shakran

We're not saying you shouldn't be smoking. As we've said many times, as long as you smoke where it's not going to harm or effect us negatively, we don't care.

Trouble with smoking sections is that they're generally open to the nonsmoking sections. Air does move, so your smoke comes over to me even if I'm in nonsmoking. I was at a restaurant once where they had a seperate smoking room that was only accessible via this weird airlock-like thing with double sliding doors. Smoke basically couldn't get out of the smoking section. Had no problem with that. Would eat there again.

As I've said, if you want to kill yourself with your cigarette smoke, that's your lookout. Just don't take me with you.

pig

Ahh yes, but you're forgetting the less well-known corollary that you're right to swing your nose ends at my fist...

__________________
You don't love me, you just love my piggy style

Glory's Sun

I understand how smoke does navigate.. hence the reason restaurants should have a good ventilation system installed if they have a smoking section. I just love how everyone talks about how breathing my cig smoke is harming them so much when the air they breathe without my cig smoke is just as bad.

pan6467

My views are this.... I pay more in life insurance than non-smokers, I pay more taxes than non-smokers in my tax bracket, because of my "nasty habit" and the others like me cities are able to have "sin taxes" that tax me even more to build stadiums and public arenas that they tell me I can't enter if I partake of the very habit/addiction that they used for money to build these things.

I also truly believe that it is not the government's place to dictate to me what nor where I can partake. It is up to the owner. Once you have government dictating where a person can smoke, they will find new things to start regulating in the name "of others good health".

What happens when all the smokers stop smoking or buying their cigarettes tax free on the black market?

You want to bankrupt a government fast? Get everyone who smokes to stop buying cigarettes through normal channels for one month. 1 month of no tax revenue from smokers and the system will crumble.

Then what are you self-righteous people going to want to tax to make up for that revenue?

Smoking is bad, but it is not up to the government to dictate to privately owned places who they can or cannot serve. As the public we have the right to shop and patronize where and what we choose to.

If the owner finds his clientele doesn't want smokers he'll go non-smoking. If an owner finds his clientele wants to smoke he'll have smoking and if the owner sees it is a split clientele he'll work out ways to appease both.

IT IS NOT GOVERNMENT'S BUSINESS TO DICTATE..... ESPECIALLY WHEN THE GOVERNMENT CANNOT FUNCTION WITHOUT THOSE TAXES.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

shakran

Oh come on, that doesn't even make sense. Sure the air's polluted. If you ADD cigarette smoke to that polluted air, it makes the air worse. The original air therefore can't be just as bad.

Xera

The ones that I love are the nonsmokers that say this and then jump into their Hummers to drive 5 blocks to the grocery store for a loaf of bread. Not that anyone here would do that, but my Spanish teacher from about 3 years ago DID. Since I wanted the good grade i did not bother telling her how hypocritical she was in her statement, but I really wanted to.

I know in Tempe Arizona after they had passed the law that banned public smoking, this was about 10 years ago, the first concert after the law was in place the police searched peoples bags and bodies for cigarettes before the concert. As I understood the law possession of cigarettes was never illegal. Only smoking them in the concert was illegal. It was a big deal because what they were specifically looking for was not illegal, making the search illegal. dunno why I'm mentioning that, but it seems to fit the question of how fair the actual treatment of smokers is.

I agree smoking in areas where nonsmokers who were smart enough to either never start of committed enough to quit and stay that way will be present is rude, dangerous, and should be highly discouraged. But this kind of treatment (searching for possession of a legal substance) is extreme and should not be tolerated.

Glory's Sun

Sure it makes sense. I mean does the air really get that polluted from cigarette smoke? Does it hang around like car fumes and jet fuel?? I highly doubt it. If people are so worried about what they are breathing in, they shouldn't walk by a running car. They shouldn't go near airports or factories. In fact, they should just live in bubbles. The air you breathe is full of junk no matter how you try to slice the pie. Get rid of the cigarette smoke and guess what? You're still breathing in crap.

I can understand how my argument wouldn't make that much sense if you are talking about an enclosed environment, but even then, there are plenty of germs, allergens and harmful things floating in the air at your neighborhood restaraunt that a little cigarette smoke isn't really going to make a difference one way or the other. You just happen to notice the cigarette smoke because you can actually smell it.

Carno

This is the second time I've seen you make reference to jet fuel that supposedly "hangs around" in the air. Explain yourself.

__________________
http://how-to-spell-ridiculous.com/

filtherton

Do you have any evidence for this? I don't think i've read any studies concluding that smoke-free enclosed environments contribute directly to the development of cancer, or that adding pollutants to air that is already polluted doesn't increase the risks involved with breathing that air.

Would you let someone piss in your drinking water? Why not? I mean, it's not like the water is sterile, and unless the person who is peeing is sick, you probably won't get sick from drinking their urine. Even if the pee-er was sick, whatever you were exposed to couldn't be any worse than what was in the water already, right?

pig

I'd stick to this part of the argument. The previous part is simply impossible to defend. If I take 1000, and I add 1, then I've still 1001. I might argue that the extra 1 is marginal, but its still there. Period.

__________________
You don't love me, you just love my piggy style

shakran

Yes, if you're sitting anywhere near me smoking a cigarette that extra pollution gets into my lungs and onto my clothes.

You don't get out to bars much do you?

Running cars do not have the concentration of carcinogens and tar that cigarettes do, and you know it. Hell a running car in LA is actually putting cleaner air out the tailpipe than it took in. You can't say that for a cigarette smoker. Additionally, cars are outside where the exhaust can dissipate. Cigarettes that I object to are inside, where it stays around. If you brought a running car into a restaurant I guarantee you'd have a room full of pissed off people.

And that makes it ok for you to put more junk into it? Great line of logic there.

That IS what we're talking about.

Just about every doctor on the planet, except those on the payroll of the cigarette companies, will disagree with you there. The germs and allergens might give me a cold or some hay fever. The cigarette smoke can give me cancer, and reduce the efficiency of my lungs for decades. There's a big difference, and pretending there isn't weakens every other argument you might come up with.

pan6467

I just don't understand the mentality of people who want to make this tax rich legal action, illegal in PRIVATELY owned places.

Again, let the marketplace decide. If a person owns a bar and is dictated to by the government who he can admit and whom he can't (provided they are of legal age) then the government by this action can hurt that owner's business.

If you don't personally like smoke, then go to places that don't allow smoking. Talk to business owners and see if it is profitable for them to close the smoking sections or perhaps seperate them better.

I don't understand why people cannot fucking just work out compromises.

I don't understand how you can sit there and beg the government to interfere and regulate and dictate when this can be handled in the marketplace itself.

Some people in this country worry more about fucking cigarette smoke getting near them than they do with what else is being put into the air, water and very foods we partake of.

Some people complain about smoke, as they pop another xanax, prozac, Zyprexa whatever, so they can get through the day and some of those people get behind the wheels of cars, teach your kids at school, make laws.

If you want to ban smoking in public places..... THEN GET YOUR FATASSES OUT AND TELL THE POLITICIANS TO STOP TAXING CIGARETTES.

There's fucking compromise ok...... you stop taxing my cigarettes, telling me how much of a whatever I am and using the places the tax money made possible through "sin taxes" and I'll stop smoking in public?????

Deal? Until then, take your selfish, "we need government involvement" (yet you complain gov't is too big), cry me a river, petty little bitch ass, and go shove your smoking laws up your ass. Because you are fucking hypocritical, until you stop living off the taxes, you are leeches.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Glory's Sun

Shakran,

Yeah I go to bars all the time. The point is that if you go to a bar, expect smoke. Deal with it. If you don't like that a bar has smokers.. then drink at home or go to a bar that doesn't or start your own bar.

You can say that cars put out cleaner air than what came in. Big deal. There's still harmful products in it. But since you were talking about just inside we'll go with that. I was going with the blanket approach.


You walk into a restaraunt that you know has a smoking section.. why? If you hate it so damn much why would you bother to go? Oh it's your right to go and you shouldn't be limited by what people do right? I shouldn't be limited to what I do either just because you don't like the "risk" or smell. You take risks in everything you do. That's life. My only gripe with nonsmokers is when they do enter into an establishment that they know has smoking and they complain. This is where I agree with Pan that the business owners should be able to decide since they write the checks.

shakran

What if I work there? My employer is allowed to expose me to noxious carcinogens without providing proper safety equipment? Someone should tell OSHA, because they're not aware of that.

You're not. go outside to smoke. Problem solved.

Well hell then let the market decide! Business owner doesn't want black people in his restaurant? Cool! The market will correct him. Maybe. Sure worked in the 50's didn't it!

Bill O'Rights

1-800-356-4674

__________________
"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." - Susan B. Anthony

"Hedonism with rules isn't hedonism at all, it's the Republican party." - JumpinJesus

It is indisputable that true beauty lies within...but a nice rack sure doesn't hurt.

pan6467

Well, you go to the employer and you tell them you wish not to work in the smoking section.

1 of 4 things will happen:

- the employer will not be able to find enough people to work the smoking section, thus he'll have to close it down,

- he'll have to run the risk of breaking EEOC laws by hiring smokers only for those sections,

- he'll tell you to go elsewhere for work,

- or he'll give higher pay to those that work the smoking sections.


Really where outside? The nonsmokers will soon complain that the smokers are polluting the air by the door, on the sidewalk they can't walk by without having to breathe smoke.... and so on..... Oh wait they already have and now there are some places with laws that say you cannot smoke 50 feet near a doorway, or on the sidewalk or in any public open air area.

So again, where exactly are we going to go?

You're kidding right? You really aren't comparing this argument to racial discrimination. Shakran, I agree a lot with you but now you are just grasping at straws here.

Yes the market will correct the owner. And in all honesty private owners still can "reserve the right to refuse service".

You cannot by law dictate how an owner will serve his clientele.

So, here in Ohio where a lot of places paid a lot of money for separate ventilation, walls between smoking areas, and so on...... they need to just turn all those areas into non-smoking.... forget the fact they spent 1,000's to make sure they separated the populations. The government has the right to DICTATE.

And you want to talk about discrimination:

I FUCKING PAY TAXES TO PARTAKE IN THIS..... YOU USE MY TAXES IN ONE FORM OR ANOTHER..... YET YOU WISH TO TAKE MY RIGHTS AWAY FROM ME????

AGAIN, YOU AND THE GOVERNMENT STOP TAXING THIS PRODUCT AND I'LL STOP SMOKING IN HIGHLY VENTILATED SMOKING SECTIONS OF RESTAURANTS. REFUND THE TAX MONEY THAT WAS USED TO BUILD PLACES LIKE JACOBS FIELD AND THE "Q" AND I'LL STOP SMOKING IN THOSE PLACES....

Sorry for the caps but I have yet to see a non-smoker who is demanding to make laws against smoking, acknowledge they need and use the taxes but will fight as hard to repeal taxes and will make sure the taxes get repealed.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Bill O'Rights

Ok...enough of this tennis match. My neck is starting hurt.

Let's focus, for awhile, on pan's assertion that the taxation of tobacco products, in today's hostile "anti-smoker" climate, is tantamount to basically...Taxation Without Representation.

Thought?

Are anti-smokers willing to do without the income generated by taxes collected from the sale of tobacco product?

__________________
"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." - Susan B. Anthony

"Hedonism with rules isn't hedonism at all, it's the Republican party." - JumpinJesus

It is indisputable that true beauty lies within...but a nice rack sure doesn't hurt.

Glory's Sun

Actually, I do go outside quite often to smoke. In fact, I won't even stand close to the door and I still have to hear self righteous non-smokers complain that they caught a wiff of smoke. If you are going to a place that you know will have smoke and you don't like smoke.. then don't go. Problem solved.

pan6467

Sorry Bill, didn't mean to give you tennis neck.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

filtherton

Smokers do have representation; they can vote like the rest of us.

And pan, i don't understand how you can have faith in the mechanics of the free market concerning smoking, but not the minimum wage.

Furthermore, the idea the we should leave the market to its own devices as a matter of principle presupposes that a free market actually exists, and also that the interests of profit line up with the interests of humanity. Anyone who believes these things is deluding themselves.

Now, i smoke 8 months out of the year, but i like the bans, and i live in one of the coldest states in the union. The majority of people think smoking is gross, the majority of people support smoking bans, there is no constitutional right to smoke. These are all facts.

Finding yourself on the side opposite the majority of a public health issue sucks, but really, your rights haven't been violated, and neither have the rights of private business owners.

pig

first, you might take note i'm not a huge anti-public smoking nazi. however, is this question an isolated question, or part of a larger fiscal reform? for instance, if we're playing house here, i'd rather reduce (not remove entirely, but drastically reduce the taxes on cigarettes...its freaking robbery as it is) the taxes on smokes, legalize/decriminalize marajuana, and tax that.

in my little licensing scenario above, i also think it makes sense that the bar owner might charge a very small membership fee to gain entrance to the bar. (in lieu of the taxes on smokes. charge people extra to actually smoke in public, but not to purchase the cigarettes themselves) the reason i say this is that it already happens in sc, only its "private club" memberships on saturday nights to get around blue laws. it's something like $1 at the door, or an annual membership of $50 or so, but it pays for the special license some bars have to stay open late on saturday nights. everyone wins. some bars don't get the license, and they close at 1 or 2 am. some bars get the license, and they stay open all night. another side affect of these things is that the people who smoke get to be around poeple who either smoke or don't care about it, and those who don't smoke don't have to worry about it.

edit: the other thing i was going to say is that pan is making a great case for what happens when you threaten to take away a smoker's smokes

__________________
You don't love me, you just love my piggy style

pan6467

Fisrt Issue 5 in Ohio tomorrow DICTATES: NO SMOKING IN ANY PUBLIC PLACES. Owners no longer have a choice.

2 totally different subjects and I care not to change the subject right now.

and again, you ignore this:

I'm serious you stop using the taxes, fight to repeal them and refund the smokers taxes that built public arenas that are non-smoking...... and I won't fight. But as long as I pay heavy taxes on my smoking and it is a legal substance, I will fight for my right to enjoy it and for there to be smoking areas in restaurants where the owner wants them.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

filtherton

But you do have representation, for whatever little that's worth.

That sucks, but them's the breaks.


So you only have conditional support in the ability of the market to allow the right thing to happen? That's all i'm getting at. You're a conditional liberatarian and that's fine. I guess i just don't think the market is necessarily that capable of making the right decision on its own.

We all use the taxes, though i assume that you're talking specifically about nonsmokers. And we all pay taxes on things that we'd rather not pay taxes on. Those taxes are then used for things that many of us would prefer they not be used for. Some of the taxes collected from tobacco are used to pay the healthcare costs of those who use tobacco.

You do know that smoking isn't a right, right? That your rights aren't being violated? Smoking is a regulated activity. The rights of business owners aren't being violated either.

pan6467

Damn right. I may be vocal and show my disgust towards other issues but I'll give up the right to smoke when you pull my smoking pack out of my dead, cancer, emphysema riddled body.

Be happy someone is standing up now...... because someday, something you do and love to do will be coinsidered harmful to others and the government and society will call you names, tax your item and then make sure what you do is never done in public.... even though you pay exoritant taxes on it and the people complaining about it live off your taxes.... you are supposed to smile, nod and comply with the government.

My God if we went after poverty. education, healthcare reform and bettering society as a whole the way this government and society is going after us smokers, this country would be in great shape. Instead we focus on bullshit, demand more government dictates and believe we are doing it for the betterment of society.... when in actuality.... it is as self serving and as egotistical and self righteous as it is just wrong to ask government to start passing laws on a taxed base minority.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

flstf

I understand that the majority can quite often dictate what the minority does. However I just don't understand why the non-smoking majority should insist on banning smoking in bars where the owner, the patrons and the employees do not mind. If everybody in the place smokes why should we force them to go outside?

I get the impression that many non-smokers really just want to ban smoking in all places in case they happen to want to go there. Either that or they are disgusted by the habit and want to force everyone to quit. Why else would they care about smoking in places they can easily avoid?

analog

I enjoy the whining about the high price of tobacco due to all the high taxes. Tough luck. Quit. You want a product, that's what the product costs. Your voice is not lost, smokers just can't seem to gather a big enough breath of air to make a voice for themselves to change anything. You vote, that's how change happens.

Maybe it's because you're not in the majority as smokers, and "breathing clean air and not getting cancer when you don't even smoke" seems to be a hot-button issue these days. Go figure.

And yes, cig smoke not only "hangs around", but it permeates and coats its surroundings like any smoke does, leaving the area to smell of cigarette even once you're gone, unless you're outside and it has someplace to go. Once inside your nose (and to a lesser degree, your mouth), it also alters the way you perceive taste, leaving you to consume food with the taste of smoke. You may want to suck on cigs all day and enjoy that taste, but I sure as hell don't.

Do you think anyone would appreciate if I found a group of smokers in a room and lit up a bong, blowing marijuana smoke all around, making everyone high against their will? Some won't care, some will thank you for it, but the point is that just because you want to do something, and you feel justified in doing it, does not make it right to force on others- and yes, when you smoke around others in public, you are forcing them to breathe your cig smoke.

And who the hell can say that public health is not more important? Public health is more important than ANY individual's right to do what they want with their body. You can't infect yourself with a terrible communicable disease because you want to and "it's your body", and then walk around the mall breathing near people.

Public health is more important, and it's ridiculous to assert otherwise.

Are you standing up now because you know that given only a few more years, you'll have to remain seated for fear of getting winded with the effort to stand?

And, they already do. It's called marijuana. You don't hear pro-marijuana people bitching and moaning like children, many of them actually campaign and TRY to make change. All cig smokers do is bitch about the high taxes and where they can't smoke. So yeah, some people already know what it's like, and don't cry about it. Hopefully smokers will stop crying about it, too, some day.

filtherton

Yeah, i don't know. I'm sure that there are a lot of reasons, more than you distill down into a two-sentence paragraph. I'm sure it would be pretty easy to claim that smokers just want to smoke inside, and that all this high falutin talk of the rights of private businesses is just a smoke screen(heh.) put up to avoid sounding like scorned addicts. I'm not going to claim that this is true for all smokers, to do so would be presumptuous and self serving in the context of my position.

In other words, people want what they want for all different reasons. The majority of people don't want to deal with smoke when they go to the bar. It sucks to be on the wrong side of public opinion, but the fact that nobody's rights are being violated means you kind've just have to deal with it.

pan6467

Yes, I believe that paying exorbitant taxes gives me the RIGHT to smoke.

It boils down to this..... you can dig deep and justify no smoking in public even though the owner has seperate rooms and ventilations..... you dig deep and can find excuses for my not smoking in the privacy of my own car..... just as someone can dig deep and find reasons why Howard Stern couldn't be on public airwaves, just like some mother can dictate to a school that she doesn't want Tom Sawyer in the library......

In any situation like that you are not in any way bettering society YOU ARE SIMPLY TAKING AWAY CHOICES AND OTHER PEOPLE'S RIGHTS..... and once you start giving any government that ability, that power, you need to see the whole picture because in the end.... the government will eventually get rid of any choice and just dictate.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

flstf

I understand, but like I asked before, why do those who do not want to deal with smoke care about smoking in places they can easily avoid?

pan6467

If you look at my stances on things you will see my stance on this isn't much different (if at all) concerning any social/moral issue.

If smoking is that offensive, just make it totally illegal.

BTW Analog, your example is not a good one considering weed is illegal. Now, Canada or some other areas where weed is legal and there are bars where people go there to smoke it.... then I would know what I was walking into or walked into (if I didn't know until I entered)..... and I have the choice to go there or not. My choice to enter the place or not....

Why do I need the government dictating my choices to me?

And again, like I said if a non-smoker who wants a ban stated they would be for eliminating the taxes on cigarettes, then I would listen and perhaps agree with his plans.

If a place at their own expense put in separate ventilation and rooms to separate smokers then who and what gives you the right to void all that and tell the owner he can't allow any smoking at all?

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

splck

Why sould we have to avoid places? What if we want to eat at a certain place that's known for great food? Just don't go there? Take the smoke outside or quit, that's all you have to do.
These laws are coming your way sooner or later, so get ready for it. It's doom and gloom for the smokers, but sweet fresh air for the rest of us.

__________________
nice line eh?

pan6467

So why is the choice of the owner who has separate ventilation and rooms still unacceptable??????? Who and what gave you the right to say that compromise, that expense the owner went through is wrong and needs to have government step in?

Unlike the non-smoker militants I see compromise..... it's sad you would rather have government dictate and make the choice rather than try to compromise.

But then again, everyone is right, everyone knows what is best and everyone expects the government to take choices they don't agree with away from the people.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

roachboy

well the tax thing is easy---roll your own.

and the smoking ban thing is not a big deal. like i said before, i prefer pubs that have good beer and permit smoking and there are such and in likelihood there would be after smoking bans--there are generally loopholes and folk find them.

and like most folk who smoke, i am ambivalent about it and imagine myself quitting soon and so maybe at some point none of this will matter to me.

what is annoying about this issue is the conversations---well more the tiresome shouting matches--like this thread.
the only reason it has unfolded as it has is because no-one is addressing actual human beings in it--they are addressing little messages with pseudonyms attached.

i think lots of people like little waves of hysteria.
they enjoy them.
they enjoy being terribly righteous and feeling like that connects them to some larger identity---protectors of some imaginary public interest or some such--it is fun, it is gratifiying ----but most of all it is easy peasy--you can use self-righteousness as an excuse to ignore your usual restraint of tone, which is built around functional communication in complex social situations---
but which for some folk must be frustrating as hell--because you give em an excuse to ditch it and it is not even a memory thereafter.

a messageboard---now this is a VERY SIMPLE social situation, no matter how you use it to project a sense of community at other moments---it is simple because it is abstract---and its simplicity is enabling in a problematic manner when little waves of righteous hysteria blow across the land--and the do all the time---this is the land of endless hysterias---they are a big compensation for the fracturing of collective identity, we love em, we need em---and they SUCH fun.

these little waves of bourgeois hysteria wrap up in a veneer of self-righteousness access to this crude and tedious version of yourself, which is among the most primitive and least socially adjusted of them.

let's call him your inner shithead.

everyone has one.
you know: your inward insufferable bore.
your inward, infantile, insufferable little bore.
everyone has one.

that is most of what i see from the antismoking mounties: posts that enable them to take their inner shithead out for a little walk.

none of this is about persuading anyone of anything about smoking either way.
none of this even presents a pretense of an actual interaction.
and if you addressed 3-d smokers as you address them here, the outcomes would be a donnybrook.
and that is what you want--at least what you want here, when there is no danger of it actually happening--here where the stakes are minimal.
nice work.

no wonder the serious issues at the core of questions to do with smoking, where it should happen etc get buried---this kind of debate is not about that--it is not even a debate--it is a kind of park where people go to let their inner shitheads run around.

maybe this kind of conversation would be better if everyone acted more like rational human beings.

i hope there is such a therapeutic function to the snippy "i dont like smoking harumph harumph" posts above.
because they sure as fuck are not about changing anyone's mind or habits.
if you want to do that, you need at least to address others as human beings.
but what fun is that?

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

sapiens

I suppose that you have conceded to the mode of interaction you describe. Your post seems to exemplify it. Insensitivity and an absence of actual discussion seems to be present on both sides of the debate. You spend much of your post attacking the non-smokers - letting their inner shitheads out for a walk, etc.

Back on topic: There was recently a referendum on a measure to ban smoking in bars where I live. I don't go to bars. It didn't affect me. So, I didn't vote.

roachboy

it is good to know that irony recognition is not dead, sapiens.
thanks.
i feel better now.

i mean, i post alot in politics and am certainly not above or outside what i talked about.
i just know what it is.
that's all.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

shesus

This is definitely an issue that hits a lot of people's buttons. I can understand the argument that smoker's smoke causes lung cancer. But honestly, you would have to be around it a lot to be put in that situation. I don't see that as a viable argument unless you live with someone that smokes or are a waitress in a bar where you can still smoke. However, if you are a waitress just quit. If it is a loved one that is smoking around you preach to them. You may have an impact...possibly not. I haven't with anyone I spoke to.

I am a former smoker. I hate the smell of smoke...I did when I smoked to. I've been the obnoxious smoker of blowing smoke in people's faces. I've been the courteous smoker. What I have found though is that what I thought was courteous, really wasn't. That smoke lingers and spreads and gets into everything. Even when JJ is outside on the balcony I can still smell it in here. So, I can understand that people have an issue with that. But cars, busses, and planes also stink and put off pollution.

I don't know...this is a topic that is going to be argued around and around and never be solved. Smokers are one of the most shunned groups around. They get the accused of a lot and really don't deserve the "Better than you" attitude. It is an addiction, it does kill, it has harmful second-hand smoke. We know this...all you can do is surround yourself with non-smoker friends and avoid it as much as possible.

People have mentioned that smokers whine and complain. But, from my experiences, the non-smokers are the loudest and rudest. It can be found in this thread and as another example. When I did wait tables, I loved the smoking section. The smokers were more relaxed, complained less, and tipped more. They weren't fidgeting and bitching to me about where there food was and could they please move because *insert whine here*. Just saying...

I'm not one way or the other...I've been on both sides, but really people need to give it a rest and get over it because it's an issue that I don't think will ever be solved. If people want to smoke more power to them. I really haven't found it a problem avoiding smokers since I quit. In fact, the smell is the only thing that I have to endure and that won't kill you. People need to understand that the lingering aroma of cigarettes is not dangerous...it's the actual smoke that you can see floating through the air. Now, the aroma is annoying, but so is BO and bus fumes...rub some scented lotion on your upper lip and you'll be ok.

__________________
Whatever did happen to your soul?
I heard you sold it

Choose Heaven for the weather and Hell for the company

Leto

yes. And before that, non-smokers were the buts of ridicule. we were un-cool, non-mainstream. All the advertising had it that we were on the social margins. All movies had the Bogarts lighting their joints. Ultra suave, ultra-Deneuve...

Even in the '70's, the fact that I didn't smoke (on the city bus! FFS) subjected me to ridicule.

Oh well, mores change, and the great wheel turns. The shoe has been put on the other foot, and it causing blisters.

jorgelito

Actually Roach, I thought you were addressing the pro-smoking militants . It goes both ways. It seems most of the tirades are coming from shouting militant smokers.

Someone keeps mentioning the taxes. Well, please cite the source and indicate where all the tax money from cigarettes are going. The claim that the govt needs the tax money from cigarettes needs some elaboration. I was under the impression that the tax money on cigarettes went to pay for the rising health costs associated with smoking. In any case, I quit smoking soon after the last tax increase.

I think letting the market decide is a good idea. Also, a tobacco license doesn't bother me too much, same as a liquor license right? As for worker's health (a good point), then there presumably would be a hazard pay (like in other industries such as entertainment where they pay you extra for exposure to cigarette smoke). Presumably, there should also be choice in work places too then. So, workers can choose to work where they please and if they don't like smoke they can work somewhere else.

If there are more smoking places than smoke free places then presumably wages can go down at the smoke free places provided more people don't like smoke. I would definitely open a smoke-free establishment with good Belgian ales on tap and live jazz while enjoying low wages cause all the other places are smoking. I would also offer full-health benefits to my employees (the non-smoking ones) because I can afford to due to the low wages. I would still try and attract smokers with a smoking zone away from the entrances so as not to disturb the non-smokers. Heck, maybe even install speakers so they can still enjoy the music.

Everyone benefits cause we then have more choice and cheaper prices due to the competition, at least in theory.

filtherton

Rights aren't supposed to be connected to the amount of taxes one pays. Can you imagine how fucked up that would be? Just because i pay the gas tax doesn't mean i can do whatever the fuck i want with my car. The ability to assert that you have a right has no bearing on whether you actually do have that right. You should admit that you have no legally protected right to smoke. You should admit that it is a stretch to even think that you have a legally implied right to smoke.

And one day they came for the smokers, but i wasn't a smoker so i did nothing... I could see your slippery slope being valid if we lived in a monarchy of some sort, but we don't. These bans quite often are approved directly by your fellow citizens via referendum. This isn't generally a case of "big government" squashing the little guy, in many places this is grassroots politics.

I think most people would disagree with the notion that smoking bans don't better society, that's why most people support them. Frankly i don't see what the big deal is. Even when i smoked a lot, i still hated coming home from a club or a bar smelling like ass with bright red eyes.

It's not that difficult a question to answer. Maybe nonsmokers feel they have some sort of "right" to go to a bar and not leave smelling like burnt tobacco. Surely all the smokers whose made up "rights" have been violated can relate to that notion.

Maybe it's just a matter of a lack of smoke-free options. See, i don't know about where you live, but i don't think that there were any bars in my city that prohibited smoking before the ban so if i wanted to go to a bar, i had to put up with the smoke. That sucked, but you know what? It doesn't anymore because it isn't a problem.

Maybe it's harsh, but in the same way that you think that nonsmokers should just stay away from smoke-filled bars if they don't like it, maybe smokers who don't like smoking bans should stay away from communities that don't allow smoking in restaurants. I mean, why do those who do not want to deal with smoking bans care about not being able to smoke in cities and counties they can easily avoid? Let the smokers vote with their choice of residencies.

Redjake

I'm sure everyone has said this already, but the only reason smoking gets on my nerves is because it affects me as well. Not only my lungs, which I admit would take a lot of second-hand smoke to truly affect - but my clothes and my breathing as well. I happen to have bad allergies and my sinus cavities are clogged a lot; whenever I am around cigarette smoke I can literally barely breathe; I have to breathe through my mouth to even get air in. And it's smoke-filled air.

I didn't use to care at all about smoking and smokers. I snapped one day when I went into a gas station with a bunch of old guys smoking one morning. I went in, paid for gas, and left. When I got in the car, the people riding with me said I smelled like a cigarette and BO mixed together. That is truly disgusting. I waited for it to go away, but ended up having to wash the clothes I wore. Anything that others are allowed to do in public that affects me in that way should be regulated much heavier than it is now. Make them smoke outside - EVERYWHERE. Anything that KILLS other people and makes me gasp for breathe and makes my clothes stink needs to stay away from me and others that don't want it.

Obesity and snack food isn't tackled because it doesn't kill other people if YOU eat a jelly donut. If you smoke, do it in your house, car, away from others who aren't smoking. It's disrespectful for that shit to be around others.


I do truly feel sorry for smokers. I have an entire family of smokers. But I have no sympathy because of its effects. Something that affects you, is one thing - but when I get affected by it with no choice, that's another thing.

I realize I can "just go to another gas station" or "just go to another bar or restaurant." But we shouldn't have to. Why should non-smokers have to go out of their way to accomodate for others? Why do smokers get the privelage of dominating territory which isn't theirs? They shouldn't. The only reason they do today is because smoking was at one time considered harmless; it was ingrained into society as a meaningless and harmless form of enjoyment, and it is still here today because the removal of a huge habit like this from a country will take a looooooong time.

__________________
Off the record, on the q.t., and very hush-hush.