Cigarette Smoking Ban

  • Thread starter Thread starter Danoff
  • 75 comments
  • 4,165 views
Danoff

Danoff

Premium
Messages
34,417
United States
Mile High City
Recently, some cities have been passing ordinances that state that inner-city bars and clubs must be smoke free. People can't even light up outside in these cities. The city govnerments support these ordinances by citing the damages of second hand smoke on others.

What’s your take on the smoke-free city movement?
 
Private business owners should decide whether to allow smoking in their establishments.

Aside from that, I don't know.
 
Delaware has banned smoking in all indoor public spaces recently, including bars. There is an opening in the law to allow certain places to become "private clubs" where smoking is allowed inside.

I have to say I support the indoor ban. While I don't really like to walk past a crowd of patrons and waitstaff outside the front of a restaurant, madly puffing away before going back in, I have to say it beats the hell out of having them inside in an open "smoking section" that has no walls and shares its HVAC system with the general populace.

Bar owners swear that it is hurting their business, but thruthfully, at the places I've been to recently (admittedly no real saloon-typ places), I don't see it.

So, I definitely support the public/indoor ban, with places like stadiums being defined as "indoor" even though they are open-air.
 
i think we should have a smoke free world everywhere, when people smoke they are just not hurting themseleves, but they are hurting people all around them :mad:
 
I do not think an adult needs his government to tell him or her what to do and when. You don't like smoke go to a smoke free Bar resturant..vote with your wallet..keep the government out of my life period.
 
It's a public health issue. Secondhand smoking has been found time and time again to be extremely hazardous to health.

Any smoker who can't put away their cigarettes long enough to have a drink at a bar clearly has addiction problems and can't preform other simple tasks in life. In Illinois, you can't smoke in an office building (meaning smokers could never have an office job) and since the 1980's, you can't smoke on airplanes (meaning smokers can't travel quickly). Smokers' cars are worth less, too.

I do not think an adult needs his government to tell him or her what to do and when.
Click to expand...

Pretend you like the hamburgers at one place, constantly filled with smokers. What are you going to do if you're asmhatic or have problems with the smell of smoke? Or, if you consistently enter said burger joint, is it worth risking lung cancer through secondhand smoke?

And - do you actually believe that 'vote with your wallet' crap? It's hard enough to convince people to vote in the normal fashion; and I - a loyal voter, taxpayer, and event-follower don't even believe voting with a wallet will make a difference.
 
Originally posted by M5Power
And - do you actually believe that 'vote with your wallet' crap?
Click to expand...

No.

Personally, I think that trying to vote with your wallet is akin to cutting off your nose to spite your face.

And this from someone who couldn't get access to any decent consumer electronics until the 1990s due to his parent's refusal to buy Japanese products...
 
Originally posted by M5Power
It's a public health issue. Secondhand smoking has been found time and time again to be extremely hazardous to health.]
Click to expand...


I wonder how much cigarette smoke contributes to others health problems compaired to ohhhh....let's say ...factories pumping out polution into the air or autos doing the same thing


Any smoker who can't put away their cigarettes long enough to have a drink at a bar clearly has addiction problems and can't preform other simple tasks in life.
Click to expand...

Anyone who has to put anyhing down to go and get a drink at a bar clearly has addiction problems and can't perform other simple tasks in life.

Pretend you like the hamburgers at one place, constantly filled with smokers. What are you going to do if you're asmhatic or have problems with the smell of smoke? Or, if you consistently enter said burger joint, is it worth risking lung cancer through secondhand smoke?
Click to expand...

I like going into a restraunt and not getting all smokie but to regulate what privately owned buisness can do on this issue is a little too much. If I don't like a place because there is too much smoke then I don't go there. Is it worth getting lung cancer through second hand smoke? Hell no. But if someone is stupid enough to continue to patronize a place that is a health risk to them then they get what they deserve.


I have left restraunts before for many reasons. One of them is because the smoke was offensive because there wasn't enough ventilation in the smoking section. I let the hostess know why we were leaving. I haven't been back since then. Will they miss me? No. But I wont miss them either.

We have choices. We can spend our money and our time where we want to. If you choose to do it in a smoke filled environment then it's your choice and not the governments.





.
 
Originally posted by vat_man
Give up smoking at once. It will kill you.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

Too bad it's not just that easy.

And i agree with the smoking ban. It's a step somewhere to less somkers here...
 
Starting July 1st, smoking is banned in all public establishments where by 25% or more of their total revenue is generated by food sales in the State of Florida. Yes, I voted for it (somehow, there was a rider on the bill that made Jeb Bush governor again, though). I'm not a big bar-hopper; I'll have an occasional drink at a restaurant or a friend's house.

I fully agree, if you can't eat without needing an immediate smoke, you have a serious problem with your life, and you need not hurt others with second-hand smoke. This is not about government stepping in; the people have spoken, and we got what the majority of the population wanted...for once. :)

However, I think the 50-foot radius/distance rule should also be enforced in public places, it does little good to get swamped by a dozen smokers as soon as you exit the office or store. Make a designated smoking area in a park, or on public property, too, because it's harder to enjoy the little bit of outdoors one encounters in an urban or suburban area without someone infesting the air with cigarette smoke.
 
Originally posted by DGB454
I wonder how much cigarette smoke contributes to others health problems compaired to ohhhh....let's say ...factories pumping out polution into the air or autos doing the same thing
Click to expand...


I hope you're not likening the two.

Every year in the United States, about 450,000 people die due to smoking - that's twenty percent of all deaths. I couldn't come across ONE non-self-afflicted factory or automobile pollution death searching Google.

The health risk from secondhand smoke is about the exact same - the only difference is that you're not inhaling as often as the person doing the actual smoking. You're still getting every one of the same effects.

Anyone who has to put anyhing down to go and get a drink at a bar clearly has addiction problems and can't perform other simple tasks in life.
Click to expand...

I said that a smoker who can't sit down for twenty minutes to have a drink clearly has no self-control about their addiction. Being able to walk away from something to have one drink isn't similarly related to not being able to be smoke-free for twenty minutes.
 
Originally posted by GilesGuthrie
No.

Personally, I think that trying to vote with your wallet is akin to cutting off your nose to spite your face.

And this from someone who couldn't get access to any decent consumer electronics until the 1990s due to his parent's refusal to buy Japanese products...
Click to expand...

What decent consumer electronics were there in the 1980's?
 
Originally posted by M5Power
Every year in the United States, about 450,000 people die due to smoking - that's twenty percent of all deaths.
Click to expand...
I find it hard to believe that one fifth of all deaths are caused by any one thing. Will I bother to check it out? Nope.

...a smoker who can't sit down for twenty minutes to have a drink clearly has no self-control about their addiction. Being able to walk away from something to have one drink isn't similarly related to not being able to be smoke-free for twenty minutes.
Click to expand...
Some people like to enjoy their boose and a smoke together. A Bombay and a Nat Sherman, for example, or a Scotch and Cuban. It's part of the scene, as it were, and I don't understand what the big deal is. Some people only smoke when they drink.
 
There's nothing more that I would love than to see all the cig smoke dissapear from the bar scene, it's groose, it affects my systems, it's dirty, and not smoking anymore, I could really enjoy not having to inhale it. But as it was stated before, milefile said I think, that the place of business should be able to decide if smoking should be allowed or not. Basically what these laws are telling us is that we cannot decided for ourselves what is or isn't a healthy environment. Better yet, they should have bars that wern't allowed to serve alchohol, and casino's that wern't allowed to have gambling machines...

It all makes such perfect sence...
 
Originally posted by milefile
I find it hard to believe that one fifth of all deaths are caused by any one thing. Will I bother to check it out? Nope.
Click to expand...


:lol:

I found it slightly hard to believe too, but I looked it up on Google. And Google never lies.
 
Originally posted by M5Power


I hope you're not likening the two.

Every year in the United States, about 450,000 people die due to smoking - that's twenty percent of all deaths. I couldn't come across ONE non-self-afflicted factory or automobile pollution death searching Google.

The health risk from secondhand smoke is about the exact same - the only difference is that you're not inhaling as often as the person doing the actual smoking. You're still getting every one of the same effects.
Click to expand...

The reason it's hard to find statistics on how many people die from factory and auto emissions is because it's hard to link them to a specific cause of death. Think about it though...How many cars are on the road and how many factories are there? There is no way that all those smokers are creating more pollution than the other 2. If someone dies from lung problems or even "natural causes" how do you know that polution from emissions didn't cause it or at the very least speed it along?

Don't get me wrong..I'm not an advocate of smoking but I am an advocate of choice and non government interferience.
 
Originally posted by M5Power
The health risk from secondhand smoke is about the exact same - the only difference is that you're not inhaling as often as the person doing the actual smoking. You're still getting every one of the same effects.[/B]
Click to expand...

Indeed - and the smoker has the benefit of the filter.

There's a few newbies around here, so I'll give you some background on my personal axe to grind. If you've heard this before, move on to the next post.
[rant]
I'm 32. In Feb last year I lost my mother due to a smoking related lung cancer. She quit smoking in 1983. She was 59.

In Nov '97 I lost my father due to smoking related stomach/liver cancer. He gave up smoking in 1988. He was 59.

Both sides of the family have a very good history of longetivity - except for the smokers. I don't smoke. I used to have one say once every 1-2 years if I was out drinking, basically because of the cool 'drunk' effect cigarettes give when you're not used to them. Don't do that anymore.

If you plan to have kids, and smoke, think about this. Do you want your kids to bury you when they're in their late 20's/early 30's?

I'm reasonably successful in life - career's okay, got a nice house, nice car, fantastic partner. Shame the folks aren't around to share. I would give almost anything for one more round of golf with the old man, or for mum to come up to Sydney to stay with us - it's a pain I have to deal with everyday.

Just stop. Stop right now. Your addiction is in your head.
[/rant]
 
Originally posted by DGB454
The reason it's hard to find statistics on how many people die from factory and auto emissions is because it's hard to link them to a specific cause of death. Think about it though...How many cars are on the road and how many factories are there? There is no way that all those smokers are creating more pollution than the other 2. If someone dies from lung problems or even "natural causes" how do you know that polution from emissions didn't cause it or at the very least speed it along?
Click to expand...

"Natural causes" such as what? I'd think the only way a person can die from auto or factory emissions is lung cancer or carbon monoxide poisoning. Lung cancer, of course, is a cause of death, not a secondary illness contributing to death, and you'd have to be exposed to car and factory smoke for an extremely regular amount to get it from that. Carbon monoxide poisoning is almost always self-inflicted.
 
I’m going to preface this with the fact that I don’t smoke, I think it’s bad for your health, and that I think second hand smoke is dangerous if consumed in a sizeable quantity over a lengthy time period.

The cigarette smoking ban is terrible. If you owned a business, how would you like the government telling you that you could not serve customers who smoked? What about customers who ate fatty goods? Those can kill too? What about rock concerts? The noise generated at those concerts can cause permanent hearing damage, and not only to the people at the concert. What about the people that work at the concert, or who walk nearby? I’ll tell you why there aren’t bans on loud music, because people have a choice whether they want to work someplace that has a lot of noise, whether they want to relax someplace that could hurt their hearing, and yes, even whether they want to walk near a place that can hurt their hearing.

The same goes for smoking at a crowded restaurant. Nobody is going to get cancer from being exposed to a few minutes of second hand smoke, the few minutes it requires to decide to go someplace else.
 
There should be an all out ban on smoking. Make the people who smoke go through the three day withdrawl and liv etheir lives smoke-free. Smoking kills you, and to force other people to have to deal with it is wrong.
 
Ok..
There should be a total ban on all alcohol. Make people who drink go through a three day withdrawl and live their lives alcohol free. Drinking kills you, and to force other people to have to deal with it is wrong.

;)

Not trying to be a smart a$$ but it's kind of the same thing.
 
All of this "all out ban" stuff sounds pretty totalitarian to me. I won't bother to mention other times in history when like-minded perspectives have held sway because it will only be seen as extreme and incredible; the results were disasterous nonetheless. In America we are supposedly free to choose, even when others don't like our choices. There are considerate smokers who understand that it affects others and go to great lengths to eliminate the burden. And yet it has been repeated here that these poeple should be coerced into behaving according to another's wishes. Then you justify it by saying it is unhealthy and/or dangerous. Fine. Nobody will dispute that. So why do we not ban all unhealthy and/or dangerous things? If a restaurateur wants to open a restaurant and make it smoke free, fine. Then people who like to hang out and have a smoke and some coffee after their meal will not go there. Conversely, if a bar owner wants his patrons to be able to enjoy a smoke with their drinks (some people only smoke when they drink), or be with those that do, then he should be able to. Those who won't tolerate smoke go elsewhere. It's called a free society where the public has choices.

I think I will open a smoking house. I will sell tobacco and related products, and just so happen to serve drinks, as well. The entire point of the business will be to provide tobacco and a pleasant environment to consume your purchase. No non-smoker would ever want to go there, nor would they have any reason to. And yet whiny trouble makers who can't mind their own business will still cry "all out ban!" because pompous anti-smoking rhetoric is all the rage nowadays.

Obviously smoking at work and in public places shouldn't be allowed because in these instances it is not acceptable to favor one preference over another. But private businesses should make this assesment on their own, not have it legislated for them only to be coerced into compliance.
 
Originally posted by DGB454
Ok..
There should be a total ban on all alcohol. ;)

Not trying to be a smart a$$ but...
Click to expand...
...but you can't drink alcohol anywhere you choose, either. Try cracking open a beer can in a courthouse, your public workplace, a bank, a grocery store, school...why shouldn't it be any different with cigarettes?
 
Well here in Winnipeg smoking is banned in ALL indoor public places. From a non-smokers point of view i think its great.
 

Latest Posts

Back