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.
I find it annoying to hear people on their phones in restaurants. But I would not advocate any laws to regulate that. The restaurant can choose to allow or not allow it. Or allow it - until someone complains.
Freedom is great. Ever since Florida instituted it's smoking ban, I have the freedom to visit any restaurant I want without having to inhale second hand smoke.
Your second point is just stupid.
People tend to talk in social settings (shocker!) like restaurants. Please explain the difference between two people sitting at a table talking and one person sitting at a table talking on a cell phone.
And how would you feel about it if one day it were proven that cell phones emitted enough radiation to be a health hazard to those around the users?
Just a hypothetical, but would you "kick your habit"? Would you support a ban on cell phones in public places? Or would you be stubborn like some smokers are right now and you are unable to see their point?
As for smartphone users, they often appear as drunks used to, staggering down the street, completely oblivious to the real world. That in itself is dangerous. At some point, I wouldn't be surprised if it's found to be psychologically damaging. So, at that point it would become a lot like the smoking issue is now (or has been), wouldn't it. A majority of the population as "users" being told they have to kick their habit for the sake of those victims around them. I'd laugh my little tushy off.
And how would you feel about it if one day it were proven that cell phones emitted enough radiation to be a health hazard to those around the users?
Just a hypothetical, but would you "kick your habit"? Would you support a ban on cell phones in public places? Or would you be stubborn like some smokers are right now and you are unable to see their point?
For the record, I am able to see the pro-smoker point of view here. That view is just profoundly stupid.
Your hypothetical is impossible to answer for a myriad of variables. The health effects of second hand smoke are not a hypothetical, however.
I works and live in a very dense area of nyc. I feel one of the most obnoxious things in the world is when someone walks down a street like this and just blows their smoke right behind. There is literally no way to a void getting a face full of smoke. It's a public sidewalk but people are okay with this? Should I stop and wait for all smokers to pass? If you're okay with it, are you okay with me holding a cup of water and dumping it on people walking by? If not, why? Please tell me why that would be different.
I am for them it would be one thing if smoking only hurt the person smoking but if affects everyone around why should I have my health compromised because you can not find somewhere else to smoke,
But there should be separate rooms that if completely sealed off from non-smoking area, can permit smoking. These areas should have warning signs required by law to inform of dangers of smoking.
Also if the non-smoking area of restaurant runs full, they should be required to also deny any more smokers even if the smoking area has not reached capacity, so that non-smokers can't feel themselves forced to compromise for an unwanted smoking area
Why should I as a business owner, be forced to accommodate non-smokers with a non-smoking section if I don't want that as part of my business plan? You guys just aren't getting it. You are operating under the assumption that everyone has a "right" to go in to a restaurant. You don't have this right. You are there because the business owner allows you to be there. If you enter and don't like my business for any reason, you are free to leave. I do n it have to accommodate your wishes.
As soon as they figure out a way for smokers to keep their smoke to themselves the problem will be solved.
That problem was solved a long time ago. Smokers can go in to businesses that allow smoking, and non-smokers can go to businesses that do not allow it if that is their fancy. The problem is, that isn't good enough for non and anti smokers. Anti-smokers assume an imaginary right to go wherever they please and have smoke-free air. This right doesn't exist, nor has it ever.
That problem was solved a long time ago. Smokers can go in to businesses that allow smoking, and non-smokers can go to businesses that do not allow it if that is their fancy. The problem is, that isn't good enough for non and anti smokers. Anti-smokers assume an imaginary right to go wherever they please and have smoke-free air. This right doesn't exist, nor has it ever.
The same self absorbed people think it's their right to prohibit CCW holder the right to carry in establishments and around them as well.
They have the "problem"...not the other way around.
I didn't know this was still an issue. Cigarette smoke is disgusting and ruins the palate of a nonsmoker, and those "non-smoking" sections were a joke. We've advanced as a society to where people are still free to smoke tobacco, just not forcing everyone around them to be smokers by default.
If a smoker is sitting in a business and is smoking, they are not "forcing" anyone to breath in second hand smoke. Everyone who is in that business, upon entering the door, has agreed of their own free will to accept the risks associated with exposure to SHS.
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.
