Smoking Thread - Now Featuring "Gas Hog" Discussions Too (drugs, health care system)
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.
so.. I should not enjoy my favorite Italian restaurant and food forever because i dont want to be expoesd to cigarettes.
While banning smoking in a restaurant only stops you from smoking in that 1 or 2 hours your in there.. if I listend to what you say I'd have to NEVER set foot in that restaurant again..
Why can't you eat your food then when you leave and go to your car..smoke your cancer stick.. this way I can enjoy the food in that restuarant and YOU can enjoy your cancers stick later..
What about an owner's right to run his or her business as they please? Does this extend to music? Does it extend to incense? Or just things you don't like?
And you damn well know you aren't going to die or get sick from being in smoking restaurant, you're just using that as an excuse so you can play the "It is just mild bother to you, but I will be forced to breathe in poison and will probably die a painful death from lung cancer" card. You are imposing your choices on someone else as well, at least most smokers have the balls to admit it, you're just being sneaky about.
Thats pretty hysterical, its a figure of speech. I should and everyone else should be able to breath clean air. If you want smoke and die earlier then you would have otherwise then be my guest but your not going to take me with you. The reality is there are more of US (non smokers) then there are of you. Thats why there are smoking bans all over the place.
Smoking is an addiction, the fact that people will go to these lengths to keep it up speaks volumes of just how addicting it is.
So, its not your air, you do not own the business. You have no rights to enforce how a business is run and yet your simply taking the "might makes right" approach? Pick up the Federalist No. 10. Madison speaks about the ills of social mobs running things based on their "personal" motives.
Also, I don't smoke. I just don't think "rights" should be subjective to the whims of the public. If the business is a smoking establishment, don't go there. You have the right to choose, but what you are doing is removing the right for someone to choose.
If you want to use mob vote to ban it in public tax paid establishments, by all means. Let the mob decide. A business however is not "public", it is "private". You have NO rights there to demand how they run the business. You do have the rights to choose to go there, but thats not what this is all about is it? This is about you pushing your personal views into law so you can control others. /boggle
edit:
I would like to ban the use of people who use perfumes or the like. They make my allergies act up and it is a health risk for me. Increased allergies symptoms can lead to infections. So I think it is only fair we ban it from use in public. Not to mention I "personally" dislike the smell of most and the way people tend to pollute my air.
I choose NOT to smoke.. to live as healthy as possible..
Now.. I am FORCED to inhale some nicotine junkies smoke because they want the right to "smoke".
Great..you want to smoke.. do it in your own car with the windows rolled up.. that way you get all the nicotine for yourself and the rest of us don't have to inhale it.
Go outside and smoke.. don't pollute the inside where there may be several people who actually CARE about their health and do not want to someday come down with lung cancer..
YOU have a right to smoke.. go right ahead.. just don't do it when you're smoke is forced upon me taking my right away to NOT smoke!!
NY.. you can't smoke in restaurants or any public place.. and since then the quality of air in stores, restaurants, bars etc. has been soooo much better and I can actually enjoy myself without gagging from the disgusting stench of cigarettes!
Oh.. that and I don't have to worry about my son inhaling that junk too!
Given the CHOICE between going to a smoking allowed and non-smoking restaruant, I'm sure you'd CHOOSE to go the non-smoking restaruant for the good your family's health, and I'd applaud your decision. The key is that you were given the choice. I'm not advocating allowing smokers to car jack you and force you or your children to toke on second hand smoke. I'm advocating for establishments be allowed to choose which clientele they'd like to cater to. Given options, I'm sure that many non-smokers would make the healthy decision on their own.
Other vice filled industries have coped with this in NY.
There are currently two types of strip clubs in New York State. Traditional strip clubs serve alcohol and allow dancers to dance topless, but must keep their bottoms on. "Juice Bars" are all nude and don't serve or allow alcohol. Consumers can choose which they want. You also have the right to go to Chucky-Cheese and avoid any form of nudity all together.
Perhaps I could justify banning smoking where monopolies exist (airports, stadiums etc...), but when options are viable, I don't believe it's government's place to choose for me.
Again, I'm not a smoker, never have been and never will be.
As for protecting the workers... Nobody is "forcing" the employees to work in smoker's welcome establishments. It's a risk they take to make tips.
Perhaps owners would have to compensate employees more, driving up prices and therefore driving down demand more...
Bingo!
See, I honestly think we are having issues with these topics because people either didn't learn what a free democratic society was when they were going through school or it is that they just don't care and want their way. Either way, they are are danger to society. Maybe we should ban them too? *chuckle*
I am not a smoker, and I never have been. I enjoy going to a bar and not coming home smelling like smoke, but I've never really understood this law, as it's currently on the books in New York State too.
Since I was a child, I've learned the ill-effects of smoking or second hand smoke. Why can't bars or restaurants decide for themselves if they want to allow smoking and have a sign out front showing their designation? If it's the governments belief that more non-smokers are negatively effected by smokers than smokers effected by the ban, wouldn't the non-smokers naturally choose to frequent designated non-smoking establishments? If they don't, they're making an active, informed decision to remain in an environment that is hazerdous to their health. I imagine that capitalism would tell us that the smoking designated establishments would slowly dwindle away.
If the government believes so strongly that smoking is national concern, why don't they just outlaw the sale of tobacco products, rather than slowly trying to coerce smokers into quitting (increased taxes, warnings, smoking bans etc.) My guess is they fear a prohibition-esque result.
Now I've read that some politicians in NYC would like to advertise the caloric intake of fast food meals on chain restaruants' menus. Do people really need to know how many calories are in a Big-Mac, right next to the price, when ordering? If in five years this doesn't curb obesity, what's the next step? Will we decide that you must be 18 or older to buy fast food? Will burgers of over X calories be banned from menus in an effort to save the children? I know this is taking things to extremes, but it's not far from the smoking ban's logic.
I too wish it would make sense to just allow the bars and restaurants decide whether or not to allow smoking or serve horribly harmful food, but the fact is that the government has functions, and one of those functions is public safety and health.
I really do wish restaurants could be trusted to choose, but when I left Kansas in 1997, I had seen only one bar or restaurant in KS or Mizzou that did not allow any indoor smoking. The simple fact is that the market and a laissez-faire mentality does not address safety and health issues.
As for the constitutional implications mentioned in the original post, the United States government has yet to make any law banning tobacco use in any state, right? State and local government are allowed to implement such bans because they are not the federal government. If you don't like the ban, you're welcome to vote your conscience, move, or deal with it.
so.. I should not enjoy my favorite Italian restaurant and food forever because i dont want to be expoesd to cigarettes.
While banning smoking in a restaurant only stops you from smoking in that 1 or 2 hours your in there.. if I listend to what you say I'd have to NEVER set foot in that restaurant again..
Why can't you eat your food then when you leave and go to your car..smoke your cancer stick.. this way I can enjoy the food in that restuarant and YOU can enjoy your cancers stick later..
Wouldn't that give incentive to a entrepenuer to open a new non-smoking restaruant to cater to non-smokers like yourself. You may also have the option of ordering take-out. If you believe that the risk of second hand smoke is too strong, why would you ever comprimise your family's health for chicken parm? You can decide if a slightly inferior sauce is worth the increased atmosphere for you and your family... If enough consumers like yourself don't accept the smoke, the owner may choose to change his/her business strategy of his/her own free will. The ultimate power belongs to the consumer who decides where to spend their money.
I like how none of the smoking ban supporters addressed my post about the damage secondhand smoke causes and the number of studies that dispute the risk (never mind that virtually all secondhand smoke studies that show a risk only show a very small increase in risk).
I like how none of the smoking ban supporters addressed my post about the damage secondhand smoke causes and the number of studies that dispute the risk (never mind that virtually all secondhand smoke studies that show a risk only show a very small increase in risk).
I read about this a book Nanny State, it said second hand smoke is essentially harmless. With multiple studies to back it up.
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.
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.
