Would you be in favor of a repeal of smoking bans ....

[Shogun]

When it is being used for sexual titillation and not as a source of nutrition.

it's still a nude titty. REGARDLESS of what it is being used for.


your position just stripped a gear.

If you get turned on watching a mother breast feed that is on you.

and yet, your retort still doesn't address that it is STILL a nude titty in public despite legally restricted nudity.

I guess that is why your pink lunger obsession with smoking bars keeps failing to do more than blow smoke up the asses of the public.

 

[Shogun]

Health codes are a good thing that business must abide to, restaurants cant choose to serve rancid meat or allow roach infestations either.

unless, of course, that is the MENU THEY CHOOSE TO SERVE AND THERE IS A MARKET FOR IT.


You've never heard of sushi, apparently... I guess you don't know what Kim chi REALLY is. I hope you never eat blowfish at a japanese resteraunt!





your argument just slipped another gear.

Umm no health codes forbid the serving of rancid meat, sushi is not rancid meat.

apparently, you have never learned about aged beef that is purposefully made tender by an aging process.


I have to say, it's funny as hell to watch you hide behind the word RANCID as if people all over the world don't eat a wide variety of shit you'd label rancid.


Kim Chi is LITERALLY rotten cabbage. Go to a korean restaurant and tell them all about how they can't serve it like salad.

 

[Immanuel]

Would you be in favor of a repeal of smoking bans in bars and retaurants?
No. They are fair. 16 29.63%
Yes. They are unfair. 34 62.96%
No. They are unfair but I prefer they remain. 1 1.85%
Yes. They are fair but I'd rather they be lifted. 0 0%
Undecided 3 5.56%


QUICK! TELL US ALL HOW THESE NUMBERS INDICATE THAT MORE PEOPLE WANT SMOKING BANS TO CONTINUE, CARRIE NATION!

Wow you sure go straight to the scientific type polls to get your point across.

But the point is that you said the OP was about repealing bans in all places. The OP clearly states bars and restaurants which is to my knowledge all we have been discussing.

Immie

 

[Shogun]

Would you be in favor of a repeal of smoking bans in bars and retaurants?
No. They are fair. 16 29.63%
Yes. They are unfair. 34 62.96%
No. They are unfair but I prefer they remain. 1 1.85%
Yes. They are fair but I'd rather they be lifted. 0 0%
Undecided 3 5.56%


QUICK! TELL US ALL HOW THESE NUMBERS INDICATE THAT MORE PEOPLE WANT SMOKING BANS TO CONTINUE, CARRIE NATION!

Wow you sure go straight to the scientific type polls to get your point across.

this is a representative sample of the population of USMB. I garentfuckingtee this would be reflective if this issue were left to a VOTE. But, as with usual fascist motherfuckers, nearly every instance of banned smoking is the product of city aldermen or other handfuls of elected people.

In fact, here in Columbia Missouri pink lunger fought to keep this issue OFF of the ballot so that it didn't get overturned after it was voted into effect by, you guessed it, our city council.

and, for real, dude.... given YOUR source of "evidence" you probably don't want to talk about valid statistics. just saying.

 

[noose4]

it's still a nude titty. REGARDLESS of what it is being used for.


your position just stripped a gear.

If you get turned on watching a mother breast feed that is on you.

and yet, your retort still doesn't address that it is STILL a nude titty in public despite legally restricted nudity.

I guess that is why your pink lunger obsession with smoking bars keeps failing to do more than blow smoke up the asses of the public.

Remove the baby from the scenario and the woman becomes subject to arrest.And for the record I am damn glad to be a pink lunger and not stupid enough to voluntarily give myself an addiction that is not only hazardous to my health but would make me stink from its nastiness.

 

[Immanuel]

Health codes are a good thing that business must abide to, restaurants cant choose to serve rancid meat or allow roach infestations either.

unless, of course, that is the MENU THEY CHOOSE TO SERVE AND THERE IS A MARKET FOR IT.


You've never heard of sushi, apparently... I guess you don't know what Kim chi REALLY is. I hope you never eat blowfish at a japanese resteraunt!





your argument just slipped another gear.

Umm no health codes forbid the serving of rancid meat, sushi is not rancid meat.

That could be read in two different ways you know.

No health codes forbid the serving of rancid meat. In other words, serving rancid meat is a-okay with the government

or:

No, health codes forbid... as in No, you are wrong, health codes do forbid.

I'm hoping you meant the latter.

Immie

 

[Anguille]

Yes. If they want to ban smoking in public places, such as airports they can. However they should not be able to dictate to business such as bars and resturants. If it is not illegal then it is up to the business. If you think smoking pot does not cause cancer you need to do more research.

NIDA - Research Report Series - Marijuana Abuse

Cancer of the respiratory tract and lungs may also be promoted by marijuana smoke.4 A study comparing 173 cancer patients and 176 healthy individuals produced strong evidence that smoking marijuana increases the likelihood of developing cancer of the head or neck, and that the more marijuana smoked, the greater the increase.17 A statistical analysis of the data suggested that marijuana smoking doubled or tripled the risk of these cancers.

Marijuana has the potential to promote cancer of the lungs and other parts of the respiratory tract because it contains irritants and carcinogens.40 In fact, marijuana smoke contains 50 percent to 70 percent more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than does tobacco smoke.41 It also produces high levels of an enzyme that converts certain hydrocarbons into their carcinogenic form, levels that may accelerate the changes that ultimately produce malignant cells.

42 Marijuana users usually inhale more deeply and hold their breath longer than tobacco smokers do, which increases the lungs' exposure to carcinogenic smoke. These facts suggest that, puff for puff, smoking marijuana may increase the risk of cancer more than smoking tobacco does.

Thanks for the link. I did not claim that marijuana doe not cause cancer. In fact I suspect it, like any kind of smoke, is harmful and contains carcinogens. But studies such as have been done on tobacco smoke have yet to be done on marijuana smoke.

"These facts suggest that, puff for puff, smoking marijuana may increase the risk of cancer more than smoking tobacco does."
So the evidence is still inconclusive. Also keep in mind that the article notes "puff for puff " I don't think marijuana smokers in general smoke as much marijuana, puff for puff, as tobacco smokers. Also this article doesn't address the issue of second hand marijuana smoke.

So I take it you would be in favor of allowing owners to permit marijuana smoking in bars and restaurants once it becomes legal?

 

[noose4]

unless, of course, that is the MENU THEY CHOOSE TO SERVE AND THERE IS A MARKET FOR IT.


You've never heard of sushi, apparently... I guess you don't know what Kim chi REALLY is. I hope you never eat blowfish at a japanese resteraunt!





your argument just slipped another gear.

Umm no health codes forbid the serving of rancid meat, sushi is not rancid meat.

apparently, you have never learned about aged beef that is purposefully made tender by an aging process.


I have to say, it's funny as hell to watch you hide behind the word RANCID as if people all over the world don't eat a wide variety of shit you'd label rancid.


Kim Chi is LITERALLY rotten cabbage. Go to a korean restaurant and tell them all about how they can't serve it like salad.

aged beef is not rancid, werent you commenting on the intelligence level of others earlier in this thread?

 

[noose4]

Would you be in favor of a repeal of smoking bans in bars and retaurants?
No. They are fair. 16 29.63%
Yes. They are unfair. 34 62.96%
No. They are unfair but I prefer they remain. 1 1.85%
Yes. They are fair but I'd rather they be lifted. 0 0%
Undecided 3 5.56%


QUICK! TELL US ALL HOW THESE NUMBERS INDICATE THAT MORE PEOPLE WANT SMOKING BANS TO CONTINUE, CARRIE NATION!

Wow you sure go straight to the scientific type polls to get your point across.

this is a representative sample of the population of USMB. I garentfuckingtee this would be reflective if this issue were left to a VOTE. But, as with usual fascist motherfuckers, nearly every instance of banned smoking is the product of city aldermen or other handfuls of elected people.

In fact, here in Columbia Missouri pink lunger fought to keep this issue OFF of the ballot so that it didn't get overturned after it was voted into effect by, you guessed it, our city council.

and, for real, dude.... given YOUR source of "evidence" you probably don't want to talk about valid statistics. just saying.

a bunch of people who sit around on a message board a good portion of the day would most likely have a bigger number of smokers on it as compared to the population in general.

 

[Anguille]

I probably just scanned over your point and ignored it like you do everyone elses point.

If you think I ignore your points why do you bother posting to me?

 

[Shogun]

Umm no health codes forbid the serving of rancid meat, sushi is not rancid meat.

apparently, you have never learned about aged beef that is purposefully made tender by an aging process.


I have to say, it's funny as hell to watch you hide behind the word RANCID as if people all over the world don't eat a wide variety of shit you'd label rancid.


Kim Chi is LITERALLY rotten cabbage. Go to a korean restaurant and tell them all about how they can't serve it like salad.

aged beef is not rancid, werent you commenting on the intelligence level of others earlier in this thread?

to SOME it very well IS rancid. Hell, to SOME rare meat shouldn't be served either. hey, guy! Let's go ban all steaks not cooked to medium well!



again, watching you hide behind the word rancid despite all the food items people DO EAT in this world that could be considered as much is fucking HILARIOUS!

ON the ban list!

 

[Anguille]

I see you have no retort even after calling me out to answer your question. shocker.

Indeed, you still never have to enter a hash bar were pot legal. Yet, ironically, you seem to be ok with the idea of public consumption of one but not the other. DESPITE the world of differences that pertain to both. Am I conveying my shock yet?

AND, your hypocrisy over allowing smoke dependant upon the Odor YOU prefer speaks volumes about your pink lunger standard. seriously.

You have completely misunderstood my stance. I made a point that my preference of the smell of one type of smoke over the other does not negate the right of anyone else who does not like the smell of pot to have to put up with it. Why not argue the points I make instead of inventing stuff I never said?

why not choose to take your fucking ass to a non smoking bar and make this entire debate a moot point?

Oh, we are ALL full of questions, aren't we?

Already answered that question ad nauseum. Try to keep up.

 

[Shogun]

If you get turned on watching a mother breast feed that is on you.

and yet, your retort still doesn't address that it is STILL a nude titty in public despite legally restricted nudity.

I guess that is why your pink lunger obsession with smoking bars keeps failing to do more than blow smoke up the asses of the public.

Remove the baby from the scenario and the woman becomes subject to arrest.And for the record I am damn glad to be a pink lunger and not stupid enough to voluntarily give myself an addiction that is not only hazardous to my health but would make me stink from its nastiness.

Again, BABY OR NOT, it is till a naked titty. FACT. You people sure don't do well in the reality category, do you?

And, I don't give a shit if you are glad to not be a smoker. I'd bet jacks, joes and dominoes that you DO have a behaviour that is just as, if not more, potentially lethal than you'd otherwise pretend. Indeed, remember, none of us smokers are demanding your company. So, since you revile us so much feel free to take your pansy ass somewhere other than to our bars just so you can cry fould after making the choice to walk in.

 

[Shogun]

You have completely misunderstood my stance. I made a point that my preference of the smell of one type of smoke over the other does not negate the right of anyone else who does not like the smell of pot to have to put up with it. Why not argue the points I make instead of inventing stuff I never said?

why not choose to take your fucking ass to a non smoking bar and make this entire debate a moot point?

Oh, we are ALL full of questions, aren't we?

Already answered that question ad nauseum. Try to keep up.

well, then I guess you don't have to think to hard to post it again then, eh? I'll try to keep up better if you actually learn about statistics.

 

[Anguille]

On the contrary, your space in never invaded if you don't CHOOSE to enter a smokey room that caters to smokers of either. THAT is a fact exponentially more solid than the kind of bullshit fabricated estimates that fill your little pink lunger quiver.

true story.

There is no such thing as bar or restaurant that caters to smokers. They are eating and drinking establishments that cater to eaters and drinkers. A shop where tobacco is sold and sales of it is the main source of income is an establishment that caters to smokers.

 

[Shogun]

Wow you sure go straight to the scientific type polls to get your point across.

this is a representative sample of the population of USMB. I garentfuckingtee this would be reflective if this issue were left to a VOTE. But, as with usual fascist motherfuckers, nearly every instance of banned smoking is the product of city aldermen or other handfuls of elected people.

In fact, here in Columbia Missouri pink lunger fought to keep this issue OFF of the ballot so that it didn't get overturned after it was voted into effect by, you guessed it, our city council.

and, for real, dude.... given YOUR source of "evidence" you probably don't want to talk about valid statistics. just saying.

a bunch of people who sit around on a message board a good portion of the day would most likely have a bigger number of smokers on it as compared to the population in general.

that certainly is your assumption.. but, we've seen how worthless those are so...

put it to a vote. you'll learn all about it. But, your kind won't allow that. and, we both know why.

 

[Shogun]

On the contrary, your space in never invaded if you don't CHOOSE to enter a smokey room that caters to smokers of either. THAT is a fact exponentially more solid than the kind of bullshit fabricated estimates that fill your little pink lunger quiver.

true story.

There is no such thing as bar or restaurant that caters to smokers. They are eating and drinking establishments that cater to eaters and drinkers. A shop where tobacco is sold and sales of it is the main source of income is an establishment that caters to smokers.

you are smoking fucking crack. Every bar that has gone out of business in Columbia Missouri since the ban went into effect catered to smokers. Bars don't have to make people smoke a cigarette for every shot they order just to cater to smokers. Your standard is asinine and funny as hell.

 

[Anguille]

No, I am saying that marijuana smoking should be permitted anywhere that tobacco smoking is permitted. Maybe in more places since marijuana has not been shown as yet to cause all the serious health problems that tobacco smoke does.

I disagree with the more places part, you can get a contact high by breathing marijuana smoke.

Which would lead to me being intoxicated... then if I drove even though I had not smoked mj... got pulled over and arrested for DUI, I would be responsible yet the pot smoker would be to blame. I wonder if Anguille would be willing to pay the fines of all non pot smokers that were busted for DUI, just for being around the stuff.

Immie

Since I don't favor allowing people to smoke marijuana in public places just like I am opposed to people smoking tobacco in public places, you would not even risk being exposed to enough marijuana smoke to make you fail a DUI test, if exposure to secondhand pot smoke could even produce that effect.

 

[noose4]

and yet, your retort still doesn't address that it is STILL a nude titty in public despite legally restricted nudity.

I guess that is why your pink lunger obsession with smoking bars keeps failing to do more than blow smoke up the asses of the public.

Remove the baby from the scenario and the woman becomes subject to arrest.And for the record I am damn glad to be a pink lunger and not stupid enough to voluntarily give myself an addiction that is not only hazardous to my health but would make me stink from its nastiness.

Again, BABY OR NOT, it is till a naked titty. FACT. You people sure don't do well in the reality category, do you?

And, I don't give a shit if you are glad to not be a smoker. I'd bet jacks, joes and dominoes that you DO have a behaviour that is just as, if not more, potentially lethal than you'd otherwise pretend. Indeed, remember, none of us smokers are demanding your company. So, since you revile us so much feel free to take your pansy ass somewhere other than to our bars just so you can cry fould after making the choice to walk in.

With your comparing legal situations to illegal ones and trying to make ridiculous comparisons to the health code that forbids tobacco addicts from getting a fix in certain places you shouldnt be tossing around reality thing so much as you are obviously not in touch with it.

 

[Father Time]

Non smokers have rights, an addict feeding their addiction should not prevent others from frequenting a business establishment, tobacco addicts already have more rights than other addicts when it comes to partaking in their addiction.

Smokers do not have more rights than you. You can choose to light up whenever you want.

Immie

The implication in this thread is that the tobacco addict is free to partake in their addiction at any time in any place regardless of who they will be imposing their addiction upon, thus giving them more rights than addicts of other drugs out there.

That's not what we're saying we're saying that the owner of the property has a right to allow or ban smoking whatever on their premises. If they want to allow medical weed but not tobacco fine, if they want to allow tobacco but not booze, that's fine too. Why are you trying to pretend this is about lighting up wherever you please?