U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-03-2011, 05:50 PM
 
Location: Central Texas
20,795 posts, read 39,800,347 times
Reputation: 24264

Advertisements

Austin, Texas, had a really great compromise, briefly. They had a ban on smoking in public places, including bars, etc. HOWEVER, if a bar owner felt that it would be in the best interests of his bottom line, he could apply for a smoking-allowed license, pay a heft fee (of course), and follow certain regulations, one of which was to post in big bold letters on the door of his establishment that it was a smoking-allowed establishment so that anyone who did not wish to be exposed to cigarette smoke could choose to patronize one of the myriad of other establishments in that fair city that were non-smoking.

Sounds great, right? Everyone's rights are respected, the business owner gets to decide what works best for their particular business, no one has to be exposed to cigarette smoke if they don't wish to be, they can vote with their dollar, and smokers who would like to have a cigarette while out drinking and listening to music can do so. The American way!

But, no. Nonsmokers simply absolutely could not STAND that someone might be allowed to smoke somewhere, even if they weren't going to be exposed to it, and threw such a hissy fit for so long that the ordinance was changed.

At that point, nonsmokers (and I don't smoke - tried it 40 years ago and it doesn't agree with me) who say that it's only because THEY don't want to be exposed to cigarette smoke blew their cover and lost ALL credibility with me. It's clearly really about controlling what other people do because you can't bear that someone might make a different life choice than you. And that flies in the face of everything that this country, and Texas, were founded on.

As Benjamin Franklin said, (yes, folks, I'm pulling it out again, because it is SO applicable to this situation): "hose who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

And those of you who want to take away the rights of smokers? When someone comes along who disapproves of something YOU do because THEY wouldn't make the same choice, and takes away your rights, remember that you have already set the precedent that that's a hunky dory thing to do. No whining, then - you've given up the right!
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-03-2011, 05:54 PM
 
Location: Austin, TX
16,781 posts, read 43,412,152 times
Reputation: 9362
I used to smoke years ago. But I'm all in favor or banning it from all public spaces and businesses that are open to the public. Smoking is a disgusting habit and smokers have no right to subject others to their second hand smoke, not to mention the stink of it.

It is amazing how smokers don't realize how much they stink. I went to a funeral a few months ago. A couple of smokers walked down the aisle and we could smell the the smoke as they walked by even though we were 10' away. Disgusting, I pitied the poor people they sent near when they picked a pew.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-03-2011, 05:55 PM
 
Location: Richardson, TX
8,720 posts, read 12,444,373 times
Reputation: 3762
There is no right not to be inconvenienced. Just like there is no right not to be offended.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-03-2011, 06:00 PM
 
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
10,739 posts, read 32,847,086 times
Reputation: 6844
Why don't smokers use the new way where the only thing that comes from the cigarette is a vapor, they still get their nicotin but there aren't the chemicals for the smoker and no smoke for the rest of us.

I don't care if people want to pollute their bodies, I just don't want to deal with the smoke. I sat at the dinner table and had a nice meal with family, two of which were smokers, they used these vapor cigarettes and they were happy and I was happy.

I think this is the way of the future...
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-03-2011, 06:02 PM
 
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
10,739 posts, read 32,847,086 times
Reputation: 6844
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady View Post
Austin, Texas, had a really great compromise, briefly. They had a ban on smoking in public places, including bars, etc. HOWEVER, if a bar owner felt that it would be in the best interests of his bottom line, he could apply for a smoking-allowed license, pay a heft fee (of course), and follow certain regulations, one of which was to post in big bold letters on the door of his establishment that it was a smoking-allowed establishment so that anyone who did not wish to be exposed to cigarette smoke could choose to patronize one of the myriad of other establishments in that fair city that were non-smoking.

Sounds great, right? Everyone's rights are respected, the business owner gets to decide what works best for their particular business, no one has to be exposed to cigarette smoke if they don't wish to be, they can vote with their dollar, and smokers who would like to have a cigarette while out drinking and listening to music can do so. The American way!

But, no. Nonsmokers simply absolutely could not STAND that someone might be allowed to smoke somewhere, even if they weren't going to be exposed to it, and threw such a hissy fit for so long that the ordinance was changed.

At that point, nonsmokers (and I don't smoke - tried it 40 years ago and it doesn't agree with me) who say that it's only because THEY don't want to be exposed to cigarette smoke blew their cover and lost ALL credibility with me. It's clearly really about controlling what other people do because you can't bear that someone might make a different life choice than you. And that flies in the face of everything that this country, and Texas, were founded on.

As Benjamin Franklin said, (yes, folks, I'm pulling it out again, because it is SO applicable to this situation): "hose who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

And those of you who want to take away the rights of smokers? When someone comes along who disapproves of something YOU do because THEY wouldn't make the same choice, and takes away your rights, remember that you have already set the precedent that that's a hunky dory thing to do. No whining, then - you've given up the right!
You really are as clueless as I remembered...
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-03-2011, 06:07 PM
 
Location: Chicago
1,257 posts, read 2,291,097 times
Reputation: 1139
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanTerra View Post
There is no right not to be inconvenienced. Just like there is no right not to be offended.

I'd like to think that constantly being exposed to deadly carcinogens goes a little beyond being "inconvenienced," my friend.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-03-2011, 06:10 PM
 
Location: Richardson, TX
8,720 posts, read 12,444,373 times
Reputation: 3762
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClarenceBodiker View Post
I'd like to think that constantly being exposed to deadly carcinogens goes a little beyond being "inconvenienced," my friend.
The inconvenience would be having to go to a different restaurant that is nonsmoking. Then there is all the carcinogens you breathe up and down Central Expressway. Perfumes are full of VOCs that are not good for you. Have you read an MSDS these substances? The problem might just be that it is a legal substance, as much as I detest it. Just need to go and make it an illegal substance instead of all this pussyfootin' around.

Last edited by PanTerra; 02-03-2011 at 06:20 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-03-2011, 06:14 PM
 
10,167 posts, read 17,830,547 times
Reputation: 5780
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lindsey_Mcfarren View Post
You really are as clueless as I remembered...
What is she clueless about? As it is, she pretty much articluted the way these things go. The latent zealouts start out as reasonble in their presenation and emotional appeal to something like "the children" or some such...but eventually end up showing their true colors. Which is controlling others because -- it almost seems to be part of their makeup -- they truly believe they know what is best for others.

Believe me, THL and I have a history (on certain topics) of pounding the table type disagrements. But I totally agree with her on this one.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-03-2011, 06:18 PM
 
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
10,739 posts, read 32,847,086 times
Reputation: 6844
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClarenceBodiker View Post
I'd like to think that constantly being exposed to deadly carcinogens goes a little beyond being "inconvenienced," my friend.
Exactly...I think they should have to take care of someone like me the next time I get sick because of their so called inconvenience...
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-03-2011, 06:22 PM
 
Location: Central Texas
20,795 posts, read 39,800,347 times
Reputation: 24264
And your problem with having smoking venues for smokers THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO ENTER AND IT SAYS RIGHT ON THE DOOR THAT SMOKING IS GOING ON is a problem to you how, exactly, Lindsey? Is it that other people smoking not in your presence in a building that you will never enter somehow causes your illness? Can you explain the medical science behind that? I'd find it fascinating.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top