Yeah, lets keep the smokers out of the bars. They make the place unpleasant. And you know what, lets keep the black people out too, they really make the place unpleasant.

California is much the same way. Very strict smoking laws. I heard a story where an owner of a company was in his office smoking. One of the employees was offended by the smoke, even after he went outside to smoke. He was fined heavily by the state for breaking the law.

I agree with no smoking in public places as I can't stand the smell and have never tried a cigarette. I also have had two grandparents die from cancer due to prolonged smoking.

Children may annoy you but they aren't bad for your health. No smoking in public places has nothing to do with being or not-being annoyed. As soon as smokers realize this, your argument will be dead in the water.
You might as well accept it, because this is the way it's gonna be.

I agree, you can pretend that smoke is just a minor annoyance, but the fact is that smoking will kill you. I think if all of the poor, rejected smokers spent half the energy they spend on cultivating such righteous indignation on actually trying to quit, everyone who wasn't a tobacco executive would be much better off.

Children are bad for my health. Besides being terrible carriers of disease due to poor hygeine, the children of developed nations are responsible for the severe overpopulation problems we now face. Children cause pollution, they consume natural resources, and they exploit children of third world nations. That their parents do this by proxy for their benefit does not absolve them of their share of guilt.

Actually, i think recent studies have shown that being exposed to a larger variety of bacteria can actually strengthen the immune system.
Your critique of the global effects of childrearing can easily be extended to everyone in the developed world- you consume natural resources and exploit children of third world nations. This is a critique of humanity in general, not children.

You're still stretching if you think any of this has anything significant to do with banning smoking in public places.

Screaming in children, children that are the product of parents that dont believe they should make them behave in public etc ARE bad for my health....they give me horrible headaches....the same kind some non smokers claim to get if they are around cigarette smoke

Will they give you a terminal disease?

doesnt matter whether its terminal or not....it affects my life and those around me for the amount of time that Im a total bitch because my head hurts

your original statement made no mention of terminality, it simply said they werent bad for my health....which is not always true

I guess i thought my emphasis on the whole "making people die" thing was pretty clear, as i bolded it only a few posts above. Which original statement are you referring to? I also find screaming children annoying, but i think it is a huge stretch to compare a screaming child-an annoyance, with smoking-which kills 400000 plus people a year.

filterton...Im SO sorry.... there is a misunderstanding here.....I was replying to this (as were a few others)

I dont know where my brain is today....I think I need to stop posting :lol:

Don't worry about it. 'tis the season for mental exhaustion.

You sir, speak like a true smoker.
You can't seriously consider this a fair comparison. You're just being silly, really.

While I sympathize with getting headaches from children, kids don't give off toxic smoke that is known to shorten lives of people around them. The whole thrust for smoke free public places isn't to stop an annoying, headache causing smell, but rather, the long term heath of the people subjected to your cancer causing by-product.
I'm in no way suggesting that you not smoke, just that when you do smoke, you keep it to your self....that's it.

No, it is a critique of children. In the same way that your ridiculous generalizations about smokers "killing you" is a critique of all smokers.

Actually, life will kill you. What I think you mean is that smoking might shorten your life. Considering the years that will be lost (senile, impotent, lame) I don't think it's a bad trade off at all. And again, it's my choice to end my life early.

And enough with the second hand smoke nonsense. Sitting next to a smoker will not kill you, let alone give you a terminal disease! You need to be exposed to smoke long term and in large quantities for it to affect you, and even then its iffy. http://www.junkscience.com/news/euwsjets.htm

Maybe the bar employees have a case, but if they don't want to work in a hazardous environment then maybe they should leave the bar and apply for a job at that nice coffee shop down the street. Why won't they? Because the coffee shop is for lamers who don't tip. Bar patrons are drunk happy people who tip well. It's a simple economics game. Do you want to outlaw all hazardous activities? Why not focus on outlawing war and religion, the biggest contributors to human death and misery of all time.

What non-smokers are really objecting to is the fact that smokers are enjoying themselves in a way the non-smokers can't participate in. They get jealous and angry and act out. Just accept that you aren't nearly as cool as smokers and be done with it.

we recently passed a law similar to this in columbus ohio. im very glad. im a non smoker, and i absolutely can not stand smoke at all. im glad ill be able to go out to bars and clubs and not come home smelling like shit. without getting into too much of a flame war - i know its sort of contradictory to go to a bar and not want to kill myself, since im drinking myself stupid, but, i really really dont want lung cancer in 20 years. i also work at a service garage, and i get a healty dose of diesel and its related combustion byproducts every day, and i get really pissed about that too.

But its not your choice to end mine.

This dated, biased, poorly written article with nearly no credibility to speak of, is obviously written by a pissed off smoker such as yourself. If you were to read some REAL facts, youd know that Tobacco kills more Americans than AIDS, drugs, homicides, fires, and auto accidents combined.

* Secondhand Smoke causes about 3,000 deaths each year from lung cancer in people who don´t smoke.
* Secondhand Smoke causes irritation of the eyes, nose, and throat.
* Secondhand Smoke can also irritate the lungs, leading to coughing, excessive phlegm and chest discomfort.
* Secondhand Smoke has been linked with the onset of chest pain may affect the heart, according to some studies.
* Children who breathe Secondhand Smoke are more likely to suffer from pneumonia, bronchitis, and other lung diseases.
* Children who breathe Secondhand Smoke have more inner infections
* Children who breathe Secondhand Smoke are more likely to develop asthma
* Children who have asthma and who breathe Secondhand Smoke have more asthma attacks
* There are an estimated 150,000 to 300,000 case every year of infections, such as bronchitis and pneumonia in infants and children under 18 months of age who breathe Secondhand Smoke. These result in 7,500 to 15,000 hospitalizations.

While I am all for outlawing war and religion, your argument has nothing to do with smoking. you said the bar patrons are drunk happy people who tip well. what does that have to do with smoking in bars? I go out occasionally also, and I tip well. I dont smoke. This argument is completely invalid.

friend, understand this. It is NOT about you. nobody cares what you do in your house, on your own time. non-smokers dont care if you smoke. They dont care what you do at all. This is about the fact that what you choose to do to yourself is not only affecting you. It affects all those around you, especially children. You can hate other people and children all you want but the fact remains that they are out there, and they take precedent.

Your argument borders the assumption that you think drinking and driving shouldnt be illegal, since you are only hurting yourself. Bottom line is, these things DO kill other people and something needs to be done about it. Thank you New York, California, and all the other places where it is banned in public. I am also in Columbus, OH happily waiting for our ban to come into effect.

Actually, there are a number of questions about the origonal EPA report on second hand smoke. http://www.consumeralert.org/fumento/passive.htm The report noticed an increase in cancer at a rate of 2 per million - which any research scientist will tell you is statistically insignificant - less than 1 thousandth of a percent.

Saying that smoking will kill you also ignores a number of things. Things like, many non-smokers get lung cancer, and many life long smokers don't get cancer. As genetics improves we may find that smoking increases the rate at which genetically inclined people develop cancer - or maybe not. Smoking does seem to be the most obvious cause, but is by no means the sole cause. However, all cancer victims drink water... makes you wonder doesn't it?

How many scientists does it take to figure out if eggs are good for you or not?

Children however, are very bad for my health. There is a stastical evidence that shows that prolonged exposure to other people's children, raises my liklyhood of killing that child and then become sentenced to death.

I started writing this before godxzilla posted his facts. Hey godxzilla, could you post where you got those facts from? This is the internet, I can check your work. Otherwise you got your statistics from where I got these statistics...

* Secondhand children cause rashes on all mice
* Secondhand children a known carriers of the plague
* Secondhand children kill 40,000 migrant workers every second
* Secondhand children cause an estimated 20 billion dollars in property damage every week
* Secondhand children are the number cause of wedgie related accidents

I got those facts from my ass. This is why I didn't link to them - as my ass doesn't have a URL at this time. (I'm just being a dick about you not citing your source... nothing against you of course...)

But my point all boils down to this. If you don't like smoking, why do you have to get the government to ban it? Can't you just go to a bar that doesn't allow it? It's called exercizing freedom. What you have done is called restricting freedom. This is my main problem with the whole thing.

i agree with this completely, and i'm a non-smoker.

as a non-smoker, I also agree with this.

Going to a bar that doesnt allow it would be fine by me. unfortunately bar owners have a different fight....that Im not a part of. restaraunts would work that way for me as well. the non-smoking section doesnt cut it because most restaraunts use a half wall to divide the 2. I am pretty easy going and understand that people do things that I dont. but when its unavoidable (ie - the mall door entrance, planes, movie theaters, etc) I appreciate the govenrment looking out for MY freedoms as well.

Smokers are not the only ones with freedoms. We all have them...where is the line drawn?

I read most of my facts from www.thetruth.com but also some came from newspaper articles and magazine articles I have been reading on the subject lately since it came up for vote back in november here in ohio

you can also read the facts that the EPA has on the subject. if thats not a credible source, nothing is.

http://www.epa.gov/smokefree/

some more good reading from the EPA about the health risks of second hand smoke

http://www.epa.gov/smokefree/healthrisks.html

the bottom line is, second hand smoke DOES affect those around you. Anyone who thinks differently is just not thinking at all.

Look, I don't mind some measures to reduce health risks from second-hand smoke -- well, that's not true, I do mind, but I'll put up with it. There's a coffee shop near me where the smoking section is entirely enclosed -- it makes you feel like you're on display, but hey, I get to smoke indoors, and you don't have to breathe my smoke. Exhaust fans, in sufficient quantity, can greatly reduce the amount of second-hand smoke in the air without annoying smokers at all. Now godxzilla posts the following list of effects of second-hand smoke - one question would be, what kind of exposure are we talking about? I think if you have kids, and smoke in your home, you're an asshole. But that's a different level of exposure entirely than one night at a bar. Moreover, take a look at the list: You'll note that all of these, except for the first one, all deal with either annoyances or children. Now, when was the last time you saw children in the neighborhood bar? So, for the most part, these alleged facts are not even relevant.

Why it is even necessary for someone to be able to smoke in public places? It seems ironic to me that most smokers will passionately defend their right to make everyone around them uncomfortable under the pretext that they shouldn't be made uncomfortable.

You will not die if you can't smoke in public. I just want to hear one smoker admit that smoking is a filthy habit, and that forcing everyone else to smoke along with you-because you went and got yourself addicted- is a fundamentally selfish act.

I would say that the reason they are including bars is because its a public place and the ban affects public places. unfortunate as it may seem, its the truth. I somewhat agree with you as far as the bar goes, I (non smoker) should be able to choose smoking or non smoking bars. But the bar owners had that fight, not smokers vs non smokers.

as for the levels of exposure, does it matter? If its a known carcinogen, why expose your children to ANY? who determines how much is too much, and when is it too late? My wife is pregnant right now. we just spent our holidays bouncing from airport to airport going through the security lines. Now there is no correlation between birth defects and the metal detector. Many women go through them every day...but they ask the woman whether she wants to go through or not because it is HER decision how safe she wants the baby to be, not the TSA, and definately not you (smoker...not directed at anyone). If some level of exposure is bad no matter how extreme, than none is the best, right?

NONSENSE! You call my article dated? The EPA report you write about is from 1992! and is only a survey that covers other reports! That 3,000 deaths number is fictitious nonsense, the EPA report even admits it! That the number gets repeated in every EPA and anti-smoking bulletin does not make it true.

The World Health Organization did a study in 1998 that:

"CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate no association between childhood exposure to ETS and lung cancer risk. We did find weak evidence of a dose-response relationship between risk of lung cancer and exposure to spousal and workplace ETS. There was no detectable risk after cessation of exposure."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q...&dopt=Abstract

If you have a more current source for your numbers that don't rely on the bullshit EPA study, link to them here. Otherwise, cut that crap out!

Then dude, you might as well put that kid in a plastic bubble and prevent him/her from breathing any of the air around us or eating any food.

Everybody does some activity that annoys somebody else. You have no right to be free from annoyances in public places. You have a right not to be killed in public, that's true, but until you can demonstrate a substantial link between an activity and some measurable harm to others the activity should be allowed.

That's true. And black people won't die if they have to use a separate water fountain and sit at the back of the bus. But not dying is not a sufficient reason to outlaw an activity.

Look no further, smoking is a filthy habit that is fundamentally selfish. But:
1. Smoking is cool. If you claim it's not, it's because you're not cool. It's also relaxing and enjoyable. The coolness, relaxingness and enjoyableness outweigh the smell for those of us who smoke.
2. Are you telling me that you have no selfish activities? Do you have cable television? Why aren't you putting that money to good use by saving the poor children in Africa who die from lack of food instead of watching the food channel while eating a whole Turkey for Christmas?

Pick a reason for the banning of smoking and stick with it. Every reason you present can be shot down, one at at time.

What are you, 12? I haven't heard of anyone claim themselves to be cool because they smoke once they have gone through puberty.

well considering you are quoting like 4 or 5 folks, ill try to keep it brief.

first of all, you think smoking is cool. you really do? maybe 20 years ago when the risks were not well known, it was a way to differentiate yourself from everyone else. it became a way of life and defined a specific group of people who may have been "cool". Now, its just plain stupid. After all the studies and the facts are known, you would have to be pretty stupid or extremely weak to continue.

I have read a bunch of other threads of yours, and it all boils down to the fact that you are a pissed off individual for whatever reason. Were you neglected as a child? I cant explain what it was, only you can. but I can tell that you need some help. maybe just a little growing up is all you need, I'm not the person to answer that.

What I want you to do for me, is give me a list of smoking benefits. no internet searches, no bullshit, just create a list of, oh, 10 reasons smoking has benefitted (spelling again, not sure about that one :)) your life.

I am not saying you shouldnt do it. I dont care if you kill yourself - truly, i will supply the bullet if you ask nicely. but once it starts affecting me and my family, you are going to hear from me. I am obviously not alone or this topic would cease to exist. The country has spoken, and smoking will be banned in public everywhere, its just a matter of time. Instead of wasting your time arguing with me about it, maybe you should start thinking of more creative ways to obtain lung cancer in public

Come ON now Averett, didn't you know? When you walk around with a cigarette in your hand, women fall to their knees and bow at your presence!

you mean YOU dont do that to men when you see them?

Honestly anyone who compares cool with smoking, be it the smoker or his "cool friends" need to get a life.

I never thought it was "cool" to smoke....its something I enjoy, others think its a filthy habit, I dont. It relaxes me when Im stressed the same way drinking does for other people (and drinkers stink too by the way). There is not much in life more enjoyable than a smoke after a really good meal (well to me there isnt).

Like I've said before...non smokers have a right to not have to be around it....just like I have a right not to patronize the establishments where its not allowed. If every single public place in the world banned smoking then fine....I can live a few hours without a smoke...I do it all the time at work.

my only gripe is this.....If I wanted to open a bar for smokers only....I wouldnt be allowed in my county and THAT isnt fair.

I couldnt agree more. You deserve that right. I bet its the other bar owners fighting against that because they KNOW they would lose too much business and we would be right back to where we started :)

Actually I think you can.... I know here in upstate NY if bars can show that they have lost a certain percentage of customers/revenu/whatever due to the smoking ban, they can allow smoking again. And for some reason I think theres a cigar bar in NYC.

I wouldn't have a problem with bars that allowed smoking. I just probably wouldn't go there. I'm not so much worried about getting cancer from spending 3 hours in a club, I just don't like smelling like an ash tray when I go to sleep that night.

Trust me....if it were allowed in GA somebody would have done it by now....our smoking ban went into affect April of 2004 and there was even a special session of the county commission because a club here Wild Bills (biggest country bar in the SE or something like that) had just put in a casino style ventilation systems MEGA BUCKS and it was put in before the ban was in and they tried to get grandfathered in and the county wouldnt allow it. So now.....instead of the smokers being in an area designated for them....they stand outside and smoke where all the non smokers have to walk thru it. (not saying thats right....I personally never stand around a door to smoke...but them I am considerate even though I have a "filthy" habit).

If they couldnt get an exception I doubt anyone could.

OK, so the new rule is every activity for which I cannot find 10 reasons it benefits my life should be outlawed? Well, look, I'll be honest with you. I've tried and tried and I can't find 10 reasons black people benefit my life. So maybe they should be outlawed too?

I did find one though: It feels goooooooood. Until it hurts you, leave me alone.

How is it substantially affecting you and your family? I don't want to kill others, if you can show me it's killing you or others I'll stop. Please, point to a source that doesn't quote a 12 year old flawed EPA study and I'll be happy to consider it.

That sounds like a great manifesto. So is marjority rule in every circumstance acceptable? If the country spoke and wanted to kill all homosexuals should we just accept that too?

Unfortunately, I'm not very smart, but if there were a cheaper, more efficient way to obtain lung cancer in public (that had the side benefit of feeling good) I would do it.

And you don't need to worry about bullets, I'll probably be dead from another type of cancer in a few years anyway.

Well you must only hang around with the uncool people.

I cannot stand the smell of smoke, it ruins my meals more then any other factor, and that includes bad food. I do not think this is at all like restricting races or weight, as others have suggested.

I have often thought, why not carry around a bottle of that fake fart smell, and just sit in the smoking section and spray it all day. Walk ahead of smokers on the streets and spray the stuff behind me. Just so *maybe* they can see how it is on the non-smoker side.

If you want to create farting and non-farting sections please do so, but I would oppose a law prohibiting the passing of gas in public just as much as I oppose the smoking in public ban.

And if the smell of smoke ruins your meal, why don't you sit in the non-smoking section or go to a non-smoking restaurant?

May be he want's to eat at theat particular restaurant? If you want a smoke so bad, why don't you just step outside? It won't kill you...but then again it might ;)
...smoking is cool? Where are you from?

I don't like the smell of Taco Bell, and I don't eat there. Now, some people like to eat at Taco Bell. It probably wouldn't kill them to not eat at Taco Bell, but I hardly think it's appropriate to outlaw Taco Bells. And eating there is probably a hell of a lot worse for you than smoking a cigarette.

Yes, I think smoking is cool and relaxing. You're free to disagree, but that's no reason to outlaw smoking. You must do some activity which I think is uncool, but I have intention of banning it.

Do you wear sneakers with lights in them? I can't think of anything I consider more uncool, yet people actually pay money for these things.

Do you wears T-Shirts with advertisements on them? This is only slightly less uncool than the sneaker thing, but people actually pay money to wear an advertisement.

Do you watch sitcoms? Lame, boring shit that emasculates men and repeats the same stupid plotlines forever, but people even Tivo this shit!

I am disgusted by all of these things, yet people disagree with me and consider them cool. I don't try to outlaw sneakers with lights in them or burn down the studio of "Everybody loves Raymond," and I hope you would show smokers the same respect by not trying to cut in on their cool action.