Is there ANYPLACE left to smoke in peace!!!

bobman1235

If we don't learn to separate things we don't like from things we have to outlaw, ban, and spend time fighting against, we really are doomed.

Live and let live people. There are way more important things in life than worrying about what someone else smokes.

PolkThug

I saw some whiskey tangos in a mini-pickup truck yesterday. Mom and dad both smoking with a 5-year old in the middle. Sad.

WilliamM2

shack wrote: »

I hope smoking is completely banned...indoors...outdoors...everywhere.

Why? You don't have to smoke.

TroyD

I find it somewhat funny that Carl is patently petrified of everything from deodorant to dental fillings but seems to be a smoker.....

That said, if people want to smoke then, by all means, smoke. However, is it that much to ask to restrict it in public places? It's sort of like beating off, if folks want to do it, is it that much to ask to do it in private so the rest of us are not exposed to it?

The litter thing drives me absolutely nuts. I walk to work every day and have to walk past the smoke pit by one of the dorms. There are butt cans every 5 feet, yet, the ground is absolutely covered in butts. Is it that frigging hard to clean up after yourself? A lot of times, smokers are thier own worst enemy in that regard.

TroyD

PolkThug wrote: »

I saw some whiskey tangos in a mini-pickup truck yesterday. Mom and dad both smoking with a 5-year old in the middle. Sad.

Is that any worse than the upper/middle class mom and dad where mom is addicted to Oxycontin and dad has a raging coke addiction?

BDT

AsSiMiLaTeD

TroyD wrote: »

I find it somewhat funny that Carl is patently petrified of everything from deodorant to dental fillings but seems to be a smoker.....

That said, if people want to smoke then, by all means, smoke. However, is it that much to ask to restrict it in public places? It's sort of like beating off, if folks want to do it, is it that much to ask to do it in private so the rest of us are not exposed to it?

The litter thing drives me absolutely nuts. I walk to work every day and have to walk past the smoke pit by one of the dorms. There are butt cans every 5 feet, yet, the ground is absolutely covered in butts. Is it that frigging hard to clean up after yourself? A lot of times, smokers are thier own worst enemy in that regard.

As usual, Troy's eloquence and subtlety works amazingly well to prove a point

sucks2beme

Common sense VS. extremists. It's why I've gone Libertarian.
Maybe the press corps won't have the Libertarian candidate
arrested during the debates this time.

I prefer my smoke covering large juicey cuts of meat.
But hey, to each their own.:D

PhantomOG

TroyD wrote: »

The litter thing drives me absolutely nuts. I walk to work every day and have to walk past the smoke pit by one of the dorms. There are butt cans every 5 feet, yet, the ground is absolutely covered in butts. Is it that frigging hard to clean up after yourself? A lot of times, smokers are thier own worst enemy in that regard.

This is also what I don't understand. Smoke if you want, but why the hell do smokers have to litter? It seems that every person that smokes in their car thinks its ok to flick the butt out the window. When and how did this become acceptable behaviour? Every year there are dozens of fires here locally started by this assinine behaviour.

tugboat

PolkThug wrote: »

I saw some whiskey tangos in a mini-pickup truck yesterday. Mom and dad both smoking with a 5-year old in the middle. Sad.

So if they're white and you don't like them, it's okay to call them white trash? I'd love to read what you'd write if it were another race. Would you call them whiskey bravos, Novembers, sierra echos...??? :rolleyes:

Airplay355

Is smoking in your car next to your children not trashy? I'd say it qualifies.

steveinaz

I tried all sorts of things to get my kids to leave; blew cigarette smoke on them, tried to lose them in the woods while hiking, drugged and blind folded them--dropped them at the Salvation Army...

None of it worked, they kept coming back home. They've grown up to be very tolerant, nice people though.

tugboat

Airplay355 wrote: »

Is smoking in your car next to your children not trashy? I'd say it qualifies.

Well then I guess there are many here that you're calling their parents trash because they smoked while in the car with them. Good going there. :rolleyes:

tcrossma

tugboat wrote: »

Well then I guess there are many here that you're calling their parents trash because they smoked while in the car with them. Good going there. :rolleyes:

There is a difference there of course, and that is that prior generations just didn't know better. My parents drank and smoke while pregnant, but once you know better, doing it makes it irresponsible. There are a lot of things that were done "before" that aren't done know because we know better.

BeRad

Regardless of what it is, I'm not a fan of legislating against behavior, especially when it is brought about by the "do gooders". The recent trend is to legislate against smoking in a car with a child in it. This is a ridiculous waste of time and money. Do you honestly think that the idiots who smoked in a car with their kids in it are going to stop just because it's now against the law (and a barely enforcible one at that). I suppose they will, just like everyone drives the speed limit because IT is the law!

I thought the idea was to elect politicians, not babysitters. Heart disease kills more people in North America than anybody: How long before unhealthy fat-rich foods are banned. Think about it. It may be a stretch, but is that not slowly the direction this continent is heading? I am reminded of a good quote relating to this subject from an average joe. "If you start to outlaw everything that a large group of people are opposed to, you will eventually cut off all social interaction." (obviously an overstatement, but still something to consider.)

Back on topic here: Smoking in public places (I believe) should be regulated, not banned. My idea: If you have a smoke-free establishment that is a restaraunt or bar, 8% rebate on property taxes. If you choose to have a smoking establishment, you must advertise that it is a smoking place, and you MUST move X number cubic feet of air per minute to readily exhaust the smoke. This would allow the business that cater to smokers to once again bring in the customers they lost. One comment I have heard a few times is of people thinking they have a right to go wherever they want and not have to deal with smoke. WRONG! If i don't want you in my bar I'm kicking you the **** out!!! Nobody has the "right" to go on to any private property be it commercial, residential, or industrial, let alone dictate what they expect the atmosphere must be like. I can't understand how people will jump to the rash-est of decisions and yell from the rooftops "Ban this, stop that, not in my backyard" instead of wanting to encourage change in a way that doesn't drastically effect anybody in a negative way. (especially a negative financial way since this continent is so bloodly capitalist.)


-sorry, been a long day at work. I'll go now.

tcrossma

WilliamM2 wrote: »

Why? You don't have to smoke.

I don't know too many people who are actually GLAD that they took up smoking. Most people I know regret the decision to start and wish they could quit.

I don't know his reason for wishing smoking to be banned completely, but I'd sure like to make sure my kids don't succumb to the pressure. It's a lot less now that the advertising has been reduced severely but it's still there.

tugboat

tcrossma wrote: »

There is a difference there of course, and that is that prior generations just didn't know better. My parents drank and smoke while pregnant, but once you know better, doing it makes it irresponsible. There are a lot of things that were done "before" that aren't done know because we know better.

What do we really know? We know that statistics are skewed towards which ever direction they want to go. Is there any evidence of someone dying from second hand smoke and it being on the death certificate (and asthma doesn't count as any particulate matter can bring on a deadly attack).

Has anyone searched for an official and documented second hand smoke death? I'd love to actually see one.

Here's an interesting link.

http://www.amlibpub.com/liberty_blog/2007/03/unfounded-scares-about-secondhand-smoke.html

hearingimpared

. . . with liberty and justice for all.:D

tcrossma

tugboat wrote: »

What do we really know? We know that statistics are skewed towards which ever direction they want to go. Is there any evidence of someone dying from second hand smoke and it being on the death certificate (and asthma doesn't count as any particulate matter can bring on a deadly attack).

Has anyone searched for an official and documented second hand smoke death? I'd love to actually see one.

Here's an interesting link.

http://www.amlibpub.com/liberty_blog/2007/03/unfounded-scares-about-secondhand-smoke.html

I don't know, but it sure seems logical to me. It has certainly been proven to cause harm to the smoker, and it's the same smoke that's making it way into other people's lungs.

http://www.entnet.org/HealthInformation/childSecondHandSmoke.cfm <-- link (just one of the first ones from a quick google search. I'm sure there's plenty to be found on both sides of the argument.)

Whatever the case my end up being, if there's a chance it's going to harm my children I'd just as soon not take the risk myself. I personally don't care if others smoke or not, although I am glad it's not allowed in restaurants up here any longer.

WilliamM2

I think we should ban alcohol, after all, I don't drink, why should anyone else? Think of all the lives we woud save!

steveinaz

Salt is bad for you, hence, illegal.

treitz3

tcrossma wrote: »

Whatever the case my end up being, if there's a chance it's going to harm my children I'd just as soon not take the risk myself. I personally don't care if others smoke or not....

OK, you said it. Vehicle emissions pose a risk to your children's health. It poses a health risk to mine. So, why are you driving? Why are you letting other people drive?

Oh....ok, I get it. It's convenient to you. On the other hand, my preference is to smoke but it seems like I'm the bad guy because I'm posing a threat to your children. There's something vaguely hypocritical about that.

What's wrong with this picture?

By the way, there have been studies that say apples are bad for you. Milk is bad for you. Wine is bad for you. Many more examples where that comes from. There have also been studies to where all of the aforementioned is good for you. Who do you believe.....and where do you draw the line?

Smokers are drawing the line that continually gets pushed back further everyday. Some of it is unacceptable. H.I mentioned "Liberty and Justice" for all. Where are the liberties for the smokers? The justice is going overboard and it's becoming a violation of our rights, as smokers.

Liberty as defined by Merriman-Webster......


Merriam-Webster FAQ
Main Entry:
lib·er·ty Listen to the pronunciation of liberty
Pronunciation:
\ˈli-bər-tē\
Function:
noun
Inflected Form(s):
plural lib·er·ties
Etymology:
Middle English, from Anglo-French liberté, from Latin libertat-, libertas, from liber free — more at liberal
Date:
14th century

1: the quality or state of being free: a: the power to do as one pleases b: freedom from physical restraint c: freedom from arbitrary or despotic control d: the positive enjoyment of various social, political, or economic rights and privileges e: the power of choice 2 a: a right or immunity enjoyed by prescription or by grant : privilege b: permission especially to go freely within specified limits3: an action going beyond normal limits: as a: a breach of etiquette or propriety : familiarity b: risk, chance <took foolish liberties with his health> c: a violation of rules or a deviation from standard practice d: a distortion of fact 4: a short authorized absence from naval duty usually for less than 48 hours
synonyms see freedom

Now looking at the definition, definition 1 [all of them] has been taken away. That's not liberty. "Justice" has taken it all away. It starts like this and it affects us. Keep it up and when your "liberty" has been taken away, DO NOT come bitching to me.

treitz3

WilliamM2 wrote: »

I think we should ban alcohol, after all, I don't drink, why should anyone else? Think of all the lives we woud save!

Good point!

tugboat

tcrossma wrote: »

I don't know, but it sure seems logical to me. It has certainly been proven to cause harm to the smoker, and it's the same smoke that's making it way into other people's lungs.

http://www.entnet.org/HealthInformation/childSecondHandSmoke.cfm <-- link (just one of the first ones from a quick google search. I'm sure there's plenty to be found on both sides of the argument.)

Whatever the case my end up being, if there's a chance it's going to harm my children I'd just as soon not take the risk myself. I personally don't care if others smoke or not, although I am glad it's not allowed in restaurants up here any longer.

There is a difference between the direct inhalation from the cigarette and the smoke exhaled. Smokers get a concentrated dose of everything including tar (one of the major causes of lung problems in smokers). That link just said it was so and didn't point to any studies and such. How do they know 3000 people per year die? They could put up a link to the data.

I understand about not wanting to harm your child with smoke. But answer an honest question or two or three. Have you ever driven at an unsafe speed with them in the car/truck? Ever made a manuver you realized you shouldn't have with them in the car/truck? You gonna give them cell phones when it might prove to give brain tumors?

I'm all for protecting kids, but there are many other more dangerous things parents do that can harm/kill their kids than exposing them to second hand smoke. So if they really want to protect them, they can't just fixate on SHS.

tcrossma

The difference is all of those things you guys have mentioned, with the exception of vehicles, is that it's bad for YOU. If you want to kill yourself, I don't care, go ahead. I drink too much myself. But if it affects other people, then do it at home instead of out in public, that's it. To do otherwise is selfish in my opinion.

As to driving emissions, I do think it's a bit of a stretch to compare a bad habit with something that's critical to the current survival of the worlds way of life. But I do agree with you that emissions are a bad thing and the world - as a whole - is trying to do something about it.

dholmes

All this smoking ban **** does get a little old,like local & fed goverment making you smoke in certain areas.Do any of you think the goverment local or fed give a **** about your health? SSSHHHIIITTTT Its all about fear & controlling people,I smoke & no it will kill me.Like seatbelt laws its all ****,but I have to admit Ive only unbuckeled a few dead people in my work!Oh I smoke outside at my house,it does make walls nasty.

tcrossma

tugboat wrote: »

There is a difference between the direct inhalation from the cigarette and the smoke exhaled. Smokers get a concentrated dose of everything including tar (one of the major causes of lung problems in smokers). That link just said it was so and didn't point to any studies and such. How do they know 3000 people per year die? They could put up a link to the data.

I understand about not wanting to harm your child with smoke. But answer an honest question or two or three. Have you ever driven at an unsafe speed with them in the car/truck? Ever made a manuver you realized you shouldn't have with them in the car/truck? You gonna give them cell phones when it might prove to give brain tumors?

I'm all for protecting kids, but there are many other more dangerous things parents do that can harm/kill their kids than exposing them to second hand smoke. So if they really want to protect them, they can't just fixate on SHS.

I've never driven with my children in the car after having any drinks. I try to drive safely and reduce risks when my children are in the car. I try to do things that will keep my children safe. But that's not the point exactly. What you're saying is more analogous to the person who drives drunk and hits ME and my children. Someone else is putting me and my children at risk without my having any control over it, which is what may be happening with second hand smoke.

And incidentally if I'm driving at unsafe speeds that is in fact illegal and will result in a penalty. And who's fixating only on second hand smoking? There's lots of things that people don't do these days that they used to. I never used to wear a seat belt. As a kid I used to sit in the front seat without a seat belt. I never used to wear a helmet while riding a bike. My parents used to drink and drive all the time and have some pretty interesting stories to tell about it. At the time it wasn't dumb exactly, it's what people did. To do any of those things now isn't all that smart because every one of those things has been proven to be harmful to ones self or to others.

treitz3

tcrossma wrote: »

As to driving emissions, I do think it's a bit of a stretch to compare a bad habit with something that's critical to the current survival of the worlds way of life.

Why would you think it's a stretch?
The PPM [Parts per million] that we all inhale, would it be more or less? Second hand smoke or vehicle emissions? [concentrated areas aside....which we have been banned from]

Not trying to confront. Just understand.

dholmes

Im going to light up now

tkfoh

YES smoking is bad and bad for who ever is close when one is smoking,thats a fact. But its not about you and I, Insurance is the big stink on smoking, why do we have seat belt laws, insurance, they dont care if I smoke or wear a seat belt, if they dont haft to pay my medical bills. SO THE NEXT ON THERE LIST IS FAT, And I would bet on that one, and after fat whats next?

brettw22

treitz, stfu with the exhaust thing.......not that i'm saying you can't have an opinion......but repeating it 15 times in a thread makes it kind of stupid sounding...........