Smoking (schools, taxes, dangerous)

[Luvsdabeach]

Originally Posted by OleTomCat

Tell that to the owners of Berts Bar on Sullivan's Island....

Wait you can't it doesn't exist anymore all because of te smoking ban.

Found this in the City Paper so it wasn't just the smoking ban.

"Bar owner Tim Runyan blames a forthcoming step hike in the rent, the recent smoking ban, and the influx of wealthy immigrants to the Sullivan’s for the bar’s recent problems."

Lucid Beaming | Charleston City Paper » The end of an era: Bert’s Bar

[Maryjane55us]

I keep waiting for the Americans for Civil Rights.. ACLU, or whatever it's called to pounce on this topic, but they haven't yet.

Especially these recent ridiculously unfair tax increases in order to attempt to further ban smoking by making it so expensive, while forcing black markets to become lucrative and created.

Doesn't this remind anyone of the Boston Tea Party? or the Prohibition era? Sure seems like repeated history to me.

I agree with Ole Tom Cat and Chrome Kitty.. And as Kitty said, a drunk behind the wheel is a heck of a lot more dangerous than a smoker.

As for this silly "PC" thing.. Pc'ers are simply the ongoing "in-crowd" of the day.. They can designate to the public that "pot is okay, in private".. "infidelity is ok as long as it's secret", "porn is ok, as long as it's secretive".. but NO one should be allowed to SMOKE publically.. Good God.. they are scum of the earth!

Meanwhile, if you are a WINE-O.. PC-ers will love ya! (Esp if you dress well and nod with approval and can pronounce the best of the french wines) Wine drinkers are the coolest among the coolest PC-ers these days! They are not taxed to prevent them from getting cirrosis and liver disease. And we need to excuse them if they get behind the wheel of their Mercedes and BMW's and kill someone after partying down at a downtown wine and cheese social event in their tux.. because it was all in good faith and charity.. and purely VERY PC of them.

But beware of that gosh darn smoker and make sure he is relegated to the outside and be sure that you vote for his taxes to increase so he can't afford his smokes anymore. Then go to church on Sun and feel blessed that you have done your *good works*.

AMEN..




I'm babbling.. but maybe someone understood my point..

[pokrplr]

I totally got it MJ and couldn't agree more. Great post...

Now i'm clicking the link and watching your rep points grow...If thats legal?

[c99]

What's so unfair about increasing the cigarette tax? If you don't like it, don't buy cigarettes and kick the habit. It's simple economics.

I also don't see the big deal about banning smoking indoors. It's healthier for the employees and patrons. Plenty of other cities have done it without (seemingly) long-term ill consequences. It would be better if an indoor smoking ban was a state (or even Federal) mandate, however, so business owners don't lose business to the nearby non-smoking city. That isn't fair to bars and restaurant owners.

Sure, it's inconvenient to have to smoke outdoors, but a lot of things are inconvenient. It's inconvenient for me to have to walk through a wall of smoke to get to the non-smoking section, too. The 'right' to smoke indoors isn't written into the Constitution. If I don't like the smoke, I don't go there. Eventually some restaurant/bar owner or the state will get sued by an employee's spouse who died from emphysema due to the smoky working conditions. Simple economics will prevail. That situation is probably pretty unlikely in this state, though.

Before you start bashing me ... I don't patronize places without distinct, non-smoking (i.e., less smoky) seating areas. If I find a new restaurant, walk in, and it's filled with smoke, I walk right back out. If I could find a smoke-free restaurant around here that I liked, I'd ONLY go there. Similarly, if I wanted to breath smoke, I'd smoke myself.

The argument that it's not PC to smoke is illogical. Smoking is unhealthy and is linked to cancer - that's not brain surgery (but may be lung surgery). Smoking in public affects surrounding people. What "right" do you as smokers have to fill my young child's (or anyone's) lungs with smoke?

[Chromekitty]

Originally Posted by Maryjane55us

I keep waiting for the Americans for Civil Rights.. ACLU, or whatever it's called to pounce on this topic, but they haven't yet.

Especially these recent ridiculously unfair tax increases in order to attempt to further ban smoking by making it so expensive, while forcing black markets to become lucrative and created.

Doesn't this remind anyone of the Boston Tea Party? or the Prohibition era? Sure seems like repeated history to me.

I agree with Ole Tom Cat and Chrome Kitty.. And as Kitty said, a drunk behind the wheel is a heck of a lot more dangerous than a smoker.

As for this silly "PC" thing.. Pc'ers are simply the ongoing "in-crowd" of the day.. They can designate to the public that "pot is okay, in private".. "infidelity is ok as long as it's secret", "porn is ok, as long as it's secretive".. but NO one should be allowed to SMOKE publically.. Good God.. they are scum of the earth!

Meanwhile, if you are a WINE-O.. PC-ers will love ya! (Esp if you dress well and nod with approval and can pronounce the best of the french wines) Wine drinkers are the coolest among the coolest PC-ers these days! They are not taxed to prevent them from getting cirrosis and liver disease. And we need to excuse them if they get behind the wheel of their Mercedes and BMW's and kill someone after partying down at a downtown wine and cheese social event in their tux.. because it was all in good faith and charity.. and purely VERY PC of them.

But beware of that gosh darn smoker and make sure he is relegated to the outside and be sure that you vote for his taxes to increase so he can't afford his smokes anymore. Then go to church on Sun and feel blessed that you have done your *good works*.

AMEN..




I'm babbling.. but maybe someone understood my point..

You aren't babbling and I know exactly what you mean. The PC'ers of today are part of what is sending this country to hell in a hand-basket. They think they can point and click their way to nirvana, all in an attempt to make themselves feel better. Today's society is a selfish one. They all follow the lines they peddle, it is easier to do that than think on their own.

[Chromekitty]

Originally Posted by c99

What's so unfair about increasing the cigarette tax? If you don't like it, don't buy cigarettes and kick the habit. It's simple economics.

I also don't see the big deal about banning smoking indoors. It's healthier for the employees and patrons. Plenty of other cities have done it without (seemingly) long-term ill consequences. It would be better if an indoor smoking ban was a state (or even Federal) mandate, however, so business owners don't lose business to the nearby non-smoking city. That isn't fair to bars and restaurant owners.

Sure, it's inconvenient to have to smoke outdoors, but a lot of things are inconvenient. It's inconvenient for me to have to walk through a wall of smoke to get to the non-smoking section, too. The 'right' to smoke indoors isn't written into the Constitution. If I don't like the smoke, I don't go there. Eventually some restaurant/bar owner or the state will get sued by an employee's spouse who died from emphysema due to the smoky working conditions. Simple economics will prevail. That situation is probably pretty unlikely in this state, though.

Before you start bashing me ... I don't patronize places without distinct, non-smoking (i.e., less smoky) seating areas. If I find a new restaurant, walk in, and it's filled with smoke, I walk right back out. If I could find a smoke-free restaurant around here that I liked, I'd ONLY go there. Similarly, if I wanted to breath smoke, I'd smoke myself.

The argument that it's not PC to smoke is illogical. Smoking is unhealthy and is linked to cancer - that's not brain surgery (but may be lung surgery). Smoking in public affects surrounding people. What "right" do you as smokers have to fill my young child's (or anyone's) lungs with smoke?

C99,

your comments are simply put ......ignorant.

Alcohol causes cirrhosis, kidney problems, heart problems, drinking and driving has killed multitudes of people. It has ruined lives and homes. Relationships are dissolved because of it. Alcohol is more devastating than
smoking, cigarettes ever will be.

As far as someone suing over smoking and it's *dangers*? Well, that has happened. I don't know what rock you have been under and just as with smoking, lawsuits have been fought, won and lost over alcohol. And that has nothing to do with simple economics. My cash is just as good as yours. But because cigarette smoke *bothers* you, you want me taxed because I smoke. How about we implement a sin tax and your booze get taxed as well. Afterall, again I will remind you that your drinking and driving has a greater chance of causing harm than my cigarettes ever have the chance of causing harm to you.

The Constitution doesn't say that I or anyone has the right to smoke, but it does say, that MY rights are protected.

It is more than in-convenient to go to a restaurant and/or store and hear kids (such as yours) screaming and carrying on and pitching fits but I don't bawk and ask that restaurants/stores no longer allow kids.

Simply put...stay out of my space.

[c99]

Originally Posted by Chromekitty

C99,

your comments are simply put ......ignorant.

Alcohol causes cirrhosis, kidney problems, heart problems, drinking and driving has killed multitudes of people. It has ruined lives and homes. Relationships are dissolved because of it. Alcohol is more devastating than
smoking, cigarettes ever will be.

As far as someone suing over smoking and it's *dangers*? Well, that has happened. I don't know what rock you have been under and just as with smoking, lawsuits have been fought, won and lost over alcohol. And that has nothing to do with simple economics. My cash is just as good as yours. But because cigarette smoke *bothers* you, you want me taxed because I smoke. How about we implement a sin tax and your booze get taxed as well. Afterall, again I will remind you that your drinking and driving has a greater chance of causing harm than my cigarettes ever have the chance of causing harm to you.

The Constitution doesn't say that I or anyone has the right to smoke, but it does say, that MY rights are protected.

It is more than in-convenient to go to a restaurant and/or store and hear kids (such as yours) screaming and carrying on and pitching fits but I don't bawk and ask that restaurants/stores no longer allow kids.

Simply put...stay out of my space.

I love it when a discussion turns to an attack. I didn't mention anything about alcohol vs. smoking. That wasn't part of my debate. Sure drinking and driving kills. I wasn't arguing that. Your idea of a "sin" (interesting word choice) tax is fantastic. Let them tax wine/liquor/beer at some ridiculous rate, too. That would likely reduce drinking and the associated health/social problems, as well as DWIs.

I don't watch TV but an hour (if that) a week, so I must have missed hearing about a specific smoking lawsuit where a spouse of a deceased employee sued the employer. I've heard a lot about the tobacco companies getting sued, but I wasn't referring to those lawsuits.

Sure your cash is just as good as mine, who said it wasn't. You're just miffed because you have less of it due to your expensive, unhealthy, infringing habit.

Not that it is any of your business, but I rarely drink and if I do, I do it in occasional moderation at home. I do NOT drink and drive; you don't know me and have no grounds to assume that I do. I also go so far as to stay off of the roads around here any time even close to when others would be drinking and driving - to keep my family safe. Too many bad and unlicensed drivers around here.

My child doesn't scream at restaurants. If he gets restless, I leave BEFORE there is any disturbance to restaurant patrons. That is common courtesy I'd extend even to you.

Please educate me on which Constitutional Right of yours is being violated? Here's a link to the U.S. Constitution to help with your discourse: LII: Constitution

By the way ... The Internet isn't your space, and neither is this topic of City-Data. Now you are trying to infringe on MY Constitutional Right of Free Speech!

Simply put ... I'll go WHEREVER I want, WHENEVER I want. Your threats are meaningless and immature. It's just a debate. Lighten up (pun unintended).

[Chromekitty]

Originally Posted by c99

I love it when a discussion turns to an attack. I didn't mention anything about alcohol vs. smoking. That wasn't part of my debate. Sure drinking and driving kills. I wasn't arguing that. Your idea of a "sin" (interesting word choice) tax is fantastic. Let them tax wine/liquor/beer at some ridiculous rate, too. That would likely reduce drinking and the associated health/social problems, as well as DWIs.

I don't watch TV but an hour (if that) a week, so I must have missed hearing about a specific smoking lawsuit where a spouse of a deceased employee sued the employer. I've heard a lot about the tobacco companies getting sued, but I wasn't referring to those lawsuits.

Sure cash is just as good as mine - you just have less of it because of your expensive, unhealthy, infringing habit.

Not that it is any of your business, but I rarely drink and if I do, I do it in occasional moderation at home where I don't have to drive anywhere. And, I stay off of the roads around here any time even close to when others would be drinking and driving, to keep my family safe. My child doesn't scream at restaurants. If he gets restless, I leave BEFORE there is any disturbance to restaurant patrons. That is common courtesy I'd extend even to you.

Please educate me on which Constitutional Right of yours is being violated? Here's a link to the U.S. Constitution to help with your discourse: LII: Constitution

By the way ... The Internet isn't your space, and neither is this topic of City-Data. Now you are trying to infringe on MY Constitutional Right of Free Speech!

Simply put ... I'll go WHEREVER I want, WHENEVER I want. Your threats are meaningless and immature. It's just a debate. Lighten up.

haha...thanks for proving you are just one of the followers. See you coming a mile away.

And no one made a threat, what happened here is you got called out for your ignorance.

[OleTomCat]

Originally Posted by c99

What's so unfair about increasing the cigarette tax? If you don't like it, don't buy cigarettes and kick the habit. It's simple economics.

I also don't see the big deal about banning smoking indoors. It's healthier for the employees and patrons. Plenty of other cities have done it without (seemingly) long-term ill consequences. It would be better if an indoor smoking ban was a state (or even Federal) mandate, however, so business owners don't lose business to the nearby non-smoking city. That isn't fair to bars and restaurant owners.

Sure, it's inconvenient to have to smoke outdoors, but a lot of things are inconvenient. It's inconvenient for me to have to walk through a wall of smoke to get to the non-smoking section, too. The 'right' to smoke indoors isn't written into the Constitution. If I don't like the smoke, I don't go there. Eventually some restaurant/bar owner or the state will get sued by an employee's spouse who died from emphysema due to the smoky working conditions. Simple economics will prevail. That situation is probably pretty unlikely in this state, though.

Before you start bashing me ... I don't patronize places without distinct, non-smoking (i.e., less smoky) seating areas. If I find a new restaurant, walk in, and it's filled with smoke, I walk right back out. If I could find a smoke-free restaurant around here that I liked, I'd ONLY go there. Similarly, if I wanted to breath smoke, I'd smoke myself.

The argument that it's not PC to smoke is illogical. Smoking is unhealthy and is linked to cancer - that's not brain surgery (but may be lung surgery). Smoking in public affects surrounding people. What "right" do you as smokers have to fill my young child's (or anyone's) lungs with smoke?

Using your logic, we should raise taxes on fatty food or salty food.

We should raise taxes on alcohol also....

It has nothing at all to do with what is 'Healthy' it is all about personal property rights, the government coming into someones place and telling them what they 'Have' to do with it.

[c99]

Originally Posted by OleTomCat

Using your logic, we should raise taxes on fatty food or salty food.

That's not a half bad idea - why not? We have to pay for the bank bail outs et. al. somehow. We'd all benefit by (eventual) lower health care costs. I'd rather have a 'fast food' tax increase than an income tax increase.

Originally Posted by OleTomCat

It has nothing at all to do with what is 'Healthy' it is all about personal property rights, the government coming into someones place and telling them what they 'Have' to do with it.

I do see your point about personal property rights ... I am not for more government intervention than absolutely necessary. The gov't usually messes things up. In my opinion, the role of the gov't should be to protect the people (from themselves). If non-smokers steadfastly discontinue patronizing bars/restaurants that allow smoking, market economics will work things out and there wouldn't be a need for gov't intervention.

Really, this whole thing doesn't affect me all that much, but I am looking at those who are more personally affected. I feel badly for the non-smoking workers who may not have the education or the means to obtain jobs other than as a server in a restaurant or bar. Then, we're talking about second-hand smoke primarily affecting a certain socio-economic class. What's right about that? I don't think it's anybody's "right" to force them, or anybody else, to breath second-hand smoke. You're affecting a non-smoker's "right to choose" to NOT smoke.

If you want to smoke in public around others - keep it to yourself so it doesn't affect others - don't exhale; swallow all your smoke - or is that just too unhealthy?