Is there ANYPLACE left to smoke in peace!!!

[obieone]

I thought I was safe down here, but NOOOOOOOOOO!!!
They're gonna make me move again, AREN'T they! BASTAHDS!!:mad:

http://www.thestate.com/local/story/361997.html

NOT April fools!:mad:

[Vr3MxStyler2k3]

Hmmm

April Fools?

[tcrossma]

I doubt it's an April's Fools joke, this is a trend in many towns/cities across the country. In my town there hasn't been smoking allowed in public buildings for many years.

[obieone]

Hell, I remember when they passed an ordinance in Weymouth banning smoking in PUBLIC!
F*cking PC NAZI's! One of the many reasons I moved down here!

[cfrizz]

There is NOTHING PC about dying from lung cancer. Especially if you are NOT a smoker. You want to kill yourself go right ahead, but you don't have the right to take anyone with you!

If it's a public venue then no smoking should be allowed.

Eventually you will run out of places to run. Stay in your house & smoke til you choke, but eventually I believe that the entire country will eventually go smoke free in all public buildings.

[daboyz]

A no smoking ban was recently passed here and it was so nice to go to a bar and not smell like a chimney when I came home. I think Cathy's right on this one.

[tonyb]

No,there should be places to smoke,and places to not.That way the consumer has a choice to frequent the places they wish...smoking...non-smoking.

Cathy,thats like saying I shouldn't have to pay higher health care costs because so many are slurping down ding-dongs.So lets ban ding-dongs? C'mon....don't go into places that allow smoking,is that so hard?

[Ricardo]

I smoked for 30 + years. Smoke free now for 7 months. Never felt better in my life.

They should ban that shit from planet earth :)

[tonyb]

.....ALSO......everyone knows smokers are more fun and tip better.:D

[tcrossma]

I'm glad that smoking isn't allowed in public buildings these days. It's nice to not come home from a restaurant and not have to wash my clothes because of the smell.

And I don't think it's a matter of having some places smoke-free while in other it's allowed. Is the town supposed to somehow select a set of restaurants that are to be smoke-free while allowing smoking in others? Are the restaurants themselves to choose? Doesn't work.

Smoking adversely affects those around the smoker, and I also agree that it's a good trend to stop it in public places. There's a whole bunch of things that can't be done in public, this is just one more.

[bobman1235]

This has been covered ad nauseum before.

Restaurants aren't public buildings, they're private buildings, owned by private citizens. That's where your theory falls apart.

I'll be completely honest, I like that there's no smoking in restaurants and bars for the purely selfish reasons you mention, but still think when someone has a private business they should be able to allow whatever legal practices they choose therein.

Your viewpoint isn't surprising considering you're from the lovely nanny state of Massachusetts, though. THey always know what's best for everyone right? Blech.

[George Grand]

The next time I'm sitting in public seating in a public venue, with some fat son-of-a-bitch next to me halfway into my seat, and he or she's NOT persecuted for it, I'll remember this thread.

[billbillw]

Smoke in your home, your yard, and your car. Be happy that cigarettes aren't illegal like some other fairly harmless natural plant products. They will probably be outlawed at some point in the future as the tobacco lobbyists become less powerful.

BTW, I used to be a HEAVY social smoker. I'd smoke a pack in a night of drinking at the bar, then go all work week without one. Next time I'd get 3+beers in me, I'd start chain smoking again. I quite about 5 years ago when I met my wife. Couldn't be happier. God awful smelling things don't even taste good. Since then, I took up occasional cigar smoking, but even that got old after awhile.

[ohskigod]

part of me thinks a person should run there business the way they want to. allow smoking, dont (vis a vis restaraunts/bars etc) whatever.

that said, going to a restaraunt or bar and not choking on smoke is a nice thing. tough call. glad I dont smoke. if anyone needs me, I'll be sitting next to George :D

[pearsall001]

I love it when all these whiney smokers start complaining. What a bunch of cry babies. If you want to kill yourself...go right ahead, in your own house. Just keep your poison puke smoke to yourself.

[tcrossma]

Restaurants aren't public buildings, they're private buildings, owned by private citizens. That's where your theory falls apart.

They are buildings open to the public, therefore they aren't private. There's lots of things that you can't do in public already, this is just another. Restaurants have regulation upon regulation they already have to deal with... it's not like you can open a restaurant (or any other business open to the public) and just do whatever the hell you want with it. Removing smoking just hits home with a lot of people because it's taking away something they could recently do. And yes, we in MA know best, so listen up ;)

[cfrizz]

Sorry Bob but this has nothing to do with my living in MA.

It has to do with the fact that I have allergies & smoking sets them off BIG TIME. It has to do with the fact that it compromises my health.

It has to do with the fact that I saw my father waste away to cancer even though he didn't smoke & the same with an uncle who died of lung cancer from smoking unfiltered Camels.

The crap is just bad news all the way around. If you want to do it in your own home have at it. in enclosed spaces where everyone else can go, NO.


This has been covered ad nauseum before.

Restaurants aren't public buildings, they're private buildings, owned by private citizens. That's where your theory falls apart.

I'll be completely honest, I like that there's no smoking in restaurants and bars for the purely selfish reasons you mention, but still think when someone has a private business they should be able to allow whatever legal practices they choose therein.

Your viewpoint isn't surprising considering you're from the lovely nanny state of Massachusetts, though. THey always know what's best for everyone right? Blech.

[candyliquor35m]

I never thought bars and now some of the casinos are going smoke free. I guess when the tobacco companies were found guilty of causing cancer, there's no stopping the smoke free movement.

It would only be a matter of time before a waitress or bartender would sue their employer for causing their cancer.

I'm not a smoker so the fresher air will be nice.

[dorokusai]

It's nice to smell good but I don't care about smoking either way. I don't smoke and I'm the last in the line, so who cares.

[F1nut]

Whole lotta me, me, me 'round here.

Some of you don't seem to remember Prohibition. Look it up, the Gov't knows what's best for you. Don't think it'll happen again.....you're fooling yourself.

Phil, your comments disappoint me.

[SKsolutions]

I find it funny. You can kill yourself with boilermakers at the bar, or outside with a cigarette. . . just not at the same time.
Ridiculous.

[mrbigbluelight]

What next ?

The revered and time-honored "Dutch Oven" ?


As far as smoking in a bar goes, if you're smoking in a bar, and I say to you, "Excuse me, but I find your smoking offensive and I think it is compromising my health", you have my permision to remind me that,

"Hey, Cupcake, it's a fugging bar !".

Thank you for your cooperation.

[hearingimpared]

/qg==wheat th rdr storuwa/s/wAaashh==sojjjjjwmwq

[hearingimpared]

Those little grrelt entereded againgl I ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhuuuuuu yooooooooe0e= ftetttttt tethk ysRR7ER ha leav ei the are gohnle.

[hearingimpared]

Those little grrelt entereded againgl I ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhuuuuuu yooooooooe0e= ftetttttt tethk ysRR7ER ha leav ei the are gohnle.

Uhgo yhyiwwwwwwww

[Face]

Joe, slowly back away from the computer... :D

[hearingimpared]

g----MBGGGGGGGGGGGGG-Nat ber wek dhhhh adkkk eiii==== adn did awhollbgig rjbot got allo e o=eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeepqoeyo=5 yo eoeo-qu =======================

As ascrewit a i aaaaaaaa ajjjjjjjjj da pye

[hearingimpared]

Those little grrelt entereded againgl I ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhuuuuuu yooooooooe0e= ftetttttt tethk ysRR7ER ha leav ei the are gohnle.

Uhgo yhyiwwwwwwww

[ben62670]

Hey Joe you OK?
Do to recent heath issues with you I am actually concerned. Shoot me a PM or I will call you.

[BaggedLancer]

+2, Joe you ok?

[ben62670]

He doesn't need any medical attention at the moment, but....

[Demiurge]

They are buildings open to the public, therefore they aren't private. There's lots of things that you can't do in public already, this is just another. Restaurants have regulation upon regulation they already have to deal with... it's not like you can open a restaurant (or any other business open to the public) and just do whatever the hell you want with it. Removing smoking just hits home with a lot of people because it's taking away something they could recently do. And yes, we in MA know best, so listen up ;)

Wrong, unless you're a Socialist.

You own your home just like a business owner owns his business, unless they've gone public (stock, etc, where a group of shareholders have a say in electing the people who run the company).

They are not public buildings. Just because government has overstepped it's bounds on so many things doesn't make what they're doing right.

Own something sometime and then come back here and tell me that Joe Schmoe and some government airbag should have the right to tell you how to operate it.

Former smoker here. I'm not on some crusade to force others to quit. That should be a choice since it's a legal product. Got a problem with cigarettes? Ban them. Do you ever ask yourself why your "do-gooder" government officials won't go for that? Tax revenue, that's why. Ain't got a damn thing to do with health -- it's all about power and money.

[pearsall001]

Whole lotta me, me, me 'round here.

Some of you don't seem to remember Prohibition. Look it up, the Gov't knows what's best for you. Don't think it'll happen again.....you're fooling yourself.

Phil, your comments disappoint me.

Sorry bro, I wasn't looking to dissapoint anyone. It's just that it's some really nasty stuff that I just don't want to be around for health reasons. Believe it or not, I can tolerate it if I'm in a smokers home...after all it is their castle. It just doesn't belong in public spaces where I have no escape route. Nothing like sitting down in a restaurant now & actually smelling the food & not stale smoky air.

[bikerboy]

One of the reasons for the ban is an employee at a bar ect had to breathe that toxic air the whole time they are at work. Unsafe work environment. Banning smoking outdoors doesnt follow that logic. My parents smoke and every time we visit we get sick 2 days later. I guess we arent tough enough to handle it.

[ben62670]

One of the reasons for the ban is an employee at a bar ect had to breathe that toxic air the whole time they are at work. Unsafe work environment. Banning smoking outdoors doesnt follow that logic. My parents smoke and every time we visit we get sick 2 days later. I guess we arent tough enough to handle it.

What did a person get a gob at a bar for if they can't handle the smoke? If you can't handle heat don't work in the kitchen. If your afraid of heights don't be an iron worker....
Open 2 identical bars. One smoking, and one non smoking. Guess which one stays open? I can see stopping it in restaurants, but bars? Private clubs?

[TroyD]

I don't have a problem with banning smoking in a public (ie govt ) place. However, I think that it's a slippery slope. Restaurants and particularly bars, I think it's going overboard. Let the market decide. If people want nonsmoking bars and restaurants, let them vote with thier wallets.

Again, not a big smoking fan but I sorta agree with Demi, the govt wants to ban smoking everywhere but doesn't want to get it's nose out of the trough of tobacco tax money.....

BDT

[shack]

It would not bother me if smoking was banned 100%.

[sucks2beme]

Sadly enough, some of the same guys that want to ban tobacco
are all for smoking the other stuff. Go figure!

[strider]

I believe you should be able to do whatever you want as long as you're not causing harm to someone else. Where Maryland takes the crown for BS regulations in regards to the smoking ban is their enforcement on anti-loitering laws outside of bars. They've been giving out citations to people who stand within 150 ft of a bar who go out for a smoke. In addition, a bar/restaurant owner is not allowed to have even a patio that has any protection around it for patrons who need to go outside to light up.

Maryland- The Land of Over Restricted Living

[tommyboy]

Banning smoking from restaurants i can maybe understand, but bars.... you got to be kidding me. I don't smoke and really never had(i did for about a month in high school and said screw it), and I'm also the person who hates coming home from a bar smelling like smoke. But I understand that this is a bar, A place where people come from a hard days work to have a good time. Its also a private business, and the owner should choose if there is smoking or not. You are not going to get lung cancer by going to a bar every once in a while and if you are really worried you are, you really shouldn't be going to a bar in the first place.

[Airplay355]

Why would you want to smoke in the first place? There's really NO good reason to, especially when you consider the consequences.

[bobman1235]

People do lots of things we don't all understand. Just because you don't get it or it's bad for you doesn't mean it should be outlawed.

[ohskigod]

fact of the matter is, it's proven fact that second hand smoke has serious health hazzards to others. there is a 2 edge sword as to why things have come to this.

a)smokers, on occasion, can be rude with the smoke. believe me, if there was a non smoking bar, at least one douschemonkey would light up and not give a crap and you smokers know it (if not more). it would never work. If I had a dollar for every time I had to tell a smoker to stop smoking in an area designated as not smoking, I'd be rich. while smokers complied with my request because I'm a 300+ lb gorilla, I have seen them to tell others to go eff themselves while standing under a non smoking sign puffing away.

b) (and this is a big one) bar and restaraunt owners could have invested a bit on smoke control. if they did, this sh*t would have never hapenned. having a seperate smoking area would have been good. and would some smokeeaters and ventilation have killed anyone? I can take some smoke, I lived with 2 parents that smoked, but when I walk into a bar or club and cant tell if its smokers haze or the f^&king building is on fire, then mr business owner is a jackwad....plain and simple.


apparently, due to human nature, things werent done the right and reasonable way. Therefore, if we figure a person's right to not die of lung cancer through no volition of his own FAR outwieghs someone's right to smoke without walking out a door to do so (and god forbid putting on a jacket and not whine like spoiled schoolgirl) we have smoking bans.



oh, and by the by, if people actually want to smoke despite paying RIDICULOUS taxes to do so, then its the smokers fault.....not the government. When your addicted to something, people will always exploit you. Drugs? your a drug dealers bitch. Smoke? the government will bang you without the courtesy of a reach around. Twinkies and Ho Ho's? your either a slave to excersize or immobility (or both..lol

life is what it is kids....act accordingly ;)

[bdaley6509]

good...it's a disgusting habit that affects other people...not just the smoker.

[shadowofnight]

As much as I can't stand smoking on a personal level, I think they went overboard when they included bars in the mix. I mean since the first bar opened its doors you knew there was going to be certain things inside....booze...smoking...and people looking to get laid

There is NO reason they cant have smoking ok bars ( Where employee's sign that they are aware this is a smoking allowed enviroment and any negatives associated with smoking hazards are up front and accepted by the employee )...as well as non-smoking bars.

Both types of bars would be well stocked with paying customers...so WTF is the problem with having both available ?

Here in CA , where the hammer has probably fallen the hardest....the hundreds of Indian Casino's are exempt....people are smoking away...thing is the ventilation systems are are so damn good its never that bad ( The casinos realize they need to keep both smokers and non-smokers happy...so they pay for and install good vent systems )

[shadowofnight]

a)smokers, on occasion, can be rude with the smoke. believe me, if there was a non smoking bar, at least one douschemonkey would light up and not give a crap and you smokers know it (if not more). it would never work. If I had a dollar for every time I had to tell a smoker to stop smoking in an area designated as not smoking, I'd be rich. while smokers complied with my request because I'm a 300+ lb gorilla, I have seen them to tell others to go eff themselves while standing under a non smoking sign puffing away.

Thats what bouncers are for.....when I was a bouncer smoking was still ok in bars here in CA...but that would be one of their responsibilities nowadays.
Since most regular bars dont have bouncers ( Mine was a strip club :) ) ...that could be one of the requirements of a non-smoking establishment...a non-smoking enforcer...that is what a bouncer does, throw assholes out . You light up in a non-smoking bar...you are an instant asshole..out you go.

[cfrizz]

Lou, that was an absolutely outstanding HILARIOUS post!!!! Thank you!

[carpenter]

Is it all about PC culture ? not so sure this time. IMHO it's more about business owners being terrified by frivolous lawsuit.
-"Hey I was in your store ten years ago and inhaled second hand smoke, while being pregnant,
now my son likes to dress like a woman! you mutated my eggs you bastard! I'm gonna sue your ass for two million!"

having recently switched teams (so to speak) I couldn't care less about the smoke ban,
but I believe, that on that subject, today's society rewrote the book on hypocrisy.
Personally? I really do wish all big Tobacco goes belly up. soon. however, because it ain't gonna happen anytime soon and remembering that smokers are ... well ... people,
I can't see the harm in designating well ventilated smoking areas, in restaurants and bars.

[bobman1235]

It's comforting to know that at least a few people know how to think rationally and not selfishly. Well said carpenter.

[Lorthos]

Sorry bro, I wasn't looking to dissapoint anyone. It's just that it's some really nasty stuff that I just don't want to be around for health reasons. Believe it or not, I can tolerate it if I'm in a smokers home...after all it is their castle. It just doesn't belong in public spaces where I have no escape route. Nothing like sitting down in a restaurant now & actually smelling the food & not stale smoky air.

You shouldn't have to come on here and apologize, your entitled to your opinion on here just like everyone else......

[cfrizz]

Again, wanting to maintain one's good health is NOT being selfish. Once your health is gone, are you going to make me all better from something that could have been prevented in the first place? I don't think so.

Smoke travels. the designated smoking areas that they tried DON'T WORK! The bar/restaurant owners are not going to spend the money to make their establishments smoke free so the only way to solve the problem is to ban smoking.

You want to drink & smoke, do it at home. You want to eat dinner out, no problem, when your done, pay up, get out & light up! No one is stopping you from smoking, they are simply saying you can't do it where you can pollute everyone elses lungs!

It's comforting to know that at least a few people know how to think rationally and not selfishly. Well said carpenter.

[bobman1235]

I personally don't smoke, and as I've said, I enjoy smoke-free bars despite being opposed to the law that created them. If I, like you, had allergies I would avoid places that allowed it. If I was that worried about my health from second-hand smoke in private establishments I would avoid those establishments. If all restaurants allowed it and it bothered you, don't go out to eat. If there were enough people like you, the restaurants would change their policies. If there weren't enough people like you, YOU'RE IN THE MINORITY.

You've got it in your head that you're entitled to go into these places, but you are not. You choose to. Just like those owners chose to put up their money and open up their restaurants and bars, you choose to walk into them. I think everyone's fine with not allowing smoking in actual public buildings that you don't have a choice in entering - courthouses, hospitals, police stations, etc.

What if I were a smoker and had a party at my house. It was an awesome party, you didn't want to miss it, but most of the people there were smokers so it would be a smoky party, and that would bother you. You'd not go, right? Should it be illegal for me to allow smoking in my apartment when I'm having a party, even if everyone entering knows what they're getting into?

[ohskigod]

I personally don't smoke, and as I've said, I enjoy smoke-free bars despite being opposed to the law that created them. If I, like you, had allergies I would avoid places that allowed it. If I was that worried about my health from second-hand smoke in private establishments I would avoid those establishments. If all restaurants allowed it and it bothered you, don't go out to eat. If there were enough people like you, the restaurants would change their policies. If there weren't enough people like you, YOU'RE IN THE MINORITY.

?

you're keeping in your head that smoking is merely an inconvenience. it isnt. if I come into your favorite restaraunt and crack you in the skull, you'd complain (as well you should). if my response was "hey, if you dont like it, don't come back" how would you take it? probably not well.

me cracking you in the skull is illegal, as it should be. why? because it harms you physically and we normally...as a society...frown on things that cause a certain amount of hard to others. second hand smoke does that, plain and simple.

I take exception to being called selfish because i dont want to inhale poison into my lungs. call me a selfish prick, but I am a fan of oxygen/air in general.

[bobman1235]

I don't mean to offend, you're certainly entitled to your viewpoint, I just strongly disagree.

Loud music is damaging to the ears, a legitimate health risk; should all concerts and clubs be required to be under 90 dB?

Pretty much everything sold at McDonalds, barring a salad with no dressing, is bad for you (arguably worse for you than smoking, considering heart disease kills more people than cancer every year), should they have to close their doors forever? Or should people just choose not to go?

And honestly, in your example, if there were a restaurant where it was advertised that when you walked in you'd get punched in the face, would ANYONE go? No, it would go out of business in a week! (or turn into an S&M bar).

[shack]

I hope that during my lifetime there is a national ban on smoking in any indoor place open to the public. I would also like to see OSHA reopen it's case on air quality in the workplace.

[tcrossma]

And you also seem to have it in your head that smokers are in the majority, which they are not by a long shot.

Smokers are the minority, restaurants wouldn't change their policies for any number of reasons, and laws were changed to accomodate.

Regardless of what you say, a restaurant is open to the public and therefore held to certain standards of responsibility. They can't just do whatever the hell they want because they are a private business. It's unsafe to allow smoking - period.

[bobman1235]

Obviously it doesn't matter what I say; almost every state in the nation has a law that bans smoking in these places. My "side" lost the argument, so you can rest happy in the fact that you won and I'm just trying to make people see things in a different light. No matter what I say or what you say the laws are there so don't get all pissy with me.

[ohskigod]

I don't mean to offend, you're certainly entitled to your viewpoint, I just strongly disagree.

no offense at all brotha, the skull cracking was just for example purposes, hope you didnt read anything else into it..LOL ;)

Loud music is damaging to the ears, a legitimate health risk; should all concerts and clubs be required to be under 90 dB?

no, because the loud music itself is the service all would expect at a concert and a dance club, whereas the smokey haze and miner's lung isn't the primary reason for everyone to go to a restaraunt and bar :p

Pretty much everything sold at McDonalds, barring a salad with no dressing, is bad for you (arguably worse for you than smoking, considering heart disease kills more people than cancer every year), should they have to close their doors forever? Or should people just choose not to go?

I knew someone was going here. me eating McDonald's hurts me. I am not cramming chicken mcnuggets down anyone's throat against there will (kinda harkes to the skull cracking argument eh). Also, McDonald's food is the primary reason for people to go into McDonald's which nullifies the argument in the same manner as the concert argument

And honestly, in your example, if there were a restaurant where it was advertised that when you walked in you'd get punched in the face, would ANYONE go? No, it would go out of business in a week! (or turn into an S&M bar).

valid point, from the standpoint of what I used as an example in my last post. however, if cracking skulls werent ilegal, it would happen ALOT more in many bars and clubs

[jflail2]

Hah, I can't believe it. I am right in line with bobman on this one. To say that there should be NO smoking facilities is just as assinine as saying everywhere should be smoker friendly.

There is talk of even banning smoking in CIGAR STORES in some states. I'm sorry, but there has to be a line drawn somewhere. If the owner chooses to provide a smoking environment, and the patrons are there (in the cigar store case) specifically to smoke, should our govt really have the ability to ban this outright? I'd know going in that there will be smoking, and if it bothers me I just wouldn't go in the 1st place...

I can understand banning it in restaurants without a completely separate smoking section, but to ban it everywhere carte blanche is a bit overboard. I guess big brother does know what's best for all of us though.....

[cfrizz]

In this particular case he does and there is over 50 yrs of medical proof to back him up!

Be my guest & kill yourself, but you shouldn't be allowed to take anyone else with you & little by little you wont be allowed to.

[shack]

Big Brother (aka federal and state government) is not trying to protect smokers from their own actions...but trying to protect others from the smokers actions. It is a legitimate and reasonable use of federal and state powers IMO.

[carpenter]

Shack, I'm afraid your take on what is government intervention worthy "but trying to protect others from the smokers actions" is a very slippery slope. this DYI statistics (http://www.alcoholalert.com/drunk-driving-statistics.html) site, says
In 2006, there were 13,470 fatalities in crashes involving an alcohol-impaired driver (BAC of .08 or higher) – 32 percent of total traffic fatalities for the year.
and ..

16,005 people were killed in the United States in alcohol-related* motor vehicle traffic crashes (BAC of .01 or higher).

and I'm leaving the children fatalities statistics out on purpose.
what would you say the government should do? should it reinstate prohibition as a way to protect tens of thousands of people ? didn't work to well the first time around did it ...? (some) people who drink and drive kill innocent children!
Am I being demagogues? you bet your ass. it's still very relevant in this discussion, as the simple fact is that the Gov't did try it once.

[tonyb]

In this particular case he does and there is over 50 yrs of medical proof to back him up!

Be my guest & kill yourself, but you shouldn't be allowed to take anyone else with you & little by little you wont be allowed to.

Oh boy.......just how far will we let big brother dictate what is good or bad?
We can all agree smoking is bad for you....and so is sugar,red meat,talking on your cell phone,listening to music at extreme volumes,and so on.Should not be a problem to all of you then when this all gets regulated.If a bar lets people smoke,you have a choice to frequent that place or not.Just like I have a choice to sit in the front row of a rock concert and risk hearing loss.So lets forbid that too then.It's about freedom of choice,plain and simple.I can agree though when you have a captive audience,such as indoor concerts,smoking should not be allowed.Here in Illinois,bar owners are lobbying to allow smoking in bars.....hmmm,could be for the lack of buisness?I guess you non smokers aren't spending enough money.:p All the smokers I know,now go out to eat and return to someones house to party rather than staying in a bar.Who looses?

[jflail2]

When you start imposing smoking bans on places that are specifically for smoking (cigar lounges, tobacco shops, any bar in which the owner has chosen to provide a smoking area for his/her clients) then yes it is going too far.

Like I said, I understand not having smoking in restaurants, malls, etc etc, but pasting that ban across all places of business is overboard.

[mantis]

No,there should be places to smoke,and places to not.That way the consumer has a choice to frequent the places they wish...smoking...non-smoking.

Cathy,thats like saying I shouldn't have to pay higher health care costs because so many are slurping down ding-dongs.So lets ban ding-dongs? C'mon....don't go into places that allow smoking,is that so hard?

Ding dongs don't hurt others while eating them.

[bobman1235]

Unless frozen, and thrown.

[ohskigod]

the comparisons people are pulling out there arses are making me giggle.

no one wants to ban smoking, just smoking in public areas where other people are who dont want to inhale smoke. NOT BANNING SMOKING.

so the alcohol/prohibition argument isnt just invalid, it's grasping at straws to bolster an argument using flawed logic. drink all you want, but if you get into a car and put others lives in danger....IT's ILLEGAL!!!!! last time I checked

smoking is fine, but smoking in some public places putting there lives in dnger (granted over a much longer term) BECOMING ILLEGAL.

----anyone see a similarity here? I do :D


hey Carpenter, thanks for bolstering my argument ;)

[ohskigod]

Unless frozen, and thrown.


again, if frozen and thrown at someone......ILLEGAL. thats assault brotha!

ROTFLMAO :p:D:p:D:p

[tonyb]

Ding dongs don't hurt others while eating them.

Then they won't mind when the airline's charge them for 2 seats.

Or when your healthcare cost goes up because of that un-insured gastric by-pass,ding dong eating mo-fo starts crying.

Smoking doesn't hurt anyone else either....as long as a non-smoker isn't standing by them.Thus,they have a choice.And if another smoker is standing there,then they really don't give a crap now do they?

[ohskigod]

There is talk of even banning smoking in CIGAR STORES in some states. I'm sorry, but there has to be a line drawn somewhere. If the owner chooses to provide a smoking environment, and the patrons are there (in the cigar store case) specifically to smoke, should our govt really have the ability to ban this outright? I'd know going in that there will be smoking, and if it bothers me I just wouldn't go in the 1st place...

I .


a VERY VALID argument here. I would say Cigar stores should be smoking permitted.

the specific places to smoke argument if applied to some bars might hold water, but can be harder to implement than you think.....

[shack]

the comparisons people are pulling out there arses are making me giggle.

no one wants to ban smoking, just smoking in public areas where other people are who dont want to inhale smoke. NOT BANNING SMOKING.

so the alcohol/prohibition argument isnt just invalid, it's grasping at straws to bolster an argument using flawed logic. drink all you want, but if you get into a car and put others lives in danger....IT's ILLEGAL!!!!! last time I checked

smoking is fine, but smoking in some public places putting there lives in dnger (granted over a much longer term) BECOMING ILLEGAL.

----anyone see a similarity here? I do :D


hey Carpenter, thanks for bolstering my argument ;)

BINGO!


Smoking doesn't hurt anyone else either....as long as a non-smoker isn't standing by them.Thus,they have a choice.And if another smoker is standing there,then they really don't give a crap now do they?


Almost all scientific research disagrees with this point of view.

[Imperitor]

^ +1

[ohskigod]

Smoking doesn't hurt anyone else either....as long as a non-smoker isn't standing by them.Thus,they have a choice.And if another smoker is standing there,then they really don't give a crap now do they?


truth be told, I have a problem with smokers dictating where I can and cant go under this argument. basically what your saying is the minority number of smokers fully dictate where the non smokers can and can not eat (well, those that don't feel like breathing in something that will kill them and make them smell like an ashtray)

smoker - "hey, I'm smoking here, if you dont like it, eat somewhere else"

me - "f%^k you, and put out your cigarette....I'm hungry"


truth be told, if someone smokes near me I might not notice it. its the chain smoker that smokes non stop while eating...creating a plume of annoyance that chaps my ass. this is the same jerkoff that didnt light up on the way to the resteraunt, or even in the car. just when they sit down to the meal to they start lettin em rip. these people exist.....believe me

I really dont see the major inconvenience. you cant just go outside for a couple minutes??? really?
If someone banned ding domg's to where I would have to go outside to eat ding dong's....my fat ass could easily go outside and eat a ding dong. I couldnt whine, what with my mouth being engorged with ding dong and all!!! :D

[tonyb]

BINGO!




Almost all scientific research disagrees with this point of view.

Really....what tests where done with a non smoker standing say 30 ft away in a dinning room and a guy smoking in the bar area? I read all the second hand smoke stuff,but just about all test put both of these people in the same crowded room with little to no air circulation.Yes,I can agree second hand smoke isn't good for you,but why is it your call on what a buisness can or cannot do? The way it used to be was you had places that allowed smoking and places that didn't.Everyone had a choice.What was wrong with that?Leave it up to the individual buisness owner to decide,not your government.

[bobman1235]

I really dont see the major inconvenience. you cant just go outside for a couple minutes??? really?
If someone banned ding domg's to where I would have to go outside to eat ding dong's....my fat ass could easily go outside and eat a ding dong. I couldnt whine, what with my mouth being engorged with ding dong and all!!! :D

Again, this is absolutely a true statement; it's just the idea of creating laws telling private businessowners what LEGAL things they can and can't do in their own establishment is bad.

Smoking is also gross and annoying, and forcing people to go outside is very much NOT a huge deal, and the arrogance of someone to do something annoying and harmful around others and saying deal with it, even that I agree is bad. They are all valid statements, and completely irrelevant : a private business is still a private business, and smoking is still legal in private places.

[tonyb]

truth be told, I have a problem with smokers dictating where I can and cant go under this argument. basically what your saying is the minority number of smokers fully dictate where the non smokers can and can not eat (well, those that don't feel like breathing in something that will kill them and make them smell like an ashtray)

smoker - "hey, I'm smoking here, if you dont like it, eat somewhere else"

me - "f%^k you, and put out your cigarette....I'm hungry"


truth be told, if someone smokes near me I might not notice it. its the chain smoker that smokes non stop while eating...creating a plume of annoyance that chaps my ass. this is the same jerkoff that didnt light up on the way to the resteraunt, or even in the car. just when they sit down to the meal to they start lettin em rip. these people exist.....believe me

I really dont see the major inconvenience. you cant just go outside for a couple minutes??? really?
If someone banned ding domg's to where I would have to go outside to eat ding dong's....my fat ass could easily go outside and eat a ding dong. I couldnt whine, what with my mouth being engorged with ding dong and all!!! :D

Smokers don't dictate,the owners do.Problem is non smokers want to eat at smoking places and expect everyone else to change to accomadate them.Go eat at a non smoking place....but you won't.So now smokers took there cash elswhere and the individual buisness owner is feeling the pinch.Go outside?? In the winter? Yeah ok....here in chicago that doesn't work out too well.The bars will get it back eventually,the state misses the money too much.

[shack]

The government regulates many activites of it's citizens. Smoking is now one of those because of it's adverse effect on others. AND YES the CDC reports do cover the distances that second hand maintains it's toxicity and emphatically states "There is no risk-free level of secondhand smoke exposure. Even brief exposure can be dangerous." MORE regulation is gaining momentum among the majority of citizens and will continue to increase in scope. It is not going to change. I am in favor of it. Smoke in your home, in your car, smoke outside but not indoors in a public place or business. I would also like to see more littering enforcement of people who throw cigarette butts out of their car or on the ground. in public.

[cfrizz]

Well eventually I believe that all establishments that cater to the public are going to go the nonsmoking route.

Since they are the minority they will either stay home or get over themselves & start eating out again & smoke their nasty butts outside when they are done.

As far as business hurting, most saw little to no change in business or an increase in business. So that BS doesn't fly either!

[treitz3]

Damn, all this talk about smoking makes me want to go outside and smoke a cigarette. Thanks, needed that.

[NotaSuv]

Well eventually I believe that all establishments that cater to the public are going to go the nonsmoking route.

Since they are the minority they will either stay home or get over themselves & start eating out again & smoke their nasty butts outside when they are done.

As far as business hurting, most saw little to no change in business or an increase in business. So that BS doesn't fly either!

In the Minneapolis area some counties went smoke free before others...the place i managed did see a big decrease during the 1am-5am shifts (bar rush) as smokers could drive 5 minutes into another county and enjoy the same food in a smoking area.....BUT when the entire state went smoke free we did actually see an overall increase..lots more families and kids during the supper hours and daytimes on weekends...the overnight rebounded as everywhere was now smoke free.... Indian casinos are the only places i know of here that now allow smoking

[Demiurge]

smoker - "hey, I'm smoking here, if you dont like it, eat somewhere else"

me - "f%^k you, and put out your cigarette....I'm hungry"

D

You don't get it.

If I open a restaurant and I allow smoking, you should expect that there may be someone smoking while you're fattening your ass up on my food.

If I open a restaurant and I don't allow smoking, you should expect that I'll throw anyone out on their ass if they try lighting up.

You've all got to accept the reality that the world always doesn't cater to you and what you deem acceptable.

If smoking bothered as many people as the government would have us believe there would be more business owners CHOOSING to ban it on their own.

Ya'll can slice this however the hell you want, but until tobacco is banned outright you don't have a leg to stand on in this argument. You seem to forget we're talking about a LEGAL and governmentally regulated product.

...and as I said before, I don't really care about what other gross abuses of power the government has advanced -- it doesn't justify this one.

Really can't wait until they come after the fat people.

[shack]

You don't get it.

No...you don't get it. You or anyone else does not have the unbridled right to what you want...when you want. Like it or not...there are rules and society gets to set those rules. If you don't like them you can work within society to change them. Smoking where and when you want or allowing smoking where and when you want is not a right guaranteed by the constitution. One has certain unalienable Rights...and smoking in a public building isn't one of them unless society as a whole allows it.

[Demiurge]

No...you don't get it. You or anyone else does not have the unbridled right to what you want...when you want. Like it or not...there are rules and society gets to set those rules. If you don't like them you can work within society to change them. Smoking where and when you want or allowing smoking where and when you want is not a right guaranteed by the constitution. One has certain unalienable Rights...and smoking in a public building isn't one of them unless society as a whole allows it.

Shack, YOU don't get it. Stop calling a private business a public buildings. They are open to the public, but you can choose who you do or do not want inside of it. I know you understand the difference, so why do insist on calling restaurants, bars, and some guys machine shop a public building?

You have a choice to make, but you want government to make it for you. Businesses have a choice to make, but you want government to take it away from them.

[treitz3]

..........and that's unconstitutional.

If it ain't, show me where it says it ain't.

[tonyb]

Shack, YOU don't get it. Stop calling a private business a public buildings. They are open to the public, but you can choose who you do or do not want inside of it. I know you understand the difference, so why do insist on calling restaurants, bars, and some guys machine shop a public building?

You have a choice to make, but you want government to make it for you. Businesses have a choice to make, but you want government to take it away from them.

Very well put Sir...

Can anyone tell me why when we had smoking places and non smoking places,why that wasn't satisfactory?Yes,I am baiting.....

[shack]

Why can't a business owner serve alcohol wherever they want? Why can't they open a strip club wherever they want?. These are legal activities and it's their "private property". Why can't you fire a gun wherever you want? You have the right to have one and the right to shoot it...why should you be limited to where?

You all can whine all you want...the fact remains that the government is making public policy decisions that the majority of the citizens agree with. You claim you have certain rights...you don't. The government has the right to do what is doing...and I wholeheartly agree with it.

[tcrossma]

Shack, YOU don't get it. Stop calling a private business a public buildings. They are open to the public, but you can choose who you do or do not want inside of it. I know you understand the difference, so why do insist on calling restaurants, bars, and some guys machine shop a public building?

You have a choice to make, but you want government to make it for you. Businesses have a choice to make, but you want government to take it away from them.

When you have a business, open to the public, you are accepting to abide by a certain set of rules. No, you can't choose who you do or do not want inside it as that would be discrimination. You can't sell people OTC drugs in a restaurant, people can't dine naked in a restaurant, you can't serve alcohol in your private hair salon, you agree to have a clean, safe, healthy environment for your patrons (thus the health code regulation). This is not your business to do with whatever the hell you want, sorry. You have to follow the rules. And right now there are rules in place in many states that say smoking isn't OK.

[cfrizz]

Bingo Tcross! The majority of society has gotten the message that smoking is bad & we will no longer tolerate the affects of second hand smoke. You are free to smoke, but the general public must be protected from 2nd hand smoke.

The govt knows that if left up to business owners they will always choose the bottom dollar over doing what's right. Therefore, more & more cities/states are making the right choice for them.

You are free to bitch about that, but you are not going to stop it. Those that don't comply will end up being fined out of existence & no one will miss them since others will take their place happy to comply with the law.

[shawn474]

Smokers can smoke......................they can smoke in their houses and in their cars. I'm not against people smoking in a bar, etc. but I must admit that it's so much nicer to go to a bar, have a few drinks and not come home smelling like a chimney. Not to mention how bad smoking and even secondhand smoke is for you (not preaching, just saying).

I don't hate smokers; I just hate smoking.;)

[hoosier21]

I hate smokers, and I am one

[tonyb]

Bingo Tcross! The majority of society has gotten the message that smoking is bad & we will no longer tolerate the affects of second hand smoke. You are free to smoke, but the general public must be protected from 2nd hand smoke.

The govt knows that if left up to business owners they will always choose the bottom dollar over doing what's right. Therefore, more & more cities/states are making the right choice for them.

You are free to bitch about that, but you are not going to stop it. Those that don't comply will end up being fined out of existence & no one will miss them since others will take their place happy to comply with the law.

The general public was protected,by having their own non smoking places.
So now the smoker is no longer "free" to smoke in a designated smoking place.

You said buisness owner will always go with whats best for the bottom dollar,yet in a previous statement,you said that buisness has been better since smoking was banned.Which one is it?
As for the majority saying no to smoking.....I must have missed that vote when it came up.Like I said before,I can agree on it when you have a captive audience in an enclosed area.Bars should be able to make their own choice.While some cities might see a benefit from it,here in chicago,we are not.We have a whole town here,Fox Lake,80% of that town smokes and has a bar on every corner.So after buisness went south and smokers stayed home to party,all the bars put up tents with heaters to draw them back.Bar owners have organized and are now lobbying to get a pass on the ban.Seeing that our state is 5 billion in the hole,they have a shot at it.I respect that you don't like smoking,just respect others that do.Goes both ways.

[dorokusai]

This thread makes we want to start smoking, just to make ppl angry.

[tonyb]

Shack,littering enforcement?? On butts?? Jeez man,while some smokers are pigs,look around,I see more Micky D's,Starbucks,Water bottles spewed all over than butts.I suppose next your going to tell me my smoking in illinois is affecting your health in Tennesse......according to the no distance is safe rule by the CDC.

[bobman1235]

Bingo Tcross! The majority of society has gotten the message that smoking is bad & we will no longer tolerate the affects of second hand smoke. You are free to smoke, but the general public must be protected from 2nd hand smoke.

The govt knows that if left up to business owners they will always choose the bottom dollar over doing what's right. Therefore, more & more cities/states are making the right choice for them.

You are free to bitch about that, but you are not going to stop it. Those that don't comply will end up being fined out of existence & no one will miss them since others will take their place happy to comply with the law.

Wow. Only in Massachusetts. That post is frightening on so many levels.

[nms]

Cool it guys. Seriously. The weirdest things set this place off. :rolleyes:

[reeltrouble1]

I have at times, enjoyed breaking a smoker in two, leaving the butt for brett.

We are watching all of you, in soooo many ways.

RT1--I'd ride my camel for a mile before I walked.

[wingnut4772]

http://bestsmileys.com/smoking/5.gif

[venomclan]

I switched to sniffing glue, I enjoy it freely everywhere. :)

[exalted512]

As a non-smoker, I would enjoy the smoke-free environment of a bar. Having said that, I don't think the government should regulate it in a bar environment. I would really rather not smell the crap while I'm eating at a restaurant, but it probably wouldn't deter me if the food was good enough. Of course, county, state, and federal buildings shouldn't allow it, but I'd hope even the smokers agree on that one.

Having said all that, the government has every right to ban it at any business they want. Its called the Commerce Clause, and under it, they can do just about anything they want to. A private business is not exempt from the government, and in reality, its REALLY ignorant to think so.
-Cody

[wingnut4772]

I switched to sniffing glue, I enjoy it freely everywhere. :)

I picked a bad week to stop sniffing glue.

[sucks2beme]

I believe all smoking should occur adjacent to large piles of meat.
Examples: brisket, ribs, pork.

[shawn474]

There are extremists on both sides of the discussion. My mother (an admitted extremist on some issues) takes the stance that it's OK if smokers want to subject themselves to the health hazards in the privacy of their homes, cars, etc. It's a different animal when you have smokers who are subjecting people (non-smokers, children, asthmatics) to the hazardous effects of smoking in a public setting (resturaunt, stadium, bar, etc.). I can't say that I disagree with her here.

I don't see banning smoking in these places a violation or over regulation any more than I see the smokers subjecting the effects of it onto the public. Bottom line is there are still places that smokers can smoke.

[tonyb]

I can agree with most comments,so why the need to change when both camps had their own places to indulge ?

Can't wait for the rest.....
The chlorine in your pool bothers me,you have to get rid of it.
Burning leaves bothers me,you can't do it.
I am driving a prius to save energy and your driving a Hummer,not fair,sell your hummer.
Your useing pesticides to control bugs on your property,and they are all running to mine,sorry,you have to stop.
Can't use regular light bulbs,must use the ones with mercury in them. HUH??
You'll have to pay a tax to visit the city if you don't live there.
Your fat,pay up.
your too skinny,pay up
Lawn mowers,leaf blowers,make too much noise,sorry,do it by hand.
Your carbon footprint is too big,pay up or buy credits.
Sorry,your kid can't have peanuts in his lunch because of one kid.
Bakery's will become the devil.

I could go on,but,really,where does it stop? No one can give me an answer on why change was needed when smokers and non smokers had their own places to patronize??
Probably cause there is no good reason.

[tcrossma]

I could go on,but,really,where does it stop? No one can give me an answer on why change was needed when smokers and non smokers had their own places to patronize??
Probably cause there is no good reason.

None of the things you mentioned has been proven to cause harm to others, with the exception of the peanut butter. And in fact my child's daycare does not allow peanut butter to be brought into the classroom if there are any students in the building that have a peanut allergy.

As to why it wasn't working when a restaurant had a place for smokers and non-smokers? Part of it might be because it's not always possible/practical to completely separate the two. I'm not sure how many times I sat in the non-smoking section that just happened to be 5 feet away from the smoking section. Unless the fascility has completely separate rooms the two sections have to merge somewhere...

Another part might be the staff. It is a proven fact that second hand smoke is bad, and why should a waitress have to serve people in a room filled with smoke? Sure, you could say "If you don't want to be around smoke, don't become a waitress". But you could also say "If you want to smoke, go outside".

Less than 20% of the country smokes. It seems to me that the recent changes to the laws prove that the majority of people do not want to be around smoke.

[avelanchefan]

Smokers can smoke......................they can smoke in their houses and in their cars. I'm not against people smoking in a bar, etc. but I must admit that it's so much nicer to go to a bar, have a few drinks and not come home smelling like a chimney. Not to mention how bad smoking and even secondhand smoke is for you (not preaching, just saying).

I don't hate smokers; I just hate smoking.;)

I will chime in then jump back out. First off I smoke, and FFS I want to quit, but I love it to much. There I said it, and its out of the way. But I know I can control my smoking. I can go all day without one and not be a complete douche bag afterwards. I have to be able to do it because my job demands it. So sometimes I do not sympathize with smokers who need to get their fix.

That all being said here in Tucson they banned smoking in all public buildings and businesses. So the bars have made smoking areas for the outcasts of society. Now the people that made their lives look more pathetic are bitching about not being able to sit outside because there are smokers outside.

Shit like that pisses me off. I don't care who the eff you are, get over yourself. You guys didn't want it in eateries, and taverns, now that you pushed the smokers outside you will not be happy with that either. Places have already banned public smoking, but why do all this stuff? Why not just ban smoking. Seriously. Why have all these laws in place, just ban it and be over with it.

But don't complain when they do ban it (and we know they will) when they cut little Johnny's after school program because, !!SHOCKER!!, all that tobacco tax was used to pay for it, and now YOU the anti smoker will actually have to foot the bill for it.

But I ask the Anti-smoker this? What kills more? Second hand smoke, or Drunk drivers from the bars that are smoke free? So getting all hot under the collar about smoke, while joe blow next to you is so inebriated that he can hardly speak, gets behind the wheel and kills someone, just makes this thread look pathetic. I wish more people were adamant about Drunk drivers as they are against smoking.

[tcrossma]

But I ask the Anti-smoker this? What kills more? Second hand smoke, or Drunk drivers from the bars that are smoke free? So getting all hot under the collar about smoke, while joe blow next to you is so inebriated that he can hardly speak, gets behind the wheel and kills someone, just makes this thread look pathetic. I wish more people were adamant about Drunk drivers as they are against smoking.

Drunk driving is illegal. And I don't think too many people are going to sympathize with someone who gets behind the wheel drunk and kills someone. You are talking about two completely different things here.

According to some quick googling, in 2006 there were approx. 14,000 deaths in the US caused by drunk driving. In 2007 there were approx. 50,000 deaths related to second hand smoking.

[shack]

Poor tony. He's so unfortunate to live in a place where there are restaurants and bars, pools, lots of vehicles, light bulbs (or electricity for that matter) leaf blowers or peanut butter or too much food. These pesky things cause nothing but trouble. There are lots of places in the world where none of this stuff is an issue. :rolleyes:

Why is smoking an issue? Because smoking not only harms the participant but adversly affects those near to them through no fault of their own. The smokers actions damages their health and intrudes on them.

Whether you believe it or not...from the CDC in 2006:

Cigarette smoking is the single most preventable cause of premature death in the United States. Each year, more than 400,000 Americans die from cigarette smoking. In fact, one in every five deaths in the United States is smoking related. Every year, smoking kills more than 276,000 men and 142,000 women.

- Between 1960 and 1990, deaths from lung cancer among women have increased by more than 400%—exceeding breast cancer deaths in the mid-1980s.

-The American Cancer Society estimated that in 1994, 64,300 women died from lung cancer and 44,300 died from breast cancer.

- Men who smoke increase their risk of death from lung cancer by more than 22 times and from bronchitis and emphysema by nearly 10 times. Women who smoke increase their risk of dying from lung cancer by nearly 12 times and the risk of dying from bronchitis and emphysema by more than 10 times. Smoking triples the risk of dying from heart disease among middle-aged men and women.

- Every year in the United States, premature deaths from smoking rob more than five million years from the potential lifespan of those who have died. Annually, exposure to secondhand smoke (or environmental tobacco smoke) causes an estimated 3,000 deaths from lung cancer among American adults. Scientific studies also link secondhand smoke with heart disease.


If 400,000 people died each year because of ANYTHING else there would be a public outcry to immediately ban/correct/remedy the problem.

Drunk driving kills about 13,000± annually.

[avelanchefan]

Poor tony. He's so unfortunate to live in a place where there are restaurants and bars, pools, lots of vehicles, light bulbs (or electricity for that matter) leaf blowers or peanut butter or too much food. These pesky things cause nothing but trouble. There are lots of places in the world where none of this stuff is an issue. :rolleyes:

Why is smoking an issue? Because smoking not only harms the participant but adversly affects those near to them through no fault of their own. The smokers actions damages their health and intrudes on them.

Whether you believe it or not...from the CDC in 2006:



If 400,000 people died each year because of ANYTHING else there would be a public outcry to immediately ban/correct/remedy the problem.

Drunk driving kills about 13,000± annually.

You know I really think those numbers are misleading. I can tell you right now, I see more DD deaths than I do smoking deaths. I can tell you right now that they will blame that breast cancer on smoking despite the fact that the woman had a family history of it, and she had been a non smoker for 20 years. They will still blame smoking. To get their point across.

I went to the doctor last year for a physical. (True story, not making this up) Doctor asked me if I had a family history of heart disease. I told him no. He said, "No one in your family has had a heart attack?" I said "Well technically yeah my grandfather had two at the age of 70, and 74." Doctor, "Well then you have a family history of it."

Basically I laughed it off, folks since when it is not acceptable for a 70 year old man to have a heart attack? And then try to tell the family the rest of their lives that they have a history of it? Hmm grandpa is 74 years old, and survived 2 heart attacks, drank until he rotted out his intestines, and smoked. He died at the age of 84 two years ago, and his doctor said smoking killed him. He is one of the 50,000 people in 2006. Grandma smoke too, so you should count her second hand smoke also. Statistics can be skewed.

[tcrossma]

He died at the age of 84 two years ago, and his doctor said smoking killed him. He is one of the 50,000 people in 2006. Grandma smoke too, so you should count her second hand smoke also. Statistics can be skewed.

No, he was one of the 400,000. Yes, statistics and numbers can be skewed, and if you think this is all some sort of consipracy that's certainly your right. But we're talking a lot of verifiable data at this point that says smoking and second hand smoke is a very very bad thing, so what you no longer have the right to do is smoke next to me while i'm eating.

[shawn474]

avalanchefan,
I'm not sure if your post was directed towards me or not, but I agree with you in some respects. We SHOULD be worrying about drunk drivers and such. The tobacco tax does pay for MANY things. However, you cannot argue with the FACT that smoking (directly or indirectly) causes cancer and contributes to a whole host of other health problems. People who don't smoke should not have to be subjected to that, plain and simple. It's your choice to smoke, greatly increasing your risk of heart disease, cancer, yada, yada, yada. But do it where it ONLY affects you. The non-smoking public should not have to be subjected to that. I'm not lecturing, judging or casting aspersions; just stating an opinion.

Tony, if you sincerely believe that the things that you listed are anywhere in the same vicinity as smoking and 2nd hand smoke, you're on another planet.

[shack]

You know I really think those numbers are misleading. I can tell you right now, I see more DD deaths than I do smoking deaths. I can tell you right now that they will blame that breast cancer on smoking despite the fact that the woman had a family history of it, and she had been a non smoker for 20 years. They will still blame smoking. To get their point across.

Statistics can be skewed.

As I said, believe what you will. A smoker dies from a from a drunk driving crash and was in the early stages of lung cancer. The DD accident killed him...but had he lived he would have been another smoking fatality. Regardless of what the numbers are...more/less...the fact remains that smoking shortens the lifespan (on average) considerably and it poses a health risk to those who come in contact with the smoke.

I have clearly stated that I believe smoking indoors in a place accesable to the public should be banned to protect all (including employees). Smoke in your home, smoke in your car, smoke in open areas away from others. Knock yourself out (literally).

Enjoy the rest of this if you choose. I'm out.

[candyliquor35m]

Right now mars is looking pretty good before the internment camps get going.

[dkg999]

The state of IA just takes a different approach! They just tax the crap out of tobacco to curb smoking. I think a pack of cigs cost about $7 now, and there is a stream of cars crossing the borders to stock up on cigs in neighboring states. The IA Dept of Revenue even has signs up on the major border crossing roads that bringing cigs into the state is illegal.

[tonyb]

"Tony, if you sincerely believe that the things that you listed are anywhere in the same vicinity as smoking and 2nd hand smoke, you're on another planet."

That wasn't the point I was trying to,but obviously failed to make.Of coarse it has nothing to do with smoking,more so big brother getting involved in your day to day life.

Ok,so if I don't care if I die earlier,you mean to tell me big brother does??

TC-I don't mean seperate sections within one building,but seperate buisnesses.What was wrong with that? No one is getting harmed besides smokers themselves,and if you worked there,chances are you smoked too,or didn't care one way or the other.So basically,I have someone else telling me what is good and bad for me.Can't wait untill they come after you overweight people.

[tonyb]

The state of IA just takes a different approach! They just tax the crap out of tobacco to curb smoking. I think a pack of cigs cost about $7 now, and there is a stream of cars crossing the borders to stock up on cigs in neighboring states. The IA Dept of Revenue even has signs up on the major border crossing roads that bringing cigs into the state is illegal.

You think they raise taxes on ciggs to curb it? Yet cry when they don't get their tax money? Whats more important? The money of coarse,has nothing to do with their concern for your wellbeing.Here in Illinois they even tax it on internet sales.So if you find a cheap site,call them instead to order.Pretty soon,you'll see internet sites for twinkies.:)

[Demiurge]

When you have a business, open to the public, you are accepting to abide by a certain set of rules. No, you can't choose who you do or do not want inside it as that would be discrimination. You can't sell people OTC drugs in a restaurant, people can't dine naked in a restaurant, you can't serve alcohol in your private hair salon, you agree to have a clean, safe, healthy environment for your patrons (thus the health code regulation). This is not your business to do with whatever the hell you want, sorry. You have to follow the rules. And right now there are rules in place in many states that say smoking isn't OK.

You're not saying anything I don't know, sir. There are regulations put in place to prevent abuses by businesses just like there are regulations put in place to prevent abuses by individuals. I don't recall having any issue with that -- it's a loose definition of a society.

I have said in this thread that citing various other intrustive and obstructive regulations that government has imposed on businesses and individuals over the years isn't a premise I am willing to accept. You, Shack, and so many others are making your argument on the assumption that those other regulations are fair and just. I will argue many of them are not, and I am not alone, certainly not in the business community.

Nobody said you can do whatever the hell you want. The issue is the anti-smoking crowd has decided that it's going to impose it's agenda on the private property rights of individuals. That's where the argument lies.

On the issue of smoking, your car, home, or business, which may all be owned by you is your private property. When you invite someone into your car, home, or business -- there's no reasonable argument that can be made stating that you should not have the right to tell that person whether or not they can - or - cannot smoke inside.

Cigarettes are a LEGAL product. If you don't like the choices made by the property owner in regards to the rules he sets around said product -- either take the issue up with him directly or leave.

It's very simple, and there is absolutely NO reason for the government to be involved in any of those choices. NONE!

If you care about people's health, quit barking up the wrong damn tree and start organizing to have tobacco products made illegal. Otherwise this incrementalism crap will creep up and hit you in the Hostess box the fatasses among us love to indulge in.

[tcrossma]

I don't care if smoking is made illegal or not, anymore than I want alcohol to be made illegal.

But if I went to a restaurant and every time I had a gulp of beer I could pour it down the throat of the child sitting at the table next to me I don't think telling that family "hey, you chose to come here" would be acceptable.

Enough said, i've spoken my peace on this subject and i'm not here to change anyone's mind, so carry on - without me.

[AsSiMiLaTeD]

I've always been on the side of banning it in public places, but am starting to see the valid arguments people like bobman and demiurge are making.

That being said, on a selfish note I do enjoy restaurants here all being non-smoking now.

[Demiurge]

I don't care if smoking is made illegal or not, anymore than I want alcohol to be made illegal.

But if I went to a restaurant and every time I had a gulp of beer I could pour it down the throat of the child sitting at the table next to me I don't think telling that family "hey, you chose to come here" would be acceptable.

Enough said, i've spoken my peace on this subject and i'm not here to change anyone's mind, so carry on - without me.

So obviously your stance on this issue is based on how you feel rather than anything substantial, such as property rights or health? Not a knock, just typical of what's been posted in this thread. It's all about ME, ME, ME, rather than putting yourselves in someone elses shoes.

If you invite someone to dinner at your place and your guest lights up a cigarette at the table do you believe you have a right to tell them they're not allowed to do that? On the converse of that, do you believe you have the right to invite them to smoke in your home?

The honest answer is yes to both questions.

Businesses are absolutely no different on this issue. In the 80s, laws went into effect forcing businesses to post Smoking and No Smoking signs in certain places of the business -- giving more than enough warning for any of you potential victims.

If restaurants with no smoking are what people want, that's what people will get. Did you know that it's LEGAL to smoke in most offices? Why don't most employers allow it? Because they wouldn't have many employees.

Let the market work. Government doesn't need to hold our damn hands on every single stinkin' issue that gets our pubes knotted up.

[tonyb]

Well Demi,unfortunatly,alot of people would rather have the government hold their hands and force an agenda down the non conformers throat.I just don't see how more government involvement helps anything...except drive up cost and raise taxes.As a buisness,you have to operate within the laws of the given jurisdiction.With so many laws,taxes,regulations,no wonder buisness owners are crying foul.It's also a miracle any one in their right mind open a small buisness of their own today.

[treitz3]

Ok, here goes. All you whiney non-smokers think about this. Your fu(king car exhaust poses a health risk to me and my family and the earth.

Stop driving.

Ever heard of carbon monoxide poisoning? Well, I've had it and it came from motorists just like you. So, tell you what. I'm going to march right on up to the Supreme Court and demand that for the health and safety of the "public"k"", that nobody can use a device that gives off carbon monoxide. Have fun mowing your yard.

[candyliquor35m]

I would like a casino 5-10 minutes from my house but the gov't says it's addictive and too dangerous.

a. The gov't decides bars are bad and does away with them completely.
b. The gov't allows bars but regulates them accordingly.

I choose option b and casinos don't even cause cancer :D

[tonyb]

treitz.....and you'll find out quick it's all about the money,they could give a rats ass if you died today or tomarrow.

Shack- I think your under the illusion that the "public majority" rules.Not so.Then let the public vote on issues,not some politician who swings the way the money flows.Example would be gay marriage.If the general public voted,and the majority said it's in the public interest to forbid it,that should be the end of it,right? Nope,there is a adgenda going on and the public interest ranks down on the totem pole.Special interest and their coin is the real public majority.

[treitz3]

Oh, I know Tony. If I marched up to the Supreme Court and actually proposed this, the oil industry would off me in about a month. It is about the $$$. If it wasn't, then we wouldn't be dependent on foreign oil and we would all be driving "green" cars [not to mention our economy just might be better].

My post does make a good point though. The non-smokers are complaining that we [smokers] are causing health problems via second hand smoke and they have the skewed data to back it up. Well, I can also produce skewed data that proves that vehicle emissions are affecting health [ask someone who lives in Hong Kong or L.A.] worldwide.

It's ridiculous to me that the non-smokers play the "my health is compromised" card when dealing with those that prefer to smoke, yet at the same time vehicles and the emissions that are just as bad, if not worse than second hand smoke continues.

I've never gotten "second hand smoke poisoning".

Some people's priorities are not what I would consider "normal". Convenient for them, perhaps, but not normal.

[shawn474]

Wow, treitz. I guess smoking doesn't cause cancer either. Talk about being under an illusion. The fact that you actually believe that second hand smoke effects are a byproduct of skewed data shows a lot. It's a common courtesy more than anything. Facts remain that smokers choose to basically poison themselves. That's their decision. I choose to partake in a few (or many) adult beverages responsibly. I know that it may damage my liver, but a risk I am willing to take. I don't shove it down other people's throats so as to make that decision for them.

Your car analogy is laughable. I (as well as the majority of the civilized world) choose to drive a car because it is convenient and a NECESSITY. I don't choose to suck on the tailpipe in my closed garage and invite the neighbors over to join in.

So, the rest of the ignorant, lying public should have to put up with 2nd hand smoke because it denies your civil rights? :rolleyes: Give me a break, man. I am through with this.

[obieone]

If places like 'The Peoples Republic of Taxatwosh*ts' want to impress me with their 'enlightened' view of whats best for the public, then they'll pass Jessicas law!
Right now they're just another state with FREE ranging PEDOPHILES!
And ONE butt wipe is holding up the law-Eugene Flaherty! I hope someone shoots this POS!

[treitz3]

Wow, treitz. I guess smoking doesn't cause cancer either. Talk about being under an illusion. The fact that you actually believe that second hand smoke effects are a byproduct of skewed data shows a lot. It's a common courtesy more than anything. Facts remain that smokers choose to basically poison themselves. That's their decision. I choose to partake in a few (or many) adult beverages responsibly. I know that it may damage my liver, but a risk I am willing to take. I don't shove it down other people's throats so as to make that decision for them.
Smoking causes Cancer. I never said it didn't. No illusion here, just reality. I understand the facts and I accept them and yes, we choose to poison ourselves as a legal right of this country. I also drink as a legal right of this country.

As for the shoving down people's throats statement....look man, typically I'm not one to argue, but look at it from a smoker's perspective. It is being shoved down our throat that what we do is socially unacceptable, a health hazard and flat out rude if we "dare" to smoke in anything other than confined airspace. From what I have been reading, my take is that the "health" concerns are from second hand smoke. The point that I made was that the emissions from exhaust from combustible engines cause more of a health risk that second hand smoke. I know of that first hand, granted the carbon monoxide poisoning was short term and both second hand smoke and emissions are both long term.

Your car analogy is laughable. I (as well as the majority of the civilized world) choose to drive a car because it is convenient and a NECESSITY.
So, what I'm getting out of this statement is that since cars are convenient [and no, they are not necessary....they have only been around for 140 years or so in the whole grand scheme of things] and even though I went without one for 14 years [no shit], you still call it a necessary "convenience" and the folks that don't "NEED" a car just have to put up with your convenience and "second hand pollution", if you will. Give me a break hypocrite.

So, the rest of the ignorant, lying public should have to put up with 2nd hand smoke because it denies your civil rights?
I'm not saying that. Manners and common courtesy with smoking should be followed. Being polite and being a gentleman or gentlewoman should always be the norm, although unfortunately this is quite often ignored.

But, on the flip-side just for the sake of argument.....should my health be less of an issue because you deem driving a "necessity" when in all actuality it is a convenience that makes the air I breathe 24/7 have the same "quality" that second hand smoke delivers? Oh, forgot...because it's your civil right to drive a car?

If someone were to deny your "civil" right to drive a car because the emissions [like in a city such as L.A.] present a health hazard worse than second hand smoke, would you not be fighting for your "right" to drive?

I thought so.

Well, I'm fighting for my right to smoke. I will be polite. I will be courteous. I will be a gentleman, however when you tell me that I have limitations that have been growing exponentially since I was born and the movement keeps going toward further restrictions? I'm sorry, but I choose to smoke [for now] and that's my right.

You choose to drive a car, and that's your right. I get it. What I don't get is that they both hold a health hazard and since the combustible engine makes it "convenient" for you [disregarding my health], then it's ok. BUT, if I choose to light up, all of a sudden there's an issue?

Uh,huh. Your health must be more important than mine. :rolleyes:

[shawn474]

I'm not trying to start a fight here and I really do appreciate your rights as a smoker. I just feel that your rights as a smoker should be confined to where it does not affect anyone else. However, equating smoking and driving a car as two in the same is ludicrous. We are just going to have to politely agree to disagree here.

I see my car as a necessity because I live 50 miles from work, which I have to do to provide food and shelter (among the other luxuries that we enjoy) for my family. I can't very well drive a horse and buggy and by your standards people who use public transportation are contributing to the emmissions as well.

How do you think driving has evolved? When cars were first made, I am pretty sure they didn't have turn signals, brake lights, etc. When people started getting into accidents, they had to make a way for cars to be safer. Laws were made to use your signals to change lanes. Stop signs. Air bags. All to make people safer. Ultimately, it's your choice to abide by the laws of the road. Smoking has evolved the same way. It used to be that you could smoke anywhere you wanted, until 2nd hand smoke was proven to be a health hazard. Now they are placing restrictions on it to allow you to still smoke, allbeit in designated areas. I don't see that as a bad thing.

Conversely, I will be one of the main people to say "Hell no, that's not fair" if big brother ever outlaws smoking altogether (which will never happen in our lifetime).

And by the way, I am concerned about your health. So quit smoking!;)

[nms]

Somebody shoot this damn thread in the head, please.

[ninerbj]

I say we roll up the thread and smoke it!

[exalted512]

I say we roll up the thread and smoke it!

Not in the forum! Its a public place.
-Cody

[treitz3]

I dunno, if I had a private club that was open to the public on a membership basis.....

I would expect the right to make my own decision as to allow smoking or not. IMO, that should be up to the property owner to decide. If it's prejudice, then those that are offended need not come. Simple as that. Gov'mnt need not apply.

[nms]

Not in the forum! Its a public place.
-Cody

But your secondhand smoke won't travel over the internets (on purpose) wires, so smoke all you want, you're not harming me!

[exalted512]

Actually, its been proven that distance doesn't matter.
-Cody

[tonyb]

Actually, its been proven that distance doesn't matter.
-Cody

Well,according to the CDC that shack quoted.I guess that also means there is no safe distance for a fart too.:)

[Demiurge]

And by the way, I am concerned about your health. So quit smoking!;)

I'm not sure if you're responding to anyone specific, but speaking for myself, I am not a smoker. Thanks for your concern, though.

This issue really has nothing to do with smoking when you get down to the brass tacks. Food is now starting to receive the same treatment as tobacco products, which I have alluded to previously. It's going to be interesting to see how you all change your tunes as the incrementalism slowly cracks down on fatty and sugary foods and fat people. It's already happening.

Do a Google search on 'Fat Tax'.

[tonyb]

Demi-great point.As the issue goes way beyond smoking.Soon you will see your local eatery not being able to cook with butter or other designated fatty products.Bakery's and ice cream stores will pay higher taxes for their contribution to overweight americans.
So much for freedom of choice I guess.Do you really want government to control every aspect of your life? The trend is a little unnerving to me.If you ask any reasonable person about society today,they will fondly recall a time in the past when life was good.Know why it was good? Less regulation,less government involvement,more freedom of choice.Buisnesses were encouraged to grow,not taxed to high heaven for being sucessfull.Schools taught the basics without agenda's.Sure,everything evolves over time,but not all things should.Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.Off the soap box,have a good one all.

[zombie boy 2000]

"Smoke 'em, if you got 'em." - Rick Moranis

[shadowofnight]

Another reason I became a craigslist shopper vs. Ebay was because I bought an amplifier on Ebay , and when I opened the extremely well packed unit I had to take 3 steps back.

It smelled like someone had somehow captured the smoke from a couple of nightclubs and condensed it into this amp. It was perfect visualy and sonically ....it just smelled horrible. I gave it away to one of my smoking buddies, and now understand what it means when you see ads pushing " Used in a smoke free environment "

[bobman1235]

Another reason I became a craigslist shopper vs. Ebay was because I bought an amplifier on Ebay , and when I opened the extremely well packed unit I had to take 3 steps back.

How does craigslist vs ebay help this? Just because of local pickup?

[shadowofnight]

How does craigslist vs ebay help this? Just because of local pickup?


Of course....I can test visually/sonically/And with da nose before purchasing. I honest to God did not think it was possible for a piece of gear to retain THAT much cigarette smell.

[candyliquor35m]

Another reason I became a craigslist shopper vs. Ebay was because I bought an amplifier on Ebay , and when I opened the extremely well packed unit I had to take 3 steps back.

It smelled like someone had somehow captured the smoke from a couple of nightclubs and condensed it into this amp. It was perfect visualy and sonically ....it just smelled horrible. I gave it away to one of my smoking buddies, and now understand what it means when you see ads pushing " Used in a smoke free environment "

I've had this happen a couple of times. The smoke smell eventually goes away. I didn't complain to the seller because he had done a excellent packing job and the cdp worked fine. When I re-used the packing material for another sale, I warned the buyer that the box would smell like smoke.

[scottnbnj]

...from the CDC in 2006:

...In fact, one in every five deaths in the United States is smoking related. ...

oh brother.

... and,uh, ~in fact~ the big, full, accurate sound that comes out of those little magic cubes is soooo amazing too.

maybe just me, but, it sort of makes me wonder what sort of voodoo the cdc had to conjure to come up with the rest of their amazing ,er, ~facts~.

)

[shadowofnight]

I've had this happen a couple of times. The smoke smell eventually goes away. I didn't complain to the seller because he had done a excellent packing job and the cdp worked fine. When I re-used the packing material for another sale, I warned the buyer that the box would smell like smoke.


I figured it would probably go away in time, but my friend had been wanting one of these anyways so I just killed 2 birds with one stone. I didnt even want a faint smell of that in my house, and it was a lot more then faint.

[Demiurge]

Demi-great point.As the issue goes way beyond smoking.Soon you will see your local eatery not being able to cook with butter or other designated fatty products.Bakery's and ice cream stores will pay higher taxes for their contribution to overweight americans.
So much for freedom of choice I guess.Do you really want government to control every aspect of your life? The trend is a little unnerving to me.If you ask any reasonable person about society today,they will fondly recall a time in the past when life was good.Know why it was good? Less regulation,less government involvement,more freedom of choice.Buisnesses were encouraged to grow,not taxed to high heaven for being sucessfull.Schools taught the basics without agenda's.Sure,everything evolves over time,but not all things should.Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.Off the soap box,have a good one all.


http://i105.photobucket.com/albums/m216/Demiurge1000/donut20police.jpg

:p

[treitz3]

Well, I just found out that we can't smoke in our privately owned pool. It's outside and quite large for the community. No notice was given and when asked for a reason, they said that "You wouldn't BELIEVE" how many people complained about smoking at the pool. Who decided? 4 members of the HOA. Good thing that there is a vote this month to elect new members. Most of the neighborhood, including the non-smokers disagree with this ruling.

It's outside. I repeat. It's outside. Even at the busiest times, maybe 15 folks are at the pool at any given time. That leaves about 30-35 available chairs and lounges to sit at. Personally, I think it's BS. If you are caught smoking within the pool areas, you are banned from the pool for a year, which I think is more BS. To top off the BS, they want you to smoke out in front of the pool house.....right next to three gardens all lined with highly flammable pine needles. No ashtray has been provided. Yeah, we have a real smart HOA folks. Real smart.

[BaggedLancer]

Well, I just found out that we can't smoke in our privately owned pool. It's outside and quite large for the community. No notice was given and when asked for a reason, they said that "You wouldn't BELIEVE" how many people complained about smoking at the pool. Who decided? 4 members of the HOA. Good thing that there is a vote this month to elect new members. Most of the neighborhood, including the non-smokers disagree with this ruling.

It's outside. I repeat. It's outside. Even at the busiest times, maybe 15 folks are at the pool at any given time. That leaves about 30-35 available chairs and lounges to sit at. Personally, I think it's BS. If you are caught smoking within the pool areas, you are banned from the pool for a year, which I think is more BS. To top off the BS, they want you to smoke out in front of the pool house.....right next to three gardens all lined with highly flammable pine needles. No ashtray has been provided. Yeah, we have a real smart HOA folks. Real smart.

I'd listen to them and throw one right in the pine needles. Watch how fast they change their minds.

[F1nut]

Stand outside the fence, right next to the pool and make sure the offended people are downwind.

[bigaudiofanatic]

Ha I hope the band it everywhere I hate smoking. Band IT band it ALL. Not good for anyone.

[George Grand]

I try to abide by all the rules. It does make sense that I shouldn't smoke in a restaurant, and it doesn't make sense that I shouldn't smoke in a bar, but that's the law so I don't. I don't go into bars a lot so that's an easy one. Outdoors at athletic fields makes sense, I don't want to leave a bad impression on young athletes. I think that over time it will be more accepted by us smokers. Give us a break, it was only about 10-15 years ago that we pretty much ruled the world, and it was our ashtray. We need more time to acclimate. At one point in time it wasn't illegal to stab somebody, and yea, stabbings were rife. After formal laws came into play, over the centuries man slowly accepted this dictum, and now it is only the hardcorest among us that still subscribe to the blade.

We got the fattest-ass country anywhere. If they find life on Mars there's no doubt in my mind we will be fatter than them too. Here we are in Hog Central, where I think 80% of the pop is obese, and that 80% is telling me my second-hand smoke might kill them. If you didn't already know better, you'd swear that someone who couldn't overcome their own shortcomings was trying to dictate how I'll overcome mine.


I'm with the band.

[F1nut]

Band it??? I'm sure you meant ban. Anyway, the problem with all this ban this, ban that is that the next thing some PC fool wants to ban is going to be something YOU like to do. Slippery slope and all that, ya know!

[George Grand]

What are you going to do if they band poor spellers?

If they do band you, I'll teach you how to smoke.

[steveinaz]

Some seriously sanctamonious assholes on this forum. Anybody got a cigarette I can bum?

If my comment offended you, the shoe must fit.

How shallow do you have to be to form such a negative opinion about someone based on a habit they enjoy. Lots of perfect humans here I guess--good for you.

[obieone]

*sigh* The whole purpose of my rant, was to point out the stupid priorities of S.C.
Here they're trying to show how PROGRESSIVE they are, but, they still have: a confederate flag on the state house grounds(not that I care at all), they DON'T have SAFETY inspection stickers or EMISSION stickers for vehicles, they pretty much ignore federal building codes, and labor laws.
If I brought a labor attorney from someplace like MA. and showed them some of the working conditions of NATIONAL chains down here, they're friggin' head would spin off!!
Basically, there's a lot of 3rd world charm down here.

[candyliquor35m]

I respect smokers. Someone has to carry the torch :)

Cigarettes were invented by the cavemen in case the fire went out :)

They were square tho because the wheel hadn't been invented yet :)

[steveinaz]

Actually, my smoking helps me to filter out the type of people I wouldn't want to associate with in the first place (read that: judgmental; intolerant). There's a plus.

If you're an anti-smoker, and you're smelling cigarette smoke---you've gone out of your way to find it in this country now. Quit your cryin.

[treitz3]

But I ask the Anti-smoker this? What kills more? Second hand smoke, or Drunk drivers from the bars that are smoke free? So getting all hot under the collar about smoke, while joe blow next to you is so inebriated that he can hardly speak, gets behind the wheel and kills someone, just makes this thread look pathetic. I wish more people were adamant about Drunk drivers as they are against smoking.
Ding Ding Ding! ;)

In other words, if you are going to bitch about something worthwhile....well then, by all means bitch about something worthwhile.

[Ricardo]

11 months smoke free next week, and loving it. I can ride 10 miles in my bike, run up the stairs to the third floor...anything is possible now. A year ago, I could not run 300 feet to catch my connection because my flight was late.

I smoked for over 30 years and I understand all of you smokers. But believe me, quitting is the best decision I've made in my life.

[wizzy]

they DON'T have SAFETY inspection stickers

Sounds good to me. They don't have the in California either.

Now I'm in NC it sucks because they do have them. So even though I have a newer car the brand spanking new tires, I have to have the gubamint not letting my old station wagon pass because "the tires don't have enough tread!"

Never mind I drive it 2k miles a year, only to go do hardware store runs and the like. Never mind I have another car with new tires I can drive in the rain.

Oh thank you government for making me spend $400 on new tires that I DON'T NEED!!

W

[JohnLocke88]

Smoking doesn't CAUSE lung cancer, or heart disease, it causes an increased RISK.

Learn about causation versus correlation.

With that, time for this thread to die.

[stereo_luver]

Exactly what are we smoking?

Chuck

[sucks2beme]

Smoking is a nasty habit that shortens your life and ruins your health.
I don't care who smokes where, as long as it's outdoors or away from me.
I don't want anyone to legislate it out of existance, because God only knows
where they'll draw the line, red meat, caffeine, alcohol, etc.
Still, not as nasty as chew. Can I have your gear when you die?:D

[steveinaz]

The last time I perused the US Constitution, I didn't notice seperate rights for smokers and non-smokers; maybe I need to read it again?

Legislation has been passed, rules are in place---anything else is simply whining by the intolerant at this point. Public domain is PUBLIC domain, you'll have to tolerate the fat, the smoker, the bad breathed, the smelly, the skinny, the red haired, the blonde haired, the handicapped, the whiney anti-smoker, etc, etc. Get a life and move on....

[steveinaz]

truth be told, I have a problem with smokers dictating where I can and cant go under this argument. basically what your saying is the minority number of smokers fully dictate where the non smokers can and can not eat (well, those that don't feel like breathing in something that will kill them and make them smell like an ashtray)



But as a smoker I cannot smoke in any restaurant, bar, indoor venue of any kind--and that's OK? So it's not fair when you're denied access somewhere, but it's cool if it's a smoker being denied access. Nice.

Just a touch self-centered, dontcha think? OH..that's right..smokers are 2nd class citizens, I forgot.

The problem is the is no compromise. As smokers we are OUT of bars, restaurants, work places, most hotels, most rental cars, airplanes--hell most airports, theaters, etc, etc. Now the antis want to target the outdoors? Sorry but as long as I help pay the taxes that support those public places, I've got just as much right to be there as you.

God this country reminds of the movie "Demolition Man"; "salt is bad for you, hence, illegal." :rolleyes:

[AsSiMiLaTeD]

Here's the way I see it.

Something that is harmful to other people in a public environment should not be allowed, plain and simple. Fat people, people with bad breath, the smelly, the skinny, and everything else steve mentioned above - not of those hurt me.

Having said that, I've not researched much, and I don't know if there's any proof that smoking causes harm to other people - so I can't form an intelligent opinion one way or the other about where it should be allowed.

They passed the restaurant law a few years back here, and while I'm not sure where I stand on the subject, it is nice to be able to eat in a restaurant and not have to endure the smell of smoke while I eat.

[steveinaz]

...and a guy standing 20 ft from you in a park smoking a cigarette isn't hurting you either. Show me a single study. It's PURE BS. This is an issue of "control" and the anti's know it. They simply want "US" out the "THEIR" parks--plain and fucking simple. THEY can kiss my ass, I helped fund that goddamn park.

The laws have gone from reasonable and prudent to STUPIDITY, based on ignorance and fear. That's what smoking Americans have a problem with.

[concealer404]

I'm a smoker, and i'll be honest, i have absolutely no problem with the restaurant ban....

The bar ban? It's stupid.... But i can live with it.

If it goes farther, though, i'm going to lose it. I work at a "smoke free!!!" workplace, and i can even deal with that, even if it means i have to walk a couple hundred yards off the premises to keep my sanity after a rough couple hours of people screaming at me.

If it gets worse? I'll lose it.

I don't smoke so much for the addiction. (Although i'll admit that's not helping things) I have no problem quitting anything when i want, i quit for 3 years cold turkey with no problems at all. Now, i do it to force myself to get away from whatever is bugging me, spend 10 minutes just thinking, calming down, freshening up my mind before i go back into the front line.

Same thing... working on my car... i get frustrated, i step back, have a smoke, and think about it rather than just pounding the crap out of the car with a hammer.

Sure, there's more constructive ways to do this, but you know what? I'm not worried about it.

[steveinaz]

If you have ever sat around