smoking in public laws

[jenn]

Jenn, not to piss you off or anything, but I'm wearing short sleeves where I am, and, yeah, it's real nice!
.

i am shaking my fist at you from my living room window that one can't see out of as there is 8 feet of snow piled up. i am living on coffee, haven't been out of my fleece jammies in weeks and i think i saw the sun, but only as a glare off the oil truck as he pumped 2000$ worth of oil into my house just to keep it tepid. but i'm not bitter.

 

[jenn]

Should you, the owner, have the right to terminate?

no just make him work in the back with all the convicts.


i am kidding, kidding.

 

[RitalinKid]

Jenn, you're actually right in a way. I worked for a company whose HR method was to never fire or lay off anyone, just create new jobs for them. It's a little naive because at some point you just run out of things to have people do, but maybe it works if you study the methods and processes involved. If somehow a person is affecting your business, you find a way for them to work for you so that they are productive. Example. At the dealership where I bought my car, the head of maintenance was so despisable that they were getting calls left and right about how their service sucked. He was good at fixing cars, only terrible with people, so they didn't fire him. They instead started sending the customers to a pretty young lady at a desk in the nice, air conditioned office instead of sending them to the cranky, old, tell-it-like-it-is mechanic in the back. I don't think this example of the pierced, tatooed kid is a very good example for a parallel to smoking. I do see that it was a business decision, and maybe the owner would have had to fire ALL his employees later if he hadn't lowered his medical plan costs.

And we've come full circle again; we're back to rising medical costs. I'm telling you guys; a conversation on how to fix rising medical costs would help us more than figuring out the fairest way to discriminate against people. For more proof that rising costs are to blame, look at the past. Was this going on in the 60s or 50s? Not that I'm aware of. Please chime in if you know differently. I'm a young whippersnapper and wouldn't remember.

To make you feel better Jenn, I had to put a coat on last night while I was cooking outside with my friends at a party. Sorry I'm so evil. I hope your a good sport and just laughing this off. However, you have snow, and I'm jealous. I get to see it way down here about once every 4 to 8 years.

 

[cajunmama]

I prefer to base my views on the danger of secondhand smoking by reading scientific reports rather than some subjective opinion formed while sitting in a room with a smoker.

Ah, I see. And that's where we differ, Zolipara. I prefer to base my views on my own experiences, logic, and common sense with additional information from scientific reports.

 

[jenn]

JTo make you feel better Jenn, I had to put a coat on last night while I was cooking outside with my friends at a party. Sorry I'm so evil. I hope your a good sport and just laughing this off. However, you have snow, and I'm jealous. I get to see it way down here about once every 4 to 8 years.

oh totally laughing, no worries. i actually love winter or wouldn't live in this part of canada. today is actually gorgeous and i have all the windows and doors open.

 

[jenn]

Ah, I see. And that's where we differ, Zolipara. I prefer to base my views on my own experiences, logic, and common sense with additional information from scientific reports.

i'm the same way. if a smoker is inhaling nicoteen(sp?) and tar and what have you, then why wouldn't we be inhaling the same thing. i don't need a scientific report to tell me that smoke hurts my throat and eyes, it makes me cough and usually gives me a headache, my body tells me. and that can't be good.
and i would hazard a guess that many of the reports that say there is a lack of evidence for the ill effects of second hand smoke are funded by companies like phillip morris. i do know for sure that they sponsor many non smoking campaigns.

 

[Eugen]

I don't smoke. The one time I tried it, a clumsy puppy, fat little teen, my dad calmly persuaded against it. Almost broke my legs.

I respect Australia for not allowing smoking in restaurants (they even have baby-free ones), as it can be annoying if one is not a smoker and, by jove, some cheapy ciggies stink. English women smoke like chimneys, perhaps more so than men. With the weather, one could understand. I couldn't sneak to pub with no one knowing, as I'd return with seven coats of tar. I'm not famous enough to write full-time, so I have a day job, which is a non-smoking building, but staff have unlimited smoke breaks.

 

[jenn]

Ifor not allowing smoking in restaurants (they even have baby-free ones), .

baby free restaurants!! that's funny

 

[Eugen]

True. Lynch's in Melbourne. Try carting a bambini, they have a court ruling to show - framed on the wall. The food is heaven, atmosphere romantic to the toenail. You won't leave without a proposal, not necessarily marriage!

 

[Motokid]

I envy anyone who can look at an issue like this and make a definitive statement about what’s right and what’s wrong. I believe that makes your life much simpler. I would love to be able to do that more often.
I also know that the people who are the greatest influences on society are the ones that push the limits of what’s acceptable, and what’s right. I also wish that society could be left alone to decide what’s right and what’s wrong without having to write so many laws about it. A business owner that makes too many rules will suffer by losing qualified employees, and losing customers. Why can’t that be the judge and jury?
I admire the owner for making a stand about a belief. I admire him for his honesty and courage.
It might be a very unwise decision on his part, and he might pay for it with his business, but

Where would we be as a human race if every time somebody wanted to push the envelope he/she listened to all the people that said “You can’t do that.”

(and rainbow girl, I’d love to debate the animal testing issue with you, but I’m afraid if I start one more thread that is not directly related to a book I’ll be castrated and left for the buzzards …maybe somebody else would be willing to start it?)

 

[Zolipara]

Ah, I see. And that's where we differ, Zolipara. I prefer to base my views on my own experiences, logic, and common sense with additional information from scientific reports.

I'm impressed, i didnt think you could determine cancer risk factors by sitting in a room with a smoker but apparently you can. Banning smoking in bars and restaurants has a lot of consequences and should be based on documented results, not personal views.

Based on common sense/logic/my own experiences i would say that:
Low exposure to unhealthy substances are rarely, if ever, especially dangerous.

While smoking isnt healthy it dont deserve this mass hysteria against it that we see all around the world. You could probably do more for the public health by banning McDonalds instead of banning smoking in bars.

nd i would hazard a guess that many of the reports that say there is a lack of evidence for the ill effects of second hand smoke are funded by companies like phillip morris. i do know for sure that they sponsor many non smoking campaigns.

I'm sure there are, as i'm equally sure a lot are funded by anti-smoking groups. Both are equally questionable. But if there is a 30-40% increase in cancer risk caused by secondhand smoking as novella suggested you would expect a bit more consistency in the results. However no such consistency has been found.

 

[RitalinKid]

Banning smoking in bars and restaurants has a lot of consequences and should be based on documented results, not personal views.

I'm not sure. I mean, it's really uncomfortable to be in a place filled with smoke. My eyes dry out. I'll have sinus problems the next day. You can't get away from it in a bar. Do smokers have the right to make the rest of us uncomfortable? I mean, if I walked around a bar banging cymbals together, wouldn't I be kicked out? I could probably be arrested for disturbing the peace or disorderly conduct too.

Based on common sense/logic/my own experiences i would say that:
Low exposure to unhealthy substances are rarely, if ever, especially dangerous.

I concur, Dr. Z.

You could probably do more for the public health by banning McDonalds instead of banning smoking in bars.

Agreed. Diabetes is an epidemic in the US, especially among Blacks and Native Americans. How much money is being spent on those treatments? However, I would never ban McDonald's (PERHAPS a fast food or junk food tax), but I agree with the point that there are other serious problems that need attention.

 

[mr_michel]

I'm not sure. I mean, it's really uncomfortable to be in a place filled with smoke. My eyes dry out. I'll have sinus problems the next day. You can't get away from it in a bar. Do smokers have the right to make the rest of us uncomfortable? I mean, if I walked around a bar banging cymbals together, wouldn't I be kicked out? I could probably be arrested for disturbing the peace or disorderly conduct too.

i insist that what its needed its restaurants better designed and equiped to have and efective smoke and non smoke areas

 

[RitalinKid]

mr m, yeah, if smokers got together and demanded that restaurants provide that for them, maybe they could get that done rather than have public smoking banned. I know some of that technology is already in use. Where I work, we have air curtains. The technology may be too expensive for bar owners though, but if people demand it, surely someone could make it affordable.

 

[Geenh]

I think smoking should be banned in places that are purely restaurants. No one,not even a smoker, wants to inhale someone else's smoke whilst they're trying a fantastic dish! Food and cigarettes don't belong in the same room. However, pubs should have regulated places to smoke.

I heard on the news today that in Tasmania, they're going to propose no smoking in cars. How to waste valuable resourses policing such a thing is ridiculous but we'll see what happens!

 

[Motokid]

How do you define a restaurant and how do you define a bar or pub?

What's the very defined line that seperates the two?

Smokers have the right to smoke anywhere they want as long as it affects no one other than themselves. Take a paper towel and some windex and go clean a smokers windshield inside their car. Then look at the yellowish-brownish color of the towel. That's the same stuff on you after you've been inside with smokers.

The no-smoking laws in my state are the best thing the local government has done in years in my opinion.

 

[mr_michel]

I think smoking should be banned in places that are purely restaurants. No one,not even a smoker, wants to inhale someone else's smoke whilst they're trying a fantastic dish! Food and cigarettes don't belong in the same room.

well everyone feel diferent, if you mean why ruin the taste of a fantastic dish with smoke around, then they also should ban beers and sugared beverages in restaurants, because definetively they also affects the taste of your food.

 

[mr_michel]

Do you really compare smoking to working? How desperate are you?

i think some people must be really desperate to do certain jobs, but still they dont get health care denied (although in certain jobs an accident means death, so health care should no be an issue )

 

[Geenh]

Ban beers? Obviously, you don't match your alcohol to your food! VERY Australian (West Coast US as well?). As for sugared beverages, you mean Coca Cola and such? I don't drink that stuff so I don't know whether or not it ruins that taste of food. I would imagine that since beverages and beer are not airbound, people are less offended. I've never inhaled someone else's cola for an entire meal, so I cannot compare.

 

[bobbyburns]

you can't kill a person if you smoke while driving.