On Oct. 11, 1995, at 11:30 a.m., I went cold turkey and set myself free; it was the last cigarette. I take no real sides on the smoking ban, as I've seen both sides now. I contacted some council persons in the past with the position that a business should have the right to decide. Even five or six years ago after I quit, my main concern was with the hyprocrisy and difference in how alcohol and smoking were being treated. I am not anti-alcohol. A couple of responsible drinks probably hurts no one.

As they try to ban smoking from public places, drinking is allowed at the civic center, gun range and on Grand Island streets at times.

I've seen the back side of both a cigarette and a drink. With drunk drivers, battered wives or families ripped apart by the abuse of alcohol, is alcohol's ugly side any worse than the ugly side of cigarettes?

What is the real truth about second-hand smoke? I'm not such a bold idiot to tell anyone it's good for you. The true effects can only be determined in a controlled pristine experiment, putting a smoker and non-smoker in a cage for 20 years. Otherwise how do you factor out the contribution of pollutants from cars, industry, chemicals etc.? One could call second-hand smoke ads a lie unless they use the terms, someone's best guess or that of a contributing factor.

So why did I change my position on this issue? First, the greedy cigarette maker doesn't give a darn about anyone. Second, I've seen several interviews by the employees trapped in these places six to eight to 10 hours a day. Most of these people seem to wish to be free of smoke, with little choice, but still with rights as anyone should to have a say. Thus, my position on the issue changed. My fight against hypocrisy seems not as important as these employees wishes for the sake of their health. Still, smoker and non-smoker should get along somehow. Though I could live without it, I don't mind if a smoker sits next to me. I've seen smoker and non-smoker treat each other terribly at times. The smokers conclude their habit is a dinosaur and be respectful, but the non-smokers must realize there is still a human being on the other side of that cigarette. Still, I say to the smoker, if I could quit, you can too. God bless.

Brent L. Klein

2305 Gateway Ave.

How will smoking ban be enforced?

A couple thoughts on the smoking ban: Didn't Utah have a ban on smoking in the 1950s? I think they even tried banning smoking and drinking on aircraft flying over the state. What happened to this law?

If the council is going to have a walk-through to check the ban, are they going to get the National Guard to help when they walk through the bars on 4th Street about midnight on a Saturday?

I don't smoke, but when I did and worked on the flight line where a cigarette might blow up something, we chewed. If the smokers get a plug of apple cut and a spit cup, I think they will be within the law. At supper time, pick a table next to one of our representatives.

Larry F. Hegwood

1213 N. Kimball

Lobbyists, not parties, dominate

Most people think a change in parties will change Washington. Our political systems of the past decades have been influenced by the status quo, Washington insiders, lobbyists, established bureaucrats and special interest groups. These groups are only interested in What's In It For Me! That has put our Congress and Senate in a position of congressional enslavement.

In essence our elected officials have enslaved themselves to the Washington establishment.

Extremism of any kind only empowers those who desire to control others.

Robert Marisch

St. Paul