Smoking Bans

[Theowl32]

Aaaaaand liberals hypocrisy on full display yet again in this thread. When you get rightwinger, Jillian and that C Jones idiot spreading their feigned outrage at smoking tobacco, let them answer what they think about smoking pot in public.

Make another poll and the liberals that are all concerned about icky smoke in their lungs will all of a sudden tell you how good pot is for you.

They think pot is actually good for you.

Watch this folks, I am going to start a thread and you will see the different tune that the hypocrites on the left will display. I am even calling the shot, and you will see it.

The left wing two step.

 

[Crystalclear]

After watching a story on the news about banning smoking in public areas- including businesses- forcibly, I realized how wrong that is. On government property- ie streets and government buildings like courthouses- the government should have the ability to ban it. But for privately owned businesses, they should be given the ability to choose. If they ban smoking, smokers can simply go elsewhere. If smoking is allowed, and offends people, said customers can use their competitors instead. As such, a business owner can then allow/disallow smoking if it would help their business. Government doesn't have a right to mandate businesses to ban something, even if it is for "the public's safety". Even that could be disproved by showing that smoking inside a building where everyone is okay with it does not harm those who actually care. And enviromentalists will now proceed to ask about factories pumping pollutants into the atmosphere and try to apply my logic to that. That is a different case, simply because potentially harmful pollutants are being put directly into the atmosphere, whereas smoking in a restaurant hasn't killed anyone walking in the street outside, as far as I know.

Apparently you are not aware that second hand smoke can lead to lung cancer. The right of the non-smoker to breath clean air outweighs any right a smoker has to smoke in every single instance except one, and that is the smokers home, if the smoker owns that home and it is free standing and has no other units above, below, or beside it.

It is more than lung cancer.....Smokers Stink



Why should I have to go out to a public place and come back with my hair and clothes stinking of tobacco?

The thing is that businesses and private places should not be forced to ban smoking. Public places is a different thing.

 

[Redfish]

It is more than lung cancer.....Smokers Stink

Why should I have to go out to a public place and come back with my hair and clothes stinking of tobacco?

You don't have to patronize establishments that allow smoking do you?

I have a right to patronize any business establishment

If there is one bowling alley in town, I don't have an option to "bowl somewhere else"
If I am attending a party or social gathering, I don't have an option to go elsewhere

As a smoker, you don't have a right to spew your filth anywhere you please

you could find something else to do, you have no right to bowl, but the owner of the alley does have the right to decide what goes on (as long as its legal) in his building.

Does someone force you to go to the party where there is smoking?

I hate smoking too, but I don't care if smokers decide to shorten their lives by doing it.

 

[Redfish]

Aaaaaand liberals hypocrisy on full display yet again in this thread. When you get rightwinger, Jillian and that C Jones idiot spreading their feigned outrage at smoking tobacco, let them answer what they thing about smoking pot in public.

Make another poll and the liberals that are all concerned about icky smoke in their lungs will all of a sudden tell you how good pot is for you.

They think pot is actually good for you.

Watch this folks, I am going to start a thread and you will see the different tune that the hypocrites on the left will display. I am even calling the shot, and you will see it.

The left wing two step.

we see liberal hypocrisy on this board every day, your reminder is on point.

 

[rightwinger]

Aaaaaand liberals hypocrisy on full display yet again in this thread. When you get rightwinger, Jillian and that C Jones idiot spreading their feigned outrage at smoking tobacco, let them answer what they thing about smoking pot in public.

Make another poll and the liberals that are all concerned about icky smoke in their lungs will all of a sudden tell you how good pot is for you.

They think pot is actually good for you.

Watch this folks, I am going to start a thread and you will see the different tune that the hypocrites on the left will display. I am even calling the shot, and you will see it.

The left wing two step.

Smokers stink and are no longer welcome to engage in their filthy habit in public
One of the best moves our society ever made

I don't want anyone smoking pot in public either.....I just don't want my tax dollars spent to send them to prison

 

[rightwinger]

You don't have to patronize establishments that allow smoking do you?

I have a right to patronize any business establishment

If there is one bowling alley in town, I don't have an option to "bowl somewhere else"
If I am attending a party or social gathering, I don't have an option to go elsewhere

As a smoker, you don't have a right to spew your filth anywhere you please

you could find something else to do, you have no right to bowl, but the owner of the alley does have the right to decide what goes on (as long as its legal) in his building.

Does someone force you to go to the party where there is smoking?

I hate smoking too, but I don't care if smokers decide to shorten their lives by doing it.

You have no right to spew your filth into my lungs

Get used to it

 

[Theowl32]

I don't want anyone smoking pot in public either.....I just don't want my tax dollars spent to send them to prison

Anyone detect the left wing two step?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

You poll answers are asymmetric. So, I'd say that yes, it should be banned in establishments that don't traditionally have large numbers of smokers as with offices and such, but places like bars and restaurants should permit it in designated smoking sections. As to out in public, should be banned in places traditionally associated with children like playgrounds and parks though provisions written into such bans that if no children are actually present, no crime is being commited if someone smokes.

Am a ex-cigarette smoker from 13-40, and current pipe smoker.

 

[rightwinger]

I don't want anyone smoking pot in public either.....I just don't want my tax dollars spent to send them to prison

Anyone detect the left wing two step?

Please explain

 

[Skull Pilot]

Why should any customer be subjected to the filth being voluntarily spewed by another customer?

You don't have to. You are free to patronize establishments that ban smoking.

 

[Redfish]

I have a right to patronize any business establishment

If there is one bowling alley in town, I don't have an option to "bowl somewhere else"
If I am attending a party or social gathering, I don't have an option to go elsewhere

As a smoker, you don't have a right to spew your filth anywhere you please

you could find something else to do, you have no right to bowl, but the owner of the alley does have the right to decide what goes on (as long as its legal) in his building.

Does someone force you to go to the party where there is smoking?

I hate smoking too, but I don't care if smokers decide to shorten their lives by doing it.

You have no right to spew your filth into my lungs

Get used to it

We agree on this, you damn fool. Are you that fricken stupid? I don't like smoking, so I stay away from smokers. Smoking is not allowed in places that you cannot leave---airplanes, buses, trains, etc.

It seems that you favor a national ban on smoking, how did that work for alcohol?

 

[rightwinger]

Why should any customer be subjected to the filth being voluntarily spewed by another customer?

You don't have to. You are free to patronize establishments that ban smoking.

I lived in your ideal society in the 60s and 70s

If you wanted to see a movie, there was smoking in the theater
If you don't like it, don't go to the movies

If you went to a restaurant or bar, you had smoke blown in your face
If you don't like it, don't go out to eat

If you took an elevator, you had to breathe the smoke
If you don't like it, take the stairs

If I went to class, I had to breathe other students smoke
If you don't like it, go to another university

When I started working, I had to breathe the smoke of a chain smoker
If you don't like it,find another job

In todays society, the burden is placed on the smoker
If you don't like it, keep your cigarettes in your pocket

 

[whitehall]

Government can ban anything and everything as long as the people go along with it. It does seem strange that government seems to be reluctant to enforce laws against the use of a restricted substance, marijuana while cracking down on a legal substance, tobacco.

 

[earlycuyler]

After watching a story on the news about banning smoking in public areas- including businesses- forcibly, I realized how wrong that is. On government property- ie streets and government buildings like courthouses- the government should have the ability to ban it. But for privately owned businesses, they should be given the ability to choose. If they ban smoking, smokers can simply go elsewhere. If smoking is allowed, and offends people, said customers can use their competitors instead. As such, a business owner can then allow/disallow smoking if it would help their business. Government doesn't have a right to mandate businesses to ban something, even if it is for "the public's safety". Even that could be disproved by showing that smoking inside a building where everyone is okay with it does not harm those who actually care. And enviromentalists will now proceed to ask about factories pumping pollutants into the atmosphere and try to apply my logic to that. That is a different case, simply because potentially harmful pollutants are being put directly into the atmosphere, whereas smoking in a restaurant hasn't killed anyone walking in the street outside, as far as I know.

Im with ya on this one.

 

[Theowl32]

Government can ban anything and everything as long as the people go along with it. It does seem strange that government seems to be reluctant to enforce laws against the use of a restricted substance, marijuana while cracking down on a legal substance, tobacco.

Yeah, liberals have both sides of that issue covered. They laugh at the right for believing pot should be illegal. Mainly due to the devastating long term health concerns. It harms more than just the lungs too. A lot more than that.

The left has somehow been able to convince a large portion that pot is actually good for us.

The same left (trust this, it has to with big evil corporations and white right wingers that make a profit off of the legal product) throws hissy fits (literally hissy fits too) over the fact that tobacco is legal. They express great outrage at the notion that tobacco is pushed on kids. Oh Lorrrrrrd do they hate that.

Pro pot rallies

The liberal two step is they do not want people smoking tobacco in public. Hell they want big tobacco to go broke and tobacco to be illegalized.

They of course claim they are not on the side of people smoking pot in public.

Notice how they never hold rallies that pot should not be smoked in public? That guy in that photo up there, is he in public?

^^^^^^How about that slut?


The reason they do it folks, in their defiant manner is because there is only one thing the left is united about and actually stand for. That is they want to find any and all ways to stick a thumb in the eye of right wing white person.

That is it.

Think those smelly left wing losers are all on the side of smoking pot only in private?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Why should any customer be subjected to the filth being voluntarily spewed by another customer?

You don't have to. You are free to patronize establishments that ban smoking.

I lived in your ideal society in the 60s and 70s

If you wanted to see a movie, there was smoking in the theater
If you don't like it, don't go to the movies

If you went to a restaurant or bar, you had smoke blown in your face
If you don't like it, don't go out to eat

If you took an elevator, you had to breathe the smoke
If you don't like it, take the stairs

If I went to class, I had to breathe other students smoke
If you don't like it, go to another university

When I started working, I had to breathe the smoke of a chain smoker
If you don't like it,find another job

In todays society, the burden is placed on the smoker
If you don't like it, keep your cigarettes in your pocket

If a business owner wants to allow smoking in his establishment it should be his choice. Not yours.

If we allowed people to choose then some businesses would allow smoking and some wouldn't.

Why do you have a problem with that when all you would have to do is patronize the businesses that ban smoking?

 

[rightwinger]

Government can ban anything and everything as long as the people go along with it. It does seem strange that government seems to be reluctant to enforce laws against the use of a restricted substance, marijuana while cracking down on a legal substance, tobacco.

Yeah, liberals have both sides of that issue covered. They laugh at the right for believing pot should be illegal. Mainly due to the devastating long term health concerns. It harms more than just the lungs too. A lot more than that.

The left has somehow been able to convince a large portion that pot is actually good for us.

The same left (trust this, it has to with big evil corporations and white right wingers that make a profit off of the legal product) throws hissy fits (literally hissy fits too) over the fact that tobacco is legal. They express great outrage at the notion that tobacco is pushed on kids. Oh Lorrrrrrd do they hate that.

Pro pot rallies

The liberal two step is they do not want people smoking tobacco in public. Hell they want big tobacco to go broke and tobacco to be illegalized.

They of course claim they are not on the side of people smoking pot in public.

Notice how they never hold rallies that pot should not be smoked in public? That guy in that photo up there, is he in public?

^^^^^^How about that slut?


The reason they do it folks, in their defiant manner is because there is only one thing the left is united about and actually stand for. That is they want to find any and all ways to stick a thumb in the eye of right wing white person.

That is it.

Think those smelly left wing losers are all on the side of smoking pot only in private?

Every one of your pictures shows people smoking pot outdoors. Cigarette smokers are allowed to smoke outdoors also

Where are your pictures of people smoking pot in restaurants, bars and public transportation?

Do you understand what hypocricy means?

 

[rightwinger]

You don't have to. You are free to patronize establishments that ban smoking.

I lived in your ideal society in the 60s and 70s

If you wanted to see a movie, there was smoking in the theater
If you don't like it, don't go to the movies

If you went to a restaurant or bar, you had smoke blown in your face
If you don't like it, don't go out to eat

If you took an elevator, you had to breathe the smoke
If you don't like it, take the stairs

If I went to class, I had to breathe other students smoke
If you don't like it, go to another university

When I started working, I had to breathe the smoke of a chain smoker
If you don't like it,find another job

In todays society, the burden is placed on the smoker
If you don't like it, keep your cigarettes in your pocket

If a business owner wants to allow smoking in his establishment it should be his choice. Not yours.

If we allowed people to choose then some businesses would allow smoking and some wouldn't.

Why do you have a problem with that when all you would have to do is patronize the businesses that ban smoking?

I grew up in the 60s where over 50% of the public smoked. The social values of the time held it to be rude to ask smokers to refrain from smoking. There were no businesses that restricted customers from smoking. If you wanted to go out in public, you had to be willing to breathe in smoke

Fast forward to today. Smokers are less than 20% of the population. They are now the social outcasts. They are the ones being expected to modify their behavior or leave. If they don't like it...tough

Your right to spew filth ends at my nose. If you want to kill yourself, it is your business. Just don't push your filthy habit on me

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

After watching a story on the news about banning smoking in public areas- including businesses- forcibly, I realized how wrong that is. On government property- ie streets and government buildings like courthouses- the government should have the ability to ban it. But for privately owned businesses, they should be given the ability to choose. If they ban smoking, smokers can simply go elsewhere. If smoking is allowed, and offends people, said customers can use their competitors instead. As such, a business owner can then allow/disallow smoking if it would help their business. Government doesn't have a right to mandate businesses to ban something, even if it is for "the public's safety". Even that could be disproved by showing that smoking inside a building where everyone is okay with it does not harm those who actually care. And enviromentalists will now proceed to ask about factories pumping pollutants into the atmosphere and try to apply my logic to that. That is a different case, simply because potentially harmful pollutants are being put directly into the atmosphere, whereas smoking in a restaurant hasn't killed anyone walking in the street outside, as far as I know.

Sorry, I can't answer the poll, its not specific enough. There are some places where smoking bans make sense (restaurants, hospitals, government buildings) other places where they don't (public beaches, where the justification is usually that butts create litter - but its already illegal to litter, right?)

On the other hand - banning smoking in dry forests with plenty of fuel when humidity drops below 10% or so (for instance) might be justified based on fire safety reasons. Of course banning ALL fires in the woods when humidity is that low makes good sense.


I'm torn on bars. I'm not really concerned about the patrons - they come for vice - the employees come to make a living though. Though I think bar owners would do themselves a favor in states where it is still legal and look for a compromise. BEcause if they don't its going to be outright banned eventually. I always thought a permit system would make most sense, issuing smoking permits to a set number of bars through auctioning off the permits - that way bars who truly depend on smokers for the revenue can still keep it.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I lived in your ideal society in the 60s and 70s

If you wanted to see a movie, there was smoking in the theater
If you don't like it, don't go to the movies

If you went to a restaurant or bar, you had smoke blown in your face
If you don't like it, don't go out to eat

If you took an elevator, you had to breathe the smoke
If you don't like it, take the stairs

If I went to class, I had to breathe other students smoke
If you don't like it, go to another university

When I started working, I had to breathe the smoke of a chain smoker
If you don't like it,find another job

In todays society, the burden is placed on the smoker
If you don't like it, keep your cigarettes in your pocket

If a business owner wants to allow smoking in his establishment it should be his choice. Not yours.

If we allowed people to choose then some businesses would allow smoking and some wouldn't.

Why do you have a problem with that when all you would have to do is patronize the businesses that ban smoking?

I grew up in the 60s where over 50% of the public smoked. The social values of the time held it to be rude to ask smokers to refrain from smoking. There were no businesses that restricted customers from smoking. If you wanted to go out in public, you had to be willing to breathe in smoke

Fast forward to today. Smokers are less than 20% of the population. They are now the social outcasts. They are the ones being expected to modify their behavior or leave. If they don't like it...tough

Your right to spew filth ends at my nose. If you want to kill yourself, it is your business. Just don't push your filthy habit on me

SO if only 20% of the population smokes you don't think that most businesses would keep the smoking ban in force?

Of course they would but a small percentage of businesses might choose to allow smoking.

You do not have to patronize those businesses do you?

I don't see how a bar or restaurant allowing people to smoke infringes your rights at all when you are free to patronize not to patronize those that allow smoking.

I don't smoke. Never did never will and I think it is perfectly reasonable to allow business owners to decide.

I just won't patronize businesses that allow smoking.

No skin off my back.

So stop being such a selfish control freak