Smoker's - A Place to Work & Shop?

[Skull Pilot]

You don't have to patronize any establishment that chooses to allow smoking do you?

Evidently.......neither do smokers

I'm not the one spreading stench

So why do you care if a bar allows smoking when you don't have to patronize that establishment?

Why should the decision of passing up a meal or bar experience be mine, when I am not the one engaging in offensive behavior?

The smoker can decide when he will smoke

So it's all about you all the time huh?

Why do you have the right to tell a business owner what he can or can't allow on his own property?

Seriously IDGAF if a place wants to allow smoking I just won't go there. I'm not so thin skinned as to take it personally I guess

Why does a smoker have a right to expose his filth to others anytime he pleases?

He doesn't. There are plenty of businesses that do not allow smoking what do you care if some other businesses do?

Why does a business owner not have the right to choose to cater to smokers if he so wishes?

You just don't have to patronize that business do you?.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Should people be allowed to have work environments and run business that permit smoking?

If I'm a smoker and I want people to feel free to do so also and I own a business, should I have the right to do so? what if I want to run an establishment where I want people to smoke?

Or is it ok for the Government to decide this?

Let's see what the Book that establishes the government says:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common Defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
​

Nope. You still cannot get around the laws of physics. People breathe air. There is no job or business that requires smoking. It's the same reason you can't just go dump antifreeze into your local water supply. Does the government, in its role as guardian of the public welfare, not have the right to prohibit you doing that?

Why would you "want people to smoke"? In your business or anywhere? Are you a (drug pusher) tobacco company? Would you "want" people to shoot heroin?

That's an extremely modern and incorrect application to the phrase Promote the General Welfare, an application (use of the phrase) never intended by the founding fathers.
The Founders made it clear that the general welfare was only referring to specifically enumerated powers granted within the Constitution, as Jefferson, Madison, Hamilton, and the Federalist Papers stated.

Is keeping the air (relatively) unpolluted "promoting the general welfare", or is it not? Seems a fairly straightforward equivalence, IMHO. Where might be the exclusionary language?

Cars pollute the air far more than does smoking a cigarette.

And no one is forcing to enter a building where people are smoking are they?

If that is the case, I would oppose you operating your car in a bar or restaurant

Is anyone forcing you to enter a business that allows smoking?

Seriously if there is a place in your town that you have never and will never patronize WTF do you care if the owner wants to allow smoking or not?

 

[rightwinger]

Evidently.......neither do smokers

I'm not the one spreading stench

So why do you care if a bar allows smoking when you don't have to patronize that establishment?

Why should the decision of passing up a meal or bar experience be mine, when I am not the one engaging in offensive behavior?

The smoker can decide when he will smoke

So it's all about you all the time huh?

Why do you have the right to tell a business owner what he can or can't allow on his own property?

Seriously IDGAF if a place wants to allow smoking I just won't go there. I'm not so thin skinned as to take it personally I guess

Why does a smoker have a right to expose his filth to others anytime he pleases?

He doesn't. There are plenty of businesses that do not allow smoking what do you care if some other businesses do?

Why does a business owner not have the right to choose to cater to smokers if he so wishes?

You just don't have to patronize that business do you?.

Because a business owner does not have the right to decide to expose his customers and employees to second hand smoke

You run a business...doesn't mean you get to ignore local ordinances...

 

[rightwinger]

Let's see what the Book that establishes the government says:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common Defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
​

Nope. You still cannot get around the laws of physics. People breathe air. There is no job or business that requires smoking. It's the same reason you can't just go dump antifreeze into your local water supply. Does the government, in its role as guardian of the public welfare, not have the right to prohibit you doing that?

Why would you "want people to smoke"? In your business or anywhere? Are you a (drug pusher) tobacco company? Would you "want" people to shoot heroin?

That's an extremely modern and incorrect application to the phrase Promote the General Welfare, an application (use of the phrase) never intended by the founding fathers.
The Founders made it clear that the general welfare was only referring to specifically enumerated powers granted within the Constitution, as Jefferson, Madison, Hamilton, and the Federalist Papers stated.

Is keeping the air (relatively) unpolluted "promoting the general welfare", or is it not? Seems a fairly straightforward equivalence, IMHO. Where might be the exclusionary language?

Cars pollute the air far more than does smoking a cigarette.

And no one is forcing to enter a building where people are smoking are they?

If that is the case, I would oppose you operating your car in a bar or restaurant

Is anyone forcing you to enter a business that allows smoking?

Seriously if there is a place in your town that you have never and will never patronize WTF do you care if the owner wants to allow smoking or not?

Because I have a right to patronize any business without being exposed to a dangerous environment.
Smokers can decide where and when they smoke
I don't have a choice where and when I breathe

 

[Skull Pilot]

So why do you care if a bar allows smoking when you don't have to patronize that establishment?

Why should the decision of passing up a meal or bar experience be mine, when I am not the one engaging in offensive behavior?

The smoker can decide when he will smoke

So it's all about you all the time huh?

Why do you have the right to tell a business owner what he can or can't allow on his own property?

Seriously IDGAF if a place wants to allow smoking I just won't go there. I'm not so thin skinned as to take it personally I guess

Why does a smoker have a right to expose his filth to others anytime he pleases?

He doesn't. There are plenty of businesses that do not allow smoking what do you care if some other businesses do?

Why does a business owner not have the right to choose to cater to smokers if he so wishes?

You just don't have to patronize that business do you?.

Because a business owner does not have the right to decide to expose his customers and employees to second hand smoke

You run a business...doesn't mean you get to ignore local ordinances...

Why shouldn't a business owner be able to cater to any particular customer niche he chooses?

Like I said you do not have to patronize that business do you?

Your answer is akin to the

"there's no real reason for it it's just our policy" doctrine of big government.

 

[Skull Pilot]

That's an extremely modern and incorrect application to the phrase Promote the General Welfare, an application (use of the phrase) never intended by the founding fathers.
The Founders made it clear that the general welfare was only referring to specifically enumerated powers granted within the Constitution, as Jefferson, Madison, Hamilton, and the Federalist Papers stated.

Is keeping the air (relatively) unpolluted "promoting the general welfare", or is it not? Seems a fairly straightforward equivalence, IMHO. Where might be the exclusionary language?

Cars pollute the air far more than does smoking a cigarette.

And no one is forcing to enter a building where people are smoking are they?

If that is the case, I would oppose you operating your car in a bar or restaurant

Is anyone forcing you to enter a business that allows smoking?

Seriously if there is a place in your town that you have never and will never patronize WTF do you care if the owner wants to allow smoking or not?

Because I have a right to patronize any business without being exposed to a dangerous environment.
Smokers can decide where and when they smoke
I don't have a choice where and when I breathe

You have a right to choose where you do business too don't you?

If it is clearly stated that a bar allows smoking why is it any skin off your nose to go to a bar that doesn't allow smoking?

 

[rightwinger]

Is keeping the air (relatively) unpolluted "promoting the general welfare", or is it not? Seems a fairly straightforward equivalence, IMHO. Where might be the exclusionary language?

Cars pollute the air far more than does smoking a cigarette.

And no one is forcing to enter a building where people are smoking are they?

If that is the case, I would oppose you operating your car in a bar or restaurant

Is anyone forcing you to enter a business that allows smoking?

Seriously if there is a place in your town that you have never and will never patronize WTF do you care if the owner wants to allow smoking or not?

Because I have a right to patronize any business without being exposed to a dangerous environment.
Smokers can decide where and when they smoke
I don't have a choice where and when I breathe

You have a right to choose where you do business too don't you?

If it is clearly stated that a bar allows smoking why is it any skin off your nose to go to a bar that doesn't allow smoking?

You have to conform with all local ordinances when you open a business.
Cusomers do not get to agree to patronize your business that does not conform

 

[Ringel05]

That's an extremely modern and incorrect application to the phrase Promote the General Welfare, an application (use of the phrase) never intended by the founding fathers.
The Founders made it clear that the general welfare was only referring to specifically enumerated powers granted within the Constitution, as Jefferson, Madison, Hamilton, and the Federalist Papers stated.

There is no federal ban on public smoking.....it is done at the state level

Bingo.

I see. If that was the point I missed that distinction. To this day I have yet to see the merit in all this angsty parsing of whether something is "federal level" or "state level". Whether it's Romneycare or Obamacare that forces me to buy something I don't want, the end result is the same; given the event, the question of which level it comes from just doesn't seem the most important thing in the world -- or even relevant.

What is the point of such hair-splitting anyway? Government is government.

Noooo, the States have specific powers and the Federal has specific powers.

No doubt.

zzzzzzzzzzz.....

Welllllll, since you've decided twice now to be a disingenuous prick you won't mind if I return the favor, will ya Sputz.

Put on your big girl panties and grab all the balm you can find, you're gonna need it.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

I find people who fret and worry about their exposure to smoke and other things are usually less healthy than you'd think just because of how much time they spend worrying about their health. Whereas we smokers are usually a lot better off. Ironic but true. We're far less stressed-out than those who worry about things like catching the odd whiff of smoke or how many calories are in their food.

Like my Mom who's always trying to stay thin despite being in her mid 60s. As I tease her, "It's probably too late to be thinking about a modelling career."

Smokers I have known throughout my life age prematurely and start having health problems in their fifties.

But ...hey

At least you got to look cool while puffing away your life

Our genes determine when we keel over and die more than any lifestyle factors like diet, exercise, or smoking. It's why the one-size fits all diet recommendations don't work for everyone. Some people eat crap yet maintain unexpectedly good health, while others who do eat well, exercise, and don't smoke die when the anneurysm in their heads pops one day, or more amusingly, they get hit by a car while jogging.

 

[martybegan]

Expecting every single bar to cater to your desire is sure as hell prissy. If a person wants to open a bar that allows smoking, what's the problem?

GO SOMEWHERE ELSE.

Expecting to breathe oxygen is a "desire" to be "catered to"?
You're not getting this, are you...

I'm getting it fine. you are an uptight, controlling jack off.

Expecting to breathe oxygen is being an "uptight controlling jack off [sic]?

No, I don't think you are.

What do you breathe, sir?

So cigarette smoke impacts the oxygen % in the air in a bar to a noticeable degree?

Again, as long as the bar posts a sign that says "smoking allowed" where is the harm to you?

I'm not debating that. I'm debating your characterization of oxygen-breathing as "prissy".

Why don't you show us how to breathe O2 like a he-man.

No, my characterization was of demanding every restaurant cater to your needs, and screw everyone else, as prissy.

Reading, learn to do it.

 

[martybegan]

So why do you care if a bar allows smoking when you don't have to patronize that establishment?

Why should the decision of passing up a meal or bar experience be mine, when I am not the one engaging in offensive behavior?

The smoker can decide when he will smoke

Why should an owner, if he wants to create a bar that caters to smokers, be forced to accommodate your prissy ass?

A bar owner does not get to decide whether he should serve minors, maintain a fire hazard or exceed occupancy limits........or allow smoking

smoking isn't the same thing, particularly if everyone involved is a willing participant.

Now someone, somewhere is probably having a good time, so go scurry off and figure out a way to ruin that, in the name of helping them.

If occupancy is 100 persons, you can't admit 150 even if everyone agrees to take the risk

yes, as long as it isn't reported to the fire marshal or something bad happens sure you can.

See, that's the issue with most of the laws like this, someone has to not be along for it for it to come to the attention of the regulating authorities, or something bad has to happen for them to do something ex post facto.

 

[Ringel05]

Should people be allowed to have work environments and run business that permit smoking?

If I'm a smoker and I want people to feel free to do so also and I own a business, should I have the right to do so? what if I want to run an establishment where I want people to smoke?

Or is it ok for the Government to decide this?

Let's see what the Book that establishes the government says:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common Defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
​

Nope. You still cannot get around the laws of physics. People breathe air. There is no job or business that requires smoking. It's the same reason you can't just go dump antifreeze into your local water supply. Does the government, in its role as guardian of the public welfare, not have the right to prohibit you doing that?

Why would you "want people to smoke"? In your business or anywhere? Are you a (drug pusher) tobacco company? Would you "want" people to shoot heroin?

That's an extremely modern and incorrect application to the phrase Promote the General Welfare, an application (use of the phrase) never intended by the founding fathers.
The Founders made it clear that the general welfare was only referring to specifically enumerated powers granted within the Constitution, as Jefferson, Madison, Hamilton, and the Federalist Papers stated.

There is no federal ban on public smoking.....it is done at the state level

Bingo.

I see. If that was the point I missed that distinction. To this day I have yet to see the merit in all this angsty parsing of whether something is "federal level" or "state level". Whether it's Romneycare or Obamacare that forces me to buy something I don't want, the end result is the same; given the event, the question of which level it comes from just doesn't seem the most important thing in the world -- or even relevant.

What is the point of such hair-splitting anyway? Government is government.

Oh and were were discussing the US constitution (general welfare) clause...... That would be Federal...... Maybe you forgot........

 

[Skull Pilot]

Cars pollute the air far more than does smoking a cigarette.

And no one is forcing to enter a building where people are smoking are they?

If that is the case, I would oppose you operating your car in a bar or restaurant

Is anyone forcing you to enter a business that allows smoking?

Seriously if there is a place in your town that you have never and will never patronize WTF do you care if the owner wants to allow smoking or not?

Because I have a right to patronize any business without being exposed to a dangerous environment.
Smokers can decide where and when they smoke
I don't have a choice where and when I breathe

You have a right to choose where you do business too don't you?

If it is clearly stated that a bar allows smoking why is it any skin off your nose to go to a bar that doesn't allow smoking?

You have to conform with all local ordinances when you open a business.
Cusomers do not get to agree to patronize your business that does not conform

We are the Borg You will be assimilated.

God ******* forbid you have to think for yourself huh?

 

[JOSweetHeart]

I think that all places should be free of smoking because then everyone can be there including those who can not deal with cigarette smoke due to any health issues that they have.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

P.S. I also believe that places should be free of smoking due to children. In my opinion, they shouldn't be exposed to it if they really do not have to be. They should most definitely deserve somewhere smoke free to go if they are stuck with parents who don't hesitate to smoke in their houses.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I think that all places should be free of smoking because then everyone can be there including those who can not deal with cigarette smoke due to any health issues that they have.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

P.S. I also believe that places should be free of smoking due to children. In my opinion, they shouldn't be exposed to it if they really do not have to be. They should most definitely deserve somewhere smoke free to go if they are stuck with parents who don't hesitate to smoke in their houses.

Why can't you see that some business owners might want to cater to smokers?

No one is forcing you to patronize any establishment are they?

I'm seriously tired of the people have to be all things to everyone crap that's going around.

I do not smoke
Never did
Never will

And yet I don't care if a bar owner in my town wants to allow smoking. I just won't go there.

There will be plenty of places where I can have a bourbon that are smoke free.

 

[JOSweetHeart]

^^^ Being a smoke free place means that everyone can be in there. It doesn't kill anyone to go outside to do their puffing. Oh and if you can't show any respect to those who can't be around cigarette smoke, don't expect any respect in return then!!! Do you think that people who have health issues enjoy having them health issues? I don't think that they do!!!

God bless you always!!!

Holly

P.S. But then again, maybe going outside to do their puffing will kill them. After all, look at what they are doing know matter where it is that they are doing it.

 

[Pogo]

Let's see what the Book that establishes the government says:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common Defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
​

Nope. You still cannot get around the laws of physics. People breathe air. There is no job or business that requires smoking. It's the same reason you can't just go dump antifreeze into your local water supply. Does the government, in its role as guardian of the public welfare, not have the right to prohibit you doing that?

Why would you "want people to smoke"? In your business or anywhere? Are you a (drug pusher) tobacco company? Would you "want" people to shoot heroin?

That's an extremely modern and incorrect application to the phrase Promote the General Welfare, an application (use of the phrase) never intended by the founding fathers.
The Founders made it clear that the general welfare was only referring to specifically enumerated powers granted within the Constitution, as Jefferson, Madison, Hamilton, and the Federalist Papers stated.

There is no federal ban on public smoking.....it is done at the state level

Bingo.

I see. If that was the point I missed that distinction. To this day I have yet to see the merit in all this angsty parsing of whether something is "federal level" or "state level". Whether it's Romneycare or Obamacare that forces me to buy something I don't want, the end result is the same; given the event, the question of which level it comes from just doesn't seem the most important thing in the world -- or even relevant.

What is the point of such hair-splitting anyway? Government is government.

Oh and were were discussing the US constitution (general welfare) clause...... That would be Federal...... Maybe you forgot........

I did miss that distinction yes, because I don't take it seriously to begin with. The point really was that it's part of the philosophy of what government's function is. Wasn't intending to parse it like an attorney.

The bottom line still is: if a given law affects me, whether that law comes from the Fed, state or municipality is irrelevant; it's still law, regardless where it came from. Surely there are, and must be, distinctions in which level gets to issue certain legislation. But that's the legislators' problem.

 

[Pogo]

I think that all places should be free of smoking because then everyone can be there including those who can not deal with cigarette smoke due to any health issues that they have.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

P.S. I also believe that places should be free of smoking due to children. In my opinion, they shouldn't be exposed to it if they really do not have to be. They should most definitely deserve somewhere smoke free to go if they are stuck with parents who don't hesitate to smoke in their houses.

I think that all places should be free of smoking because then everyone can be there including those who can not deal with cigarette smoke due to any health issues that they have.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

P.S. I also believe that places should be free of smoking due to children. In my opinion, they shouldn't be exposed to it if they really do not have to be. They should most definitely deserve somewhere smoke free to go if they are stuck with parents who don't hesitate to smoke in their houses.

Why can't you see that some business owners might want to cater to smokers?

No one is forcing you to patronize any establishment are they?

I'm seriously tired of the people have to be all things to everyone crap that's going around.

I do not smoke
Never did
Never will

And yet I don't care if a bar owner in my town wants to allow smoking. I just won't go there.

There will be plenty of places where I can have a bourbon that are smoke free.

In other words you're enslaved to an ideology, regardless of the practical consequences.

Sorry --- between these two points... hers saves lives, yours saves ideology.
Holly wins.

 

[Ringel05]

That's an extremely modern and incorrect application to the phrase Promote the General Welfare, an application (use of the phrase) never intended by the founding fathers.
The Founders made it clear that the general welfare was only referring to specifically enumerated powers granted within the Constitution, as Jefferson, Madison, Hamilton, and the Federalist Papers stated.

There is no federal ban on public smoking.....it is done at the state level

Bingo.

I see. If that was the point I missed that distinction. To this day I have yet to see the merit in all this angsty parsing of whether something is "federal level" or "state level". Whether it's Romneycare or Obamacare that forces me to buy something I don't want, the end result is the same; given the event, the question of which level it comes from just doesn't seem the most important thing in the world -- or even relevant.

What is the point of such hair-splitting anyway? Government is government.

Oh and were were discussing the US constitution (general welfare) clause...... That would be Federal...... Maybe you forgot........

I did miss that distinction yes, because I don't take it seriously to begin with. The point really was that it's part of the philosophy of what government's function is. Wasn't intending to parse it like an attorney.

The bottom line still is: if a given law affects me, whether that law comes from the Fed, state or municipality is irrelevant; it's still law, regardless where it came from. Surely there are, and must be, distinctions in which level gets to issue certain legislation. But that's the legislators' problem.

Okay, now you're being clear and not disingenuous or dismissive which is more what I'm used to with you.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I think that all places should be free of smoking because then everyone can be there including those who can not deal with cigarette smoke due to any health issues that they have.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

P.S. I also believe that places should be free of smoking due to children. In my opinion, they shouldn't be exposed to it if they really do not have to be. They should most definitely deserve somewhere smoke free to go if they are stuck with parents who don't hesitate to smoke in their houses.

I think that all places should be free of smoking because then everyone can be there including those who can not deal with cigarette smoke due to any health issues that they have.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

P.S. I also believe that places should be free of smoking due to children. In my opinion, they shouldn't be exposed to it if they really do not have to be. They should most definitely deserve somewhere smoke free to go if they are stuck with parents who don't hesitate to smoke in their houses.

Why can't you see that some business owners might want to cater to smokers?

No one is forcing you to patronize any establishment are they?

I'm seriously tired of the people have to be all things to everyone crap that's going around.

I do not smoke
Never did
Never will

And yet I don't care if a bar owner in my town wants to allow smoking. I just won't go there.

There will be plenty of places where I can have a bourbon that are smoke free.

In other words you're enslaved to an ideology, regardless of the practical consequences.

Sorry --- between these two points... hers saves lives, yours saves ideology.
Holly wins.

Saves lives?

Hyperbole.

You still have not addressed the fact that you are not forced to patronize any business that allows smoking.

So what if a bar owner wants to allow smoking? You don't have to drink there do you?