-
Welcome
to BookAndReader! We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!
Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.
smoking in public laws
- Thread starter Motokid
- Start date
Motokid
New Member
There are such things as "Private Clubs" which can get around some of the laws about smoking in public laws.
But you can complain about it all you want. If smoking in public laws cause the casino's to close, and cause less people to hang out in bars drinking before they get into their cars and drive away, then I say there's way more benefit from these laws then I'd ever imagined. Think about it. Smoking laws could help curb not one, but three rediculous, and addicting habits all with one set of laws. My heart does not bleed for casino's or bars.
Smoke all you want, just don't force others to smoke who don't want to. Most smokers are not considerate. They are brash and ignorant. They pollute the entire planet with their garbage and their habit. I especially love it when a motorist opens their car door, and empty's the entire contents of their ashtray onto the road at a stop light. You mentioned the smokers blowing smoke up at passing shoppers...thats real considerate.
I love the smoking laws in my state, and that's the one, and only reason I ever cast a vote for our current Governor. You have every right to smoke. I should have every right to not smoke, and so should my children.
But you can complain about it all you want. If smoking in public laws cause the casino's to close, and cause less people to hang out in bars drinking before they get into their cars and drive away, then I say there's way more benefit from these laws then I'd ever imagined. Think about it. Smoking laws could help curb not one, but three rediculous, and addicting habits all with one set of laws. My heart does not bleed for casino's or bars.
Smoke all you want, just don't force others to smoke who don't want to. Most smokers are not considerate. They are brash and ignorant. They pollute the entire planet with their garbage and their habit. I especially love it when a motorist opens their car door, and empty's the entire contents of their ashtray onto the road at a stop light. You mentioned the smokers blowing smoke up at passing shoppers...thats real considerate.
I love the smoking laws in my state, and that's the one, and only reason I ever cast a vote for our current Governor. You have every right to smoke. I should have every right to not smoke, and so should my children.
Ronny
Well-Known Member
Actually I agree with not smoking in public. In my state we don't have the laws in place yet many businesses are smoke free by choice and I support those resturants, bars and parks. To me even if there is a non-smoking section it still drifts around to you and I hated it back when people would smoke at the zoo and such because even if you were outside they would be walking in a crowd of kids waving their cigs around all over the place, I've been burned on my hand by a stranger that way. Now that many of the places we go are smoke free I enjoy them more and feel better about taking my son to them. I guess at this point I like that it is something the business owners have a choice in and were not forced into, I like that choice. I also don't see why if someone chose to have a place such as a cigar bar that wouldn't be ok.
SFG75
Well-Known Member
Well, that would be fine and dandy-but the anti-tobacco zealots are targeting them as well.
Here
http://www.massnews.com/2005_editio...oking_advocates_going_after_private_clubs.htm
As well as...
http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/specialnews/smoke/21.htm
These people are forgetting the difference between a personal "vice" and a crime. If we are going to look out for people, perhaps we should also ban McDonald's and eggs from grocery store shelves. After all, we need to watch out for people's cholesterol you know. While we're at it, let's get rid of automobiles, which have a pretty good rate of killing people. Not to be out done, we could also then require everyone to stay in their homes, since that would prolong their lives since no risk taking would be occuring. Maybe we could have a television turn on in every home and have government officials tell everyone what to do, since people are not capable of making decisions as others want them to make.
Motokid
New Member
sigh.....the difference is...you can eat a quarter-pounder with cheese everyday for 5000 years and I will not receive any of the health issues because you ate it. What you eat does not effect my health. You driving your car does not effect my health either unless you decide to run me over, or park it in my garage and leave it running.
Obviously all things risky and dangerous can not be outlawed....read my threads on helmet laws, pitbulls, fireworks, drugs......
Most of the things I advocate in those threads might be of very high risk to the person using them or playing with them, but pose very little threat to "innocent" bystanders....the same can not be said for cigarette smoke.
Obviously all things risky and dangerous can not be outlawed....read my threads on helmet laws, pitbulls, fireworks, drugs......
Most of the things I advocate in those threads might be of very high risk to the person using them or playing with them, but pose very little threat to "innocent" bystanders....the same can not be said for cigarette smoke.
BookFanatic
New Member
What about factory smoke? You don't see the government rushing to shut down big businesses even though the pollution they produce will one day melt the polar ice caps.
Motokid
New Member
According to the American Lung Association there are roughly from 1000 to 1400 people dying in the USA alone from smoking related causes EVERY DAY.
That's like a 9/11 type number of people dying every other day. It's hard to imagine.
When you can show statistics about something that's creating those kinds of numbers, that people actively and knowingly seek, and voluntarily part-take in, then I will listen to your arguements about possibly making it illegal.
The number I keep reading is 400,000 in the USA per year. 400,000 people die from smoking related illness every year.
If you think smoking is not incredibly dangerous, and highly risky to your overall health and possible survival then you are either completely in denial about it or completely ignorant. Add on to that the possibility that your smoking can or could possibly kill someone close to you then you become suspect of commiting a crime.
I predict there will be a day when we see a charge brought against a smoker for involuntary man-slaughter. Probably against a parent who's subjected a child to years and years of second-hand smoke, that results in the childs death due to a smoking related illness. Does that sound like a fair charge? Would that kind of charge hold up in a court of law? Sounds like a pretty fair arguement to make to me.
That's like a 9/11 type number of people dying every other day. It's hard to imagine.
When you can show statistics about something that's creating those kinds of numbers, that people actively and knowingly seek, and voluntarily part-take in, then I will listen to your arguements about possibly making it illegal.
The number I keep reading is 400,000 in the USA per year. 400,000 people die from smoking related illness every year.
If you think smoking is not incredibly dangerous, and highly risky to your overall health and possible survival then you are either completely in denial about it or completely ignorant. Add on to that the possibility that your smoking can or could possibly kill someone close to you then you become suspect of commiting a crime.
I predict there will be a day when we see a charge brought against a smoker for involuntary man-slaughter. Probably against a parent who's subjected a child to years and years of second-hand smoke, that results in the childs death due to a smoking related illness. Does that sound like a fair charge? Would that kind of charge hold up in a court of law? Sounds like a pretty fair arguement to make to me.
geneviv
New Member
Damn straight!BookFanatic said:
I use to work in state representatives office from Detroit. They were constantly voting on anti-pollution laws that would somehow hinder the Big Three car manufacturers. Even though everyone knows pollution is detrimental to our health and the planet "vote no" always outnumbered "vote yes." People were just more concerned about their jobs than the negative effects of pollution.
Even if there was proof that pollution from factories and automobiles was causing cancer, I doubt the vote would of turned out any different. I'm sure out of the 1000's of people who voted no there were some zealot anti-smokers.
SFG75
Well-Known Member
I don't believe that anyone would disagree with a good compromise between smokers and non-smokers. I don't think it's asking too much of non-smokers to keep the hands of that intrusive beast known as government, away from private-clubs, tobacconist shops, as well as cigar bars. At the same time, I have no problem with not lighting up in a restauraunt or a place like that.
BookFanatic and Geneviv have a great point as well. There is another case where smoke from one source pollutes the rest. The difference is that the "big smokers"(i.e.-corporations) have more money than working people who happen to enjoy smoking.
BookFanatic and Geneviv have a great point as well. There is another case where smoke from one source pollutes the rest. The difference is that the "big smokers"(i.e.-corporations) have more money than working people who happen to enjoy smoking.
Zolipara
New Member
Motokid said:
Hmm driving a car is one of the most (if not the most) polluting things you can do as a private citizen. Its directly affecting the health of many people, especially people living in cities. Long term exposure to air pollution from cars is linked to a increase in a large number of diseases. In fact the links between air pollution from cars and disease is much stronger than between second-hand smoking and disease. Not to mention the effect this pollution has on nature.
SFG75
Well-Known Member
Zolipara said:
Excellent points. If I may add, a recent study found that many children born in industrial areas had high concentrations of toxins in the bloodstream. Once again, industry has the pocketbooks to buy their way out. Average smokers, who actually work for a living, are at a disadvantage due to their modest means of living for the most part.
MonkeyCatcher
New Member
Smoking in pubs has recently been outlawed here in NZ, although smoking in other public places has been illegal for a long time now. IMHO, I think that it is better off this way. If people choose to kill themselves with their death sticks then that's their choice, but there is no reason why people who prefer to stay smoke-free should have to suffer because smokers are too lazy to go outside and smoke. When people have colds they generally try to keep away from other people so as to not give them the virus too, so I think that smokers hsould have the same respect for the health of others.
And just for the record, people /are/ trying to cut down on the amount of factory smoke that is released into the environment. This issue has come up before the UN in the form of the Keyoto (sp?) protocol, but the US, I believe, was one of the only major powers in the world to vote "no". This has no relevance to weither people should be allowed to smoke in public places, however, as there is no easy way to fix this problem, unlike the problem of second-hand smoke.
~MonkeyCatcher~
And just for the record, people /are/ trying to cut down on the amount of factory smoke that is released into the environment. This issue has come up before the UN in the form of the Keyoto (sp?) protocol, but the US, I believe, was one of the only major powers in the world to vote "no". This has no relevance to weither people should be allowed to smoke in public places, however, as there is no easy way to fix this problem, unlike the problem of second-hand smoke.
~MonkeyCatcher~
SFG75
Well-Known Member
If I start a business, let's say a private club or a cigar bar, who is the government to come in and tell me what I can and cannot do? Unless the "invisible hand" of the free market(i.e.the consumers) choose to "vote" a business out of business through not spending their money in a given place, then what you have is essentially, a capricious abuse of power that reeks of statism. Smokers are consumers as well and if a person wants to attract their dollars, the government shouldn't deter that.
Motokid
New Member
The problem with the New Jersey smoking in auto thing is that they are not pushing it on the grounds of health to the oocupants blah, blah, blah....
The arguement is the danger of smoking as a distraction while driving and that it's a danger to others. So based on that arguement all radio's, cd players, heating and a/c units and their controls should all be outlawed too.
And at some point, taken far enough, any passenger, especially kids, should be outlawed in cars too. It's a rediculously pathetic attempt to make a law that is just plain stupid.
The arguement is the danger of smoking as a distraction while driving and that it's a danger to others. So based on that arguement all radio's, cd players, heating and a/c units and their controls should all be outlawed too.
And at some point, taken far enough, any passenger, especially kids, should be outlawed in cars too. It's a rediculously pathetic attempt to make a law that is just plain stupid.
RobertFKennedy
New Member
My feeling on this is that smoking should be banned in all restaurants and most pubs and nightclubs.
I also feel however that there should be special licences for a reasonably small number of pubs and nightclubs to allow smoking on the premises. That way, smokers have an option but non smokers have the far bigger choice of venues.
At the moment smokers are being treated like pariahs and feel they are being pushed to the edge of society. Many feel pretty marginalised.
Public health is vital but so are civil rights and smokers have these too.
I think that in any town or city there should be a few venues for smokers. I am very much against private members clubs being told how to run their businesses on this issue. PRivate members clubs should have the option to allow smoking on their own private property if they so wish. Non Smokers, if they are strongly opposed to smoking, don't have to join. I certainly wouldnt allow the government to tell me not to allow smoking on my own property.
One of the problems in this debate is the lack of willingness of the anti-smoking lobby to compromise on ANYTHING. It's control freakery.
For the record, I'm a former 5 cigarette a day man and have been a non-smoker for 1 week. It's been easy going so far.
I also feel however that there should be special licences for a reasonably small number of pubs and nightclubs to allow smoking on the premises. That way, smokers have an option but non smokers have the far bigger choice of venues.
At the moment smokers are being treated like pariahs and feel they are being pushed to the edge of society. Many feel pretty marginalised.
Public health is vital but so are civil rights and smokers have these too.
I think that in any town or city there should be a few venues for smokers. I am very much against private members clubs being told how to run their businesses on this issue. PRivate members clubs should have the option to allow smoking on their own private property if they so wish. Non Smokers, if they are strongly opposed to smoking, don't have to join. I certainly wouldnt allow the government to tell me not to allow smoking on my own property.
One of the problems in this debate is the lack of willingness of the anti-smoking lobby to compromise on ANYTHING. It's control freakery.
For the record, I'm a former 5 cigarette a day man and have been a non-smoker for 1 week. It's been easy going so far.