I’m an atheist who strongly believes in personal freedoms, so naturally I think the current anti-drug climate in North America is a bit silly. That goes with the belief that if you’re stupid enough to smoke 5 packs a day for 20 years, that’s your right. But when your rights get in the way of my right to breathe, then fuck off please.
I have cystic fibrosis and asthma, so it’s hard enough to breathe anyways. But when I breathe in tobacco smoke it makes me gag on cough up a storm, even a little triggers it. Same with pot, it actually makes me have nausea and irritates my lungs. I’d like to state that again, whatever goes into your body is none of my fucking business. But PLEASE, have some respect for what goes into MINE. All smokers out there that stand at crowded busstops on a non-windy day puffing away into the crowd while people are hacking away, go jump off of a bridge, please. People will say “just ask them politely to move or go to the other side of them”, but, just like asking people to turn their super-duper loud mp3 player down, they won’t do shit all.
In summary: Smokers, go home and smoke, and stop screwing with my body too. If I can spit in your face without repercussion, then you can smoke inside.
You know, children really bug me, their crying tends to give me headaches, they really shouldn’t be allowed in public places.
What exactly gives you more right to be in a public place then a smoker? Because you have an involuntary disease, and the smoker has a voluntary addiction? But you both voluntarily came to the same place (let’s say a public park). What if you didn’t have a disease and just didn’t like smoke, then on what grounds would you have more right to that place then the smoker? How about shops that cater to smokers, you wouldn’t be banned from there, if you showed up would they all have to put it out?
I can understand, say, a courthouse disallowing it, nobody voluntarily goes there, we’re generally summoned and all have to share the same space. But a park, please, there’s plenty of room for everybody. And a private business, what grounds does the government have to say what perfectly legal activities can and can’t go on in a privately owned building? If the owner allows smoking and you don’t like it, don’t offer your business, if the business goes down enough I guarantee the owner will put a stop to it, no need to ask the government to baby sit you.
I’ll quit smoking in public places and never do it again if all taxes are removed from tobacco today, and the government refunds me every cent of tax I have paid on a pack of cigarettes for the last ten years.
I’m sick of this double-sided crap. Nobody wants smokers anywhere around them unless they’ve got their hands in our wallets. You hate smoking so much? Quit taking the tax money.
I am an EXTREMELY POLITE smoker. I always inquire as to whether it’s alright to smoke around people when I meet them, I don’t smoke in other people’s houses or cars without their express permission, I refuse to smoke near schools, and I even carry a little portable ashtray around so that I don’t litter while I’m smoking in public. Everyone in my household (nine of us, and we all smoke) does the same. Most of my smoker friends do too.
However.
I fully believe that if I sit in the smoking section and that I pay for my meal, and I don’t go out of my way to try to make your life a living hell because that’s just not the way I am - well, fuck. I think that after I have my nice dinner I deserve to have a smoke. Anyone who’s smoked for a while knows that after you eat, you usually want a smoke. I’m no different. Why the hell should I have to go stand out in the boiling hot (or freezing cold) outside just because you’re the one in a thousand sensitive one? I go OUT OF MY WAY, and I know a lot of other smokers who do too, to not offend your precious senses. Don’t bar me from one of my few pleasures in life.
That said.
I think it’s stupid to try to get rid of smoking in casinos (like they’re trying to here - it just isn’t going to fly because a lot of people who don’t smoke on a regular basis DO smoke while they’re drinking, and the casinos what you drunk) and it’s stupid to have a non-smoking section in a casino unless they have a REALLY GOOD ventilation system. In restaurants, I think that the smoking section (or nonsmoking section) should be physically walled off from the smoking area, not in the same room. Cuz then it’s just a place where you can smell smoke but can’t actually smoke.
At least I can still smoke in my car and house. Oh, wait, do you have a problem with that, too?
Sorry for the double-post, but I called my dad and mom and read them this post from work because it was so good, and you got a resounding applause from everyone at my house.
Does it apply to any kind of smoke (say, from barbeque, a fireplace, etc…) or is tobacco smoke the only kind of smoke that affects you negatively for some reason? More importantly , and more commonly, does it apply to car exhausts that certainly pollute the air and negatively affect people with asthma (and all others including me)? Should driving be drastically restricted (ie : only allowed when strictly necessary) on this basis? Should eating peanuts or wearing perfume in a public place be forbidden because some people are allergic?
I doubt he is the 1/1000 sensitive one. If that really were the case these smoking laws would never see the light of day.
Since you can’t contain the smoke to one place in the restaurant, your smoke does ruin my meal. So much for your consideration. And yes, before this town went smokeless at all restaurants, I did visit just the ones that did it voluntarily.
The strongest argument I’ve heard for outlawing smoking in private places such as restaurants is the protection of the health of people that work there. I’m certain that you wouldn’t want to work in a place in which you were subjected to carcinogens on a daily basis. Neither do the people that work in restaurants. And while in a utopian world they can go find other jobs, the truth is that it would be really hard for most people to do that. From building and fire codes to health and safety regulations, there are many, many laws on the books that prevent private owners of businesses from doing whatever the hell they want and letting the “free market” decide what succeeds and what doesn’t.
Also, the argument that it is a legal habit is also a bit lacking. Not everything legal can be done in all places, even if the owner of that place agrees to it.
Having said all that, I disagree that smoking in outdoor areas needs to be outlawed. Unless you are talking an area that people are forced to be in, smoking should remain legal there. It is legal and therefore people should be allowed to smoke where others have a choice on whether or not to be around that smoke.
Sigh…we’ve had so many pieces of this discussion before. I can’t speak for the OP, but anecdotally, as another asthmatic (luckily of a much milder and more intermittent variety, with no cystic fibrosis, thank goodness!):
– Tobacco smoke is by far my worst legal asthma trigger, exceeded only by marijuana smoke. Fireplaces and car exhaust do it sometimes, too, but how often do you find either of those in a public place where you need to be for any extended period of time?
– Like the OP, I certainly wish I didn’t have to give a damn about tobacco smoke. I would love to be able to hang out around cigarette smoke - as in the linked thread, it’s very annoying to have what should be one’s normal daily activities curtailed by one’s medical limitations. VERY annoying.
In theory, I am all for free will; in practice, I am a huge fan of live music, but I am really sick of paying for, say, concert tickets and then having to run out halfway through the show because I am hacking my lungs up. I suppose I should thank my lucky stars that I am living now, rather than 50 years ago when many U.S. professional workplaces allowed smoking. I don’t know how I would have managed to hold a job.
– Peanuts, perfume, other allergens: except for the few people most severely affected, it’s difficult for secondhand exposure to cause enough of the allergen to come into contact with the person’s lungs to trigger an attack. On the other hand, current estimates are that about 10% of Americans have been diagnosed with asthma at some point in their lives (see chart on p. 15 of linked .pdf), not to mention with other lung diseases adversely affected by tobacco smoke. That’s a lot of people. (And yes, I think people should drive less, too. And recycle more, and use less disposable stuff, etc. - I practice what I preach.)
Yes, I agree that to a certain extent, I just have to deal with my limitations - it sucks, but that’s what I get for inheriting my dad’s crummy lungs. But by the same token, I want to strangle the people who smoke at the subway stop, half the time while standing in front of the No Smoking sign; it’s not like I really have a choice about using the subway. To whatever extent possible, I patronize places that don’t allow smoking, for my own self-preservation, but in certain categories of establishments, there is simply no choice. And frankly, I will be a very happy camper when the Chicago and Cook County nonsmoking ordinances take effect.
We’ve been down this road in exhaustive (no pun intended) detail in a forum more suited for the exchanges this subject provokes.
The debate is increasingly ending well for the approximately 80% of adult Americans who do not smoke.
In recent developments, two major hospital systems in my city (including the one I work at) have announced the establishment of smoke-free campuses. Both to my knowledge had banned all indoor smoking some time ago, and the latest action hopefully will curb both the smoke-blowers who congregate near entrances and the unending stream of discarded butts and other tobacco-related litter.
California’s proposed major hike in cigarette taxes (Prop. 86), intended to discourage smoking, would raise up to 2 billion dollars a year for health spending (there’s a dispute over how much it would actually garner, given the likelihood of increased buying/smuggling from neighboring states with lower taxes).
Ah, but crying, annoying children could be linked to high blood pressure and heart disease… so it could be argued that there is a case for prohibiting children from public places, too. *
I don’t actually mean this seriously… I’m just playing a form of Devil’s Advocate. And FWIW, I don’t smoke, but have no problem with others smoking in public. Restaurants and other enclosed spaces are a different kettle of fish, however.
Sure, smokers have it so hard these days. Oh you poor basterds, having to step out into the sunlight to “calm yourself down”. I know I have a far above average hatred of smokers (my mom has smoked for over 30 years, and is hacking her lungs up everyday). But I’m just so glad smoking is getting banned everywhere. And since when does a smokers right to smoke, outweigh a nonsmokers right to breath?
Oh, and another thing. Of course me or any other nonsmoker breathing in smoke for a minute or 2 will basically cause no harm (unless you have asthma). But neither would me punching you in the face. You’d survive, and it would heal quickly. Can I do that, it calms me down, and it’s my right as a citizen, isn’t it?
As I’ve said in many a thread, I support smoking bans in public places. I also hate inconsiderate smokers.
I ask in return that non-smokers acknowledge that, for all its ills, smoking is currently a part of society - diminishing, true, but still there. If you ban us from smoking inside, which I support, make sure that the areas where we can indulge in it are away from you but not preposterously inconvenient. And don’t exaggerate the effect of tobacco smoke compared to other airborne pollutants (clearly this doesn’t apply to the OP).
Everybody loves the billions and billions of dollars that are taken from the smokers in taxes. Nobody’s complaining about the money that rolls in because the tax on a pack of cigarettes in PA is $1.74 plus 6% sales tax which on my smokes is another $0.24.
A pack of Marlboro 27s, including PA cigarette tax, federal cigarette tax, and sales tax currently costs me $4.26. That’s $4.02 if you remove the sales tax, and $2.28 when the state and federal cigarette tax is removed. Which comes out to a total in taxes of $1.98 in taxes for a $2.28 pack of cigarettes. That means 46% of the price I pay at the register for a pack of Marlboro 27s is tax, and that my cigarettes are taxed at a rate of 86%.
The hands of the people who hate the smokers are so deep in my pocket that they could shine my fucking shoes, and all I get to hear is complaining about the ever dwindling list of places I still can go out and have a cigarette with my food or my drink. I’ve never bitched and moaned about paying the price for a pack of cigarettes, never gone online to try to get them cheaper or avoid paying the taxes on them. What I have done is endure endless complaining about smokers being disgusting and evil and everything else, but nobody wants to give up that tax racket that’s going on. Smokers in PA are subsidizing health care for thousands of people (CHIP program) and lining the pockets in Harrisburg and Washington, D.C. I don’t hear anyone complaining about our second-hand dollars.
So honestly, I offered a deal. I’ll even compromise. I don’t need a refund on all the tax I paid in the last ten years, just don’t make me pay any more taxes on cigarettes. Give up the $1.98 per pack that you get, and I will never smoke in a public place again. But that will never happen, because much like the church and gambling, the anti-smokers will continue to point their fingers and ‘tut tut’ at the smokers, as they shove their hands further down into our pockets.
Leave us alone in our smoking areas. Leave us alone outdoors. Leave us alone in bars. Or give up our money. Can’t do it, can you? You’re all addicted to our money.
