The state of Ohio just passed a no smoking law for all public places...including bars.
I think that sucks...The government is imposing upon privately owned estabishments. If you own a bar, it should be your decision as to whether or not you allow smoking inside...what's that you say?...cigarette smoke makes you sick...so don't go into the bar!
. . .
On the bright side my wife and I can enjoy the parts of the restaurants we used to have to avoid. I like the law. I have to breathe other peoples cigarettes when I'm outside, now I can go inside for some fresh air. . .
Bolshevic...I can appreciate the personal advantages it is to you...BUT, what's next?...no "cussing" in public?...no farting?...no gum chewing?...How far does the government get to go in regulating behavior?
The state of Ohio just passed a no smoking law for all public places...including bars.
I think that sucks...The government is imposing upon privately owned estabishments. If you own a bar, it should be your decision as to whether or not you allow smoking inside...what's that you say?...cigarette smoke makes you sick...so don't go into the bar!
The government collects PLENTY of tax money on cigarettes...they are sold legally in stores...but I can't light up when I go out for a beer?...I think it's crazy.
...and while I'm at it, I don't buy into this second hand smoke myth either...You say smoking is bad for me?...so is consuming caffine, sugar and monosodium glutamate...
Welcome to the new regulated society where nobody is allowed to mind their own business.
What is THIS? THE Groucho Marx Jr going over to the dark side... er, "right" side? I'm SHOCKED! ;)
Btw, in AZ, it's now law also... but law enacted by the PEOPLE (by way of a ballot measure). A law enacted by duly elected representatives (legislators) is STILL law enacted by the people, but not quite as directly so.
Bolshevic...I can appreciate the personal advantages it is to you...BUT, what's next?...no "cussing" in public?...no farting?...no gum chewing?...How far does the government get to go in regulating behavior?
When do we cease being free?
Me thinks thou hast an ox that hast been gored! Don't you mean "how far do the people go in regulating behavior?" Should the people demand that murder not be tolerated? What about child molestation?
It's ALL a matter of what society -- a majority of the people -- decide.
Obviously, certain rights of the minority (those whose ox get gored) must be honored... but WHAT is a "right?"
Bolshevic...I can appreciate the personal advantages it is to you...BUT, what's next?...no "cussing" in public?...no farting?...no gum chewing?...How far does the government get to go in regulating behavior?
When do we cease being free?
I can't sit in my own apartment without breathing a neighbor's cigarette or cigar. So on a nice Spring or Fall day, my windows are shut. This law gives me someplace else to go.
I was a smoker for about 5 years, I know its a pain. Maybe with this global warming the Northern Territories in Canada will be more habitable, so we can all spread out more.
Me thinks thou hast an ox that hast been gored! Don't you mean "how far do the people go in regulating behavior?" Should the people demand that murder not be tolerated? What about child molestation?
It's ALL a matter of what society -- a majority of the people -- decide.
Obviously, certain rights of the minority (those whose ox get gored) must be honored... but WHAT is a "right?"
Is smoking a right? Should it be?
I agree with you Rocky, and I don't. :)
As far as the smoking ban in bars and restaurants goes ---
I have a problem with it being legislated to folks who own their own business.
They own the building, they pay the property taxes,
they pay the high fees for having a liquor license,
they hire folks to check ID's so there are no underaged drinkers in their bar,
(in other words) they are doing their best to follow the law ---
and then they are told that no one is permitted to smoke there??
It's their place. It's their paycheck, place of business, whatever you want to call it.
They should be calling the shots there, not the *smoking police*.
When I see the folks who want to eradicate smoking paying all the bills
that These folks pay, then (perhaps) I'll grant them some latitude in saying
what should or should not be done within the walls of a legitimate business.
There were several bars and restaurants here in town that built a THRIVING business --
because they were smoke free. Now that has been denied to them as well.
They were no longer *unique* -- and lost a lot of customers as a result.
'Nother words (at least here in Duluth and I suspect this isn't the only town),
there's diverse enough of a society that OPTIONS are offered for smoking or non-smoking.
It's my (humble) opinion, that the shop owner should be allowed to run his business as he sees fit.
If it's a business (i.e. -- let's say a bar/ restaurant), and they allow smoking there ---
You don't have to go in if you object to smoking because ----
there's other places in town that DON'T allow it. Go there instead.
I agree with Groucho entirely on this one.
I'm thinking that the next thing is we will be told what we can or cannot do in our own homes.
It's a scary thought -- but NOT so far-fetched -- given what is happening already.
I've smoked for longer than some of you have lived. Over the past 5 years I've quit for several months at a time, even a year once. I was a smoker when the smoking ban came up on the ballot in Ohio, and I voted for it. Why? Because the dangers of second-hand smoke aren't a myth, as much as we die-hard smokers would like to believe that.
The most selfish thing I ever did as a parent was smoke around my child. I would have laid down my life for him (still would), and I worked hard to support him and raise him. He was pretty much the center of my world throughout his growing-up years. Yet as much as I loved him, I let my addiction to nicotine put his health in jeopardy. He had asthma and he frequently had respiratory problems and severe ear infections. May God forgive me for putting my addiction ahead of my child.
We can rationalize all we want. That's what addicts do. We can whine and pi$$ and moan about getting our rights taken away. It's a smoke screen (yeah, I meant to do that). It covers up the fact that (a) we know smoking is bad for our health yet we think somehow we'll dodge the bullet and (b) we're pretty darn sure smoking is bad for the health of those we subject to it and we know damn well it irritates a lot of nonsmokers. Addicts have a hard time getting honest about their addiction.
I had a woman approach me a couple weeks ago about signing a petition to get a bill put on the ballot to rescind the smoking ban in public places in Ohio. I was smoking (outside) at the time, so she thought I'd jump at the chance. I said, "No thanks." She asked why. I said I don't mind going outside to have a cigarette. It's better than sitting someplace where dozens of people are chain-smoking all at once." She looked at me like I was Hilary Clinton walking into the Republican National Convention and stomped away in a huff. Tough.
So today I'm on day 2 of what I hope will be my final attempt to quit again. Finally, our office building is enforcing the law. In my last two attempts, I got sucked into starting again because we have a smoking room here and I'd get stressed out and go have "just one." Ha! Just one.
Back to the original point of this thread: I'm glad!!! I can't tell you how much it bugged me to see people smoking in movies when I was, at least temporarily, free from tobacco. It made me want to smoke so badly it darn near drove me nuts.
So take heart, smokers. You have the great outdoors to smoke in, and your car, and your own homes. Me, I can only hope that this is it, that this is the time when I quit forever--and that I can stop lining the pockets of those rich old goobers who sell the darn things and spend my money on something less toxic and a whole lot more fun!!
We all also need to keep in mind that tobacco companies *still* are fighting the medically proven FACT that smoking causes cancer and all the other smoking related diseases. And for no better reason than the _bottom line_.
Guess what folks. Nowhere in the Constitution is there any concept or law protecting smoking as part of the Bill of Rights. ... Sorry!
As far as the smoking ban in bars and restaurants goes ---
I have a problem with it being legislated to folks who own their own business.
They own the building, they pay the property taxes,
they pay the high fees for having a liquor license,
they hire folks to check ID's so there are no underaged drinkers in their bar,
(in other words) they are doing their best to follow the law ---
and then they are told that no one is permitted to smoke there??
It's their place. It's their paycheck, place of business, whatever you want to call it.
They should be calling the shots there, not the *smoking police*.
When I see the folks who want to eradicate smoking paying all the bills
that These folks pay, then (perhaps) I'll grant them some latitude in saying
what should or should not be done within the walls of a legitimate business.
There were several bars and restaurants here in town that built a THRIVING business --
because they were smoke free. Now that has been denied to them as well.
They were no longer *unique* -- and lost a lot of customers as a result.
'Nother words (at least here in Duluth and I suspect this isn't the only town),
there's diverse enough of a society that OPTIONS are offered for smoking or non-smoking.
It's my (humble) opinion, that the shop owner should be allowed to run his business as he sees fit.
If it's a business (i.e. -- let's say a bar/ restaurant), and they allow smoking there ---
You don't have to go in if you object to smoking because ----
there's other places in town that DON'T allow it. Go there instead.
I agree with Groucho entirely on this one.
I'm thinking that the next thing is we will be told what we can or cannot do in our own homes.
It's a scary thought -- but NOT so far-fetched -- given what is happening already.
I agree with Garth that Linda put it very well.
As to Mr. Miller's comment, David, you forget/forgot that SOME people do NOT have the particular freedom you referenced.
In a situation where there is less than full employment in a community, the employees do NOT necessarily have the freedom to refrain from going to that establishment. Oh sure, I've heard the line -- they can always get a job somewhere else. Even that is far easier said than done at least sometimes. So, I believe a very compelling case can be made that we have a right to breath the best air available (by natural means) in a given community and THAT right could be far more compelling than the "right" to smoke in public places.
ADULTRESS.....SNOW WHITE LIVING WITH SEVEN MEN AND THEN DUMPING THEM ON THEIR BUTTS WHEN SHE FOUND THE RIGHT GUY.
BLOODY....WELL, ONLY INFERRED BUT KILLING BAMBI, SCARR SCRATCHING THE HELL OUT OF THE LION KINGS HANDS AND HIM FALLING DOWN A HUGE MOUNTAIN RIDGE....JAFAR AND THE SWORD,
GAY....WOW, PROBABLY PRINCE CHARMING, PROBABLY THE SEVEN DWARFS...
I mean, even SHREK makes reference to Disney all through those, to how utterly stupid, gay and sadistic they are...and of course KIDS are not influenced by that???
Cigs are just not the biggest issue, but if you are a non smoker, of course it will always and forever be an issue.
I remember a guy one time on the WOW field that told me he didnt like the fact that I smoked (PRETTY sure it was the cigs and not the knowledge that I had of the Bible) as he sat and ate at a DUNKIN DONUTS....at 465 pounds as he ate a dozen.
He that is without sin, cast the first Donut?...How did I go from Disney to smoking to Donuts???
As much as I know there are sadistic characters, "almost all of them" is quite a stretch.
The Snow White as adultress comment was meant as a joke, right ?
Those were valid 'bloody' examples.
And the gay comments were also meant to be a joke, I'm sure.
I thought the first Shrek movie to be clever, and sometimes insightful, but I can think of any number of Disney films I'd rather a child watch than Shrek 3.
Dawn, if I were to eat a dozen donuts, it wouldn't be great for me, but it wouldn't affect you in the least. However, if I smoke up the joint around a nonsmoker, I'm jeopardizing his health, not just mine. Big difference, isn't there?
Some nonsmokers are judgmental, I grant you, but for me this isn't about judging. All I feel for smokers, having been one for the majority of my life, is pity. It sucks to get hooked.
And have you ever read any Victorian children's books geared at teaching character and morals. Some of them are more grim than Grimm. Apparently these were an effort to put the fear of the Lord into the little ones. They're dark, filled with deaths of parents and siblings--downright terrifying.
Recommended Posts
Bolshevik
On the bright side my wife and I can enjoy the parts of the restaurants we used to have to avoid. I like the law. I have to breathe other peoples cigarettes when I'm outside, now I can go inside for some fresh air. . .
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
Bolshevic...I can appreciate the personal advantages it is to you...BUT, what's next?...no "cussing" in public?...no farting?...no gum chewing?...How far does the government get to go in regulating behavior?
When do we cease being free?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
What is THIS? THE Groucho Marx Jr going over to the dark side... er, "right" side? I'm SHOCKED! ;)
Btw, in AZ, it's now law also... but law enacted by the PEOPLE (by way of a ballot measure). A law enacted by duly elected representatives (legislators) is STILL law enacted by the people, but not quite as directly so.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Me thinks thou hast an ox that hast been gored! Don't you mean "how far do the people go in regulating behavior?" Should the people demand that murder not be tolerated? What about child molestation?
It's ALL a matter of what society -- a majority of the people -- decide.
Obviously, certain rights of the minority (those whose ox get gored) must be honored... but WHAT is a "right?"
Is smoking a right? Should it be?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChasUFarley
New Hampshire just passed the smoking ban in public places...
With the state motto: Live Free or Die
No mandatory seatbelt law
No mandatory motorcycle helmet law
No state income tax
No sales tax
But don't you dare light up a ciggy in a bar!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
I can't sit in my own apartment without breathing a neighbor's cigarette or cigar. So on a nice Spring or Fall day, my windows are shut. This law gives me someplace else to go.
I was a smoker for about 5 years, I know its a pain. Maybe with this global warming the Northern Territories in Canada will be more habitable, so we can all spread out more.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Actually, THAT is, or at least appears to me to be, quite a poignant statement about the significance of this particular issue.
Edited by RockyLink to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
I agree with you Rocky, and I don't. :)
As far as the smoking ban in bars and restaurants goes ---
I have a problem with it being legislated to folks who own their own business.
They own the building, they pay the property taxes,
they pay the high fees for having a liquor license,
they hire folks to check ID's so there are no underaged drinkers in their bar,
(in other words) they are doing their best to follow the law ---
and then they are told that no one is permitted to smoke there??
It's their place. It's their paycheck, place of business, whatever you want to call it.
They should be calling the shots there, not the *smoking police*.
When I see the folks who want to eradicate smoking paying all the bills
that These folks pay, then (perhaps) I'll grant them some latitude in saying
what should or should not be done within the walls of a legitimate business.
There were several bars and restaurants here in town that built a THRIVING business --
because they were smoke free. Now that has been denied to them as well.
They were no longer *unique* -- and lost a lot of customers as a result.
'Nother words (at least here in Duluth and I suspect this isn't the only town),
there's diverse enough of a society that OPTIONS are offered for smoking or non-smoking.
It's my (humble) opinion, that the shop owner should be allowed to run his business as he sees fit.
If it's a business (i.e. -- let's say a bar/ restaurant), and they allow smoking there ---
You don't have to go in if you object to smoking because ----
there's other places in town that DON'T allow it. Go there instead.
I agree with Groucho entirely on this one.
I'm thinking that the next thing is we will be told what we can or cannot do in our own homes.
It's a scary thought -- but NOT so far-fetched -- given what is happening already.
Edited by dmillerLink to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
But don't they get you elsewhere? Aren't property taxes high?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
and $1000-$2000 a year in car insurance
Freedom is for the rich.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Linda Z
I've smoked for longer than some of you have lived. Over the past 5 years I've quit for several months at a time, even a year once. I was a smoker when the smoking ban came up on the ballot in Ohio, and I voted for it. Why? Because the dangers of second-hand smoke aren't a myth, as much as we die-hard smokers would like to believe that.
The most selfish thing I ever did as a parent was smoke around my child. I would have laid down my life for him (still would), and I worked hard to support him and raise him. He was pretty much the center of my world throughout his growing-up years. Yet as much as I loved him, I let my addiction to nicotine put his health in jeopardy. He had asthma and he frequently had respiratory problems and severe ear infections. May God forgive me for putting my addiction ahead of my child.
We can rationalize all we want. That's what addicts do. We can whine and pi$$ and moan about getting our rights taken away. It's a smoke screen (yeah, I meant to do that). It covers up the fact that (a) we know smoking is bad for our health yet we think somehow we'll dodge the bullet and (b) we're pretty darn sure smoking is bad for the health of those we subject to it and we know damn well it irritates a lot of nonsmokers. Addicts have a hard time getting honest about their addiction.
I had a woman approach me a couple weeks ago about signing a petition to get a bill put on the ballot to rescind the smoking ban in public places in Ohio. I was smoking (outside) at the time, so she thought I'd jump at the chance. I said, "No thanks." She asked why. I said I don't mind going outside to have a cigarette. It's better than sitting someplace where dozens of people are chain-smoking all at once." She looked at me like I was Hilary Clinton walking into the Republican National Convention and stomped away in a huff. Tough.
So today I'm on day 2 of what I hope will be my final attempt to quit again. Finally, our office building is enforcing the law. In my last two attempts, I got sucked into starting again because we have a smoking room here and I'd get stressed out and go have "just one." Ha! Just one.
Back to the original point of this thread: I'm glad!!! I can't tell you how much it bugged me to see people smoking in movies when I was, at least temporarily, free from tobacco. It made me want to smoke so badly it darn near drove me nuts.
So take heart, smokers. You have the great outdoors to smoke in, and your car, and your own homes. Me, I can only hope that this is it, that this is the time when I quit forever--and that I can stop lining the pockets of those rich old goobers who sell the darn things and spend my money on something less toxic and a whole lot more fun!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GarthP2000
Well put post, Linda. :)
We all also need to keep in mind that tobacco companies *still* are fighting the medically proven FACT that smoking causes cancer and all the other smoking related diseases.
And for no better reason than the _bottom line_.
Guess what folks. Nowhere in the Constitution is there any concept or law protecting smoking as part of the Bill of Rights. ... Sorry!
<_<
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
I agree with Garth that Linda put it very well.
As to Mr. Miller's comment, David, you forget/forgot that SOME people do NOT have the particular freedom you referenced.
In a situation where there is less than full employment in a community, the employees do NOT necessarily have the freedom to refrain from going to that establishment. Oh sure, I've heard the line -- they can always get a job somewhere else. Even that is far easier said than done at least sometimes. So, I believe a very compelling case can be made that we have a right to breath the best air available (by natural means) in a given community and THAT right could be far more compelling than the "right" to smoke in public places.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
prayingfordaylight
SADISTIC....ALMOST ALL OF THEM
ADULTRESS.....SNOW WHITE LIVING WITH SEVEN MEN AND THEN DUMPING THEM ON THEIR BUTTS WHEN SHE FOUND THE RIGHT GUY.
BLOODY....WELL, ONLY INFERRED BUT KILLING BAMBI, SCARR SCRATCHING THE HELL OUT OF THE LION KINGS HANDS AND HIM FALLING DOWN A HUGE MOUNTAIN RIDGE....JAFAR AND THE SWORD,
GAY....WOW, PROBABLY PRINCE CHARMING, PROBABLY THE SEVEN DWARFS...
I mean, even SHREK makes reference to Disney all through those, to how utterly stupid, gay and sadistic they are...and of course KIDS are not influenced by that???
Cigs are just not the biggest issue, but if you are a non smoker, of course it will always and forever be an issue.
I remember a guy one time on the WOW field that told me he didnt like the fact that I smoked (PRETTY sure it was the cigs and not the knowledge that I had of the Bible) as he sat and ate at a DUNKIN DONUTS....at 465 pounds as he ate a dozen.
He that is without sin, cast the first Donut?...How did I go from Disney to smoking to Donuts???
Just me, rambling as usual...
Dawn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hiway29
I'm really not looking to argue, but ...
As much as I know there are sadistic characters, "almost all of them" is quite a stretch.
The Snow White as adultress comment was meant as a joke, right ?
Those were valid 'bloody' examples.
And the gay comments were also meant to be a joke, I'm sure.
I thought the first Shrek movie to be clever, and sometimes insightful, but I can think of any number of Disney films I'd rather a child watch than Shrek 3.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Linda Z
Dawn, if I were to eat a dozen donuts, it wouldn't be great for me, but it wouldn't affect you in the least. However, if I smoke up the joint around a nonsmoker, I'm jeopardizing his health, not just mine. Big difference, isn't there?
Some nonsmokers are judgmental, I grant you, but for me this isn't about judging. All I feel for smokers, having been one for the majority of my life, is pity. It sucks to get hooked.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheInvisibleDan
Actually, the original fairy tales before Disney's handling are far more Grimm.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Linda Z
Good point, Dan.
And have you ever read any Victorian children's books geared at teaching character and morals. Some of them are more grim than Grimm. Apparently these were an effort to put the fear of the Lord into the little ones. They're dark, filled with deaths of parents and siblings--downright terrifying.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.