Quote:

there were at least 5 businesses that I know of in Tempe, Arizona that shut down when they outlawed smoking in the bars. smokers will travel to find a bar that will allow them to smoke inside.

Same deal here in Washington. There is a ban on all indoor smoking and a 25ft restriction from the entrances. Public transportation "sheds" (the bus stops) also count as "indoors"

Various establishments have erected smoking tents, complete with infrared heaters and whatnot, to attempt to retain some of the business lost due to this ban.1

The exemption to this is tribal property, also you can be within 25ft of the entrance if you are a passer-by (no lingering around). Just so happens one of the best places I know of to get prime rib around here is on tribal land.

I agree with Jarrett on this one. Non-smokers, just like religious folks, should not be forcing beliefs on me. I too am aware that smoking is shortening my lifespan, but as the quote goes: "We all gotta die sometime, right? Might as well choose the method"

GAM (The Kilted One) wrote:BK3K what if you have to work there, and everyone else smokes?

I'm only asking this question of you because I don't think you should smoke indoors (because it forces other people to have to deal with your habit, (private membership clubs should be exempt), it's not only rotten smelling after a few hours but it's murder on the paint and furniture.

I agree with you otherwise, I just feel that smokers shouldn't have the right to push the effects (mainly the distasteful odor) of their habit on others who don't want it.

Well GAM, I said that it should be up to the person who owns the building - in this case that would be your employer. No responsible employer is going to allow that in your workplace - assuming your workplace is not a bar etc. If they did though - I still have the option not to work there. My friend briefly worked at a telephone based collections company who allowed all their employees to smoke inside even while on the phones. They where in a small room too. So she quit - its that easy.

I will agree that I hate the smell of smoke especially how it stays in your car, on your clothes, etc etc - but I can always tell people not to smoke in my car or at least roll down the windows first. And yes it makes paint look terrible - and I can tell people not to smoke in my house. Problem solved - without any legislation.

Rosario wrote:Now im not disagreeing with you. I dont have a problem with pot at all. However, you cant compare the two. Pot @!#$ with your head as well as other drugs, where ciggs dont. Pot and alcohol go together alot better

Pot barely does anything to your head - especially compared to the strong and very dangerous effects alcohol - which is legal. I'm not really trying to defend pot - I gave it up years ago as I said, but it's not that big of a deal. It's about as much of a "drug" as aspirin - while even less potentially dangerous when mis/over-used.




I've never heard of this "part throttle" before. Does it just bolt on?

GAM (The Kilted One) wrote:both are filthy habits, and neither are particularly pleasing, and you generally shouldn't subject others that don't do it to the effects of said habits.

It's common courtesy.

you should mention that to the 250+ pound people that wear spandex, inconsiderate drivers, and people who chew with their mouth open just to name a few.


Desert Tuners

“When you come across a big kettle of crazy, it’s best not to stir it.”

Bastardking3000 wrote:

GAM (The Kilted One) wrote:BK3K what if you have to work there, and everyone else smokes?

I'm only asking this question of you because I don't think you should smoke indoors (because it forces other people to have to deal with your habit, (private membership clubs should be exempt), it's not only rotten smelling after a few hours but it's murder on the paint and furniture.

I agree with you otherwise, I just feel that smokers shouldn't have the right to push the effects (mainly the distasteful odor) of their habit on others who don't want it.

Well GAM, I said that it should be up to the person who owns the building - in this case that would be your employer. No responsible employer is going to allow that in your workplace - assuming your workplace is not a bar etc. If they did though - I still have the option not to work there. My friend briefly worked at a telephone based collections company who allowed all their employees to smoke inside even while on the phones. They where in a small room too. So she quit - its that easy.

My question is: Why should I have to quit my job to be free of carcinogens? Asbestos has to be abated when found in a building... Cig smoke is at least as bad. This is a health and safety issue, cut and dry. I don't care if you want to kill yourself slowly, but I sure as hell don't want you doing the same to me. I'll be damned if I have to deal with the fallout from someone else's filthy habit. Doesn't matter the venue or the work area, smoking at work should be done outside. Hell, my GF smokes, and she goes outside to smoke. I won't tolerate it in my house, I won't deal with it inside my workplace. Outside, hell fill your boots, and your lungs, go for it.

Working in a small room like that, I couldn't handle that. I wouldn't quit, but I'd raise all manner of hell (Broccolli, onions and lamb with atomic stinging garlic... gets rid of cigarette smell pretty fast Also induces gagging, but hey, tit for tat). That's just repugnant. There's a time and a place for everything, and work is not for smoking. Doesn't matter if it's a bar, tavern, pool hall... whatever.


Jarrett: Those examples are interspersed in the list. I have a list that's about 12,000 items long of things that people do that just piss me off, I have a lot of free floating hostility.




Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

GAM, I can understand where you're coming from. I'm not looking at this from the health standpoint. I'm looking at this from a basic rights standpoint.
I've had a lot of non-smoking friends, and I try to do my best when I'm around them. most smokers respect the non-smokers, but it seems that the non-smokers aren't paying any in return. it's the point of taking someone's rights away from them. if you're that offended by cigarette smoke (which you have every right to be), then don't go into the establishment. I don't like gay bars (except for a few lesbian bars that I've been to) so I don't go in to them. it should be up to the establishment's owner, not the general public, and not the government.
smokers pay their dues, and the non-smokers reap the benefits. they should stop bitching so much.


Desert Tuners

“When you come across a big kettle of crazy, it’s best not to stir it.”

I'm a smoker, and I agree about not smoking inside at the workplace, grocery stores, hospitals (yes, hospitals used to allow smoking inside), etc.

Where I draw the line is legislating my personal space, inside my car, home, on my front porch... If I choose to ingest the 8 bazillion toxins for my amusement that is my decision. If I'm sitting in my car during rush hour with 4 lanes of stopped traffic, my cigarette isn't spewing nearly the foul gasses that the diesel truck sitting next to me is putting out.

As far as bars, bowling alleys and strip clubs, I say leave the smoking decision to the bar owners. If the people stop spending money at your bar because you allow smoking, you'll have to change your policy or have to close the business. Same goes for places that don't allow smoking, if no one spends their money at your place, you have to "give the people what they want" or close the doors.

Here in Cleveland, "sin taxes" on booze and tobacco were put in to build a new baseball stadium and a new football stadium. That's right, 2 new stadiums on tax revenue. Half the cost of cigarettes in Cuyahoga county is taxes, because they've added so many surcharges for non-related projects. They don't tax cigarettes for cancer research, nor do they tax booze for alcoholism research or liver research.

I could rant for about 30,000 words over this, but I'll cut this short.


.


John Wilken
2002 Cavalier
2.2 Vin code 4
Auto

GAM - notice how I underlined responcible? If your employer is allowing that in the workplace - chances are you don't have the best work environment anyways - I don't see this being an issue at any place you would actually want to work.

Z24 FReQ (Jarett) wrote:smokers pay their dues, and the non-smokers reap the benefits. they should stop bitching so much.

Non-smokers reap the benefits?! What benefits? However taxpayers(smoking and non-smoking) get to pay for medical treatments for smokers that are required as a result of their habbit. The taxes made off of cigarettes are not enough to pay for the health care that is required because of it.

I'm not bitching, just pointing out that we don't reap any benefits of you smoking. I have no reason to do much bitching about this subject - go ahead and light one up, it doesn't hurt me.





I've never heard of this "part throttle" before. Does it just bolt on?

so you're saying that all $8 billion dollars in federal taxes went to smokers? or the $1 million plus state taxes paid in Arizona in '05 went solely to smokers in Arizona?


Desert Tuners

“When you come across a big kettle of crazy, it’s best not to stir it.”

where some of the money went to:

http://www.brownandwilliamson.com/legal/stateMSAMoney.aspx


Desert Tuners

“When you come across a big kettle of crazy, it’s best not to stir it.”

Bastardking3000 wrote:Non-smokers reap the benefits?! What benefits? However taxpayers(smoking and non-smoking) get to pay for medical treatments for smokers that are required as a result of their habbit. The taxes made off of cigarettes are not enough to pay for the health care that is required because of it.

I'm not bitching, just pointing out that we don't reap any benefits of you smoking. I have no reason to do much bitching about this subject - go ahead and light one up, it doesn't hurt me.

Tobacco and alcohol are the two easy targets for "sin taxes". Re-read my post about how the sin taxes built two stadiums in Cleveland. Both are paid for, but the sin taxes are still in place. They aren't for treating health problems caused by smoking or drinking, they are revenue generators for politicians pet projects.

And while we're discussing taxes on items that cause health problems, should there be taxes on fast food to pay for high cholesterol problems? Or taxes on junk food to pay for obesity patients? How about a tax on Playboy magazine for causing carpel tunnel, blindness, and hairy palms?

<sarcasm>
How about taxing preporation H for education, you could call it "Smart-ass tax".
Or taxing condoms for remedial education, you could call it the "Dumb F#&* tax".
</sarcasm>


.



John Wilken
2002 Cavalier
2.2 Vin code 4
Auto

That link above did do to a website ran by a major tobacco company BTW - which is like asking the White House to give you impartial information on themselves. Even assuming that info is true - I can't help how states misuse the tobacco tax "income" - but the medical cost alone massively outweigh the taxes collected on it. A quick google search found this -

Quote:

ANDREW CZAJKOWSKI, CEO, Blue Cross-Blue Shield: The Minnesota Department of Health has estimated that the cost of tobacco use in Minnesota, just the health care costs alone, were $1/2 billion last year. Since we purchase health coverage for about 1.6 million Minnesotans, we felt that this added cost was something that we needed to address.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/health/jan-june98/tobacco_1-16.html

1/2 Billion a year - in Minnesota alone. The USA has 50 states. Why do you think the states launched a lawsuit against the tobacco companies - to collect part of the cost that the taxpayers are fronting. IIRC - they won too. Non-smokers, in the long run, are not reaping any benefits from smokers.




I've never heard of this "part throttle" before. Does it just bolt on?

Also just so no one is mistaken - I am not against people smoking at all. It is not my business what you do to your body.




I've never heard of this "part throttle" before. Does it just bolt on?

Quote:

Non-smokers, in the long run, are not reaping any benefits from smokers.

If thats the case, then i would love to see all taxes on ciggs abolished or better yet all of them put away and go directly to health care for smokers only.


Then everyone would see how much the sin tax truley helps out with everyday @!#$.

Outlaw smoking? Hmmm, great idea! I mean just look at how well it worked when they outlawed drinking! So what if you start a whole new generation of Al Capones and "Bugsy" Malones (sp?) at least it illegal right.





Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.

Kardain wrote:I agree with Jarrett on this one. Non-smokers, just like religious folks, should not be forcing beliefs on me. I too am aware that smoking is shortening my lifespan, but as the quote goes: "We all gotta die sometime, right? Might as well choose the method"

To that same effect being a non-smoker I don't believe that I should have to inhale the smoke you exhale, or the unfiltered smoke off the end of your cig. But if your walking in front of me on a busy street or standing in a crowd, etc... There isn't any way for me to avoid it.

On other notes:
Smoke that comes out of your lungs isn't dilluted by oxygen, its diluted by carbon dioxide.

I fully agree that people shouldn't be allowed to smoke inside around children under age 8, I'd go as far as saying age 10. Smoke can really affect their growth and development.

The chewing tobacco spit on the shirt is a perfect example. If I'm around smokers when I go home the smell of stale smoke is all over me, and my clothes. it was in your body and now its all over mine.

By all means smoke all you want, but I shouldn't have to deal with the wake of your habbit. I've tried smoking for a few months because I was dating someone who smoked, didn't see what the big deal was, and was able to quit without a second thought and so was she when she decided to kick the habbit.


-Chris

Let's not blow this out of proportion..

In Germany a 40 year study showed no health effect from second hand smoke, in fact most studies show limited effect if any. It is purely ancidotal evidence that "supports" the idea that non-smokers get sick from smokers activities. Yes, smoke is bad for you, but living with a smoker, then getting lung cancer does not mean you got lung cancer from the smoker. It means that you got lung cancer and you happen to live with a smoker, that is all it means. I work with people at a cancer treatment center and they told me that only about 30% of their lung cancer patients ever smoked in their lives and that fully 40% had limited or no exposure what-so-ever.

Now think about the pollutants coming out of your tailpipe? Think about the at least 200CFM of noxious crap. Now think about that cigarette, what is the flow rate? Just how dirty is that smoke? Does it even come close to the emissions from your car for 5 minutes? No, not even close.

Worried about your health? Don't smoke, and try to do something to lessen your impact on the air everyone breaths. Try not idling your car, heck, walk if you can. Think about your waste, what goes into the water and soil in your area, those kinds of things. Second hand smoke cannot be good for you, that is true, but it is pretty low on the list of everyday things that are bad for you.

Let's not make a mountain out of a mole-hill OK?

PAX

I'm a non-smoker, and I agree with Jarett and Kardain.

The most common-sense approach to this would be to declare a business smoking, or non smoking in regards to a bar, strip club, pool hall, concert venue, etc. And have a nice placard on the front door declaring it to the patrons and the workers as such. That way, if you're a non-smoker walking into said establishment, you have no farqing right to complain! you KNEW what you were getting into. Ditto with smokers. Now, you tell me, if two bars open up right next to each other, one smoking and one non-smoking...they AREN'T going to be taking business away from each other...they wikll be heling each other out to cater to BOTH clientelles and possibly encouraging more peopel to go out...

but of course they would never do that--it makes sense.

I, though, find it humorous how smokers nowadays deal with the Washington Smoking Ban (known colloquially as the anti-bar law). My bro, for example, at a sproting event, takes his last long drag, holds it, walks back inside and lets it out--just to be contrary.

For the majority of businesses, buildings, airplanes, etc, yes, no smoking (however, i do believ there should be a smoking cubicle on long transantlantic flights that is on a separate HVAC circuit from the plane).

And hahaha, you did hit a good point. you have more to worry about from petrolum smoke than tobbacco smoke.


Goodbye Callisto & Skaði, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.

smoking should be illegal everywhere. I understand that you have rights and all that but doesnt the government have a duty of care here? It is their responsibility to protect the public not only from others but from themselves. Just because you are stupid enough to want to kill yourself does not mean that you should be allowed to.

I think I should take a trip to a bar that allows smoking and sit down right next to a smoker, I'm going to start huffing gasoline while I sit there. Who gives a crap if they don't like it or I'm killing myself I'm not hurting them am I? I mean there are less damaging chemicals in that than a pack of smokes. And I'm sure it smells a hell of a lot better.

The argument is made that if non-smokers don't like it they can just not visit places that have smoking. Why should we suffer for your choices? You think non-smokers should have to go to different strip clubs and bars because they inconvienience you? Sounds familiar, except for the fact that you can leave for 5 minutes and return with no problem, it doesn't work the other way around because if I leave while you have a smoke the place still smells like @!#$ when I get back.

Toronto and now the entire province of Ontario have already gone through this transition and everyone bitched just as much when it happened here. Businesses freaked out about going under and loosing all of their patrons. I'd be interested to see some statistics regarding how many actually lost their businesses because I'd be willing to bet it wasn't a high percentage. The strip clubs here are DOING BETTER THAN ever. Do you have any idea how much easier it is to cnovice girls to come out to the strip club with no smoke?

It's your choice. Die a horrible and bloody lunged death if you want, but don't bitch because someone decides to force you to be a little more responsible with at habit that IS KILLING YOU. You want to be irresponsible with your body do it in your own home, because no matter where you are smoking unless everyone around you is a smoker you are killing someone else.

I can't wait for just one precedent setting case in this sue happy retarded continent of ours where a non-smoker sues an individual smoker or business for contributing to their illness and wins. Lighting up outside a non-smoking bar next to an asthma patient with a chip on their shoulder could spell bad news.

drys95z24 wrote:smoking should be illegal everywhere. I understand that you have rights and all that but doesnt the government have a duty of care here? It is their responsibility to protect the public not only from others but from themselves. Just because you are stupid enough to want to kill yourself does not mean that you should be allowed to.

Why stop at smoking? With this logic, let's make all non-healthy foods illegal. And make everyone purchase a gym membership and force them to go, just to everyone is in shape. We'll make being fat a crime, and put overweight people in prison.

drys95z24 wrote:I think I should take a trip to a bar that allows smoking and sit down right next to a smoker, I'm going to start huffing gasoline while I sit there. Who gives a crap if they don't like it or I'm killing myself I'm not hurting them am I? I mean there are less damaging chemicals in that than a pack of smokes. And I'm sure it smells a hell of a lot better.

I wouldn't sit too close to a lit cigarette with an open container of gasoline. But you won't have to worry about sitting in a "BAR" anymore, because alcohol is bad for you and after tobacco is illegal the government will make alcohol illegal too. So you won't have to worry about going to a "BAR" again.

drys95z24 wrote:The argument is made that if non-smokers don't like it they can just not visit places that have smoking. Why should we suffer for your choices? You think non-smokers should have to go to different strip clubs and bars because they inconvienience you? Sounds familiar, except for the fact that you can leave for 5 minutes and return with no problem, it doesn't work the other way around because if I leave while you have a smoke the place still smells like @!#$ when I get back.

If you knew that a bar was a "gay bar", would you complain about the lack of women in there? Or what about a biker bar, where you would most likely see or be involved in a fight? Would you go to these establishments and tell them to change to suit YOU?

drys95z24 wrote:Toronto and now the entire province of Ontario have already gone through this transition and everyone bitched just as much when it happened here. Businesses freaked out about going under and loosing all of their patrons. I'd be interested to see some statistics regarding how many actually lost their businesses because I'd be willing to bet it wasn't a high percentage. The strip clubs here are DOING BETTER THAN ever. Do you have any idea how much easier it is to cnovice girls to come out to the strip club with no smoke?

It's been my experience that strippers go where the money is, smoke or not, even if it's a mob place or rough neighborhood.

drys95z24 wrote:It's your choice. Die a horrible and bloody lunged death if you want, but don't bitch because someone decides to force you to be a little more responsible with at habit that IS KILLING YOU. You want to be irresponsible with your body do it in your own home, because no matter where you are smoking unless everyone around you is a smoker you are killing someone else.

Again, let's not stop at smoking, let's ban everything that is bad for you. Let's take away the choice to enjoy red meat, fast food, drink alcohol, eat candy, etc. If you're going to make laws based on what's "healthy", let's go all the way.

drys95z24 wrote:I can't wait for just one precedent setting case in this sue happy retarded continent of ours where a non-smoker sues an individual smoker or business for contributing to their illness and wins. Lighting up outside a non-smoking bar next to an asthma patient with a chip on their shoulder could spell bad news.

I'm sure someday there will be a lawsuit like this. I'm also planning on sueing anyone who farts by me because farts contain methane gas, and as I'm holding a lit cigarette, it could have caused an explosion. So I'll say that it was "attempted murder" and the courts will have to make farting anywhere but inside your own home illegal.



.



John Wilken
2002 Cavalier
2.2 Vin code 4
Auto

Also they should outlaw cars too as they are dangorous too. And Bikes, and Skateboards, and walking too. I mean hey you might trip and break your neck.





Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.

dry: Looking at the amount of corruption and graft in ANY government, the last thing i want to do is force a government to have any obligations that would require anyone that i don't agree with to lose their liberty at the expense of my comfort.

And i don't think that if you firmly establish that an establisment welcomes smokers that a non-smoker has any right to be offended. After all, if my bro (a smoker) opened up a venue that catered to smokers, i'd likely open one up next door that was non-smoking, and we'd BOTH eat up the profits.

If i, as a non-smoker, go into a bar, i'm expecting smoke. I deal with it.

If i go into a non-smking establishment, i don't expect smoke.

It's not that hard to do.


Goodbye Callisto & Skaði, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.

[quote=Keeper of the Light™]

For the majority of businesses, buildings, airplanes, etc, yes, no smoking (however, i do believ there should be a smoking cubicle on long transantlantic flights that is on a separate HVAC circuit from the plane).

just some FYI smoking was not banned on airplanes due to passenger comfort or health concerns. it was banned because all the tar and crap in ciggarrets made maintenance a pain and very expensive, it would plug up the pressurization and HVAC systems. when smoking was allowed, thats how mechanics found the leaks in the pressureization system was to look for concentrations of tar.

so everyone who thinks that smoking was banned on planes for health reasons is wrong...again, it all comes back to money saved (in maintenance fees) VS money lost (from smokers who refused to fly)


You'll never touch God's hand
You'll never taste God's breath
Because you'll never see the second coming
Life's too short to be focused on insanity
I've seen the ways of God
I'll take the devil any day
Hail Satan

(slayer, skeleton christ, 2006)

Jackalope wrote:Outlaw smoking? Hmmm, great idea! I mean just look at how well it worked when they outlawed drinking! So what if you start a whole new generation of Al Capones and "Bugsy" Malones (sp?) at least it illegal right.

Actually, that was Bugsy Siegel... Bugsy Malone... well: Link

BK3K: Responsible? Well.. I've worked for terrible employers and you don't WANT to work for them, but sometimes you have to. You shouldn't have to deal with that kind of crap regardless. As I said, it's a H&S issue, and one that a state labor board can fine the employer for.



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

I'm not exactly sure how they said it, but playing Grand theft Auto San Andreas they were saying on some radio station...

"Second hand smoke kills people.
Vote for the new proposition where you can legally kill a smoker. When you see smokers, shoot them.
Lets smoke the smoker before they kill you" haha

I'm not exactly sure how they said it, but that's pretty much it.

Lets smoke the smokers!!

If we can't smoke in front of children because its bad for their health, why not make smoking illegal?
Maybe is because the government need that extra tax money from smokers.

Seat belts.
You HAVE TO wear a seat belt or you get a ticket.
Does the government really care about me wearing a stupid seat belt?
"I think not" They don't give a rat's ass about it, all they need is the money with the excuse that I need to wear it
in case of a crash.

don't get me wrong, I believe all this laws are great.
But To me they only exist to create more money for the government. Its all about the damn money, but that's what makes
America so great

oops! interest rate went up today". wow really...
one word about that. "inflation" Why? "War maybe?"

Your right, smoking should be illegal.

As well as drinking alcohol and using swear words. I also think incense and trains should be illegal. As well as driving a car and setting off fireworks. And for sure burning ants with a magnifying glass and campfires. In fact, fires in general should be illegal, they give off smoke too.

Forget freedom, this is America! What do you think this is, a democracy? Hahaha