Go Back   I-Mockery Forum > I-Mockery Discussion Forums > Philosophy, Politics, and News > Norway finds smoking to be a human right
Reload this Page Reply to Thread
FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Thread: Norway finds smoking to be a human right Reply to Thread
Title:
Message
Image Verification
Please enter the six letters or digits that appear in the image opposite.


Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Topic Review (Newest First)
Apr 21st, 2004 06:27 PM
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..."
Apr 21st, 2004 04:33 PM
kellychaos
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobo Adobo
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.
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.
Apr 21st, 2004 01:28 PM
Zebra 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by AChimp
How is that stupid, other than the fact that people look retarded with a cigarette in their mouths?
[center:c4045a0fbf]

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,...
Apr 21st, 2004 01:16 PM
Bobo Adobo
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.
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.
Apr 21st, 2004 01:12 PM
Bobo Adobo
Quote:
Originally Posted by AChimp
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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achimp
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.


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.
Apr 21st, 2004 01:08 PM
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.
Apr 21st, 2004 08:51 AM
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.

Quote:
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.

Quote:
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.
Apr 21st, 2004 01:30 AM
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.
Apr 21st, 2004 12:49 AM
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...
:/
Apr 21st, 2004 12:43 AM
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.
Apr 20th, 2004 11:05 PM
thebiggameover
Quote:
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/s....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/s....5275fdf8.html

and...
http://www.azfamily.com/news/local/s...1.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...
Apr 20th, 2004 03:50 PM
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.
Apr 20th, 2004 02:41 PM
Zebra 3
Son-of-a-fuckin'-bitch!!!
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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....
- Oh for fuck sakes, you're only inviting AChimp to tell yet again his burger draggin' on the floor story.
Apr 19th, 2004 07:43 PM
Carnivore I echo AChimp's sentiments.

That is all.
Apr 19th, 2004 04:23 PM
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 ... where does it end for some of you?
Apr 19th, 2004 01:44 PM
Zebra 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by AChimp
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 99ยข cup of coffee as well!
Apr 19th, 2004 09:20 AM
AChimp Maybe that's why they let white man take over so easily. :/
Apr 19th, 2004 09:16 AM
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.
Apr 19th, 2004 08:43 AM
AChimp
Quote:
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.

Quote:
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.


It sure is medicinal alright! Smoking is the Natives' version of Montezuma's Revenge.
Apr 18th, 2004 09:02 PM
Guderian As unpopular as Malthus is these days, people are still dying left and right from easily preventable diseases for a reason, you know.
Apr 18th, 2004 07:27 PM
Bobo Adobo "You haven't seen our warnings, huh? They take up half the package, on both sides."

No Wonder your Brainwashed.

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.
Apr 18th, 2004 07:20 PM
AChimp
Quote:
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.

Quote:
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?

Quote:
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.

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.

Quote:
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.

Quote:
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/tob.../warnings.html
Apr 18th, 2004 06:55 PM
Bobo Adobo
Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.
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?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achimp
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!

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?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achimp
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.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AChimp
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.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Achimp
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.
Apr 18th, 2004 04:30 PM
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?
Apr 18th, 2004 03:37 PM
ziggytrix
Quote:
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.
Quote:
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?".
This thread has more than 25 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

   


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:20 AM.

I-Mockery.com - Archive - Top

© 2008 I-Mockery.com
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.