12:34 PM | Link to this

Isn’t it fun that when the majority of the voters say to smokers they can’t smoke inside that we hear about the evils of majority rule but when the majority of voters say to gay men and lesbians that same sex marriage and civil unions won’t be recognized in Ohio that majority rule is okay?

By MV

December 29, 2008 12:41 PM | Link to this

In the immortal words of comedian Auggie Smith: “Who is concerned about their health in a bar? Excuse me, Mr. Bartender-man, but I am trying to get drunk so I can drive home and have unprotected sex with this woman I just met tonight…and this guy is blowing SMOKE in my face!” If you don’t like it, don’t go! I do like that I can go to a restuarant and actually smell my food rather than cigarettes, but at a bar…it’s ridiculous! If I die of cancer, chances are just as good that it’ll be from too much sunlight, McDonalds food, or something genetics rather than cigarette smoke!

By cig

December 29, 2008 12:46 PM | Link to this

All of you smokers that are whining about the law… This is how a democracy works, majority does rule. That is how it has always been and should be. I know of several smokers who actually voted for the ban. And I have yet to see any bar go out of business because of the law like so many predicted. If you dont like it, stay at home and drink. There are plenty of other countries that would allow you to smoke, you can still smoke on airplanes in China you know.

By SallyC

December 29, 2008 12:52 PM | Link to this

As a non smoker I do not feel I have “more rights” than a smoker-how ever since smoking is a choice I choose not make-then why in the heck should I have to subject myself to it?? I went out when smoking was allowed-but HATED the smell of my clothing and the coughing attacks I had when at a smoking establishment. Now I enjoy myself 100% more. SO why should smokers have more rights (by being allowed to smoke inside bars/restaurants?) than those of us who made a choice NOT to smoke?? No one forced a gun to your head and said smoke did they?? Smoking is a choice-not a right. Though I have to say the best part of the law is the no smoing in restaurants…I hated tasting cigarette smoke when I ate..

By Bob540

December 29, 2008 12:56 PM | Link to this

Seems to me: If a bar occupied two separate buildings, with separate entrances/exits, one with smoking and one without, and employees only work the non-smoking bldg., and smokers have to come over to order food and drink in the non-smoking bldg. and then take it back to the smokers’ bldg., why wouldn’t that be legal? Let em serve everyone.

By cig

December 29, 2008 1:11 PM | Link to this

Very well put SallyC. All things being equal, Non-smokers right to not inhale smoke takes precedence over smokers rights to smoke. You have made the choice, you should be the ones to leave a bar to smoke instead of non-smokers needed to leave to breath fresh air. That is what the majority of voters decided when they passed the law. Stop crying about it and accept it. This has been coming for a long time. Next time you are in a crowded bar (say BW-3), look around. The vast majority of those people are not smokers, the handful that are you will see going outside constantly. Must suck to be left out in the cold like that.

By Greg P.

December 29, 2008 1:17 PM | Link to this

Imagine smokers outside and noone inside. I guess all those nonsmokers who didn’t go to the bar because of cigarette smoke are out on some other windmill chase.

By My2cents

December 29, 2008 1:37 PM | Link to this

You all are so sad. Regardless of whether or not you agree with the ban, it’s still a law. Do you like posted speed limits? Why not whine and complain about that? Maybe if you gripe enough, posted speed limits will be done away with. Do you see why your arguing is dumb? It doesn’t matter why or who passed this law - what matters is, it’s a law and you’ll have to adjust whether you agree with it or not.

By just me

December 29, 2008 1:52 PM | Link to this

I am a smoker and I really just go to bars that let you smoke. I have a friend who owns a bar tried to play by the rules and obey the law but quickly began to loose money and almost had to close, until she said “screw it! If I get a ticket, I’ll pay the fine! so let the non-smokers have their moment, as for me…. I’ll enjoy my rule breaking smoking bars

By To JS

December 29, 2008 2:45 PM | Link to this

JS fat people are a burdian on our health system too stop blaming smokers, and as for a recession being to blame for all those non-smokers who said they go bowling or to a restraunt/bar if there was no smoking well where was they before the recession.What a load.This is a free country and the owners and patiorns of a choice to do as they wish.Goo Day

By Don

December 29, 2008 3:08 PM | Link to this

As a one-time (30 years) smoker of up to three packs a day, I can say without doubt that I feel much better after 20+ years of NOT smoking. I find it most interesting that the majority of the comments here are NOT from what smokers claim are the vocal, non-smoking minority…but rather, from the rampaging smokers who claim that the MINORITY has infringed on their freedoms. Again, the MINORITY can’t pass laws. It takes the MAJORITY to do that. It’s just a shame that you smokers don’t “get it” sufficiently to protect your OWN health.

By Carl

December 29, 2008 3:19 PM | Link to this

Are these huts open on 2 sides like the law calls for. If they are not than some lawyer just found some money for his vacation. A A A Nothing like the goverment running our lives.

By Bob540

December 29, 2008 3:22 PM | Link to this

Don and My2Cents: Laws are made and laws are changeable. Bad laws are sometimes passed and need to be amended or repealed. For the record, I am a non-smoker and voted against any ban on smoking. I hear that many people voted for the ban because they thought it exempted clubs such as AmVets and VFW, and now they feel duped into having voted a total ban. In this case, separate facilities would be the best for everyone. We have to stop discriminating against people and trying to force them to live a lifestyle we want them to live. I support freedom.

By Jean55

December 29, 2008 3:24 PM | Link to this

This is for JS, I am a smoker, I have my own insurance, you are not paying for it. The rest of you non-smokers, you are not concern about me smoking, no more than I am concern that you don’t smoke. Get a life. This is a free country, the land of the Free.

By Ms. Emme

December 29, 2008 3:40 PM | Link to this

Duh, why are smokers always being dumped on? If I am smoking, I get some fat, sloppy person telling me that I should quit. I tell them that when they lose 50 lbs then they can talk to me. What about all you obese non smokers? When will you quit eating and save us some money? Your health care costs exceed that of most smokers. There should be a law against obese people.

By Jim 5

December 29, 2008 3:47 PM | Link to this

This is a great idea. Now that Obama has promised not to smoke in the White House, will he have one?

By Jean55

December 29, 2008 3:53 PM | Link to this

This is for Amy, you are one of the most heartless person I have ever heard of, you just keep living, you are going to die yourself from something, you are not on this earth to live forever, hope that you live to be old and won’t remember a soul not even yourself.

By Lynn

December 29, 2008 4:07 PM | Link to this

I’m a non-smoker who voted against the ban. I figured smoking and drinking go hand in hand. I must admit however that it is so nice to come home after an evening out and not smell like an ashtray, but it does get lonely in the bar when everyone else is outside smoking! By the way, are the bars in West Carrollton exempt from this law or what? They all still allow smoking!

By Ms. Emme

December 29, 2008 4:10 PM | Link to this

Personally, I like the idea of huts, CA has them. I’m from the Wash Dc area and smoking has been banned in DC and Maryland. VA, not yet (they are a tobacco state). We do not have smoking huts and the bartenders have a fit if you go outside (you may not pay). Remember that if you are coming here for the inaguration. P.S. I have more fun in the smoking areas (outside) than inside.

By smokey

December 29, 2008 5:00 PM | Link to this

smoking is not a constitutional right. furthermore, the constitutional rights you do have end at the tip of my nose! the world is not your ashtray. stop dumping your butts out the window too, litter bug!

By smokey

December 29, 2008 5:00 PM | Link to this

smoking is not a constitutional right. furthermore, the constitutional rights you do have end at the tip of my nose! the world is not your ashtray. stop dumping your butts out the window too, litter bug!

By null

December 29, 2008 6:33 PM | Link to this

WHY IS IT THAT MOST NON SMOKERS ARE IN THE BUTT HUT?

By rrhoop5469

December 29, 2008 7:41 PM | Link to this

KJ: This law is so unconstitutional. ME: You have the right to smoke. I have the right to not die of 2nd hand smoke. There is nothing wrong with doing something that will eventually kill you in your own home but to take that & FORCE it on innocent people who choose not to smoke, is what is unconstitutional. You don’t see me cramming all my beliefs & likes down your throat do you? JS: In regards to where are the non smokers - has anyone noticed we are in a recession???? ME: EXACTLY, we all aren’t rich enough to continue blowing money. DL: Excuse me JS but I believe that I am the one paying for my own health care. I am self-employed and no one contributes but me. ME: That is now, what about when you’re older & NOT working, who’s paying for your healthcare then? It sure won’t be you. B rogers: California has had a smoking ban for 10 years. The healthcare costs have not gone down one cent. ME: Why would healthcare costs go down when inflation for everything is going up? Not only that, the damage to all those smokers has already been done. They fill the hospitals & nursing homes up every day.

By rrhoop5469

December 29, 2008 7:45 PM | Link to this

There are a ton of comments about smoking & drinking going hand & hand, etc. This ban was for ALL public places, not just the bars people. I guess smoking & eating go hand in hand, smoking & shopping go hand in hand, etc.

By rrhoop5469

December 29, 2008 7:54 PM | Link to this

Last comment: Smokers can get off their high horse about their rights, etc. Non-smokers have the right NOT to die of 2nd hand smoke. Like I said before, I don’t shove my beliefs & likes down your throat, why should you shove your smoke down mine? Because you want to smoke, I can’t leave my house? Talk about not having any rights. Do what you want in your own home & don’t force us to breath your left-overs. Smokers have just as many rights as non-smokers. Now when they ban smoking all together, then complain about your rights. Just like prohibition when they banned alcohol. They didn’t just say you couldn’t drink in bars, they said you couldn’t drink anywhere! This law just lets us non-smokers BREATH! So get off your high-horses, quit acting all undignified & SELFISH! Think about someone elses health & livelihood for a change. It just so happens there are millions of people who have allergies & asthma who really can’t breath cigarette smoke.

By rrhoop5469

December 29, 2008 7:54 PM | Link to this

Last comment: Smokers can get off their high horse about their rights, etc. Non-smokers have the right NOT to die of 2nd hand smoke. Like I said before, I don’t shove my beliefs & likes down your throat, why should you shove your smoke down mine? Because you want to smoke, I can’t leave my house? Talk about not having any rights. Do what you want in your own home & don’t force us to breath your left-overs. Smokers have just as many rights as non-smokers. Now when they ban smoking all together, then complain about your rights. Just like prohibition when they banned alcohol. They didn’t just say you couldn’t drink in bars, they said you couldn’t drink anywhere! This law just lets us non-smokers BREATH! So get off your high-horses, quit acting all undignified & SELFISH! Think about someone elses health & livelihood for a change. It just so happens there are millions of people who have allergies & asthma who really can’t breath cigarette smoke.

By rrhoop5469

December 29, 2008 7:56 PM | Link to this

Last comment: Smokers can get off their high horse about their rights, etc. Non-smokers have the right NOT to die of 2nd hand smoke. Like I said before, I do not shove my beliefs & likes down your throat, why should you shove your smoke down mine? Because you want to smoke, I can not leave my house? Talk about not having any rights. Do what you want in your own home & do not force us to breath your left-overs. Smokers have just as many rights as non-smokers. Now when they ban smoking all together, then complain about your rights. Just like prohibition when they banned alcohol. They did not just say you could not drink in bars, they said you could not drink anywhere! This law just lets us non-smokers BREATH! So get off your high-horses, quit acting all undignified & SELFISH! Think about someone elses health & livelihood for a change. It just so happens there are millions of people who have allergies & asthma who really can not breath cigarette smoke.

By britt

December 29, 2008 9:37 PM | Link to this

I really think they oerstepped the bounds. A one time smoking was abusive. You could smoke anywhere, eveb in the hospital,, courts etc. Then they went way overboard with abusive taxes and regulting soking to the point where there are few places you can smokke. The stron antis want to even disallow smoking only places(butt huts) If a biz owner wants to run a smoking establishment, then thats his right. No law says you have to go in. Drinking is far more dangerous, causing more criminal actions than any other activvity. Its also murer on the health. Then we have you cel phone junkies who could care less about traffic than the phone call. I think threre should be a block where cels dont workk inside or in a vehichle. And the next time I see a an oerly obese person coplainof the dabggre of my smoke Ill laugh in his face. You evere see a 450lber with his belly below his kneess b***h about health risks.Geta g grip fat boy That law will never stand. Next vote itll go the way of legalized sodomy(gay marraige!

By virgilk

December 30, 2008 9:53 PM | Link to this

Not one person has been proven to have died from SHS. Even the ACS and the WHO studies found no connection of SHS to Cancer or Heart Disease. The CDC in their pie chart on the Ten Leading Causes Of Death show 23% of non-smokers and 16% of smokers die from Lung Cancer and 30%of non-smokers and only 18% of smokers die of Heart Disease. No mention at all in the chart about any deaths from SHS.

By NCF

February 8, 2010 1:08 PM | Link to this

So much dull chatter, but the crux of this matter is that these outdoor huts for the smoking of butts are helping some wallets grow fatter! I honestly doubt these “huts” fully meet the strict definitions laid out by ORC 3791, which says that they can’t have a roof if they have walls, & vice versa. (I simplified that, BTW)