Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 53

Thread: Wonder if Mayor Bloomberg feels guilty?

  1. #1

    Wonder if Mayor Bloomberg feels guilty?

    http://www.ny1.com/ny/TopStories/Sub...entintid=29355



    A bouncer at an East Village nightclub was fatally stabbed early Sunday morning while trying to enforce the city’s new smoking ban.

    A brawl broke out after the bouncer, 32-year-old Dana Blake, told two brothers that they were not permitted to smoke in the bar, Guernica on Avenue B. Blake tried to eject them, but one of the brothers pulled out a knife and stabbed him in the stomach, police said.

    The brothers, Johnathan and Ching Chan, were arrested and charged with assault, before Blake died in the hospital. Prosecutors have not yet upgraded the charges or said who stabbed Blake.

    Blake’s older brother said he blames the death on the smoking ban.

    Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s spokesman said that the mayor is pleased the police quickly arrested the suspects and that "his thoughts are with the family of the victim."

    A ban on smoking at virtually all of the city's bars and restaurants took effect about two weeks ago.



    Great job Bloomberg I hope he pays for the funeral.

  2. #2
    Second Most EVIL YARDofSTUF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    69,983
    its sad, but this stuff happens when enforcing new laws

  3. #3
    Flip Chip Qwijib0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona Processor: GenuineIntel Member #4896
    Posts
    8,269

    Re: Wonder if Mayor Bloomberg feels guilty?

    Originally posted by davy19
    http://www.ny1.com/ny/TopStories/Sub...entintid=29355


    Great job Bloomberg I hope he pays for the funeral.
    Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!

    How can you blame the mayor for a citizen's actions?! That logic makes no sense...
    If your browser can't read unicode, you should probably switch!

  4. #4
    Elite Member Jim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    13,231
    While I don't necessarily completely agree with the law (I love the principle behind it, but feel uneasy about any government regulating more and more stuff like that), you're saying that its the LAW which is at fault, and not the guy who stabbed him?

    Hell, what a way to shrug off personal responsibility! "Its not my fault I shot a police officer in the face, he was only pulling me over for speeding! Its the speeding law which is at fault, not me!"

    Give me a break. The guy's brother is obviously a narrow-minded person as well, for blaming the death on this smoking ban and not THE PSYCHO WITH A KNIFE WHO STABBED HIS BROTHER.

    Blame Bloomberg for other things. Hell, blame him (and Pataki, and everyone else involved) for the law itself. But don't blame him for this man's death. Its unnecessary and frankly, has no basis.

  5. #5
    my point is the law is the most stupidest law, especailly now when the enconomy is so hurt. Look at all the tax money it is costing the city to enforce the law? and he is complaining he needs more money from the state so lets tax more.

    For crying out loud you go to a bar to drink, which kills your liver/heart and other organs, but bloomberg is so worried about smoking? How about we worry about drugs instead?


    Lets put it this way, if bloomberg was not mayor, and or this law did not pass, how much you want to bet that guy would still be alive?

    Of course those guys should be held responsible, but that is another story.


    I personally hope the guys brother sues Bloomberg and gets millions of dollars, well maybe not becasue bloomberg will just tax us more, just sue bloomberg personally..yeah that it.

    Turth is I hate Bloomberg worst then Clinton, man did I just say that? lol

  6. #6
    Elite Member Jim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    13,231
    Well let me put it this way. Smoking is one of those things that isn't exactly self-contained. If I go to a bar (I don't drink or smoke), my choice to not ingest any alcohol is my own. However, if I choose to not smoke, that doesn't mean my lungs won't be filled with...well, let's face it, cancer. How about some sympathy for those who work in these places? Even if they choose not to smoke, they are essentially smokers by the simple fact that they are surrounded by it ~40 hours a week. The analogy between smoking and alcohol is somewhat limited because of things like that.

    I'm somewhat against the law, although I completely support what it stands for. While I'm not often in the city (and therefore this ban doesn't directly apply to me), I can usually tell the difference between restaurants that allow smoking, and those that don't (or at least strictly curb it). Personally, I think it ruins the dining experience. If I had the choice to go to one of two seperate restaurants (all things being equal), one with smoking and one with a smoking ban, I'd choose the smoke free one almost every time.

    Lets put it this way, if bloomberg was not mayor, and or this law did not pass, how much you want to bet that guy would still be alive?
    Yeah, while that may be a given, you have to look at the criminal here (Mr. Chan, not Bloomberg). If this man is the type who believes that a rational action is STABBING A MAN TO DEATH WITH A KNIFE over someone telling him that he can't smoke, then he's certainly a bomb waiting to explode. That bouncer may be alive, but I'm sure that guy would eventually snap somewhere. If he believes killing a man will somehow let him smoke in that bar, or anywhere else, then he certainly has issues.

    The law may be A problem, but the law isn't THE problem.

  7. #7
    Senior Member nightowl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    ottawa, canada (ROCKS)
    Posts
    7,405
    we've had that smoking ban in ottawa for a couple years now, its great!!!

    i can actualy enjoy bars now, and not go home smelling like an ash tray.....even my buddies that smoke admit that they prefer the smoking ban.
    Quote Originally Posted by Zilog B
    Loading the dishwasher at brembo's house means bringing the fiancee a sixpack home.

  8. #8
    NYC Newbie Slayer Prey521's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Humble, Tx
    Posts
    34,934
    I have to go with Jim on this one, unfortunately , can't blame the law for that man's death. And I'm actually for the law. Bloomberg is just following up on Guiliani's quality of life program, and I'm sure that if Rudy were still mayor, he would have enforced the no smoking law also.
    Have your feelings been hurt by a random act of E-Thuggery? If so, call 1-800-Waaaaahmbulance, we're here 24 hrs a day, 7 days a week, to take your call, you could be due a large monetary settlement, don't delay, call now.

    "Please be careful prior to entering the world wide web, the internet is serious business"


  9. #9
    Originally posted by BIGJIMSLATE
    Well let me put it this way. Smoking is one of those things that isn't exactly self-contained. If I go to a bar (I don't drink or smoke), my choice to not ingest any alcohol is my own. However, if I choose to not smoke, that doesn't mean my lungs won't be filled with...well, let's face it, cancer. How about some sympathy for those who work in these places? Even if they choose not to smoke, they are essentially smokers by the simple fact that they are surrounded by it ~40 hours a week. The analogy between smoking and alcohol is somewhat limited because of things like that.

    I'm somewhat against the law, although I completely support what it stands for. While I'm not often in the city (and therefore this ban doesn't directly apply to me), I can usually tell the difference between restaurants that allow smoking, and those that don't (or at least strictly curb it). Personally, I think it ruins the dining experience. If I had the choice to go to one of two seperate restaurants (all things being equal), one with smoking and one with a smoking ban, I'd choose the smoke free one almost every time.



    Yeah, while that may be a given, you have to look at the criminal here (Mr. Chan, not Bloomberg). If this man is the type who believes that a rational action is STABBING A MAN TO DEATH WITH A KNIFE over someone telling him that he can't smoke, then he's certainly a bomb waiting to explode. That bouncer may be alive, but I'm sure that guy would eventually snap somewhere. If he believes killing a man will somehow let him smoke in that bar, or anywhere else, then he certainly has issues.

    The law may be A problem, but the law isn't THE problem.

    Why would you go to a bar and not drink?

    Unless you are designated driver

    I bet if you look at statistics, drunk related accidents/disease including drunk driving causes more deaths then second hand smoke ever will.


    So is he going to start to ban alcholol as well?

    I mean we never know when someone is drunk and get in a car.



    Our rights are slowy being riddled away and people dont see it.

    It should be up to the bar to ban smoking, not the govt.

    If people dont like the smoke then dont go to the bar, but I am sure bars in nyc are being hurt even worse economically right now.

  10. #10
    resident Humboldt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Northern CA
    Posts
    27,789
    Ridiculous thread.

    Blaming the law or the mayor for this idiot's actions?

    Right.

  11. #11
    SG Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    3,846
    No, Davy19, I don't think that the mayor feels the least bit guilty. No well adjusted adult would feel guilty for something they did not do.

    I don't feel guilty about it. It's a shame it happened, but there is only knife-wielding lunatic to blame for it.

  12. #12
    Originally posted by Snuf
    No, Davy19, I don't think that the mayor feels the least bit guilty. No well adjusted adult would feel guilty for something they did not do.

    I don't feel guilty about it. It's a shame it happened, but there is only knife-wielding lunatic to blame for it.

    Every action has a reaction, his action caused this man to die.

    Yes, it was not his fault directly and he is not responsible 100%, it woud be one thing if this law was a valid law, like stopping drugs, but not for smoking.



    What I find ironic is, the law bloomberg has set forth prevents smoking in bars because it supposedly causes a detrimintal to health (which really has not been proven btw), but more then likely it was the alcoholol and maybe drugs that acutally caused this man to get upset and stab the bouncer.

    I bet if alcholol was not involved there would be not problems, of course I am only speculating.

  13. #13
    resident Humboldt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Northern CA
    Posts
    27,789
    Originally posted by davy19
    Every action has a reaction, his action caused this man to die.

    Yes, it was not his fault directly and he is not responsible 100%, it woud be one thing if this law was a valid law, like stopping drugs, but not for smoking.
    I disagree with you on the smoking ban too

  14. #14
    Moderator Bouncer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    OCONUS
    Posts
    4,834

    Action, Reaction

    Well.. personally I think Bloomberg is making a mistake.

    Phillip Morris is relocating it's headquarters from NY, and instructing it's subsidiaries (including Nabisco etc) to do the same.

    That's going to cost Bloomberg upwards of 10000 high paid corporate types and their taxable salaries.

    the impact from that alone is going to be well into the hundreds of millions of dollars.

    Doubt that it was worth it just to harass people engaging in a legal pastime on private property. Remember, NO ONE makes you go into a bar. You do that by choice. Further, NO ONE can tell a bar operator they can't make their private establishment non-smoking. They choose to allow people to smoke on their property.

    Regards,
    -Bouncer-

  15. #15
    n00b pWn3r! EvilAjax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    New York City, USA
    Posts
    6,973
    What he's trying to say is "If the law did not exist, it would have never happened"... plain and simple. WTF is everyone gettin on his case for? Laws suck ass... I dont give a F what anyone says.

    Stupid bastards want to take fireworks away from us... Bloomberg should be recieving my M-80 in a couple of days..

    Why bad smoking though? ( I don't smoke myself....) but others do... they seem more relaxed when they smoke after a few drinks. Me, I turn to marijuana. Another substance that shouldn't be illegal... spending 3 nights in Central Bookings just because you was smoking a joint in the streets (not hurting anyone but "yourself") is retarded. Anyone who disagrees should be shot, f*ck it.
    <sarcastic>um... yeah</sarcastic>

    Wanna get pwned?

    Quote Originally Posted by raromoney View Post
    Thanks EvilAjax!
    Yup, I'm baaaackkk!

    EvilAjax unbanned, reinforces stereotypes with gunplay braggadocio...

  16. #16
    n00b pWn3r! EvilAjax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    New York City, USA
    Posts
    6,973
    And while we're at it, F**k Guiliani too.

    however you spell that hijo de la gran puta's name.
    <sarcastic>um... yeah</sarcastic>

    Wanna get pwned?

    Quote Originally Posted by raromoney View Post
    Thanks EvilAjax!
    Yup, I'm baaaackkk!

    EvilAjax unbanned, reinforces stereotypes with gunplay braggadocio...

  17. #17
    Flip Chip Qwijib0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona Processor: GenuineIntel Member #4896
    Posts
    8,269
    What you choose to do on your own time, be it tobacco, pt, crack , meth, what have you... is not my problem. Your right to smoke, however, stops when that smoke hits my face. I am a big fan of the no-smoking laws in AZ. Tucson just got one passed too, and there was a big outcry-- but even my roomate who just picked up smoking agrees with it. He realizes that he should be courteous to others.
    If your browser can't read unicode, you should probably switch!

  18. #18
    Senior Member Blisster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    9,668
    easy there ajax....


    We have had a smoking ban in bars here in california for about 6 years. No one was ever stabbed to death while trying to enforce this ban. I was a BARTENDER at the time the new law took place (and a SMOKER too) and was peeved about it as well. Here in the City many bar owners disregarded the law for quite some time, the bar I worked at at the time was frequently on the local city news concerning the issue. As time passed more and more bars started enforcing the law and now pretty much across the board you go outside to smoke anymore.

    I'm not a bartender anymore, nor do I smoke, but I still go to bars and I wave to admit that it is alot nicer to sit in a smokeless bar enjoying drinks with my friends, not smelling like smoke, etc.

    The only exception to the Law is a Privately owned bar where ALL staff persons are partners in the ownership of the establishment. then they can do as they please there as they are not hiring someone and subjecting them to secondhand smoke for 8 10 or 12 hours....



    Bloomberg may be an idiot, but that mans death was not his fault, it sounds like those punks prolly would have stabbed SOMEONE that night, or another night....
    I hope they goet a nice long stint in the pen, where they learn the true definition of "pole smoking".....


    Quote Originally Posted by Edward Abbey
    A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government.

  19. #19
    resident Humboldt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Northern CA
    Posts
    27,789
    Originally posted by EvilAjax
    WTF is everyone gettin on his case for?
    Who TF is getting on his case?

    He asked a question of opinion, he's getting opinions.

    No one is flaming or, until you posted, even getting that excited.

    Just a discussion

  20. #20
    Senior Member Blisster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    9,668

    Re: Action, Reaction

    Originally posted by Bouncer
    Well.. personally I think Bloomberg is making a mistake.

    Phillip Morris is relocating it's headquarters from NY, and instructing it's subsidiaries (including Nabisco etc) to do the same.

    That's going to cost Bloomberg upwards of 10000 high paid corporate types and their taxable salaries.

    the impact from that alone is going to be well into the hundreds of millions of dollars.

    Doubt that it was worth it just to harass people engaging in a legal pastime on private property. Remember, NO ONE makes you go into a bar. You do that by choice. Further, NO ONE can tell a bar operator they can't make their private establishment non-smoking. They choose to allow people to smoke on their property.

    Regards,
    -Bouncer-


    Well it may be a short-term loss but I personally think it is worth it on this facet alone. Were I a mayor I would hate to be under the thumb of the Tobacco conglomerates and theyre filthy money.
    I hope for a day when big tobacco is put on trial again , business shattering fines are leveyed and mass-producing tobacco and marketing it to kids is ILLEGAL and punishable by a prison term, where if you wanna smoke it, you gotta grwo it yourself.

    Tobacco kills, period.


    Quote Originally Posted by Edward Abbey
    A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •