Outdoor smoking bans

[KittenKoder]

That's just whacko conspiracy talk designed to distract us from the real problem.

you know what scares the shit outta me? babies! little liberal babies! What can we do about this phobia?

Lop off yer head?

How do you know my secret cure for cancer?

 

[DamnYankee]

put every dime collected from tobacco taxes into treating lung cancer and helping smokers quit. That will change a few minds

Wouldn't have a problem with that if Congress put it's money where it mouth is.

Family Smoking Prevention and
Tobacco Control Act (H.R. 1108) 2007
The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act was introduced during the 110th Congress on February 15, 2007 as (H.R. 1108) by Reps. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) and Tom Davis (R-Va.). A companion measure (S.625) was introduced in the Senate by Sens. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) and John Cornyn (R-Tex.).
Bill Summary
The act would give the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) greater authority to regulate tobacco products in an effort to assist current smokers with quitting and prevent tobacco manufacturers from enticing youth to smoke.[1] According to the its sponsors, the measure would aim to give the FDA the legal authority it needs to:

Prevent tobacco advertising that targets children
Prevent the sale of tobacco products to minors
Help smokers overcome their addiction
Identify and reduce the toxic constituents of tobacco products and tobacco smoke for those who continue to be exposed to them
Regulate claims about reduced risk tobacco products
Prevent the tobacco industry from misleading the public about the dangers of smoking.[2]
This would include establishing stronger warning labels on tobacco products, more stringent regulations of the advertising and sales of tobacco products, the gradual reduction and removal of hazardous ingredients from cigarettes, and new standards for tobacco products labeled "reduced risk" or "low tar."
Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (H.R. 1108) 2007 - SourceWatch

Starting with PREVENTION.

That said, I don't believe in legislating BEHAVIOR, particularly when there are generally ulterior motives. For instance, here in Jersey, there was an attempt to ban drivers from smoking in their vehicles under the pretext that it was a "distracting" behavior, i.e. cell phone use, eating, applying make-up while driving. It was bullshit. The sponsor of the bill had just lost his wife to cancer.

 

[KittenKoder]

I don't care if they make it harder for people to get started, they just need to stop changing the rules in the middle of the fucking game. If it wasn't legal when I started, I would not have started ... but now I'm addicted, a bit late. Also, they still don't have a method for everyone. Give me thirty days, locked up, without any way of gong near tobacco, and it would have to be that long. I'd be able to avoid it then, but I'm a weak willed bitch, I can't do it otherwise.

 

[Big Black Dog]

Please leave us smokers alone. We'll kill ourselves off in good time. This whole smoking issue is just one more part of your life that the government (local or state) trys to control. If smoking is such a bad thing quit taxing it to death and just outlaw it altogether, close the tobacco companies down and be done with it. Can't have it both ways. Our beloved (sic) President smokes. I don't know who can be the most obnoxious at times, the smoker or the anti-smoker who makes an ass out of himself to prove his politically correct point.

 

[Zoom-boing]

put every dime collected from tobacco taxes into treating lung cancer and helping smokers quit. That will change a few minds

Well shit dill, then how will uncle pay for s-chip?

 

[Zoom-boing]

Smoking in State Parks has been outlawed here in Maine.

I don't want to have an allergy attack because someone is smoking near me. Smoke in your own home.

They also have banned gay sex in State Parks. Do that in your own home as well.

You do know you have options. Ask the smoker to stop smoking or . . . . move away from the smoker. Government controlling what we put in our bodies because they think it's wrong is what's wrong.

 

[xotoxi]

Still no proven evidence that second hand hurts anyone. None, zero, ziltch, only speculation and circumstantial.

Uh...come on over here and smoke in my presence if you want to have some fun watching someone sneeze uncontrollably.

Difference, I'm allergic to dairy, but almost all foods contain it, so your point?

Do you dairy allergies act up when someone sitting at a picnic bench 20 feet away from you is drinking a glass of milk?

I didn't think so.

 

[KittenKoder]

Uh...come on over here and smoke in my presence if you want to have some fun watching someone sneeze uncontrollably.

Difference, I'm allergic to dairy, but almost all foods contain it, so your point?

Do you dairy allergies act up when someone sitting at a picnic bench 20 feet away from you is drinking a glass of milk?

I didn't think so.

But it's in almost all foods, or did you miss that. Can I get all dairy banned just because there is a chance I will consume it without knowing it .... or do I have to actively avoid it like a smart person?

 

[xotoxi]

Okay, I'm deathly allergic to bee poison, so since many others share this allergy we should kill all the bees.

Many of us are allergic to pollen ... we should destroy all the flowers in the world.

More people die of car accidents, let's ban those while we're at it.

Sex spreads more disease than anything else, so we have to ban that ... hell, I'm all for that one.

Almost half the population is lactose intolerant (to some degree) so let's ban dairy.

Just as many people die from alcohol poisoning, gotta ban that.

Almost everyone who has died of a heart attack has walked more than a mile a day, so we gotta ban walking.

Hmm ... I know there are a million more connections we can make.

Meat causes a lot of illness, so we have to ban that to.

That's a silly argument. Maybe we should build a tent over the entire country so we don't get skin cancer from the sun.

Most of the things that you mentioned (such as bee and pollen allergies, and lactose intolerance) are the responsibility of the afflicted to avoid them. Generally these unfortunate folks do not have others forcing milk down their throats, shoving flowers in their faces, or dropping bees down their shirt.

However, when it comes to smoking, those who are allergic are affected directly by the actions of another person. Should people who are allergic to cigarette smoke just stay home and indoors to avoid people who are smoking?

Or maybe those that smoke can have an ounce of self control and cease smoking for an hour while they are having a picnic in the park, so that everyone can enjoy it?

 

[xotoxi]

Difference, I'm allergic to dairy, but almost all foods contain it, so your point?

Do you dairy allergies act up when someone sitting at a picnic bench 20 feet away from you is drinking a glass of milk?

I didn't think so.

But it's in almost all foods, or did you miss that. Can I get all dairy banned just because there is a chance I will consume it without knowing it .... or do I have to actively avoid it like a smart person?

Are you suggesting that I actively avoid public places where people are smoking? Maybe I'll just go to the State Park beach after the sun sets and the gate is locked.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Okay, I'm deathly allergic to bee poison, so since many others share this allergy we should kill all the bees.

Many of us are allergic to pollen ... we should destroy all the flowers in the world.

More people die of car accidents, let's ban those while we're at it.

Sex spreads more disease than anything else, so we have to ban that ... hell, I'm all for that one.

Almost half the population is lactose intolerant (to some degree) so let's ban dairy.

Just as many people die from alcohol poisoning, gotta ban that.

Almost everyone who has died of a heart attack has walked more than a mile a day, so we gotta ban walking.

Hmm ... I know there are a million more connections we can make.

Meat causes a lot of illness, so we have to ban that to.

That's a silly argument. Maybe we should build a tent over the entire country so we don't get skin cancer from the sun.

Most of the things that you mentioned (such as bee and pollen allergies, and lactose intolerance) are the responsibility of the afflicted to avoid them. Generally these unfortunate folks do not have others forcing milk down their throats, shoving flowers in their faces, or dropping bees down their shirt.

However, when it comes to smoking, those who are allergic are affected directly by the actions of another person. Should people who are allergic to cigarette smoke just stay home and indoors to avoid people who are smoking?

Or maybe those that smoke can have an ounce of self control and cease smoking for an hour while they are having a picnic in the park, so that everyone can enjoy it?

How about both and the government stays out of the whole damn thing?

 

[KittenKoder]

Do you dairy allergies act up when someone sitting at a picnic bench 20 feet away from you is drinking a glass of milk?

I didn't think so.

But it's in almost all foods, or did you miss that. Can I get all dairy banned just because there is a chance I will consume it without knowing it .... or do I have to actively avoid it like a smart person?

Are you suggesting that I actively avoid public places where people are smoking? Maybe I'll just go to the State Park beach after the sun sets and the gate is locked.

Well ... there use to be smoking and non-smoking sections ... if left at that, fine, and yes you could avoid it. But an all out ban is wrong, you know it. It's no different than banning anything. Caffeine because it's addictive, mind altering, and dangerous, and it's in half the drinks you consume (a TON in energy drinks). Banning perfume because many of us can't be near it, do they have perfume and non-perfume sections for us with allergies to that garbage? What about car exhaust, deadlier than cigarettes and completely unavoidable, maybe we should ban all vehicles? Then there's hairspray ... and you already mentioned the tent idea ... no, any ban is wrong if there is no logical reason. But since non-smokers have pushed this too far, then many of us smokers will have to find a way to push back in the same extremist fashion ... like Anarchy, or perhaps push to get asbestos back. If people had left it at the compromise, it would have been fine, but you didn't, did you? Places are banning it in people own homes just because it might (like a 1% chance) blow over to the neighbors. Banning from outdoors is completely stupid. Worse, all this shit is based on myths and prejudice, nothing more.

 

[dilloduck]

put every dime collected from tobacco taxes into treating lung cancer and helping smokers quit. That will change a few minds

Well shit dill, then how will uncle pay for s-chip?

They don't want people to stop smoking or they would ban it. Simple as that---they take smoker's money using the guise of protecting others.

 

[xotoxi]

Okay, I'm deathly allergic to bee poison, so since many others share this allergy we should kill all the bees.

Many of us are allergic to pollen ... we should destroy all the flowers in the world.

More people die of car accidents, let's ban those while we're at it.

Sex spreads more disease than anything else, so we have to ban that ... hell, I'm all for that one.

Almost half the population is lactose intolerant (to some degree) so let's ban dairy.

Just as many people die from alcohol poisoning, gotta ban that.

Almost everyone who has died of a heart attack has walked more than a mile a day, so we gotta ban walking.

Hmm ... I know there are a million more connections we can make.

Meat causes a lot of illness, so we have to ban that to.

That's a silly argument. Maybe we should build a tent over the entire country so we don't get skin cancer from the sun.

Most of the things that you mentioned (such as bee and pollen allergies, and lactose intolerance) are the responsibility of the afflicted to avoid them. Generally these unfortunate folks do not have others forcing milk down their throats, shoving flowers in their faces, or dropping bees down their shirt.

However, when it comes to smoking, those who are allergic are affected directly by the actions of another person. Should people who are allergic to cigarette smoke just stay home and indoors to avoid people who are smoking?

Or maybe those that smoke can have an ounce of self control and cease smoking for an hour while they are having a picnic in the park, so that everyone can enjoy it?

How about both and the government stays out of the whole damn thing?

Since it is a state park, its kind of hard for the government to stay out of it.

 

[dilloduck]

That's a silly argument. Maybe we should build a tent over the entire country so we don't get skin cancer from the sun.

Most of the things that you mentioned (such as bee and pollen allergies, and lactose intolerance) are the responsibility of the afflicted to avoid them. Generally these unfortunate folks do not have others forcing milk down their throats, shoving flowers in their faces, or dropping bees down their shirt.

However, when it comes to smoking, those who are allergic are affected directly by the actions of another person. Should people who are allergic to cigarette smoke just stay home and indoors to avoid people who are smoking?

Or maybe those that smoke can have an ounce of self control and cease smoking for an hour while they are having a picnic in the park, so that e WH veryone can enjoy it?

How about both and the government stays out of the whole damn thing?

Since it is a state park, its kind of hard for the government to stay out of it.

They tax the shit out of tobacco even if you stay at home and smoke it. Do you enjoy using smoker's money?

 

[xotoxi]

But it's in almost all foods, or did you miss that. Can I get all dairy banned just because there is a chance I will consume it without knowing it .... or do I have to actively avoid it like a smart person?

Are you suggesting that I actively avoid public places where people are smoking? Maybe I'll just go to the State Park beach after the sun sets and the gate is locked.

Well ... there use to be smoking and non-smoking sections ... if left at that, fine, and yes you could avoid it. But an all out ban is wrong, you know it. It's no different than banning anything. Caffeine because it's addictive, mind altering, and dangerous, and it's in half the drinks you consume (a TON in energy drinks). Banning perfume because many of us can't be near it, do they have perfume and non-perfume sections for us with allergies to that garbage? What about car exhaust, deadlier than cigarettes and completely unavoidable, maybe we should ban all vehicles? Then there's hairspray ... and you already mentioned the tent idea ... no, any ban is wrong if there is no logical reason. But since non-smokers have pushed this too far, then many of us smokers will have to find a way to push back in the same extremist fashion ... like Anarchy, or perhaps push to get asbestos back. If people had left it at the compromise, it would have been fine, but you didn't, did you? Places are banning it in people own homes just because it might (like a 1% chance) blow over to the neighbors. Banning from outdoors is completely stupid. Worse, all this shit is based on myths and prejudice, nothing more.

Actually, I didn't have anything to do with banning it. In fact, I don't really have that strong an opinion. I do have allergies to it, but not too bad unless you blast me with it.

It is nice to be able to smell nature when outdoors, rather than cigarette smoke, but I rarely go to the state parks anyway.

 

[KittenKoder]

Are you suggesting that I actively avoid public places where people are smoking? Maybe I'll just go to the State Park beach after the sun sets and the gate is locked.

Well ... there use to be smoking and non-smoking sections ... if left at that, fine, and yes you could avoid it. But an all out ban is wrong, you know it. It's no different than banning anything. Caffeine because it's addictive, mind altering, and dangerous, and it's in half the drinks you consume (a TON in energy drinks). Banning perfume because many of us can't be near it, do they have perfume and non-perfume sections for us with allergies to that garbage? What about car exhaust, deadlier than cigarettes and completely unavoidable, maybe we should ban all vehicles? Then there's hairspray ... and you already mentioned the tent idea ... no, any ban is wrong if there is no logical reason. But since non-smokers have pushed this too far, then many of us smokers will have to find a way to push back in the same extremist fashion ... like Anarchy, or perhaps push to get asbestos back. If people had left it at the compromise, it would have been fine, but you didn't, did you? Places are banning it in people own homes just because it might (like a 1% chance) blow over to the neighbors. Banning from outdoors is completely stupid. Worse, all this shit is based on myths and prejudice, nothing more.

Actually, I didn't have anything to do with banning it. In fact, I don't really have that strong an opinion. I do have allergies to it, but not too bad unless you blast me with it.

It is nice to be able to smell nature when outdoors, rather than cigarette smoke, but I rarely go to the state parks anyway.

If you can't smell fresh air near a smoker, you are standing too close to the smoker anyway. Someone stands that close to me, unless I know them, the cigarette will be the last thing they would have to worry about.

 

[Luissa]

In some parts of the U.S., including Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, Hawaii County, Minneapolis and Abilene, Texas, there are ordinances that prevent golfers from enjoying a smoke while on the course.

Earlier this year, park and recreation officials in Spokane, Wash., attempted to put a smoking ban on its four municipal golf courses, but an outcry from citizens forced the parks board to stay the decision.

"We had a policy in place at our parks, but after hearing from a group called 'Teen's against Smoking,' we decided to include golf courses," said Spokane parks and recreation spokesman Nancy Goodspeed, who earned a Masters degree from Penn State University in the mid-1980s. "When the board passed it in March, we heard it from everyone, even nonsmokers who felt their personal rights were being infringed. So, that's why the board backed off. We're going to look for more information and may address it at a later date."
...
At last year's U.S. Open at Torrey Pines in San Diego, the pro golfers were the only people permitted to smoke. San Diego has a no-smoking ordinance in place at parks, beaches and public golf courses.

I'm telling ya folks, if tabacco taxes weren't such a cash cow, it would already be outlawed entirely.


Mention of smoking ban fires up golfers - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

By the way the whole issue of not smoking in parks is also going away in Spokane. The ban might be in place but no one is enforcing it in Riverfront Park where it is only in place as of now. I smoke a cigarette last week in the park and no one told me not to. They realized what horse shit it all was.
A former politician said some asshole thing about golfers having more right than the lower middle class people who use Riverfront Park and the ban pretty much disappeared.

 

[KittenKoder]

In some parts of the U.S., including Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, Hawaii County, Minneapolis and Abilene, Texas, there are ordinances that prevent golfers from enjoying a smoke while on the course.

Earlier this year, park and recreation officials in Spokane, Wash., attempted to put a smoking ban on its four municipal golf courses, but an outcry from citizens forced the parks board to stay the decision.

"We had a policy in place at our parks, but after hearing from a group called 'Teen's against Smoking,' we decided to include golf courses," said Spokane parks and recreation spokesman Nancy Goodspeed, who earned a Masters degree from Penn State University in the mid-1980s. "When the board passed it in March, we heard it from everyone, even nonsmokers who felt their personal rights were being infringed. So, that's why the board backed off. We're going to look for more information and may address it at a later date."
...
At last year's U.S. Open at Torrey Pines in San Diego, the pro golfers were the only people permitted to smoke. San Diego has a no-smoking ordinance in place at parks, beaches and public golf courses.

I'm telling ya folks, if tabacco taxes weren't such a cash cow, it would already be outlawed entirely.


Mention of smoking ban fires up golfers - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

By the way the whole issue of not smoking in parks is also going away in Spokane. The ban might be in place but no one is enforcing it in Riverfront Park where it is only in place as of now. I smoke a cigarette last week in the park and no one told me not to. They realized what horse shit it all was.
A former politician said some asshole thing about golfers having more right than the lower middle class people who use Riverfront Park and the ban pretty much disappeared.

Cops in Seattle haven't been enforcing the public street ban here either. They are spinning their wheels with these, just using them as ways to propagate their myths and phony statistics, much like the "green machine" does.

 

[dilloduck]

I'm telling ya folks, if tabacco taxes weren't such a cash cow, it would already be outlawed entirely.


Mention of smoking ban fires up golfers - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

By the way the whole issue of not smoking in parks is also going away in Spokane. The ban might be in place but no one is enforcing it in Riverfront Park where it is only in place as of now. I smoke a cigarette last week in the park and no one told me not to. They realized what horse shit it all was.
A former politician said some asshole thing about golfers having more right than the lower middle class people who use Riverfront Park and the ban pretty much disappeared.

Cops in Seattle haven't been enforcing the public street ban here either. They are spinning their wheels with these, just using them as ways to propagate their myths and phony statistics, much like the "green machine" does.

scare tactics to disuade the chicken shits