U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Charlotte
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-09-2009, 06:56 AM
 
3,774 posts, read 6,993,242 times
Reputation: 4402

Advertisements

I don't like amploud's "libertarian" world.

Sound more like quasi-socialist liberal vengeance to me.

 
Old 05-09-2009, 07:28 AM
 
Location: State of Being
35,885 posts, read 67,034,397 times
Reputation: 22370
Quote:
Originally Posted by amploud View Post
Totally wrong, especially in today's economy. One may not have a choice in employment these days.

A person should not be forced to choose between being employed and their health and well-being. This has been the opinion of the courts in most cases. As a result, virtually every chemical in the workplace is regulated by OSHA. It's required by law that the MSDS for each chemical is kept on site for employee review. Safe exposure PPM levels, personal protective equipment, and handling instructions are mandatory and required by law for many chemicals far less toxic than cigarette smoke. Cigarette smoke has gotten a free pass for too long. It is perfectly reasonable to restrict or eliminate it in anyone's workplace based on well documented, proven health impacts.

Also, if it is the "private business owner's choice" to allow smoking, it will be the "private business owner's employee's choice" to sue for damages, unsafe working conditions, etc.

If smoking was totally safe, my arguments would not be worth typing. Knowing what we now know about smoking, it completely boggles my mind that intelligent people will argue for the side of the smoker.
THE ONLY JOB OUT THERE IS ONE WHERE YOU ARE A WAITRESS OR BARTENDER? Really. This has gone from the sublime to somewhere out there in space . . .

If you have problems with smoke why would you CHOOSE to be a waitress or bartender?

If the only job out there was working in a meat packing plant, you would go work there- or you would MOVE? Dear me. The illogic is staggering.

AMPLOUD - you are too emotionally wrapped in this issue and are grasping for straws to support your untenable position, IMHO. Not meaning to offend you b/c we all have the right to our opinions . . . but the supporting statements you are using . . . I dunno.
 
Old 05-09-2009, 07:35 AM
 
Location: Some got six month some got one solid. But me and my buddies all got lifetime here
4,551 posts, read 9,275,017 times
Reputation: 2121
Quote:
Originally Posted by amploud View Post
If smoking was totally safe, my arguments would not be worth typing. Knowing what we now know about smoking, it completely boggles my mind that intelligent people will argue for the side of the smoker.

Okay, for the last f***ing time...

NOBODY IS ARGUING ON THE SIDE OF THE SMOKER!!!! WE'RE ARGUING ON THE SIDE OF A PRIVATE BUSINESS OWNER TO MAKE A DECISION HE OR SHE FEELS IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF HIS OR HER BUSINESS!!!!!!!

Holy CRAP what is so hard to figure out about that???????

Forget about the smoker. It's the owner of the business we're concentrating on. Not the smoker, the owner.



I like you, I really do, but you're driving me up a wall here!

Tell you what...I'll use your views and say this: ban sports on every level. Ban 'em. People could've been killed at Talladega when Carl Edwards' car got airborne and hit the retaining fence. Ban it. Ban ice hockey because 13 year old Brittanie Cecil died after being struck by a puck that flew from the rink during a hockey game. Ban it. Ban it all. Anybody from the people who attend to the people who work in arenas during those events could be killed. Ban it all because there's a risk to their health and safety. All we'll be left with is curling.

Hey, maybe banning spectators at sporting events is next. Would you be for that too???? We'll just wait until a line drive comes screaming over third base, kills a five year old and then have the government ban baseball. I'll bet you guys would be singing a much different tune if that were to happen.

And using this economy as an example as to why it's more necessary to ban smoking for the sake of a potential employee...how about not putting your business at potential risk by banning it, thereby potentially leaving more people unemployed against the one person you might have hired. Because you know somewhere along the way at least one business has been affected by that sort of a ban. Maybe most bars and restaurants haven't felt it but you know at least one has.

If I feel the business that I OWN can benefit from allowing smoking, that should be MY decision for me to make. Not yours, anyone else's here, and CERTAINLY not the government on any level. I'm not a smoker, I don't like it, but if I'm looking to cater to a certain crowd you damn well better believe I'm going to want to allow it.
 
Old 05-09-2009, 07:44 AM
 
Location: Partisanship Is An Intellectual/Emotional Handicap
1,851 posts, read 1,874,631 times
Reputation: 1079
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagocubs View Post
Businesses are NOT going to make the choice. They don't want to risk alienating people (and, thus $$$)
.

What? What in the world are you talking about? Businesses have been doing exactly that for a long time, now.

Have you been out and about lately? Over the last few years?

There's a lot of places that are completely non-smoking and have been for a while.

Businesses HAVE been making their choices and they would continue to do so.

As a smoker I try to be very conscience of non-smokers. I have been smoking outside for years. I have kids and I have never smoked around them. Always outside. And never, ever in the car.

A majority of places I go to are already completely non-smoking.

When I go out to eat with my kids, we always sit in the Non-smoking section; if by chance they provide a smoking section.
 
Old 05-09-2009, 07:46 AM
 
Location: State of Being
35,885 posts, read 67,034,397 times
Reputation: 22370
Methinks some people who would ban anything they feel makes them uncomfortable (for whatever reason) would have fit in great with Carrie Nation's followers . . . and Prohibition.

Our constitutional rights, AS BUSINESS OWNERS, are being infringed upon. Think about this: what about porno shops? I am offended! I think that pornography not only objectifies women, but it also appears to be tied to violence against women. So I want it banned b/c it psychologically affects SOME men, who then act out inappropriately against women. That porno shop a few miles away? BAN IT. It is a social problem and bad for mental health and can propel men to physical violence, thus is a HEALTH PROBLEM.

Guess what the Supreme Court has to say about that?

And how is it different? Oh. You don't CHOOSE to go there? Uh, how is that different from CHOOSING to go to any particular restaurant or bar? How is smoking POTENTIALLY hurting you any more (or less) than porno may potentially hurt you (or cause you to hurt someone else?)

A business owner has the right to make a living, too, you know. If a restaurant owner has found that smokers spend more money in his establishment than non-smokers, why should he/she have to ban smoking? By doing so, you, the public (who can CHOOSE not to frequent that business) have now affected the business owner's ability to make a living. How is that fair? It is fair just b/c you have decided it is fair? So you can make decisions about what is and isn't fair to YOU, but you can't seem to be fair to the person who OWNS THE BUSINESS???
 
Old 05-09-2009, 07:48 AM
 
Location: North Carolina
6,772 posts, read 11,870,752 times
Reputation: 6513
Quote:
Originally Posted by amploud View Post
A person should not be forced to choose between being employed and their health and well-being. This has been the opinion of the courts in most cases. As a result, virtually every chemical in the workplace is regulated by OSHA. It's required by law that the MSDS for each chemical is kept on site for employee review. Safe exposure PPM levels, personal protective equipment, and handling instructions are mandatory and required by law for many chemicals far less toxic than cigarette smoke. Cigarette smoke has gotten a free pass for too long. It is perfectly reasonable to restrict or eliminate it in anyone's workplace based on well documented, proven health impacts.
Have you ever even worked in the food service/bar industry? I have. I bartended and waitressed all thru college and I can tell you that nearly ALL restaurant employees smoke.

I've worked in fine dining restaurants, nightclubs and chain restaurants....almost every employee smokes and every server fights over who gets the smoking section because smokers spend more money and are better tippers. If you don't believe me ask your server next time you go out to eat.

A good *majority* of these same employees also do not support these bans! But let the non-smokers and the government protect them from themselves...puh-leeze
 
Old 05-09-2009, 07:50 AM
 
Location: Partisanship Is An Intellectual/Emotional Handicap
1,851 posts, read 1,874,631 times
Reputation: 1079
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianH1970 View Post
Okay, for the last f***ing time...

NOBODY IS ARGUING ON THE SIDE OF THE SMOKER!!!! WE'RE ARGUING ON THE SIDE OF A PRIVATE BUSINESS OWNER TO MAKE A DECISION HE OR SHE FEELS IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF HIS OR HER BUSINESS!!!!!!!

Holy CRAP what is so hard to figure out about that???????

Forget about the smoker. It's the owner of the business we're concentrating on. Not the smoker, the owner.



I like you, I really do, but you're driving me up a wall here!

Tell you what...I'll use your views and say this: ban sports on every level. Ban 'em. People could've been killed at Talladega when Carl Edwards' car got airborne and hit the retaining fence. Ban it. Ban ice hockey because 13 year old Brittanie Cecil died after being struck by a puck that flew from the rink during a hockey game. Ban it. Ban it all. Anybody from the people who attend to the people who work in arenas during those events could be killed. Ban it all because there's a risk to their health and safety. All we'll be left with is curling.

Hey, maybe banning spectators at sporting events is next. Would you be for that too???? We'll just wait until a line drive comes screaming over third base, kills a five year old and then have the government ban baseball. I'll bet you guys would be singing a much different tune if that were to happen.

And using this economy as an example as to why it's more necessary to ban smoking for the sake of a potential employee...how about not putting your business at potential risk by banning it, thereby potentially leaving more people unemployed against the one person you might have hired. Because you know somewhere along the way at least one business has been affected by that sort of a ban. Maybe most bars and restaurants haven't felt it but you know at least one has.

If I feel the business that I OWN can benefit from allowing smoking, that should be MY decision for me to make. Not yours, anyone else's here, and CERTAINLY not the government on any level. I'm not a smoker, I don't like it, but if I'm looking to cater to a certain crowd you damn well better believe I'm going to want to allow it.

Direct hit! BINGO-O-RENO!!!

I'd also like to ad something else.......

Amploud seems to not realize the ugly can of worms he opened up with his ...."Right to Pursuit Of Happieness" angle.

That's one hell of a paralyzing precedent to put forth. A very ugly can of worms.

On the basis of ........."Right To Pursuit Of Happieness" ......we may as well just shut down the country. Shut it all down and we may as well start finding another country to live in. Because with that precedent, you paralyze everyone and every business.
 
Old 05-09-2009, 07:52 AM
 
Location: Moon Over Palmettos
5,975 posts, read 17,561,674 times
Reputation: 5007
Quote:
Originally Posted by sophialee View Post
Have you ever even worked in the food service/bar industry? I have. I bartended and waitressed all thru college and I can tell you that nearly ALL restaurant employees smoke.

I've worked in fine dining restaurants, nightclubs and chain restaurants....almost every employee smokes and every server fights over who gets the smoking section because smokers spend more money and are better tippers. If you don't believe me ask your server next time you go out to eat.

A good *majority* of these same employees also do not support these bans! But let the non-smokers and the government protect them from themselves...puh-leeze
Bravo, Sophia, bravo!!!!!
 
Old 05-09-2009, 08:27 AM
 
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
21,886 posts, read 27,156,907 times
Reputation: 8945
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianH1970 View Post
Okay, for the last f***ing time...

NOBODY IS ARGUING ON THE SIDE OF THE SMOKER!!!! WE'RE ARGUING ON THE SIDE OF A PRIVATE BUSINESS OWNER TO MAKE A DECISION HE OR SHE FEELS IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF HIS OR HER BUSINESS!!!!!!!

Holy CRAP what is so hard to figure out about that???????

Forget about the smoker. It's the owner of the business we're concentrating on. Not the smoker, the owner.



I like you, I really do, but you're driving me up a wall here!

Tell you what...I'll use your views and say this: ban sports on every level. Ban 'em. People could've been killed at Talladega when Carl Edwards' car got airborne and hit the retaining fence. Ban it. Ban ice hockey because 13 year old Brittanie Cecil died after being struck by a puck that flew from the rink during a hockey game. Ban it. Ban it all. Anybody from the people who attend to the people who work in arenas during those events could be killed. Ban it all because there's a risk to their health and safety. All we'll be left with is curling.

Hey, maybe banning spectators at sporting events is next. Would you be for that too???? We'll just wait until a line drive comes screaming over third base, kills a five year old and then have the government ban baseball. I'll bet you guys would be singing a much different tune if that were to happen.

And using this economy as an example as to why it's more necessary to ban smoking for the sake of a potential employee...how about not putting your business at potential risk by banning it, thereby potentially leaving more people unemployed against the one person you might have hired. Because you know somewhere along the way at least one business has been affected by that sort of a ban. Maybe most bars and restaurants haven't felt it but you know at least one has.

If I feel the business that I OWN can benefit from allowing smoking, that should be MY decision for me to make. Not yours, anyone else's here, and CERTAINLY not the government on any level. I'm not a smoker, I don't like it, but if I'm looking to cater to a certain crowd you damn well better believe I'm going to want to allow it.
Brian, you hit the nail on the head.

When NJ passed the state-wide ban, the casinos in AC were exempted. A few people screamed about it & got smoking banned on the gaming floors. Well, that went so well that the ban had to be lifted last fall. It seems that people voted on that one with their feet & went to slots parlors in PA, where smoking is allowed or just stayed home.

It's like I said, this smacks of Prohibition, & we all know how well that went, don't we.
 
Old 05-09-2009, 08:40 AM
 
206 posts, read 453,423 times
Reputation: 90
1. Support
2. Non-Smoker
3. Transplant
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Charlotte
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top