Smoking Bans

[Pogo]

I've grown so fearful of violent backlash from non-smokers I don't even smoke in my car if there's a chance I will stop next to a non-smoker's car. I relegate my smoking to out in my backyard with no one around.
That's okay, that's when I put together my most devious plans. Non-smokers beware.

Thanks for that. Driving behind a smoker is damn disgusting. Gotta roll all the windows up. Fuck that.

What are you, bloodhound?

It's called a normally functioning body. That smokers kill their olfactorial capabilities and degrade to blissfully unaware of what everyone else is sensing, that's your problem, not mine, but I'll be god damned if I'm going to dumb mine down just because you dumbed yours. Again -- fuck that.

Yeah y'all are hopelessly ignorant of it but when you walk into the room after getting your fix, you fricking reek. You're broadcasting the stench like a fifty thousand watt radio station. That's your choice of course, but don't be surprised that normal humans can smell your stench and don't be offended that most of us choose not to live in the same gutter.

So I thanked the poster above for exhibiting something you don't -- personal responsibility. You might take a cue.

I doubt you will though.

 

[Pogo]

Smoking is a health problem for employees. Leave your guns and sigs at home, I do...

Radon kills seven times more EMPLOYEES AND CUSTOMERS than second hand smoke, yet I am the only one pointing out how silly it is to ban the less of the two evils , while allowing the other element in public spaces.

Too bad we can't get that word out over the uproar of the anti smoking nannies

You are freaking dense. Nobody walks into a confined space and lights up a Radon. Your desperate goalpost move continues to be inoperative.

 

[Pogo]

The überyoga stretches that the Randbots here assume is ironic ---- they claim to champion the right of the "individual" over any kind of "control" squashing those rights, yet have no qualms themselves about squashing the simple right to breathe of others around them -- a biological right that really can't be more basic. And faced with an articulation of the consequences they throw a tantrum, try to change the inconvenient subject or just go


I've learned from this forum what this faux-noble bullshit "libertarian" label really means --- it means never having to take responsibility for one's personal actions. It means having the "freedom" to live with the emotional maturity level of a four-year-old where everything in one's sphere is entirely egocentric. All about Numero Uno.

That explains Fingerboy's avatar. It sums up the whole sociopath attitude.

​

Unfortunately for them humans are a social species. There's not a damn thing they can do to change that. They're just gonna have to grow up.

 

[AquaAthena]

Smoking is a health problem for employees. Leave your guns and sigs at home, I do...

Radon kills seven times more EMPLOYEES AND CUSTOMERS than second hand smoke, yet I am the only one pointing out how silly it is to ban the less of the two evils , while allowing the other element in public spaces.

Too bad we can't get that word out over the uproar of the anti smoking nannies

You are freaking dense. Nobody walks into a confined space and lights up a Radon. Your desperate goalpost move continues to be inoperative.

I don't want to be forced to inhale something that has been in someone else's lungs or mouths. Beyond disgusting. I hold my breath when walking past smokers and am resentful their nastiness is in my hair and on my clothes.

 

[Redfish]

Restaurants casinos and bars should have the freedom to allow smoking sections or not. People should have the freedom to eat in those restaurants. Freedoms are what we are about.

What about the freedom to breathe?



It ain't about the "rights" of the business owner --- it's about the rights of the breather.



Duh?

The people can choose to go to a no smoking restaurant or bar. I don't smoke and that may be my choice. But just because I don't smoke, I don't expect others to go without their cigarettes.

"Can choose to go to a non-smoking (whatever)" is the same as denial of the right to breathe.
Prove it's not.


Whether smokers go with or without their cigarettes, who cares, that's on them. But once they impinge on my ability to breathe, shit's gonna hit the fan. Why should they get breath rights and I don't?

No its not.

To non smoker, any smoker is a problem. Even when it doesn't affect non smoker at all.

Don't be absurd. Why would I give a flying shit what a smoker's doing to his own lungs in East Jipip? Obviously you didn't read my post even though you had a week which for most people is enough time to catch the conditional phrase. You must be one of the super-slower readers. I bolded it for you so you can maybe Where's Waldo it. Get back to me in three more months.

rarely do we agree.

 

[Redfish]

Smoking is a health problem for employees. Leave your guns and sigs at home, I do...

Radon kills seven times more EMPLOYEES AND CUSTOMERS than second hand smoke, yet I am the only one pointing out how silly it is to ban the less of the two evils , while allowing the other element in public spaces.

Too bad we can't get that word out over the uproar of the anti smoking nannies

You are freaking dense. Nobody walks into a confined space and lights up a Radon. Your desperate goalpost move continues to be inoperative.

I don't want to be forced to inhale something that has been in someone else's lungs or mouths. Beyond disgusting. I hold my breath when walking past smokers and am resentful their nastiness is in my hair and on my clothes.

Do you not exhale? Do others not have to inhale your garlic breath and your eau de toilet perfume.

 

[AquaAthena]

Smoking is a health problem for employees. Leave your guns and sigs at home, I do...

Radon kills seven times more EMPLOYEES AND CUSTOMERS than second hand smoke, yet I am the only one pointing out how silly it is to ban the less of the two evils , while allowing the other element in public spaces.

Too bad we can't get that word out over the uproar of the anti smoking nannies

You are freaking dense. Nobody walks into a confined space and lights up a Radon. Your desperate goalpost move continues to be inoperative.

I don't want to be forced to inhale something that has been in someone else's lungs or mouths. Beyond disgusting. I hold my breath when walking past smokers and am resentful their nastiness is in my hair and on my clothes.

Do you not exhale? Do others not have to inhale your garlic breath and your eau de toilet perfume.

Perfect example of how threads die when they stray off-topic. Just another reason why I make few posts here.

Logging out.

 

[Pogo]

Smoking is a health problem for employees. Leave your guns and sigs at home, I do...

Radon kills seven times more EMPLOYEES AND CUSTOMERS than second hand smoke, yet I am the only one pointing out how silly it is to ban the less of the two evils , while allowing the other element in public spaces.

Too bad we can't get that word out over the uproar of the anti smoking nannies

You are freaking dense. Nobody walks into a confined space and lights up a Radon. Your desperate goalpost move continues to be inoperative.

I don't want to be forced to inhale something that has been in someone else's lungs or mouths. Beyond disgusting. I hold my breath when walking past smokers and am resentful their nastiness is in my hair and on my clothes.

Do you not exhale? Do others not have to inhale your garlic breath and your eau de toilet perfume.

I'm gonna take a wild random guess here and surmise that you don't get a lot of dates... call it a hunch.

 

[Redfish]

Smoking is a health problem for employees. Leave your guns and sigs at home, I do...

Radon kills seven times more EMPLOYEES AND CUSTOMERS than second hand smoke, yet I am the only one pointing out how silly it is to ban the less of the two evils , while allowing the other element in public spaces.

Too bad we can't get that word out over the uproar of the anti smoking nannies

You are freaking dense. Nobody walks into a confined space and lights up a Radon. Your desperate goalpost move continues to be inoperative.

I don't want to be forced to inhale something that has been in someone else's lungs or mouths. Beyond disgusting. I hold my breath when walking past smokers and am resentful their nastiness is in my hair and on my clothes.

Do you not exhale? Do others not have to inhale your garlic breath and your eau de toilet perfume.

I'm gonna take a wild random guess here and surmise that you don't get a lot of dates... call it a hunch.

Can't speak for aqua girl, but I don't need dates. I have been married to the same beautiful woman for many years.

 

[Pogo]

Radon kills seven times more EMPLOYEES AND CUSTOMERS than second hand smoke, yet I am the only one pointing out how silly it is to ban the less of the two evils , while allowing the other element in public spaces.

Too bad we can't get that word out over the uproar of the anti smoking nannies

You are freaking dense. Nobody walks into a confined space and lights up a Radon. Your desperate goalpost move continues to be inoperative.

I don't want to be forced to inhale something that has been in someone else's lungs or mouths. Beyond disgusting. I hold my breath when walking past smokers and am resentful their nastiness is in my hair and on my clothes.

Do you not exhale? Do others not have to inhale your garlic breath and your eau de toilet perfume.

I'm gonna take a wild random guess here and surmise that you don't get a lot of dates... call it a hunch.

Can't speak for aqua girl, but I don't need dates. I have been married to the same beautiful woman for many years.

See? I was right.

 

[rightwinger]

If a business wants to allow smoking that's fine with me.

People can look for jobs at nonsmoking businesses if they want and customers can patronize businesses that ban smoking as well.

Freedom of choice. Period.

Sure, you can choose where to shop, that's fine; if you don't want carcinogens in your lungs you can patronize somewhere else, nobody forces you in there. All true. BUT...

That business, in order to operate, must have employee staff. And they can't be forced to breathe that stuff against their will -- unless the business wants to hire only smokers, which they can't do. So keep it out of the workplace to protect the employees -- who have no choice -- and the dilemma of what to do about the clientele takes care of itself. Problem solved.

no one is forced to work for an employer that allows smoking. Smoking is permitted in most casinos, no one is forced to work as a dealer or cocktail waitress. If you accept a job in a place that allows smoking, you do so voluntarily.

why does freedom confuse you liberals so much?

Why does "safe workplace" confuse you?

Is it because you get off on bootlicking? Or you just don't have the cojones to stand up for your own rights?

No one is forced to work in a place they consider unsafe. If a restaurant wants to serve only smokers and only hire smokers, that should be its right. Why do libs fear freedom?

Thankfully, we moved past that opinion in the 1920s

Yes, you have to provide a safe workplace and no, you can't force employees to make a choice between risking their lives and feeding their families

 

[Redfish]

If a business wants to allow smoking that's fine with me.

People can look for jobs at nonsmoking businesses if they want and customers can patronize businesses that ban smoking as well.

Freedom of choice. Period.

Sure, you can choose where to shop, that's fine; if you don't want carcinogens in your lungs you can patronize somewhere else, nobody forces you in there. All true. BUT...

That business, in order to operate, must have employee staff. And they can't be forced to breathe that stuff against their will -- unless the business wants to hire only smokers, which they can't do. So keep it out of the workplace to protect the employees -- who have no choice -- and the dilemma of what to do about the clientele takes care of itself. Problem solved.

no one is forced to work for an employer that allows smoking. Smoking is permitted in most casinos, no one is forced to work as a dealer or cocktail waitress. If you accept a job in a place that allows smoking, you do so voluntarily.

why does freedom confuse you liberals so much?

Why does "safe workplace" confuse you?

Is it because you get off on bootlicking? Or you just don't have the cojones to stand up for your own rights?

No one is forced to work in a place they consider unsafe. If a restaurant wants to serve only smokers and only hire smokers, that should be its right. Why do libs fear freedom?

Thankfully, we moved past that opinion in the 1920s

Yes, you have to provide a safe workplace and no, you can't force employees to make a choice between risking their lives and feeding their families

OMG, you are so full of left wing bullshit------------you are willing to give up freedom to have safety and in the end will have neither. There is a Franklin quote that says pretty much the same thing. Since you worship the founders, look it up.

 

[SillyWabbit]

Smoking is a health problem for employees. Leave your guns and sigs at home, I do...

Radon kills seven times more EMPLOYEES AND CUSTOMERS than second hand smoke, yet I am the only one pointing out how silly it is to ban the less of the two evils , while allowing the other element in public spaces.

Too bad we can't get that word out over the uproar of the anti smoking nannies

You are freaking dense. Nobody walks into a confined space and lights up a Radon. Your desperate goalpost move continues to be inoperative.

I don't want to be forced to inhale something that has been in someone else's lungs or mouths. Beyond disgusting. I hold my breath when walking past smokers and am resentful their nastiness is in my hair and on my clothes.

How do you deal with a fart--that gaseous outflow straight from the bowels of another, filled with particles of poo poo?

 

[SillyWabbit]

Sure you can pinch your nose, after you've already taken the poo poo into your lungs.

 

[Clementine]

Oh, and I thought your support was for health reasons.

"Support" of what? The fact of forced smoking causing cancer and emphysema? Yeah it is for health reasons. Ain't that a Captain Obvious moment.
Doesn't need "support" though; it's a known known. And it's not in question that my right to breathe air trumps somebody else's right to force me to breath shit.

Appears not

It appears anything that simply upsets a nanny must be banished from society

How very exciting for you

And I thought you were serious, for what, the first time?

This makes no sense.

What makes no sense is your lack of understanding of the entire subject. But then again, this isn't about the environment inside enclosed space. It's about you controlling others.

NO, it's about the right to breathe. I claim it. It's not something I have a choice not to claim. Now if we were all fish this wouldn't be an issue.

You don't have the right to pour hot tar down my throat; if you view that as "controlling" you, I think you need a shrink to examine said homicidal fantasies.

Businesses should have say because they own the property. It's up to you to avoid things you don't like and if you know a business allows it, then you're an idiot for going in. I never went to a local place because it was small and everyone smoked. Their business. I just went elsewhere since they have a right to do as they please on their own property.

Personally, I would ban perfume if I owned a restaurant because some people douse themselves in it and it makes me sneeze. Maybe you liberals could get right on that and ensure that I don't run into people who wear too much perfume or people with bad body odor. How well would that go over if places turned people away because they were stinky?

We weren't talking about businesses -- we got ourselves a couple of denialists here (one of whom may have left) who would have us believe forced smoking is innocuous. That's got zero to do with what anybody "likes". My mother died from lung cancer and she said she "liked" the smell of it (though she was not a smoker). It's about being fucking honest about public health hazards. We can't take step two if people are gonna stuff their heads in the sand and declare it doesn't happen when there's direct evidence that it does.

You know how completely recycled the air is on a plane? (hint: never take a flight when you feel a cold coming on) Should smokers have the "right" to light up on a plane then? What about the rights of the other passengers to breathe what little air there is? Fuck 'em, they can walk to San Diego, right?

Randbots.....

No one is forced to endure smoking. They don't have to enter certain bars or restaurants if it's allowed. People do have a choice. Plenty of business owners would still choose to have a non-smoking establishment, so it's bull that anyone is forced to inhale it. We are forced to inhale perfume because people everywhere wear it and it's impossible to stay away from all businesses. There are places you have to go in, like hospitals, DMV, city hall to pay bills or even court houses. I have asthma and could never work in a nail salon or at a perfume counter, but I do manage to avoid it. I have trouble if I'm in an elevator and someone doused in cologne gets on with me. I cover my nose and don't care if they are offended.

Point is that business owners tend to do what the majority of their customers prefer. Some bars might have a majority of smokers and it should be their right to accommodate them. Non-smokers can find another bar.

In Minnesota, a city banned people from smoking outside and don't want to even see them walking down the street. That isn't about health of others, it's about not even tolerating the sight of it. Meanwhile, people cheer the legalization of pot.

Some exaggerate it and even claim that they can smell it from across the street and one lady once claimed that her windshield was "pelted" with cigarettes every time she drove around the city. I've seen people carelessly toss their cigarettes out the window and they don't land on cars. Seriously, it's gotten to the point of being ridiculous.

I am more concerned about drunk driving or sheer stupidity when I'm driving down the road because I am in way more peril of an accident than anything. Yet, we have millions of illegal aliens who apparently haven't had any driver's ed and some states saw clear to hand them driver's licenses. And you're worried about someone smoking in a bar where you don't have to be. Tell me how to stay away from idiots and criminals. People are being killed by gangs or home invaders every day.

If you don't like smoking, avoid going where people smoke. Passing smokers on the street won't hurt you, but you might want to watch for muggers, rapists, gangs playing the knock out game or people on drugs or alcohol because they might get you. Breaking a damn curly light bulb requires more caution that walking past a person smoking.

 

[Pop23]

If a business wants to allow smoking that's fine with me.

People can look for jobs at nonsmoking businesses if they want and customers can patronize businesses that ban smoking as well.

Freedom of choice. Period.

Sure, you can choose where to shop, that's fine; if you don't want carcinogens in your lungs you can patronize somewhere else, nobody forces you in there. All true. BUT...

That business, in order to operate, must have employee staff. And they can't be forced to breathe that stuff against their will -- unless the business wants to hire only smokers, which they can't do. So keep it out of the workplace to protect the employees -- who have no choice -- and the dilemma of what to do about the clientele takes care of itself. Problem solved.

no one is forced to work for an employer that allows smoking. Smoking is permitted in most casinos, no one is forced to work as a dealer or cocktail waitress. If you accept a job in a place that allows smoking, you do so voluntarily.

why does freedom confuse you liberals so much?

Why does "safe workplace" confuse you?

Is it because you get off on bootlicking? Or you just don't have the cojones to stand up for your own rights?

No one is forced to work in a place they consider unsafe. If a restaurant wants to serve only smokers and only hire smokers, that should be its right. Why do libs fear freedom?

Thankfully, we moved past that opinion in the 1920s

Yes, you have to provide a safe workplace and no, you can't force employees to make a choice between risking their lives and feeding their families

That safe working environment sadly does not include insuring radon is tested for in these places

Might I remind you, radon accounts for 7 times the amount of lung cancer deaths than second hand smoke.

But you'll still visit those businesses knowing this

And your point is?

 

[Pop23]

Smoking is a health problem for employees. Leave your guns and sigs at home, I do...

Radon kills seven times more EMPLOYEES AND CUSTOMERS than second hand smoke, yet I am the only one pointing out how silly it is to ban the less of the two evils , while allowing the other element in public spaces.

Too bad we can't get that word out over the uproar of the anti smoking nannies

You are freaking dense. Nobody walks into a confined space and lights up a Radon. Your desperate goalpost move continues to be inoperative.

I don't want to be forced to inhale something that has been in someone else's lungs or mouths. Beyond disgusting. I hold my breath when walking past smokers and am resentful their nastiness is in my hair and on my clothes.

Do you not exhale? Do others not have to inhale your garlic breath and your eau de toilet perfume.

AA answered honestly. I can appreciate that.

My question would be to her if she thinks an odor she feels unpleasant is enough to force businesses to ban it from their property.

 

[SillyWabbit]

Apparently, no one has a right to do anything liberals don't like. Smoking is legal. Business owners should decide whether they allow it in their bars or restaurants. Don't like it, don't go there. It should be up to the owners, not the whiny ass liberals who are so intent on imposing their will on others.

Hey, who said people couldn't smoke?

Do you remember those pesky little things called HUMAN RIGHTS? They say that you can do ANYTHING you want, as long as it doesn't HARM others. Does smoking in confined spaces around other people harm those other people? YES IT DOES.

Does this mean there is a right to smoke around other people in confined spaces? No it doesn't. Just as there is a right to free speech but not one to shout fire in a crowded space.

It's not difficult.

You talk about business owners. What about workers who can't get a job, get offered a crappy job in a bar and they HAVE to take it to be able to feed their kids otherwise the right wingers will moan they're just out to get welfare, but they have to put their damn health on the line.

I guess you'd be in favor of people going into Uranium mines unprotected, hey, it's up to the owner right? Same with construction workers, who needs a hard hat? Up to the business owner right?

Safety is only the job of the business owner, no one else can tell them what to do, and if you die, so the hell what? Right?

You are living in the 19th century. You might want to get current.

But the 19th century is the favorite century of conservatives

My favorite century is the one wherein the Coca-Cola Slurpee was invented. There's nothing like a Coke Slurpee and a smoke!

 

[rightwinger]

Sure, you can choose where to shop, that's fine; if you don't want carcinogens in your lungs you can patronize somewhere else, nobody forces you in there. All true. BUT...

That business, in order to operate, must have employee staff. And they can't be forced to breathe that stuff against their will -- unless the business wants to hire only smokers, which they can't do. So keep it out of the workplace to protect the employees -- who have no choice -- and the dilemma of what to do about the clientele takes care of itself. Problem solved.

no one is forced to work for an employer that allows smoking. Smoking is permitted in most casinos, no one is forced to work as a dealer or cocktail waitress. If you accept a job in a place that allows smoking, you do so voluntarily.

why does freedom confuse you liberals so much?

Why does "safe workplace" confuse you?

Is it because you get off on bootlicking? Or you just don't have the cojones to stand up for your own rights?

No one is forced to work in a place they consider unsafe. If a restaurant wants to serve only smokers and only hire smokers, that should be its right. Why do libs fear freedom?

Thankfully, we moved past that opinion in the 1920s

Yes, you have to provide a safe workplace and no, you can't force employees to make a choice between risking their lives and feeding their families

OMG, you are so full of left wing bullshit------------you are willing to give up freedom to have safety and in the end will have neither. There is a Franklin quote that says pretty much the same thing. Since you worship the founders, look it up.

Sorry...employee safety is not left wing bullshit

It has been a staple of civilized societies for over 50 years

 

[Ame®icano]

Good point. Now, hows that different from "we do not hire smokers"?

Actually, under the context it would be "we do not hire people who smoke at work"......

I stand with what I said.