Norway finds smoking to be a human right

[punkgrrrlie10]

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040414/ap_on_fe_st/norway_smoker_s_rights

I guess being free from having to inhale other people's habits is not a human right.

[thebiggameover]

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040414/ap_on_fe_st/norway_smoker_s_rights

I guess being free from having to inhale other people's habits is not a human right.

damn stright its not a human right. i'm smoking. if you dont want it, then stay the fuck away from me...
>:

[Ghost of Fraiser]

If smoking is a human right, then so is holding people down with force and making them eat your feces.

[Big McLargehuge]

I smoke, guys :(

[Ghost of Fraiser]

BigMcBlackLungs

Enjoy an early death, jerk :lol

[ArrowX]

:lol your gonna Die (But I'm gonna go first) :(

[Ghost of Fraiser]

Your making me die, with that disgusting avatar.

[Bobo Adobo]

Smoking Cigarettes (not cigars) is a stupid habit. I hate seeing the Gov't banning it though. I'm just a civil liberties nut. :/

People should be allowed to do things that are hazardous to there health, just as long as they don't fuck with anybody elses. By making more laws against smoking, were just asking for civil unrest.

[punkgrrrlie10]

so you must not think 2nd hand smoke is bad.

[Bobo Adobo]

In enclosed places it is. But banning in all public places, like ireland did, is just fucking rediculous.

I Hate the smell of cigarette smoke, I don't even let people smoke in my car. But like I said, I'm a civil liberties nut. I don't want to live in a country where big brother is telling me what I can and can't smoke/drink.

[pjalne]

There's been a lot of hoopla around smoking over here the last year. There are some parties who want to outlaw it completely, others just want to reduce the number of places you're allowed to smoke. I'm all for letting people do it in their homes and anywhere outside as long as isn't not at a gas station or anything, but I kinda have to agree with the no-smoking-in-bars law that's being put to practice next month. I don't mind the smoke myself, but it really trashes the health of the people who have to work there.

[kahljorn]

IRONY

[AChimp]

You're not allowed to smoke in any public places in Winnipeg anymore, and the provincial government is thinking of making the ban province-wide. :)

It's great. I can go out now and come home without smelling like an ashtray. :)

[Royal Tenenbaum]

"I can go out now and come home without smelling like an ashtray."

You still do. :lol

[Zebra 3]

You're not allowed to smoke in any public places in Winnipeg anymore, and the provincial government is thinking of making the ban province-wide. :)
:/ - Ontario is planning a province-wide ban as well.

[Bobo Adobo]

What would be a province-wide ban? Does tha mean that it would be banned/outlawed totally?

I sorta agree on the bars thing too. But I also think its up to the owner of the estabolishment. We live in the INFORMATION age. Everyone knows the risk of smoking and being around a lot of smokers. If you don't want to work around alot smokers in a bar because your afraid you won't live to be 80, WORK IN A FUCKING FACTORY.

Its about time people start taking responcibilty for there own short comings. >:

[thebiggameover]

What would be a province-wide ban? Does tha mean that it would be banned/outlawed totally?

I sorta agree on the bars thing too. But I also think its up to the owner of the estabolishment. We live in the INFORMATION age. Everyone knows the risk of smoking and being around a lot of smokers. If you don't want to work around alot smokers in a bar because your afraid you won't live to be 80, WORK IN A FUCKING FACTORY.

Its about time people start taking responcibilty for there own short comings. >:

word. also, if your going to poison your liver, why are you freaking out about your lungs?

[kellychaos]

Carbon monoxide's billowing out of cars outdoors and people are worried about a little cigarette smoke outdoors too? I'm a former smoker but, unlike the other converted, non-smoking, used-to-smoke health zealots, I leave the smokers alone as long as it's not in an enclosed area.

[AChimp]

Province-wide is the same as state-wide. The ban on smoking would extend to all public places in the province. :)

[ziggytrix]

What a business owner wants to allow or disallow in their establishment should be up to them, not the government (at least in America).

Smoke-free bars exist, and no one HAS to work in a pro-smoker bar.That said, I'ma go out and light one up.

[Zebra 3]

Province-wide is the same as state-wide. The ban on smoking would extend to all public places in the province. :)

:/ - Indeed, and I like to add outdoor public places like patios are exempt, which is the only loop hole in such smoking bans.

[Rez]

will you over-reactive numb-nuts just let people smoke where they want ferchrissakes? i can understand not wanting it in an enclosed space, but bitching about how you're breathing in the occasional second-hand out in open air is ridiculous and shows you buy into and are more scared into what TV campaigns tell you than you really should be.

[AChimp]

Or smokers could wear little domes to keep all their by-products to themselves.

[Cosmo Electrolux]

or you could make them wear a special insignia on their shirt...like say a little black lung....and then round them all up and move them into a huge area that is surrounded by razor wire...like Utah....and they could be with others of their ilk and smoke to their hearts content....untill they all drown in their own mucus or die of cancer or heart attacks....then we could round up all of the fat people.........................................

[AChimp]

I RESIST YOUR SARCASM. >:

[Cosmo Electrolux]

then the blacks and jews and faggots and retards and .................................................. .................................................. ..................

[kellychaos]

I RESIST YOUR SARCASM. >:

Respect his ironic AUTHORITI! >:

[Pub Lover]

then the blacks, jews and faggots...
See, I was with you right up till you got silly. :(

[FartinMowler]

I don't mind that they ban it from the work place but they should allow it in a section of a Bar that is isolated. Alot of Donut shops here in Ontario have spent money building such rooms for people stupid enough to encase themselves and I think they should have the right to stink and get cancer at an elevated pace.

[Zebra 3]

Or smokers could wear little domes to keep all their by-products to themselves.

[center:a82d92a15b]http://www.cinerhama.com/getsmart/csilence3.jpg

Regular Sit On the Goddamn Floor Model

http://www.cinerhama.com/getsmart/minicone1.jpg

Special Limited Edition Sporty Light Model[/center:a82d92a15b]

[Mr. Vagiclean]

But I also think its up to the owner of the estabolishment. We live in the INFORMATION age. Everyone knows the risk of smoking and being around a lot of smokers. If you don't want to work around alot smokers in a bar because your afraid you won't live to be 80, WORK IN A FUCKING FACTORY.

Its about time people start taking responcibilty for there own short comings. >:

In enclosed places it is. But banning in all public places, like ireland did, is just fucking rediculous.

I Hate the smell of cigarette smoke, I don't even let people smoke in my car. But like I said, I'm a civil liberties nut. I don't want to live in a country where big brother is telling me what I can and can't smoke/drink.

so the workers or the patrons in a bar who doesn't want any smoke near them has to decide whether to "suck it up" or "quit the job and move to another location because you care for your health"?

[ziggytrix]

Yes, they have to go find a bar where the owner doesnt like smokers and doesn't allow it in his bar. Or they can start their own smoke-free bar.

Or they can petition the bar owner to make the establishment smoke-free.

But bleeding-heart do-gooders who don't even fucking GO to bars have no right to be pushing legislation to ban smoking in those bars.

[AChimp]

Public health regulations don't work that way. Would you be in favour of allowing lepers to walk freely around in public, perhaps even sitting next to you on the bus?

[Rongi]

or you could make them wear a special insignia on their shirt...like say a little black lung....and then round them all up and move them into a huge area that is surrounded by razor wire...like Utah....and they could be with others of their ilk and smoke to their hearts content....untill they all drown in their own mucus or die of cancer or heart attacks....then we could round up all of the fat people.........................................

You stole that from Carlin except changed it around, jerk

[thebiggameover]

Public health regulations don't work that way. Would you be in favour of allowing lepers to walk freely around in public, perhaps even sitting next to you on the bus?

oh , so i'm a leper now?
>:

[AChimp]

Yeah, basically. And you also lost out to a rockstar black dude. >:

[kellychaos]

If it's a government funded area or builiding meant for the whole public to use, then I agree. However, I think that there's a bit too much regulation and/or interference by the government nowadays. So where does the rights of the public begin and the rights of the business owner begin. After all, it is HIS business, right? If you don't want to patronize a business with a smoke-filled atmsophere, then don't. Take a little responsibility for yourself. It's really that simple.

[AChimp]

You shouldn't have to base decisions on what to do in your spare time on the habits of others. If people want to smoke, they can go outside or do it in the privacy of their own homes.

My right to not breathe in your second-hand smoke overrides your right to spew it wherever you choose because it's a public health issue.

[ziggytrix]

And your rights override the rights of the business owner to run his business as he sees fit?

You're a bigger wanker than I thought.

Edit: Out of curiosity chimp, how often do you go to bars?

[Pub Lover]

I could have gone to a bar last night but none of my friends were available.

So I played Return to Castle Wolfenstein instead. :(

[AChimp]

Crap, wrong account again. :(

[AChimp]

And your rights override the rights of the business owner to run his business as he sees fit?

You're a bigger wanker than I thought.
Yep. Public health, remember? What if he decides to rub his burgers across the floor before serving them? Second-hand smoke makes people sick, just like salmonella can.

I haven't been to a bar in a few weeks, but that's a personal choice rather than the fact that there's no smoking. I can tell you that the bars here have had ZERO drop in business, though. In fact, the bars and casinos here have all had increases in business since the smoking ban was put in effect, so, remind me again why business owners would have any basis for their complaints?

[Baalzamon]

Simple fact of the matter is that if you are smoking indoors you are burning cigarettes.

Am I the only one that finds it absolutely retarded that lighting a plant on fire in an enclosed space was ever legal in the first place.

I dont give a fuck if people want to smoke, but under no circumstances should people to be allowed to smoke inside a building.

If your coffee, or beer, or meal is ruined becuase you cant combine it with cigarette smog thats too fucking bad because you are a retarded fucking moron for even considering smoking while you eat in the first place.

[Bobo Adobo]

:rolleyes I think that was the most retarded post I have ever seen.

Achimp, you can't get salmonella from burgers, only from uncooked chicken. also Second hand smoke does get people "sick", but driving on the road can get you killed, skydiving can get you killed, riding a plane, listening to loud music can make you go deaf, eating red meat can give you high cholesteral, eating too much will give you a heart attack, eating to little will make you too skinny, eating to much celery will give you malnutrician, and so on.

You think that banning all these things for "public health", is a good thing? You know what the risks of 2nd hand smoke are, and you have the CHOICE to not go into a smoking estabolishment, or sit in the non-smoking area. You have the CHOICE to work in a bar, or an office building. I don't think you want the Gov't making choices for you.

[AChimp]

:rolleyes

You know what I was talking about with the burger analogy. Excuuuuse me for not getting my bacteria right.

Driving already has GOVERMENT REGULATIONS, or did you forget that? Would you prefer that everyone just drove the way they wanted to?

Everything else you mention only affects ONE person: the person that is consuming the read meat, the person that is eating too much or not enough, and so on. You can't spread your heart attack to other people by eating steaks. When you smoke, your habit is affecting everyone around you. That's the difference between "public" and "private."

Nice stereo-typical American attitude, though, putting your "god-given" rights before your responsibilities.

[Bobo Adobo]

When you fart, your habit is affecting everyone around you. You want to outlaw farting too? Yes driving has regulations, but its still dangerous to public health. Smoking has regulations, but its still dangerous to public health. What is your Point? Would you also like the speed limt to be 25 mph on the interstate?

And since when is my attitude "sterotypical" by any means. In America, you are subject to watching countless ammounts of anti-smoking ads. But its illegal for smoking companies to even use certian media outlets for advertising. Me being a non-smoker, and suporting civil liberties, is by no means stereotypical american.

[Baalzamon]

Limitting smoking to either outdoors, or your own private property (if you absolutely insist on smoking indoors) is perfectly reasonable.

Public buildings where both smokers and non smokers go should not be allowed to fill up with smog just to satisfy your habbits.

Simply allowing non smokers to "make a choice" and not go is a rediculous idea.

If I as a non smoker want to avoid indoor smoking, I basically cant go anywhere unless there is some sort of ban or limitation in place.

If you want to smoke, do it inside your own home or outdoors.

Dont make me limit my travel just to avoid it.

Why should I be restricted by your filthy habbit? YOU smoke, so YOU can be the one to stay in your own house while you do it!

[AChimp]

Where has it been proven that farting causes cancer? Driving isn't a public health threat, either; any problems related to it are public safety issues. There's a difference: health issues deal with long term and biological effects, while safety issues deal with more immediate bodily harm.

Airbags that decapitate people are a safety issue, while crappy chair design that leads to chronic back pain is a health issue, see?

In America, you are subject to watching countless ammounts of anti-smoking ads.
Oh, you poor muffin! However do you live? If you don't like the ads, you don't have to watch them. :rolleyes

Your attitude shows that you feel that people should have to accomodate whatever you decide to do just because you can do it. If you want to light up, dammit, you can light up and all the fuckers that were there before you can move if they don't like it. Then you all scratch your heads and wonder why people hate America.

[Brandon]

Nice stereo-typical American attitude, though, putting your "god-given" rights before your responsibilities.
Yeah, imagine actually defending individual rights! What country-fried roobs we must seem to you noble Canadians! :rolleyes

[Baalzamon]

Once again you seemt o have forgotten the RESPONSIBILITY part.

How typically amercan of you

[Bobo Adobo]

Oh, you poor muffin! However do you live? If you don't like the ads, you don't have to watch them. :rolleyes
Egg-Fucking-Zactly! But the thing I don't have the choice to change when there is a cigarette ad, BECAUSE THERE ARE NO FUCKING CIGARETTE ADS.

Your attitude shows that you feel that people should have to accomodate whatever you decide to do just because you can do it. If you want to light up, dammit, you can light up and all the fuckers that were there before you can move if they don't like it. Then you all scratch your heads and wonder why people hate America.

Yes, thats what us Americans do, we just light our cigarette and have no respect for anyody. We don't ask to light up, or go outside when we are at a non-smoking estabolishment. We just light up because we can, its our freedom, we have no respect. :/

[AChimp]

Thank you for your valuable contribution to this thread, Brandon :|

[Brandon]

Thank you for your valuable contribution to this thread, Brandon :|
You're welcome, pumpkin.

[AChimp]

Bobo, have you ever looked at the back of the National Enquirer? Yeah, 99% of the time that's a cigarette ad.

Yes, thats what us Americans do, we just light our cigarette and have no respect for anyody. We don't ask to light up, or go outside when we are at a non-smoking estabolishment. We just light up because we can, its our freedom, we have no respect.
:lol

You are taking things out of context. Your individual rights have no right to infringe on another's individual rights.

[The_Rorschach]

Rights versus Liberties. Really, smoking fits the classic definition of a Liberty and is not a Right at all.

[AChimp]

Does that mean you're on my side? :love

[Bobo Adobo]

Yes I read a variety of magazines, and that is the ONLY place I EVER see cigarette ads. Never see billboards, and never see T.V. Commercials. Tell you what I do see when driving down the interstate, A big black disgusting looking cancer ridden lung. That might turn you on, but I would rather see a cowboy in the sunset next to a surgeon general warning.

Please tell me. Why is having your own section in restaurants, increasing tobacco taxes, having surgeon general warnings on cigarettes, and outlawing most cigarettes ads not enough? Whos infringing who?

Do you also believe in banning alcohol in public places?

[Baalzamon]

Alcohol only has a health effect for the person drinking it. Safety is of course an issue if you get drunk and start hurting people.

I personally think the banning cigarrette ads is stupid.

The only thing I care about is banning it in indoor public places.

other than that people should be able to smoke all they want, and advertise for it as well.

[Bobo Adobo]

Alcohol only has a health effect for the person drinking it. Safety is of course an issue if you get drunk and start hurting people.


Whats the big difference? An raging alcoholic will kill a person faster than any form of cancer.

[The One and Only...]

You are taking things out of context. Your individual rights have no right to infringe on another's individual rights.

Which is exactly why your right to eat can't infringe on my right to property.

Stop the exploitation. END TAXATION NOW.

[ziggytrix]

Public buildings where both smokers and non smokers go should not be allowed to fill up with smog just to satisfy your habbits.

Who's arguing against that? I don't think anyone is. But most buildings are privately owned, and it should be the buisness owner's decision, not the state's. That is all I'm saying.

[Ant10708]

Can it also be the owner's decision to fill up the building with other toxins then?

[AChimp]

Alcohol only has a health effect for the person drinking it. Safety is of course an issue if you get drunk and start hurting people.


Whats the big difference? An raging alcoholic will kill a person faster than any form of cancer.

Which is exactly why there are laws against public drunkeness. :rolleyes

OH NO! THE GOVERNMENT MIGHT BE DOING SOMETHING TO PROTECT PEOPLE! BE AFRAID! BE PARANOID! :chatter

You can't compare alcohol consumption to smoking because, like Baalzamon already stated, it's only affecting the person drinking it. The liquor doesn't travel from your liver into mine.

But most buildings are privately owned, and it should be the buisness owner's decision, not the state's. That is all I'm saying.
What don't you people understand about public health? If I may get back to my burger analogy, according to your reasoning, because it's his own private property, the restaurant owner can prepare food any damn way he pleases, even if that means sliding the meat along the floor. Why do health codes even exist, if business owners could do whatever they wanted on their own private property?

[Bobo Adobo]

You really have a passion for knowing whats good for people don't you. Whats so wrong with designated places for smokers to go and relax and drink/smoke? Especially when the Owner and employees are OK with it?

Sure you can preach about your public health and whatnot. But If people somehow liked eating bacteria infested meat, and knew that an estabolishment offered such a thing. The government would probably be Ok with it, as long as they were fully informed of the risks. But there isn't any because food poisoning infects you alot harshly than exposure to second hand smoke. You won't get lung cancer if you go to a bar every weekend or after work for a drink.

Hell, I've worked in a few Bar/Grills and most of the Employees smoked. The ones that didn't knew they were exposing themselves to it, and they had the choice to work there. I only rarely hear about that people that get cancer from exposure to 2nd hand smoke. And usually they are close to or way past there retirement age.

You say I have this stereotypical American point of view, but it is really you that has it. You have that "it can't possibly be my fault" mentality that plagues america today. Its the knid of mentality that makes it "ok" to sue McDonalds because you are overweight.

You are responcible for your own short comings, not Joe Camel.

PS...And yes there are regulations for public drunkeness. But I shit still happens. There are surgeon general warnings on cigarette packs, but people still die of lung cancer.

Thing is all you health zealots preach about banning smoking, But in the heat of it all you fail to be rational. Maybe funding research into air purification systems, or talking to congress to require owners of smoking estabolishments to require a certain amount of ventalation in there building. But No, you know whats good for people, you have the right to be an irrational twit.

[ziggytrix]

What don't you people understand about public health? If I may get back to my burger analogy, according to your reasoning, because it's his own private property, the restaurant owner can prepare food any damn way he pleases, even if that means sliding the meat along the floor. Why do health codes even exist, if business owners could do whatever they wanted on their own private property?

Health codes exist to protect comsumers from unsafe buisness practices. This is something entirely different. We're talking about consumer behaviors. Business owners should have the right to decide whether or not smoking is allow on the premises. Public health codes should require the business owners to clearly mark their establishment as smoke-free or smoke-friendly, so that consumers may make a decision. We shouldn't need the government to hold our hands here.

For what it's worth, I don't smoke while eating, and prefer non-smoking restaraunts, but I fully support a restaraunt owner's right to provide a smoking section.

"Whats so wrong with designated places for smokers to go and relax and drink/smoke? Especially when the Owner and employees are OK with it?"


Exactly!

[AChimp]

The government would probably be Ok with it, as long as they were fully informed of the risks. But there isn't any because food poisoning infects you alot harshly than exposure to second hand smoke. You won't get lung cancer if you go to a bar every weekend or after work for a drink.
:lol That's like saying there's no risk of choking when you swallow. The government would NOT be okay with someone selling diseased food for human consumption, at least the Canadian government wouldn't be.

And who's talking specifically about lung cancer? There are dozens of other lung conditions that are caused and/or exacerbated by cigarette smoke, like asthma, allergies, and emphysema.

I only rarely hear about that people that get cancer from exposure to 2nd hand smoke. And usually they are close to or way past there retirement age
And I suppose getting lung cancer when you're old is better than getting it when you're young?

Smoking-related diseases cost hundreds of millions of dollars to deal with. Maybe in the U.S. where you all pay your own healthcare costs, and if you get sick it's your own fault, that's not a big part of the issue, but here it's everyone's problem because that money comes out of all our pockets.

You say I have this stereotypical American point of view, but it is really you that has it. You have that "it can't possibly be my fault" mentality that plagues america today. Its the knid of mentality that makes it "ok" to sue McDonalds because you are overweight.
So it's going to be my fault for breathing in the remnants of your habit? Again, you're taking an example of an individual effect--getting fat from fast food--and applying it to this situation. When I eat a burger, the fat and cholesterol doesn't jump into your blood veins.

The fatbodies who sue McDonald's are retarded, anyways. If this thread was about ridiculous lawsuits, they'd be on top of my list of people to laugh at.

Thing is all you health zealots preach about banning smoking, But in the heat of it all you fail to be rational. Maybe funding research into air purification systems, or talking to congress to require owners of smoking estabolishments to require a certain amount of ventalation in there building. But No, you know whats good for people, you have the right to be an irrational twit.
The fact of the matter is that your freedoms should not infringe on my freedoms. Making me change my lifestyle to accomodate your addiction does just that.

BTW, ventilation does very little to affect cigarette smoke, unless you're talking about putting your restaurant in a wind tunnel. The big donut chain here, Tim Horton's, put those fancy ventilation systems in most of their new shops and it still stunk like shit.

You always talk about how non-smokers can just go somepleace else... the bar that is all non-smoking, the restaurant that is all non-smoking. Maybe you and Ziggy could come here and we'll go back in time 12 months so you can show me where all those places were. Ironically, the only restaurants that were completely non-smoking were the big fast food joints.

Since the ban was put in place, business at restaurants and bars has increased, and all the people who were complaining about how it would infringe on their rights have been left with their foots stuck firmly in their mouths. The only person still whining is one bumtown hotel owner who is trying to scapegoat the results of his crappy business practices on the smoking ban.

I can actually get a seat in the mall food court now, too! The smoking section isn't filled with people who sit for two hours nursing their 99 cent cup of coffee, while people like me who will buy an entire $8.00 meal have to walk around and eventually decide not to bother at all. If you told the smokers to leave back then, well, you were infringing on their rights as a paying customer!
Everyone eats in 10-15 minutes and makes room for the next wave of customers. Dollars sure make people forget their previous complaints.

[ziggytrix]

You always talk about how non-smokers can just go somepleace else... the bar that is all non-smoking, the restaurant that is all non-smoking. Maybe you and Ziggy could come here and we'll go back in time 12 months so you can show me where all those places were.

Since the ban was put in place, business at restaurants and bars has increased, and all the people who were complaining about how it would infringe on their rights have been left with their foots stuck firmly in their mouths.

Sounds like either someone was missing out on a really good business model, or your assumption of causality is horrbily flawed. Just think, if these non-smoking establishments are so much better, and do such better business, simple economics would have made smoking establishments obsolete! You could have been rich by being the first to start a smoke-free bar.

You keep mentioning restaraunts, and I would like to clarify that I don't care about smoking prohibitions there. It's government placing restrictions on bars, establishments who cater specifically to vice, that I'm against.

Again, I'd like your response to Bobo's question "Whats so wrong with designated places for smokers to go and relax and drink/smoke? Especially when the Owner and employees are OK with it?".

[AChimp]

Willful endangerment still costs taxpayers in the end. It's the same reason why there are laws that say you have to wear a seatbelt. Sure, you can forget about wearing one, and accept the risks, but sometimes you will get unlucky and wind up splattered across the streets.

Same goes for working in a smoking environment. The taxpayer foots the bill when Joe Bartender needs a respirator in 50 years; it doesn't matter if he's "near" or "past" retirement age.

The government doesn't let you work with hazardous materials like chemicals, asbestos, etc. without the safety equipment, regardless of whether or not you're okay with the potential risk of burning your face off... unless you're doing it on your own property.

The smoking ban doesn't extend into your own home. If you want to smoke there, you're still quite welcome to. It'll cost you, though, because cigarettes cost $12/pack now.

The ban applies to anywhere that is open to the public. Businesses, even though they are private establishments, are still open to the public. There are numerous laws that already extend into this realm, like the health codes that I mentioned earlier.

If you want to count as completely private, you have to start charging for membership and be selective about who you let in; no one has done that because the smokers here have just accepted the fact that the vast majority of people think their habit is disgusting. It might fly here, but why pay when you can go for free, even if you can't smoke while you drink?

Why should 3/4 of the population be beholden to 1/4 of the population?

[Bobo Adobo]

Willful endangerment still costs taxpayers in the end. It's the same reason why there are laws that say you have to wear a seatbelt. Sure, you can forget about wearing one, and accept the risks, but sometimes you will get unlucky and wind up splattered across the streets.

Here in America we pay for our health insurance. You communist pig! j/k

Things like ultimate fighting,football and boxing are still legal( and yes they have saftey precautions). To be involved in those sports is willfull endangerment. "Taxpayers" have to pay for every single dislocated shoulder, not to mention the amount of serious injuries that still happen. Do you want to outlaw them too?


The government doesn't let you work with hazardous materials like chemicals, asbestos, etc. without the safety equipment, regardless of whether or not you're okay with the potential risk of burning your face off... unless you're doing it on your own property.

Exactly, but the governemt usually doesn't ban the use of such materials. They help come up with ways to make the work environment safer.

The thing is, America was built on something called "Free Market Economy". Meaning you own property and your place of business can actually be the same thing! :eek

Tell me what would the difference be of just having a bunch of people over on your property who happened to smoke, than opening a bar and allowing people to smoke in it?

Both are your property, one just happens to be open to the public. Here in America, in our free market economy, people can choose what businesses they can go to/support. And the Business can choose who they do business with. you don;t have to go to place were all those dreadful smokers hang out.

Whats wrong with restaurants having a non-smoking section. Almost every restaurant has one here. Are you telling me you can't be within 20 feet of the dreadful second hand smoke?


The smoking ban doesn't extend into your own home. If you want to smoke there, you're still quite welcome to. It'll cost you, though, because cigarettes cost $12/pack now.

12$!! Jesus, You actually think thats the answer to smoking, to charge a ridiculous price? Your just asking for another Al Capone.



Why should 3/4 of the population be beholden to 1/4 of the population?

Because in countries like America, and Canada 1/4 of the Population is a HUGE chunk of the country. If Everything was decided by the Majority, things like slavery and segregation, would have lasted a lot longer. Smoking Tobacco is a privialge that has been around almost forever. A huge amount of people do it, and they know the risks of doing it.


And who's talking specifically about lung cancer? There are dozens of other lung conditions that are caused and/or exacerbated by cigarette smoke, like asthma, allergies, and emphysema.

No shit sherlock, but tell me again. Which one of those is the equivelent to the "black death"? And which one of those doesn't appear on the surgeon general's warnings?

Keep Preachin' Rhiner.

[AChimp]

Things like ultimate fighting,football and boxing are still legal( and yes they have saftey precautions). To be in those sports is willfull endangerment. "Taxpayers" have to pay for every single dislocated shoulder, not to mention the amount of serious injuries that still happen. Do you want to outlaw them too?
So are you going to argue now that smoking is a profession? You can't compare something that people get paid to do with smoking, and you know what I mean when I said taxpayers. Everyone in the world knows about Canada's public healthcare system. With wrestlers/boxers/etc, if they get hurt in a fight then their sponsors pay for it.

I doubt the WWF punishes it's wrestlers by making them put a splint on their own leg.

Exactly, but the governemt usually doesn't ban the use of such materials. They help come up with ways to make the work environment safer.
The government hasn't banned the use of tobacco, you just can't smoke it in public places. Wanna chew it?

12$!! Jesus, You actually think thats the answer to smoking, to charge a ridiculous price? Your just asking for another Al Capone.
The Al Capone of cigarettes... When the price is that high in almost every province? Cross-border smuggling isn't that profitable, either. :lol

A lot of smokers already roll their own rather than buying packages up here. For $3 more, you can get a pouch that will make twice as many smokes as the 25 that come in a package.

Because in countries like America, and Canada 1/4 of the Population is a HUGE chunk of the country. If Everything was decided by the Majority, things like slavery and segregation, would have lasted a lot longer. Smoking Tobacco is a privialge that has been around almost forever. A huge amount of people do it, and they know the risks of doing it.
Now you're going to liken the anti-smoking lobby to the supporters of slavery? That's grasping at straws. The majority isn't always right, yeah, but everyone agrees that smoking is bad for everyone, smokers and non-smokers alike. You'd be hard-pressed to find evidence that slavery is good for both the slave owners and the slaves themselves.

Smoking isn't a privilege. You make it sound like the smoking of today is a grand old tradition. Seth's pipe is tradition. The Marlborough Man is a twat. Westerners haven't been smoking for all that long, and I don't think you'd ever find chain-smoking Natives 600 years ago.

No shit sherlock, but tell me again. Which one of those is the equivelent to the "black death"? And which one of those doesn't appear on the surgeon general's warnings?
You haven't seen our warnings, huh? They take up half the package, on both sides.

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hecs-sesc/tobacco/legislation/warnings/warnings.html

[Bobo Adobo]

"You haven't seen our warnings, huh? They take up half the package, on both sides."

No Wonder your Brainwashed. :lol

Owners and Employees of bars are being paid for being in an and operating a willfully endangering environment. Even if its a non-smoking bar. The Patrons are paying to be in it. Whats the big diff?

Whats the sense in paying so much for a pack, and not so much for rollable tobacco? Does working harder for your nicotine fix make it better? :/

Smoking IS a privilage and a tradition. It is the cash crop the helped build America. Natives were the first people in America to grow an sell tobacco. And even used it for medicinal purposes. Its a tradition in there culture. Which is the true North American culture.

[Guderian]

As unpopular as Malthus is these days, people are still dying left and right from easily preventable diseases for a reason, you know.

[AChimp]

Whats the sense in paying so much for a pack, and not so much for rollable tobacco? Does working harder for your nicotine fix make it better?
My mistake, a pouch of tobacco is $19 now after taxes. I haven't worked in a grocery store for almost six months now.

Anyways, bulk is always cheaper. Anyone who shops at Costco knows that. :rolleyes

Smoking IS a privilage and a tradition. It is the cash crop the helped build America. Natives were the first people in America to grow an sell tobacco. And even used it for medicinal purposes. Its a tradition in there culture. Which is the true North American culture.
:lol

It sure is medicinal alright! Smoking is the Natives' version of Montezuma's Revenge.

[Bobo Adobo]

Hey, I didn't say it is medicinal, the natives thought it was. I could see why, smoking real tobacco can be quite relaxing.

[AChimp]

Maybe that's why they let white man take over so easily. :/

[Zebra 3]

I can actually get a seat in the mall food court now, too! The smoking section isn't filled with people who sit for two hours nursing their 99 cent cup of coffee, while people like me who will buy an entire $8.00 meal have to walk around and eventually decide not to bother at all. If you told the smokers to leave back then, well, you were infringing on their rights as a paying customer!
>: - Non-smokers will nurse that goddamn 99¢ cup of coffee as well!

[kellychaos]

I can't believe you all are still over-looking the business owner as being an individual with his own rights (or liberties ... whatever), one of which is to run his/her business the way they see fit. If they don't get non-smoking customers OR employees, so what. It's should be their choice. Is a smoking-allowed business really going to impact on people outside the business any more than the multitude of combustion engines spewing out carbon monoxide? We are over-regulated, in certain areas, as it is. I mean, I consider myself somewhat liberal, but ... this forum :rolleyes ... where does it end for some of you?

[Carnivore]

I echo AChimp's sentiments.

That is all.

[Zebra 3]

I can't believe you all are still over-looking the business owner as being an individual with his own rights (or liberties ... whatever), one of which is to run his/her business the way they see fit....
>: - Oh for fuck sakes, you're only inviting AChimp to tell yet again his burger draggin' on the floor story.

[kellychaos]

In that case, all they'd have to do is put a "Smokers Welcome" or "Salmonella (sp?) Eaters Welcome" sign outside the doors of the business.

[thebiggameover]

Since the ban was put in place, business at restaurants and bars has increased, and all the people who were complaining about how it would infringe on their rights have been left with their foots stuck firmly in their mouths. The only person still whining is one bumtown hotel owner who is trying to scapegoat the results of his crappy business practices on the smoking ban.


http://www.azfamily.com/news/local/stories/KTVKLNews20020711.6d86a090.html

Tempe Bar Owners: Smoking Law Snuffing Out Business

07/11/2002


The Associated Press



TEMPE, Ariz. -- Tempe bar owners are red hot over the city's controversial smoking ban, saying they're upset that business has gone up in flames since the ordinance took effect May 31.


Now, bar owners want voters to approve a new and more lenient anti-smoking law.


About 25 bar owners met Wednesday on a plan of action. They're meeting next week with an attorney to draft a smoking ordinance that's similar to one approved by Mesa voters. The Mesa ordinance allows hardship exemptions and the rules are less stringent.


The owner of Mill Avenue Beer Company says business is off by 40 percent.


Lee Fairbanks led the successful Proposition 200 effort to ban smoking. He says voters won't change it. He says the same people who believe clean air is better than dirty air are still around.


also...
http://www.azfamily.com/news/local/stories/KTVKLNews20020619.5275fdf8.html

and...
http://www.azfamily.com/news/local/stories/KTVKLNews20030511.c4af4d3.html

Tempe bar, restaurant owners blame smoking ban for problems

05/11/2003


By azfamily.com Staff



More than a dozen Tempe bars and restaurants are out of business, revenue is down at many of those still operating, and owners are blaming the city's smoking ban.


Sales revenues are down about 12 percent overall.


Mayor Neil Giuliano said it's unfair to place all of the blame on the ban, which went into effect almost one year ago. He pointed out that people are spending less money in general because of the strained economy.


Embroiled in a legal war, the smoking ban is set to go back to the voters, who will decide on an amendment to repeal the portion of the law that bans smoking in bars.


The Associated Press contributed to this report.

------------------

i'm fine with it not being in restraunts and other places, but let me smoke in a fucking bar please! i want a smoke with my beer...
>:

[punkgrrrlie10]

those stories are over a year old. Usually when the bans are first put in place there is drop off and then it goes back up.

[thebiggameover]

yeah, i couldn't find anything recent on the tempe smoking ban. i know some of my favorite places to see shows in tempe went bankrupt after that ban kicked in...
:/

[Bobo Adobo]

My Dad, who is a bar owner, actually said he would almost rather have smoking illegalized than banned in all public places. He said when he went to California to visit his family, there would be mobs sitting outside of bars just puffing away. Fucking Stupid. :lol

[AChimp]

You know what happens right after a smoking ban is put into place? All the smokers pout and say they will boycott businesses until the government backs down.

They sit at home, and yeah, business does go down a bit for a few weeks, but then it shoots right back up when they get bored and decide that going out and not smoking is better than sitting at home and smoking. The smokers also stop whining about how stupid the non-smokers are for complaining about having no where to go.

I have seen it happen first hand.

My Dad, who is a bar owner, actually said he would almost rather have smoking illegalized than banned in all public places. He said when he went to California to visit his family, there would be mobs sitting outside of bars just puffing away. Fucking Stupid.
How is that stupid, other than the fact that people look retarded with a cigarette in their mouths? The smoke is going up, up and away and isn't hovering in an enclosed environment for everyone to breathe in over and over.

I can't believe you all are still over-looking the business owner as being an individual with his own rights (or liberties ... whatever), one of which is to run his/her business the way they see fit. If they don't get non-smoking customers OR employees, so what. It's should be their choice.
You're overestimating the extent of your rights, and forgetting about your responsibilities. If you're a business, and you claim to be open to the public, there are rules you have to follow to remain in the best interests of everyone. This is same the reason why there's handicapped entrances.

[punkgrrrlie10]

It's also why there are FDA regulations and cleanliness standards...IF I'm a restaurant owner I couldn't be sitting in back putting out my cigarrette in people's food no matter how much I wanted to and even if it is my own private business.

[Bobo Adobo]

The smokers also stop whining about how stupid the non-smokers are for complaining about having no where to go.

I have seen it happen first hand.



Non-Smokers have tons of places to go, so why are you complaining? I'm a non-smoker, but I recognise that most Bars are OK with smoking. I also recognise that there are tons of non-smoking bars and restaurants that are non-smoking.

I guess I'm just one of those rational people that would rather have that than the Government regulators stepping in and telling business owners what to do.


How is that stupid, other than the fact that people look retarded with a cigarette in their mouths? The smoke is going up, up and away and isn't hovering in an enclosed environment for everyone to breathe in over and over.


:lol

Its retarded because no matter what business you own, you don't want mobs of people outside your place of business! It looks bad.

It's bad enough that there not inside drinking while there smoking, but also the fact that there is a mob outside scares away paying customers.

[Bobo Adobo]

It's also why there are FDA regulations and cleanliness standards...IF I'm a restaurant owner I couldn't be sitting in back putting out my cigarrette in people's food no matter how much I wanted to and even if it is my own private business.

Thats not the point, people don't want cigarettes in there food. They want to smoke cigarettes, in a bar. Its there choice along with the business owners.

Is that so hard to understand?

You preach about "Responciblity", and that is what is exactly about, your responcibilty, not the business owners.

[Zebra 3]

How is that stupid, other than the fact that people look retarded with a cigarette in their mouths? [center:c4045a0fbf]http://www.pbgeorge.com/images/einstein.jpg

Albert Einstein[/center:c4045a0fbf]
For the longest time, in the right mouth or hand, smoking be it pipe, cigars, or cigarettes gave the appearance of sophistication, cool, sexy,...

[kellychaos]

It's also why there are FDA regulations and cleanliness standards...IF I'm a restaurant owner I couldn't be sitting in back putting out my cigarrette in people's food no matter how much I wanted to and even if it is my own private business.

Thats not the point, people don't want cigarettes in there food. They want to smoke cigarettes, in a bar. Its there choice along with the business owners.

Is that so hard to understand?

You preach about "Responciblity", and that is what is exactly about, your responcibilty, not the business owners.

Exactly so. How is smoking in a place enything like putting cigarettes's in someone's food? Even if the cook smokes a cigarette on his break, he is still supposed to wash his hands before going back to cooking again. If he doesn't or isn't made to by the owner then, yes, he and/or the business owner are both wrong in respect to health standards. I'm sick of all the finger pointing as to responsibility. It works both ways. If you don't like the atmosphere of a place. Then. Don't. Go. There.

[ScruU2wice]

This post is kinda out of context, becuase i made it on another board:



"Ok I see that there is alotta anti-smoking sentiment out there, so i'll play devil's advocate here, eventhough i don't smoke and i dislike many people who do.


I think it's pretty ignorant to say that people are stupid and whatnot for smoking. Just because we are overrun by media and everything telling us that smoking is bad it's not really affecting you as much as you think. I really don't like campaigns like TRUTH that take a few facts out of context and skew things for there own purposes. I think that propoganda is a cliche word, but that's exactly what truth is, no more no less. I've read tons of articles that each give a different number and effects of second hand smoke. I really don't like knowing that alotta sutff out there that i read is either not true or skewed.

Other countries and cultures don't hold Smoking at such a horrible level. If you go to europe or asia, you don't get smoldered with anti smoking laws, and it isn't looked down upon that much. My dad started smoking while he was living in yemen, he moved to germany and other places, not getting any guff about it. Even here till a few years ago, people weren't told not to smoke in bars and other places. I mean the emloyees at our store smoke out in the front right out side one there breaks, now if a customer comes up and asks them to put it out, eventhough they won't be within 3 feet of the smoker for more than a second, what should the smoker do?

I really dislike how smokers can't go anywhere to smoke. There's laws someplaces that if a neighbor is "disturbed" by a smokers fumes they can ask them not to smoke. Now if i was pissed off at my smoking neighbor for not mowing his lawn or some other frivilouse thing, I can just tell him to stop smoking in his house. It might be that exact same scenario but there probably are ways laws like these can be abused. Also the tobacco industry was almost completely crippled by one lawsuit which awarded the family of dead smoker millions of dollars because there loved one died of lung cancer caused by smoking. I don't the tobacco company is nice or anything, but i think it's more wrong to destroy an industry...

The smokers are the most discriminated against people. Law after law passes limiting there actions that annoy some people. Tax after tax accumulates to try to keep people from smoking, eventhough the people who need to will by them anyways by any means necessary. the money just goes to politcians and they know it. They can't smoke in resturaunts outta resturaunts, in virtually any building anymore and many times even on the street.

I'm not trying to be a jerk or anything, seriously, just try to see it both ways and just walk away any time you want to get away from the smoke of a cigarette. I mean it's not like the smoke will be spreading exponentially through the sky and you probably wont be around a crows of 50 people strategically placed so you can't escape the smoke.

Just as a synopsis Smokers aren't stupid ignorant punk kids, People of every kind smoke, and discriminating against them and segregating them isn't the only answers, it's just the one people find the easiest..."