Quick question: Smoking in public buildings? (Houston, Dallas: homes, inspectors, fence)

[krisco750]

Originally Posted by lh_newbie

If I had a can of benzene and sprayed it randomly around a restaurant - would you not want that to be illegal? Or should it my my right to do what I want - and if people don't like it - they can just stay away from public places? Or do you feel that there is a reason we have public safety issues and laws to enforce them? I assume you feel it's wrong to have a seat belt law based on the arguments you've made above - or that having a motorcycle helmet law is infringing on someone's rights? (although these two points don't affect OTHER folks health, so it's certainly not apples-to-apples).

That's a bit of a dramatic exaggeration, no? I don't think anyone will agree that spraying toxic chemicals into the air is the same as someone smoking in the same area.

As for the seat belt and motorcycle helmet laws, you are correct. I do not agree with them. I've often used seat belt laws as an example in debating with people over issues actually. For different reasons, however.

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree. I'll take my meals in Dallas though and refuse to eat at restaurants that allow smoking. I'll let me dollars speak. And since I'm not paying $4 for a pack of cancer sticks, I'm guessing I'll have more money to frequent restaurants and ultimately win this argument.

Brian

I'll agree with you on that It's funny though that your last paragraph pretty much sums up all that I was saying. Please _DO_ make personal choices and vote with your dollars. Not only will you save the money but you will live a healthier lifestyle. Please _do not_ impose your preferences on the rest of society by lobbying for legislation.

[krisco750]

Originally Posted by edubya

We are both advocating positions that involve treating opponents as second-class citizens. We're both telling the other party: "If you don't like it, go somewhere else." So who wins? I vote for the side that doesn't stink up the place.

That's not true. I'm advocating allowing business and people to make the choices. You can go somewhere else next door, down the street, whatever.

You're advocating making smoking against the law in entire regions. Here it's on a city-by-city basis, but in some places (like where I'm from, NJ) it is statewide.

[krisco750]

Originally Posted by Lakewooder

The free market should decide, not politicians. If you don't like smoke, don't patronize the business.

I smoked for four or five years (mostly while drinking) and I quit - but I swear I am not going to turn into one of the antismokingnazis.

Thank you for recognizing my point, Lakewooder.

Any time I get into this argument it's automatically written off because I'm a smoker. I'd feel the same way if I was not a smoker, but people never believe that.

[lh_newbie]

Originally Posted by lh_newbie

If I had a can of benzene and sprayed it randomly around a restaurant - would you not want that to be illegal?

Originally Posted by krisco750

That's a bit of a dramatic exaggeration, no? I don't think anyone will agree that spraying toxic chemicals into the air is the same as someone smoking in the same area.

Benzene is a class A carcinogen.

2nd hand cigarette smoke is a class A carcinogen.

I don't see a difference. Both are harmful to people. Both should be illegal to spray into a public area. Dramatic? Yes, but on point. So what I hear you say is that you agree that harmful chemicals should not be sprayed in a public area, but you disagree that 2nd hand smoke is harmful. So we agree on the principal of public safety concerns. As far as I am concerned - that's fine. We should make smoking illegal and then if your side wants to fight with the EPA to get 2nd hand smoke taken off the list of carcinogens - go at it.

And for the record... regarding helmet laws and seat belts - that's a PERSONAL safety issue, not a public safety issue. While I think it's stupid to not wear a helmet or seat belt - I disagree with making it a law to have to do so. If you want to endanger yourself - by all means - go at it. In the wild, that's called natural selection.

Brian

[krisco750]

Originally Posted by lh_newbie

Benzene is a class A carcinogen.

2nd hand cigarette smoke is a class A carcinogen.

I don't see a difference. Both are harmful to people. Both should be illegal to spray into a public area. Dramatic? Yes, but on point. So what I hear you say is that you agree that harmful chemicals should not be sprayed in a public area, but you disagree that 2nd hand smoke is harmful. So we agree on the principal of public safety concerns. As far as I am concerned - that's fine. We should make smoking illegal and then if your side wants to fight with the EPA to get 2nd hand smoke taken off the list of carcinogens - go at it.

Which is why I mentioned in an earlier post that it would be a futile argument. I do not agree that second hand smoke is as dangerous as it is painted out to be. I don't think we are going to come to an agreement on this :P

And for the record... regarding helmet laws and seat belts - that's a PERSONAL safety issue, not a public safety issue. While I think it's stupid to not wear a helmet or seat belt - I disagree with making it a law to have to do so. If you want to endanger yourself - by all means - go at it. In the wild, that's called natural selection.

Agreed 100%.

[Lakewooder]

Smokers are usually very nice and sociable. Of course it's probably not worth the consequences but it could be said that it drives business.

Example - The Mansion Bar used to be the epicenter of the Dallas scene. They even sold excellent cigars (used to have the "21" paper band). As soon as the smoking ordinance was passed it had to ban smoking because it is in a hotel. The business went down the tubes. They have tried a renovation but it's just not the same anymore.

OTOH try the Ritz where you can smoke outdoors. It's packed.

[Canine*Castle]

Originally Posted by krisco750

3) That really doesn't mean anything. There are many things used in day to day life that can be dangerous. I hate to re-use the example, but perfume (which is also airborne) contains just as many bad chemicals and is horrible for your health to inhale. However, it smells good - so people don't care.

I care tremendously. I cannot stand the stench of women's perfume especially when they wear it heavily. It chokes me. I've never smelled one that smells good. If they only new how offensive it was to many of us. Now men's cologne on the other hand, that's nice. (Well, not Stetson though).

[caligurltotx]

Krisco I think the entire no smoking ban came into play in CA due to the health risk to bar employees. At least that's what I remember the argument being, and it was a valid one since it is a fact that 2nd hand smoke has detrimental consequences to non smokers.

The fact that I had to leave the group I was with due to too much smoke in the place and go watch the end of the game elsewhere was not a win/win. I was having fun with this group but I knew I would wake up sick the next day if I continued to stay. So yes, I will not be meeting up with them again there cause that is my right to not be in a smoke filled bar.


I have friends that smoke and one in particular is very respectful of those around her. Maybe if smokers didn't have such a sense of entitlement then it wouldn't be such an issue with non smokers. If you are with friends and sitting next to someone that doesn't smoke why can't you move to the other side away from them and light up. Instead smokers have the attitude that they allow smoking in here so I am going to light up and to hell with anyone around me that doesn't smoke. So instead smoker's attitudes are well you don't have to frequent this place. Well what if a non smoker likes to frequent that place why shouldn't they.

And eating habits are not the same as smoking. So if I eat a big mac around you it's not going to get in your clothes, hair, have yr throat sore, eyes dry, contacts irritating and possibly at some point cause you cancer.

[Lakewooder]

At the Ritz..well maybe not the best example. But you can't serve peanuts on a plane anymore, either.

[caligurltotx]

Okay lakewooder that is funny but it makes a point. If I was at the Ritz then I could enjoy myself by staying inside in a non smoking environment or I could step outside with the smokers but at least I have a choice and can be at an event that gives me options. I don't have to leave and go somewhere else!