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 don't get how the government can continue to rely heavily on making a profit from a substance (tobacco) that they *also* deem so toxic as to nescessitate making laws about it's use on private property... If tobacco smoke, either direct or secondhand, is that bad (which it probably is), then it should no longer be legal.
But to the OT- Maine has been smoke free for a number of years (since 2000, I think) and I (a light smoker) have not been inconvenienced by it. In fact, I appreciate the non-smoking better since I have a small child and wouldn't want him around the smoke. If I want to smoke mid-meal (which I hardly do anyway), I step outside. I haven't been to a lot of bars in those years, but again, sometimes stepping outside for a minute is not any more of an inconvenience than having to visit the restroom.. HOWEVER.... I do think that drinking in bars should be up to the property owner- it is assured that all patrons will be legal adults-old enough to choose to be there or not, unlike kids at a restaurant, and they should be able to decide for themselves whether to go smoke-free or not.
I go to bars that break the ban. They need to break it to survive. They make more money in a night of letting people smoke and paying a fine (if they had to) than they would if they didn't let people smoke. At first, no bars would let anyone smoke. But as people started going outside to smoke and therefore, spending less OR coming in for 1 or 2 and leaving to go home, the owners realized that they can't stay in business this way. Particularly if they don't have a beer garden. Since all of the patrons are either smokers or regulars who don't smoke but always went there when it was smoking, no one complains or reports the places. There are no new patrons - just the same group; like Cheers. It's as if time turned back to 2007.
I am a non smoker I have only had 4 ciggerates in my lifetime. It was ok it's just no something I'll buy on a regular basis since here in Canada its at least 7 bucks a pack and we pay more taxes than Americans. I am neither pro or anti smoking but here is my 2 cents.
I can understand the smoking ban in restaraunts since it is common curtesy (sp?). I don't have a problem with adult oriented places like bars, clubs, and casinos having designated smoking area (many here still do). Here you can't smoke in your own car even if there is no children in there, and I have came across some places where you can't even smoke on your patio or yard. I don't see how second-hand smoke is just as lethal or even more than smoking a ciggerate and if a non-smoker gets lung cancer or even other kinds it is always caused by second-hand smoke. What proof do you have that it was second-hand smoke and there are many things that cause cancer nowadays. You might as well smoke up since that tiny exposure of second-hand smoke will give you lung cancer and will kill you.
I am not as pissy as the average non-smoker but the stereotypical ones are the biggest crybabies on the planet . I saw on the opinion page in my local paper. It went like this. I think smoking should be banned altogether cause everytime I open my window or patio I smell the smoke. I feel like a prisoner in my own condo. . Unless you have pre-existing respitory problems ****.
I am watching the Butt Out episode of South Park right now
The emirate of Ras Al Khaimah has imposed Sunday 5th October a smoking ban in public places. The fines are hefty AED5000 or around $1600. With so many smokers around the world could they be a "dying breed" and could we see our grandchildren living in a healthier world?
Last edited by Jame Strong; 10-07-2008 at 03:00 PM..
Location: The Chatterdome in La La Land, CaliFUNia
39,031 posts, read 23,025,682 times
Reputation: 36027
Quote:
Originally Posted by harleyrider1978
you sir,have bought the entire anti-smoking agenda propaganda hook line and sinker. I suppose you like to drink on occassion,you know your favorite watering hole maybe...........well they kicked out the smokers and thats not all they want..............robert wood johnson foundation is behind the bans along with much of the biased and psudo-medical community........well heres one for the drinkers out there.
The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation has created a nation-wide network of temperance-oriented groups and individuals and has poured hundreds of millions of dollars into supporting the anti-alcohol agenda and activties of that network. For more, visit Robert Wood Johnson Foundation: Financier of Temperance.
America’s anti-alcohol movement is composed of dozens of overlapping community groups, research institutions, and advocacy organizations, but they are brought together and given direction by one entity: the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF). Based in Princeton, New Jersey, the RWJF has spent more than $265 million between 1997 and 2002 to tax, vilify, and restrict access to alcoholic beverages. Nearly every study disparaging alcohol in the mass media, every legislative push to limit marketing or increase taxes, and every supposedly “grassroots†anti-alcohol movement was conceived and coordinated at the RWJF’s headquarters. Thanks to this one foundation, the U.S. anti-alcohol movement speaks with one voice.
An owner's bar or restaurant is that person's private property. I'll just wait until BIG BROTHER determines what you can do in your own house-other than watch child porn or use narcotics-we all can agree that's illegal in any case. In England, a resident can not even defend themselves against an intruder in their own house, they have been sued by the invader for harm. Welcome to the brace new world order liberals.
I am a smoker for about 57 years,already outliving a lot of my non smoking friends. So much for the smoking kills and 2nd hand smoke retoric! When is the last time you saw 2nd smoke on a death cerficate? I think my point
is it that it"s a lifestyle choice, that has been taken away. I don't look at
it as losing because it is what it is! The only way I can get even is not to
patronise bars or restaurants any more. Think of all the money I will save
by eating and drinking at home, so I win and the businesses lose! This is how I will deal with it and in time they will all show a loss of revenue, which is a proven pattern in other states.
They move to Miami where its not enforced like most laws
I never understood this crap to be honest. I admit that I am a biased smoker. Take banning smoking in restaurants as an example. If this is only because it is a health issue, why not ban fatty foods? There are far more people dying from diseases related to obesity than from smoking. It's just another case of whiny people using the godvernment to enforce something that they themselves don't have the balls to do themselves.
the government makes billions of tobacco each year and now the same a holes that make billions are going to try and tell me i can't smoke, aint going to happen. I pay 7 bucks per pack that gives me the right to smoke where ever i please
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.
.
. I saw on the opinion page in my local paper. It went like this. I think smoking should be banned altogether cause everytime I open my window or patio I smell the smoke. I feel like a prisoner in my own condo. 
