Tobacco expected to kill 1 billion this century

[Caine]

That's a bogus argument, and you know it. Would you say the same thing in a law being passed that does NOT allow business owners to serve alcohol to a person who is legally drunk?

Ummm... your wording is a little retarded but, There are already laws in place that make it unlawful to serve alcohol to someone who is visibly intoxicated.

Do I believe these laws to be "selfish" no, not at all. People die in many different ways due to alcohol. We have the classic drunk driving death. There is the alcohol poisoning death, then you have all of the other deaths that are not directly attributed to alcohol, however, alcohol plays an important role, in the case of domestic violence or other assaults that turn deadly because one person is completely incapable of rational thought due to their alcohol impairment. .

Let me just reiterate that I love DC's smoking ban. It's fantastic!

Ummm.... okay? Who cares?

Is this some kind of a weak attempt to get me into a flame debate?

Im not that passionate about this topic, especially not passionate enough about it to get angry as you continue to flaunt D.C.'s smoking ban.

 

[Caine]

Fact is smoking is very dangerous stuff. So many pollutants and poisons in it you can't even shake a stick at it. If this had been known when smoking was introduced it probably would have been made illegal pretty quickly.

We are currently experiencing moves to make the US smoke free. The government hasn't been too forceful yet in it's desire to get rid of this pest. Mostly they are taxing and banning it out of existance. The reason I quit was because of the cost. I had wanted to quit for at the very least 12 years before I actually did. I don't know what I would have done if the government had suddenly banned it everywhere. I couldn't quit just like that.

Eventually it's gonna be illegal, I have no doubt, but this is a big country and there are still millions who smoke. I'd say the government has been very patient with the stragglers, but they will lose their patience at some point.

People who smoke need to count their blessings that they can still smoke anywhere at all. People who have kids should not be smoking in the home, car, any enclosed space, and you know they do. This is causing harm to their children. It's child abuse.

Personally,I think cigarettes are a curse. They are totally unnecessary, and a vice. They make you less than you can be. I'd like to see them disappear. Nobody would even miss them except the smokers, and they'd get over it, eventually.

Ahem. One Word. Fascism.

Wait, I can play this game too..


Fact is alcohol is very dangerous stuff. So many negative effects on the body you can't even shake a stick at it. If this had been known when alcohol was introduced it probably would have been made illegal pretty quickly.

People who drink need to count their blessings that they can still drink at all. People who have kids should not be drinking in the home, and you know they do. Trying to take care of children while you are impaired can be harmful. This is causing harm to their children. It's child abuse.

Personally,I think alcohol is a curse. It is totally unnecessary, and a vice. It makes you less than you can be. I'd like to see it disappear. Nobody would even miss it except the drunks, and they'd get over it, eventually.

 

[WI Crippler]

Ahem. One Word. Fascism.

Wait, I can play this game too..


Fact is alcohol is very dangerous stuff. So many negative effects on the body you can't even shake a stick at it. If this had been known when alcohol was introduced it probably would have been made illegal pretty quickly.

People who drink need to count their blessings that they can still drink at all. People who have kids should not be drinking in the home, and you know they do. Trying to take care of children while you are impaired can be harmful. This is causing harm to their children. It's child abuse.

Personally,I think alcohol is a curse. It is totally unnecessary, and a vice. It makes you less than you can be. I'd like to see it disappear. Nobody would even miss it except the drunks, and they'd get over it, eventually.

I have a better idea, lets get rid of everything humans have ever made, as along as we can prove its detrimental to your health in some way shape or fashion. Then we can all go back to being hunter/gatherers and live for about 30-40 years instead of 70+ on average.

 

[TheNextEra]

Might be owned by a private company, but it's still public if anybody can walk in.

Not saying you specifically, but you really are making people out to be just plain retarded. Are you saying that someone walking into a bar would have any other delusion that he is walking into a smoking place before the smoking ban was in effect? How about a restaurant. It is the responsibility of the person, not the owner, to ASK if the place is a non-smoking establishment. If some idiot walks into a PRIVATE establishment, it is their responsibility to find out if it is smoking or not.

Again, public places, like parks outside, etc, I could MAYBE agree with in some cases (not all), but private establishments? Hell no, there shouldn't be a ban unless the owner wants it.

 

[Caine]

There's no way that can happen with cigarettes. Cigarette smoke moves around. This affects other people who may not want to be a part of your smoke. I read that the smoke you blow out is actually more harmful than the smoke you inhale.

It moves around, but it also dissipates within the air. Its no different than the exhaust from a large tractor/trailer or pickup. More air pollutants come from vehicle than come from cigarettes. Where is the outrage there?

There's truth in this, but some patrons might be dumb and dumber

Then it is their own damned fault. Its not the governments job to go protecting every dumb *** who can't pay attention that smoking is bad for them.

or just like the atmosphere in a certain place, and smoking might seem ok to them because of the time period they will be exposed to it, but in reality there is danger in there for them.

Again, they entered and stayed at their own risk. Its their own damned fault. Just like anyone who still smokes today, its their own damned fault that they do so, knowing that it is harmful to their health. And many accept that.

Also, you might drop into a place, and not realize that it isn't smoke-free.

The moment you smell the smoke is the moment you should leave then. Again, you remain at your own risk.

An establishment should have to enlighten all of it's patrons to a non-smoke-free atmosphere.

No. In today's America, SMOKE FREE establishments enlighten its patrons that they are smoke free, not the other way around.

What do you mean by private establishment? Anyplace that is open to the public is public if you ask me. Might be owned by a private company, but it's still public if anybody can walk in.

Just because a place is open to customers doesn't mean the government has the right to trample the owner's free will to run his business how he wishes. That falls in line with socialism, where the government basically runs all forms of business.

I still think smoking is sexy as hell. It's a shame they never were able to come up with a safe cigarette.

Smoking is extremely unattractive. Of course, I won't demand banning it because of such like aps and luhdhaiaiaiaia

 

[aps]

Ummm... your wording is a little retarded but, There are already laws in place that make it unlawful to serve alcohol to someone who is visibly intoxicated.

Do I believe these laws to be "selfish" no, not at all. People die in many different ways due to alcohol. We have the classic drunk driving death. There is the alcohol poisoning death, then you have all of the other deaths that are not directly attributed to alcohol, however, alcohol plays an important role, in the case of domestic violence or other assaults that turn deadly because one person is completely incapable of rational thought due to their alcohol impairment. .

I'm glad you agree that this isn't selfish--neither is preventing people from smoking.

Ummm.... okay? Who cares?

Is this some kind of a weak attempt to get me into a flame debate?

Im not that passionate about this topic, especially not passionate enough about it to get angry as you continue to flaunt D.C.'s smoking ban.

I care, and it wasn't directed at you to "flame" you. It was just my reminding myself how much I LOVE that DC has banned smoking from restaurants and bars.

Oh, and you're not passionate about this? LOL Yeah, that's why you can't stop posting in this thread and getting all bent out of shape over my and ludahai's posts.

 

[aps]

Not saying you specifically, but you really are making people out to be just plain retarded. Are you saying that someone walking into a bar would have any other delusion that he is walking into a smoking place before the smoking ban was in effect? How about a restaurant. It is the responsibility of the person, not the owner, to ASK if the place is a non-smoking establishment. If some idiot walks into a PRIVATE establishment, it is their responsibility to find out if it is smoking or not.

Again, public places, like parks outside, etc, I could MAYBE agree with in some cases (not all), but private establishments? Hell no, there shouldn't be a ban unless the owner wants it.

I guess I don't know why people make this argument. There are smoking bans in so many states/cities/counties that prevent private establishments from allowing smoking.

 

[winston53660]

I guess I don't know why people make this argument. There are smoking bans in so many states/cities/counties that prevent private establishments from allowing smoking.

Just the bans are there doesn't mean they are right.

 

[TheNextEra]

I guess I don't know why people make this argument. There are smoking bans in so many states/cities/counties that prevent private establishments from allowing smoking.

So? And that somehow makes the bans right? I'm sorry but what ever happened to PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY of if you don't like something don't go in there.

I can understand how people hate smoking outdoors, I really can. I am a non-smoker and I don't like it, but I am not willing to ban it and I can understand why some would.

But why mess with someone's private business that someone doesn't have to go into? That to me is excess. If you don't want to smell smoke at a bar don't go in the bar.

 

[Caine]

I'm glad you agree that this isn't selfish--neither is preventing people from smoking.

FORCING private businesses to ban smoking in their establishment IS being SELFISH.
You are forcing the business to adopt a policy which is contrary to the desire of their customers. For, if it is not the desire of their customers to be in a bar/restaraunt that allows smoking, then those people who dislike it shouldn't be customers of that particular restaraunt/bar. Its that simple Aps! Its just that simple.
It has been explained to you COUNTLESS times that if a customer doesn't like the smoke, they should go somewhere else, instead of forcing the business owner to adopt a policy in tune with your own personal desires.

The health of the public is not at stake because those who chose to go to that bar/restaraunt are choosing to be in a smoking atmosphere, and thus, the basic principle of it is no different than those who choose to smoke themselves.

I care, and it wasn't directed at you to "flame" you. It was just my reminding myself how much I LOVE that DC has banned smoking from restaurants and bars.

Man... I just LOVE how my state grows the nation's tobacco and we have some of the lowest cigarette prices in the country! I love it!
(even if its been 4 days since I had a cigarette, since im quitting and all)

 

[rhinefire]

You speak as though I agree with all of the regulations you mention. I do not, therefore, whatever point you were making is moot with me.

Restaurants and bars are not SERVING cigs. They're simply allowing a legal activity on THEIR property. The patrons, and employees, are perfectly free to make a choice to either remain in the establishment, or depart. There is no need - in any way, shape, or form - for the government to make that decision for them. I don't care if they are whiney crybabies who don't know how to walk out of a door and not return to said establishment. It's still not the government's job to tell a business owner that they cannot allow a legal activity such as smoking on their premises. This is not about smoker's rights. This is about business owner's rights.

And yes, the people DO trust that a restaurant's food in this country won't kill them. We are trusting that they're adhering to safe cooking practices. It's all about trust. I have left restaurants before because I saw something that made me distrusttheir cooking hygene or practices. I didn't stay and eat and then whine to the government. I actually made a choice myself and acted on what I considered my own best interest. More people should do the same instead of relying on the government to make those choices for them.

Not too many posts are 100 % off base like the offering above. I'll skip the "rights" garble posted about smoking and move on to "trusting America's kitchens." I recently visited a restautrant that had no doors at the kitchen entrance. It got my attention because you just don't see that every day. I wonder why. Mexican restaurants serve chips in bowls as an appetizer. How many restaurant put the uneaten chips right back in the bag for the next loser to eat? Luby's or restaurants with food laid out for the custonmer to choose; What happens to that food that does not get chosen on any given day? Also ever notice there are no sneeze/cough guards? Chinese buffets; ever wonder to what happens to the food that does not get eaten on any given day? Roaches, rats and mice all attracted to food and that is the main reason kitchen doors are closed. Bottom line if you want to trust them, that's your option but I'll go through life knowing what I can't see can hurt me in the hands of someone trying to make money off the food they serve. I have seen enough to justify that attitude.

 

[rivrrat]

Not too many posts are 100 % off base like the offering above. I'll skip the "rights" garble posted about smoking and move on to "trusting America's kitchens." I recently visited a restautrant that had no doors at the kitchen entrance. It got my attention because you just don't see that every day. I wonder why. Mexican restaurants serve chips in bowls as an appetizer. How many restaurant put the uneaten chips right back in the bag for the next loser to eat? Luby's or restaurants with food laid out for the custonmer to choose; What happens to that food that does not get chosen on any given day? Also ever notice there are no sneeze/cough guards? Chinese buffets; ever wonder to what happens to the food that does not get eaten on any given day? Roaches, rats and mice all attracted to food and that is the main reason kitchen doors are closed. Bottom line if you want to trust them, that's your option but I'll go through life knowing what I can't see can hurt me in the hands of someone trying to make money off the food they serve. I have seen enough to justify that attitude.

And everyone that eats out TRUSTS that crap isn't happening. Whether it is, or isn't.

 

[rivrrat]

Man... I just LOVE how my state grows the nation's tobacco and we have some of the lowest cigarette prices in the country! I love it!
(even if its been 4 days since I had a cigarette, since im quitting and all)

NC is awesome :mrgreen:

 

[rhinefire]

And everyone that eats out TRUSTS that crap isn't happening. Whether it is, or isn't.

"......everyone.........TRUSTS." Where do you come up with that crap? Can you prove with a survey or a study or SOMETHING or do we rely on your imagination.........again. Maybe you have flowers in your head but considering what goes in to a hot dog or piece of lunchmeat I would have to day the business, that's BUSINESS of food needs some work. Remember every nose picking, butt scrathing high school, minimum wage earning employee at fast food restuarants has you personal well being at heart. TRUST me.

 

[Marilyn Monroe]

Not saying you specifically, but you really are making people out to be just plain retarded. Are you saying that someone walking into a bar would have any other delusion that he is walking into a smoking place before the smoking ban was in effect? How about a restaurant. It is the responsibility of the person, not the owner, to ASK if the place is a non-smoking establishment. If some idiot walks into a PRIVATE establishment, it is their responsibility to find out if it is smoking or not.

Again, public places, like parks outside, etc, I could MAYBE agree with in some cases (not all), but private establishments? Hell no, there shouldn't be a ban unless the owner wants it.

Let me just say this. I researched cigarettes many years ago for a term paper, it's always been known that they were dangerous. There were King's that didn't allow their people to smoke. People who claim ignorance about the danger are lying to themselves.

I feel that when an owner has an establishment he has responsibilities to all his customers to provide clean surroundings. Cigarette smoke gets on everything around it. There are tars that stick to anything it comes in contact with.

When something is a pollutant, and it is well known as with cigarettes it becomes a public health hazzard. That's the end of the story, really. There has to be government intervention because most establishments won't look out for all their customers. They are looking at profits. Yeah, people know that restaurants, and bars house smoker's, but that shouldn't mean that I have to be unable to go there because someone who smokes is. I shouldn't have to wonder everywhere I go if it will be smoke-free or not.

Cigarettes are still a legal substance, but just barely. I'd smoke as many as you can because the days are getting more and more numbered that they are going to have to go.

Another fact is smoker's also have responsibilities, not just non-smoker's. They shouldn't be smoking anywhere that isn't out in the open, and away from everything, which is pretty hard to do. I think this paints the grimness of the smoker's future.

 

[Marilyn Monroe]

And a person's residence is made specifically so that he or she may engage in whatever legal personal and recreational activities he or she may well choose, all while enjoying that activity in the privacy of their own home.

This is true, but.... most things you do won't hurt anybody. Drinking won't, but now if you start hitting your wife, oops off to jail you will go. Drinking is more benign than smoking. It really only hurts the drinker, if you hurt someone while drinking you'll go to the pokey. Smoking on the other hand pollutes the air, so it's not benign. You are hurting the people who reside in your household, and now we know this, so you should be liable for it. If you live alone in a single dwelling home I have no problem with you smoking all you want.

 

[rivrrat]

"......everyone.........TRUSTS." Where do you come up with that crap? Can you prove with a survey or a study or SOMETHING or do we rely on your imagination.........again. Maybe you have flowers in your head but considering what goes in to a hot dog or piece of lunchmeat I would have to day the business, that's BUSINESS of food needs some work. Remember every nose picking, butt scrathing high school, minimum wage earning employee at fast food restuarants has you personal well being at heart. TRUST me.

WTF are you going on about? Where do I "get" the notion that people trust the folks preparing their food? How about the fact that they fricken EAT it. How is that not trust? Talk about flowers in your head. If people are eating the ******* food, then they're trusting it's prepared properly. I don't think I need to do a survey to make such a statement.

 

[rivrrat]

When something is a pollutant, and it is well known as with cigarettes it becomes a public health hazzard. That's the end of the story, really.

No it's not the end of the story. Not when people are completely capable of choosing whether or not to be in the vicinity of said smoke.

There has to be government intervention because most establishments won't look out for all their customers.

Look out for their customers? Why should they "look out for" people who wish to either smoke or be around smoke/smokers? Why is it their job to keep you out of smoke if you can't even make the decision to do it yourself?

They are looking at profits. Yeah, people know that restaurants, and bars house smoker's, but that shouldn't mean that I have to be unable to go there because someone who smokes is. I shouldn't have to wonder everywhere I go if it will be smoke-free or not.

Why not? Why shouldn't we all be free to choose where we wish to patron and for what reason?

 

[Ikari]

What do you mean by private establishment? Anyplace that is open to the public is public if you ask me. Might be owned by a private company, but it's still public if anybody can walk in.

Who pays the taxes on the property? I damned well bet it's an individual who does so, not the People as a whole and not the government.

The thing is, you have identified something that you don't like, that you wish would disappear, then you endorse using the government to force that upon everyone else. It's dangerous logic, it's an abuse of the government, and it's an affront to freedom and liberty. Just because you don't like something doesn't mean that you should be able to force your way on the rest of us. This is supposed to be land of the free, which means we are all free to make up our own minds. Some people can smoke if they choose, some people don't have to smoke if they choose, private property owners can allow a legal activity to take place on their property, private property owners can not allow a legal activity to take place on their property. It's that simple, see before there was choice and there was freedom and your ilk used the government to reduce it...like good commies would. Grow up and learn to accept the responsibilities and consequences of freedom.

 

[aps]

Man... I just LOVE how my state grows the nation's tobacco and we have some of the lowest cigarette prices in the country! I love it!
(even if its been 4 days since I had a cigarette, since im quitting and all)

Virginia is very similar to North Carolina (I live in Virginia). I would love to see you quit smoking!

 

[ludahai]

The above red enlarged and bolded section is all I needed to hear.

The rest of the junk in your thread is not an act of malice, therefore, he is only exercising his rights to smoke a legal substance within his own residence.

You have a problem with reading comprehension. He has the right to smoke in his place so long as it doesn't interfere with anyone else. There is nothing inconsistent with what I have been saying. His rights end at my nose.

 

[ludahai]

And a person's residence is made specifically so that he or she may engage in whatever legal personal and recreational activities he or she may well choose, all while enjoying that activity in the privacy of their own home.

However, he can't do anything in his private residence that negatively affects my enjoyment of my own.

 

[rivrrat]

However, he can't do anything in his private residence that negatively affects my enjoyment of my own.

I don't like my neighbor. The fact that he BREATHES in his residence negatively affects my enjoyment of my own residence. He should be banned and/or forbidden to breathe.

Oh, and when he fires up his BBQ, that seriously negatively affects me too. I can't wait until the city enacts a ban on BBQs because they are a nuisance to me personally. His rights end at my nose, and I can smell his BBQ and that smoke is harmful to my health. And when the woman next door burns something, OMG... talk about negatively affecting the enjoyment of my home! I'm going to call the police next time and file a complaint. Maybe they will forbid her from cooking since she sometimes offends me by forcing smells into my nostrils.

The paper mill in town REEKS! I can smell the sulfur everywhere in the morning. I don't understand how it's legal for them to violate my rights like that. I mean, I can SMELL it, so it's violating my rights.

Behind my place, there's this guy that likes to build campfires and roast marshmellows with his kids. I can smell it. What right does he have to infringe upon my enjoyment of my home by forcing me to smell a campfire and polluting my lungs with its smoke? None, I tell ya. If I can smell it, you're infringing on my rights. I don't care what it is. Cologne, perfume, food, whatever.

Ban everything, god-damnit.

 

[Ikari]

Ban everything, god-damnit.

only if we can have some form of secret police that goes around shooting people who break the law.

 

[americanwoman]

Re: a little common sense, people!

It's still not the government's job to tell a business owner that they cannot allow a legal activity such as smoking on their premises. This is not about smoker's rights. This is about business owner's rights.

Amen to that.