I have been a smoker for for 22 years now and it doesn't bother me 1 bit that I can't smoke in a restaurant or bar anymore. I have no quams with going outside to feed my addiction. Things change and you just have to roll with the punches. My fear in all of this is that they will soon try to ban smoking in your own home! The way I see it is... It's my home, if you know me well enough to be in my home then you already know I smoke, if you don't like the smell then don't come over. It's that simple.

As for the taking of our rights... I don't believe they have messed with my right to smoke. They just gave me some rules I have to live by in order to smoke. No big deal. Now if you want to get on the subject of taking rights away then lets talk about the seatbelt law. I personally don't like seat belts and if I want to get in my own car and endager my own life (even more) by not putting on a seat belt then thats MY CHOICE NOT THEIRS! A motorcyclist can ride a motorcycle without a helmet, but I have to wear a seatbelt? THATS BS! That should be a choice that I, being of sound mind and body, should be allowed to make a decision on. I don't need some government official to tell me what I "HAVE" to do when it involves my own person and does not put any other person at risk.

quote Originally posted by JimmyS: It's my home, if you know me well enough to be in my home then you already know I smoke, if you don't like the smell then don't come over. It's that simple.

Total agreement. I won't be coming over.

quote Originally posted by JimmyS: I don't need some government official to tell me what I "HAVE" to do when it involves my own person and does not put any other person at risk.

The problem is (in a worse case scenario), after your family's finances have been completely drained due to your brain injuries, the government is then responsible for keeping you alive (ie. paying the bills) in a vegetative state for the rest of your life.

By the way, here in BC seat belts are mandatory as are motorcycle helmets.

Here in Florida a motorcyclist does not have to wear a helmet as long as he carries extra insurance. I feel the same should apply to a seat belt. My whole problem with the seat belt law is the choice issue.

As for not coming over... you werent invited anyway. LOL

[This message has been edited by JimmyS (edited 12-10-2006).]

quote Originally posted by JimmyS: As for not coming over... you werent invited anyway. LOL

After all the barbs I've taken in this thread, that's got to hurt the most.

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Would you hurt my dog?

Definitely not. Especially if I knew you let him pee on your shoes also.

Patrick,

What's wrong with "that" is that simply because you don't "want" something is no reason to deny that something to others. It's just that simple.

In your example, no, I wouldn't WANT that, but I would also NEVER try to pass an ordinance BANNING that. Your example is, actually, realistic. There are areas around hotels/motels, parks, etc., that are set aside for walking dogs. If I want to take a walk, I pretty much avoid those areas because I don't want your example on my shoes. If you want to take that a bit further, let's say that I don't like that mess SO MUCH that I get a regulation banning the walking of your dog in Public Parks, then later in your front yard, since that's a potentially public use spot. Oh, you can still legally OWN a dog, you just can't let him do his bidness anywhere.........................

John Stricker

quote Originally posted by Patrick: And what, pray tell, is wrong with that? If I was walking my dog, and everytime it passed you I allowed it to pee on your shoe, would you be upset? Would you want my dog to stop doing that? Of course you would. But why, I see no associated health concern. (Well, maybe my health when you eventually pull your side arm out.)

I can fully understand a non smokers point on the smell. Cigarettes smell nasty. Its a fact. As for the cancer thing... I think a non smokers chance of developing lung cancer from second hand smoke is very very very slim. Yes it may cause your food to taste funny and your clothes to smell bad and your eyes to possibly burn but the lung cancer thing from second hand smoke is pushing the envelope. I am not saying it can't happen but think about this logically... A smoker smokes for 40+ years and gets lung cancer from smoking. How long do you think it will take a non smoker to develope lung cancer? Mabe 100+ years with the minimal intake that a non smoker may actually inhale. After that long of a period, more than likely you will have died from some other cause. I am glad that non smokers can now enjoy things that maybe they couldn't before but enjoy them for the right reasons.

[This message has been edited by JimmyS (edited 12-10-2006).]

quote Originally posted by cliffw: Definitely not. Especially if I knew you let him pee on your shoes also.

Well Cliff, my dog wouldn't be peeing on your shoes, or John's shoes, or Aceman's shoes, or anyone's shoes. Why? Well not because there's necessarily any health risk involved, but because I have no right to allow my dog to infringe upon anyone else's private space - ie their shoes.

I also wouldn't allow my dog to smoke in a public place.

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Jimmy, I don't agree with your figures, but nevertheless I appreciate your attitude.

My figures are not a documented thing just an example.

Your welcome. I can just understand both sides of the situation. As a smoker I realize that cigarettes smell nasty and that smell gets everywhere and can even make food taste different. I smoke but even when smoke gets in my eyes it burns.

quote Originally posted by jstricker: In your example, no, I wouldn't WANT that, but I would also NEVER try to pass an ordinance BANNING that.

Okay, we'll see about that. I'm going to move to Kansas and I'm going to chase you around the state with my dog. We'll see how long you tolerate wet stinky shoes.

First though, I'll have to get a dog...

G'Nite all. I said my peace, and I quote "Peace".

1 final thought... as I stated before. I just hope this doesn't lead to a ban on smoking alltogether. Then I would feel it would infinge on my right to choose.

[This message has been edited by JimmyS (edited 12-10-2006).]

G'Nite Jimmy. Please don't fall asleep with a lit butt.

[EDIT] That didn't sound quite right, but you know what I mean.

[This message has been edited by Patrick (edited 12-10-2006).]

quote Originally posted by aceman: pokey, If I didn't fowllow sanitary rules in my kitchen of my restaurant, I as the owner can infect a population with food poisoning, e coli, or botulism. ALL have a DIRECT LINK with being a health issue. However, I am not directly harming my customers by allowing smoking in my restaurant. Why? Because the secondhand smoke exposure has not been proven anywhere to DIRECTLY cause a health issue. If I eat food with e. coli contamination, I'm likely to get e coli. If I sit in a retaurant with someone smoking 25 feet away, I'm NOT LIKELY to get cancer.

Heres the deal. I'm talking about one thing and you're talking about another I think.
How about this in the formof a question.

Does a smoker and a non smoker both have the right to enjoy a meal without another person making it intolorable for them?

quote Originally posted by pokeyfiero: Heres the deal. I'm talking about one thing and you're talking about another I think. How about this in the formof a question. Does a smoker and a non smoker both have the right to enjoy a meal without another person making it intolorable for them?

That's what smoking and nonsmoking sections are for. If I go out with my wife and a restaurant doesn't allow smoking, we may not go to that restaurant. They don't cater to my wife's desires. Same goes for a nonsmoker. If a patron has an issue with a restaurant that does or does not allow smoking then take it up with the owner.......not the government!

No one has exclusive "rights" to eat at a restaurant. For the most part it's up to the owner of the establishment. I don't think tobacco preference was included in the equal rights act.

You have the right to smoke free dining and enjoying your meal......IN YOUR HOME.....Otherwise, it should be up to the restaurant owner's discretion.

quote Originally posted by aceman: You have the right to smoke free dining and enjoying your meal......IN YOUR HOME.....Otherwise, it should be up to the restaurant owner's discretion.

Again ... restaurants are public places.

The non smoker is not the attributing factor to the issue. It is the smoker wishing to cause someone else problems with their desires.
What if someone started spaying harmless water on everybody? Would that be OK. Maybe the water sprayer has a right to do this because the person that doesn't like it can just exercise their right to stay home?

The non smoker simply believes they should be able to enjoy the same rights as anyone else. They are not asking for special treatment. They are asking to be treated with respect as most respect your right to smoke or do most anything as long as it doesn't effect them in a negative manner.

I'm done. There isn't anything else I could say that has not already been said.

quote Originally posted by pokeyfiero: The non smoker simply believes they should be able to enjoy the same rights as anyone else. They are not asking for special treatment. They are asking to be treated with respect as most respect your right to smoke or do most anything as long as it doesn't effect them in a negative manner. I'm done. There isn't anything else I could say that has not already been said.

No, they don't want the same rights, and I don't smoke regularly and never indoors. They want it THEIR WAY. Period. They can't share space. They can't make allowances. It's getting more and more restrictive with the examples I mentioned of some local buildings not allowing smoking ON THEIR PROPERTY, EVEN OUTDOORS. That kind of regulation has NOTHING to do with the rights of the non-smoker, it has to do with arrogance of others wanting to bend someone to their will.

As I said before, stop pussyfooting around. You want smoking banned, then frigging make it ILLEGAL to buy, posess, or use tobacco in any form. Come on, grow a pair and let's find out what will REALLY HAPPEN.

(you know the intersting thing, to me, is that Patrick, Scott, and a few others, are pretty liberal in their views and most liberals are proponents for choice on things like drug use, abortion, etc., but in the case of tobacco..................no choice.)

John Stricker

quote Originally posted by Patrick: Okay, we'll see about that. I'm going to move to Kansas and I'm going to chase you around the state with my dog. We'll see how long you tolerate wet stinky shoes. First though, I'll have to get a dog...

You already have a dog. It's name is "Smoking Ban". You have already moved and are already chasing us around the state. Into places that allow smoking. Even those that want to allow it.
It is not like we chased you into places that did not allow it.

A "public place" that everyone wants smoking banned at should be defined as places ALL MUST be present at and can't avoid going to to conduct business and all pay for thru taxes: All municipal buildings. Otherwise, if it's not directly causing a health hazard or conducting illegal business, KEEP THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF THE PRIVATE BUSINESS. You don't HAVE TO go to a bar or a restaurant. You can choose a restaurant that is smoking or nonsmoking. You're trying to force your viewpoints onto me.

Besides, everyone is talking about their RIGHTS. What RIGHTS under the Constitution does a smoker violate by smoking in front of you? There is no Ammendment or Right or Freedom in the Constitution of the Freedom/Right of Choice.

quote Originally posted by pokeyfiero: Again ... restaurants are public places.

NO THEY AREN'T. You do not HAVE to go to a restaurant...you CHOOSE to. If I open a bed and breakfast and I clearly state when making all reservations that smoking by our guests is not allowed then smokers who would otherwise book a reservation can choose not to. Plain and simple, it is my choice that I don't want my inn smelling like smoke, and it is the smoker's choice to not patronize my establishment.

The reverse is also true, if I open a bed and breakfast and say smoking is not only allowed, but we have a smoking room where we encourage our patrons to smoke although it is allowed anywhere in the house, that is my CHOICE as the owner and operator of the establishment. It is also the non-smoker's choice to not patronize my establishment.

Now say I also operate a sizable restaurant on the same property, in a large dining room attached to the house, in either case I have made my choice as to whether or not I want the business of smoking patrons, and the smokers or non-smokers as the case may be choose whether or not to patronize my restaurant. The government should NOT be allowed to regulate this kind of behavior.

quote Originally posted by AntiKev: NO THEY AREN'T. You do not HAVE to go to a restaurant...you CHOOSE to. If I open a bed and breakfast and I clearly state when making all reservations that smoking by our guests is not allowed then smokers who would otherwise book a reservation can choose not to. Plain and simple, it is my choice that I don't want my inn smelling like smoke, and it is the smoker's choice to not patronize my establishment. The reverse is also true, if I open a bed and breakfast and say smoking is not only allowed, but we have a smoking room where we encourage our patrons to smoke although it is allowed anywhere in the house, that is my CHOICE as the owner and operator of the establishment. It is also the non-smoker's choice to not patronize my establishment. Now say I also operate a sizable restaurant on the same property, in a large dining room attached to the house, in either case I have made my choice as to whether or not I want the business of smoking patrons, and the smokers or non-smokers as the case may be choose whether or not to patronize my restaurant. The government should NOT be allowed to regulate this kind of behavior.

DING DING DING!! We have a winner!!!!
Nick

Public, as in anyone can walk in and have a seat and order a meal. It's not their fault they are having smoke float by them.

Not private, like your house were only invited can do the same. Then it's there fault that they inhale others secondhand smoke.


It's not right that I can't go certain places to eat because I don't want to die from the actions of others.

OK how about a deal.. If anytime anyone in any restaurant, bar, ect. wanted to smoke he had to ask every person in there if it would bother them. If ONE person says yes, then no smoking. If nobody cares, then smoke up. I bet everywhere would be nonsmoking.

I pretty much agree with this... but here is the Devil's advocate view being used.

The workers don't have a choice... they have to work in that smoke filled environment day after day, year after year ingesting smoke they didn't produce. Sure they have a choice... second hand smoke or unemployment.

That's the argument use by the Health department here. The choice of finding a job in a non smoking restaurant or bar didn't exist prior to the first smoking ban here in Washington... every restaurant or bar was a smoking establishment. When the ban went into effect and was then overturned a lot of places stayed non smoking because it was nicer and business went up rather than down. I think the ban is back in effect for about the third time now.

I don't like cigarette smoke and am glad I can enjoy my time out having fun better, because my eyes don't sting, my clothes don't stink. Cancer is way down my list of concerns from smokers. The world being their litter box, the effect on my eyes, the stink are all way higher. But I still think the regulations suck.

ug - 4th page. I'm getting in this thread late, and was too lazy to read all the pages....

I smoke. I will continue to smoke.
I hate other people who smoke. smoke bothers me. I hate the mess they make.
people shouldnt smoke. its bad for you. its bad for everyone & everything around you.

like many have said: a resturant is a PRIVATE place. smoking bans are government officials telling private business owners how to run their business.
but, OSHA & FDA do this also. every business is burdened with rules to make things fair & safe for the public.
the usual solution for laws/bans is to make a bar a private club. the private club can smoke if they like. since no "general public" will be visiting, and members know what they are in for, everyone is happy.

smoking is not a "right". there is not a "right to smoke". there are not "smokers rights".
if 2 people are standing there, and one lights a smoke, and the other says "put it out" - who should yeild? the smoker. why? because he is the one infringing. everything was fine untill then. he should have asked if its ok, and if ok, then lit up.

and thats it. WE voted on it. A majority won.

I'm fixin to go get a greasy cheese burger and a beer in a Bar where folks can drink and smoke if they want too.

I figure if they can smoke I can fart and belch.

quote Originally posted by Butter: I'm fixin to go get a greasy cheese burger and a beer in a Bar where folks can drink and smoke if they want too. I figure if they can smoke I can fart and belch.

well, that is on the list too - so, enjoy while you can. and I dont mean the farting & belching.

quote Originally posted by Butter: I'm fixin to go get a greasy cheese burger and a beer in a Bar where folks can drink and smoke if they want too. I figure if they can smoke I can fart and belch.

Or look at it this way - The byproduct of them enjoying their cigarette is the second hand smoke. The byproduct of me enjoying a pint in the same establishment is urine. How would they like it if I whipped down my drawers and pissed on them after enjoying my drink.

I kid, ...I kid.....

I don't get it. If a business owner decides to allow smoking in their business, they should have the right. If you, as an employee, don't like it, then leave. It is not a choice of second-hand smoke or unemployment. It is a choice of one job or another job. If the person can only get a job in a smoking environment, then they have bigger problems than inhaling smoke.

Same goes for people going out. If you don't like eating out where you may smell smoke, then don't go out. Or better yet, start your own business and don't allow smoking. I go out to eat and when I don't like the food, or I don't like the service, I don't return. Same for a smoky environment, I make a choice with my money.

A bar is for smoking and drinking, If you don't like it, then open your own bar.

Why do people believe they have the ability to restrict other people's rights? What if I don't like your perfume? Do I have the the right to pass a law banning you from wearing it when I go out to eat? Sounds silly right... don't be too sure, it is coming.

Fast food will be next... You won't be able to have your fries with that (well, they will be oven baked and tasteless).

Proper venting is the answer, and still, it is up to the owner of the business to make the choice. No one is forcing you to enter or work at ANY business... you have a choice (at least here in the U.S.... for now).

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: I don't get it. If a business owner decides to allow smoking in their business, they should have the right. If you, as an employee, don't like it, then leave. It is not a choice of second-hand smoke or unemployment. It is a choice of one job or another job. If the person can only get a job in a smoking environment, then they have bigger problems than inhaling smoke. Same goes for people going out. If you don't like eating out where you may smell smoke, then don't go out. Or better yet, start your own business and don't allow smoking. I go out to eat and when I don't like the food, or I don't like the service, I don't return. Same for a smoky environment, I make a choice with my money. A bar is for smoking and drinking, If you don't like it, then open your own bar. Why do people believe they have the ability to restrict other people's rights? What if I don't like your perfume? Do I have the the right to pass a law banning you from wearing it when I go out to eat? Sounds silly right... don't be too sure, it is coming. Fast food will be next... You won't be able to have your fries with that (well, they will be oven baked and tasteless). Proper venting is the answer, and still, it is up to the owner of the business to make the choice. No one is forcing you to enter or work at ANY business... you have a choice (at least here in the U.S.... for now).

it just makes it so much eaiser to do it th other way around. ban smoking, and make smoking places the exception. more people DONT smoke. over pefumed people DO get harrassed also. many people have allergies that perfumes will set up. and, very few jobs will let you smoke & work. and why should they? not paying you to light fires. I smoke. I smoke alot. I make my own to avoid the taxes. my wife smokes even more. I know smoking is NOT a right. all things become a problem when to many people get involved.

quote Originally posted by fierofetish: DING DING DING!! We have a winner!!!! Nick

Thanks Nick.

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: I know smoking is NOT a right. all things become a problem when to many people get involved.

That's where you're wrong. Smoking is a right. It's the basic right of me to choose whether or not I want to smoke. If you take away the choice you violate a right. And just as a side note, by rolling your own you bypass a lot of the crap that the anti-smoking crowd are against in cigarettes, all the harsh chemicals, by rolling your own you choose what to put in them. Obviously there are a few basic ingredients that have been used since the first tobacco harvest, but beyond that...

[This message has been edited by AntiKev (edited 12-11-2006).]

quote Originally posted by AntiKev: That's where you're wrong. Smoking is a right. It's the basic right of me to choose whether or not I want to smoke. If you take away the choice you violate a right. And just as a side note, by rolling your own you bypass a lot of the crap that the anti-smoking crowd are against in cigarettes, all the harsh chemicals, by rolling your own you choose what to put in them. Obviously there are a few basic ingredients that have been used since the first tobacco harvest, but beyond that...

how is smoking a right?
and, if it is - isnt the right to NOT have smokers around you the same right?
I guess I associate "rights" with significant choices.

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: it just makes it so much eaiser to do it th other way around. ban smoking, and make smoking places the exception. more people DONT smoke. over pefumed people DO get harrassed also. many people have allergies that perfumes will set up. and, very few jobs will let you smoke & work. and why should they? not paying you to light fires. I smoke. I smoke alot. I make my own to avoid the taxes. my wife smokes even more. I know smoking is NOT a right. all things become a problem when to many people get involved.

Most people don't indulge in gay sex either, so why cant we keep it outlawed? AIDS has been proven to be transmitted by same sex intercourse, so to keep from overburdening the healthcare system we should outlaw gay sex.

does that sound silly? it's the same argument.
Gays are infringing on my rights by increasing medical costs, and they violate my religious views as well!

(Devils advocate argument)

yes, it would be nice to stop them damn gays from having sex when I'm trying eat dinner....

quote Originally posted by Uaana: Most people don't indulge in gay sex either, so why cant we keep it outlawed? AIDS has been proven to be transmitted by same sex intercourse, so to keep from overburdening the healthcare system we should outlaw gay sex. does that sound silly? it's the same argument. Gays are infringing on my rights by increasing medical costs, and they violate my religious views as well! (Devils advocate argument)

Most eunuchs don't indulge in sex either, so why cant we keep it outlawed? AIDS has been proven to be transmitted by sexual intercourse, so to keep from overburdening the healthcare system we should outlaw sex.

does that sound silly? it's the same argument.
Sexually active people are infringing on my rights by increasing medical costs, and they violate my eunuchian beliefs as well!

(Devils advocate argument)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

This thread is going nowhere. No surprise.

I’ve said my piece. Unless someone brings something new to the table, I’ve had enough.

quote Originally posted by Uaana: Most people don't indulge in gay sex either, so why cant we keep it outlawed? AIDS has been proven to be transmitted by same sex intercourse, so to keep from overburdening the healthcare system we should outlaw gay sex. does that sound silly? it's the same argument. Gays are infringing on my rights by increasing medical costs, and they violate my religious views as well! (Devils advocate argument)

noone is saying anything about smoking at home. you can have all the gay sex you want at home too.
we be talking about restuarants & bars. neither of which sex of ANY kind is allowed. you WILL be arrested, if caught screweing ANYONE gay or otherwise at your local Applebees.

My dad died at 58 from cancer due to his smoking. My mom died a few years later from the exact same symtoms and she never smoked a single cigarette...just from always being around him. That to me makes 2nd hand smoke somewhat harmful....

Well, I wouldn't say smoking is a right, but does a business owner have a right to run their business the way they wish? We are talking about a legal product here. I am concerned with the rights of individuals... more and more people are giving up their rights, soon you won't be able to walk down the street without irritating or endangering the rest of the population. We as a group are giving up our rights way too easy, if you want to smoke, drink and do anything else, then so be it! If a business owner wants to indulge your habits, then so be it. If you want to work in that environment, then so be it.

J.

quote Originally posted by rogergarrison: Its really simple....they put it to a vote...more than once...and the no smoking won. Case closed. As to smoking being a right....thats the same excuse people use about driving. You dont have a right to drive anything anywhere...its a privelige granted to you. Things you have a right to are breathing, sleeping, eating, to seek employment, marry ..... etc.