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.
Since I do not live anywhere near the tunnel, it's a moot question for me.
What it boils down to is controlling what you can. We can control indoor air. We cannot control outdoor air very well.
It might be necessary for me to accept the risk of exposure to smoke in an outdoor setting in order to get from point A to point B.
Since I also dislike sitting in automobile exhaust, I might avoid the tunnel for that reason, not so much cigarette smoke.
However, if I am sitting in the bleachers at a Friday night high school football game and you light up a smoke, expect me to move away from you. That I can control.
And smokers who insist on smoking in crowds and right next to entrances to buildings are a part of the problem. They can expect to be disliked as much for their inconsideration as for their smoking.
The problem here Katiana is you see it as a health issue, I see it as a freedom issue and it's understandable why you would want to steer the conversation away from that because you can't win that argument.
Uh, no. A hotel/motel is a public accomodation. The owners are not free to do whatever they want, as one is in their own private home. They are subject to various laws regarding how they do business. This is only one example.
I don't know whether this was written tongue in cheek or seriously, but it makes some devastating points (intentional or not) about the logicial extensions of the Public Accomodations Act. Which the anti-smoking zealots retreat into when they can't -- or won't -- address basic freedom issues.
It is worth either reading or at least, scanning! Here is the main link and an excerpt from it....
It took decades for the workplace to acknowledge the dangers of smoking and to
recognize the deadly effects of exposure to second-hand smoke. Once acknowledged, it was a
few more years before the workplace became safe for workers from the dangers of second
hand smoke. This paper suggests that fragrance is following the same trajectory. To date most
of the research on fragrance exposure has been localized in the health care profession and has
not received the necessary attention it deserves in the management literature for managers to
become knowledgeable about the extent of employer liability and what constitutes a good faith
effort to protect workers.
Uh, no. A hotel/motel is a public accomodation. The owners are not free to do whatever they want, as one is in their own private home. They are subject to various laws regarding how they do business. This is only one example.
Without a law you the non smoker has freedom of choice, the smoker has freedom of choice and the business owner has freedom of choice. With a law 2 of these groups lose that freedom of choice. How could possibly argue it isn't a freedom of choice issue?
You mention private home ownership, do you support the new bans on private homes that are attached to others?
Without a law you the non smoker has freedom of choice, the smoker has freedom of choice and the business owner has freedom of choice. With a law 2 of these groups lose that freedom of choice. How could possibly argue it isn't a freedom of choice issue?
You mention private home ownership, do you support the new bans on private homes that are attached to others?
A hotel/motel is a public accomodation. Therefore, it is appropriate to restrict smoking to protect the public. No one is being harmed by this law. Smokers can go outside to smoke. I don't know of any contitutional right to freedom of choice, anyway.
Your second paragraph is a deflection. I'm not going there. Been in too many smoking threads that got off on tangents that way.
I don't know whether this was written tongue in cheek or seriously, but it makes some devastating points (intentional or not) about the logicial extensions of the Public Accomodations Act. Which the anti-smoking zealots retreat into when they can't -- or won't -- address basic freedom issues.
It is worth either reading or at least, scanning! Here is the main link and an excerpt from it....
It took decades for the workplace to acknowledge the dangers of smoking and to
recognize the deadly effects of exposure to second-hand smoke. Once acknowledged, it was a
few more years before the workplace became safe for workers from the dangers of second
hand smoke. This paper suggests that fragrance is following the same trajectory. To date most
of the research on fragrance exposure has been localized in the health care profession and has
not received the necessary attention it deserves in the management literature for managers to
become knowledgeable about the extent of employer liability and what constitutes a good faith
effort to protect workers.
Great! What a brave new world we can look forward to! Nobody smokes, nobody is fat, nobody is in any danger at all, but we'll all smell like last week's dirty armpit.
Great! What a brave new world we can look forward to! Nobody smokes, nobody is fat, nobody is in any danger at all, but we'll all smell like last week's dirty armpit.
A hotel/motel is a public accomodation. Therefore, it is appropriate to restrict smoking to protect the public. No one is being harmed by this law. Smokers can go outside to smoke.
Could you agree if the non smoker never entered an establishment that allowed smoking they would not be harmed?
Quote:
Your second paragraph is a deflection. I'm not going there. Been in too many smoking threads that got off on tangents that way.
No it's not and you are the one that brought home ownership into the discussion and now realize that was a poor choice because again you can't defend such bans.
So, there IS a measure of risk you're willing to accept if you have to?
The point is that smoking bans mean there are risks I do not have to accept.
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.
Looky here!
