Yes.
Do you have a cite for this? How do you define a harmful level?
Right. And I’m in Chicagoland nearly every weekend. I will also note that many restaurants are now wholly smoke-free. Simply because the owner has decided it is in his best interest financially to operate in such fashion.
If you can prove that (for an otherwise healthy lung) then you’ll be the first.
Well, I should have stated that better. Detectable by humans, not by instruments. Obviously if we can’t detect it at all we can’t show it has a harmful level.
Anyway…as for the disapation, that’s basic diffusion, no question that the multiple compnents of cigarette smoke seperate and disperse in the air.
For harmful levels, we can turn to our friendly HazMap which shows that Carbon Monoxide is dangerous at 1500 to 2000ppm for 60 minutes. It’s odorless and tasteless so as to be undetectable by a human without an instrument of some sort.
Sadly, science twarted me on Hydrogen Cyanide, which appears to have a lower odor threshold than I’d thought.
Anyway…what does this have to do with cigarettes? Well their smoke emits a number of toxins, carcinogens and radioactive materials. I find it interesting that many smokers have very little knowledge of this and tend to react negatively to any suggestion of their neighbors working with some of the components. See Excalibre.
I have no problem with smokers as long as they have as much concern for my rights not to inhale their toxic emissions as much as I respect their rights not to be poisoned by materials I might play with. But don’t tell me that just because you’re on the other side of a few inches of drywall and a few layers of paint that cigarette emissions aren’t getting into the average apartment or room nextdoor. You don’t have fume hoods and stacks piping it into the atmosphere. It’s an ugly clash of rights, where does one end and the other begin? I dare say there is no clear cut answer, so frequently people err on the side of caution.
I’m no housing expert, but in NYC, “public housing” in common speech refers to the NYC- owned housing projects. There are plenty of other types of housing which involve government subsidies or tax breaks, but they aren’t referred to as “public housing”.
You’re saying that housing projects are actually built with NYC money? Like I said, I’m no expert in the housing situation of New York, but money for public housing generally comes from federal subsidies. I have no doubt that the city has played a leadership role in implementing them, but even if they are the holders of the deed (are they?) it’s certainly not a type of “ownership” comparable to that of a private landlord who is, of course, justified in regulating (within applicable laws, naturally) what may be done within his property.
Excalibre whooa buddy. Calm down there.
To begin with, I can’t say I’ve done vast amounts of research in the area of smoking sections in Chicago. As I said, I was there last summer…for a week. I went to maybe, what? Twelve restaurants? All of them were down town, all of them had smoking and non smoking sections (or bars in the restaurant that weren’t separated off by anything more then a four foot high wall). I can only speak from my experience, as I’m not a…Chicago smoking-section-ologist 
. I’m speaking from what I experienced in Chicago (admittedly limited), what I remember from when California wasn’t smoke free, and from my 6-8 trips to Las Vegas a year.
It was my experience (I should probably say it again – to be taken with a grain of salt as it is my piddly, limited experience), smoking sections don’t stop anything. Just about every place I have been has the smoking section as part of the restaurant and there are not even any dividing walls. Smoke wafts. That’s what it does. And it wafts into my booth. It makes me have an asthma attack or get a migraine. Does that make me selfish? Sure, why the hell not?
You have the right to smoke. No one denies that (well, people do, but that’s not the point…I don’t deny that). I ask for some courtesy, that’s all. Is it really that much to ask smokers to sit on the patio or walk outside once or twice to smoke? Surely you get that smoke really does have negative effects (long term is arguable, but many people do have BAD short term reactions).
What’s the problem with going to the patio? That’s what my Mom does. She even prefers it as she gets lovely patio seating 
(a lot of restaurants…around here at least once again my piddly experience offer patio seating to smokers first).
Are you kidding? The walk to the patio is damaging. How draconian of you to think this way.
I say let people smoke in their apartments & dorm rooms. They should be responsible for getting rid of the stink once they move out though.
So the devil gas can kill without knowing it’s there?
OK, being a chemist, explain to the class how this would work out.
I go to the local Chevy dealer and buy a used car owned by a smoker. I can’t smell the smoke, but it’s still there. After I die of cancer months later, who do the relatives sue? I was subjected to a gas chamber against my knowledge. Seriously, who’s in the wrong?
Jesus Christ, you’re an arse. Do they let you act like this in public? In case it hadn’t already been made abundantly clear, what is draconian is enforcing inconvenience on every smoker in the country so that you can enjoy any bar you choose. Of course, this has been made abundantly clear, and you still haven’t explained exactly why you seem to feel that the world’s bars should be your exclusive domain, but then you’re being an arse, so I shouldn’t be surprised.
How unutterably benificent. Your generosity with other people’s private property knows know bounds. Except places you want to go, of course. Or might want to go. Some day. Or walk past. Or hear about. No, those smokers shall never enjoy a cigarette with a drink again, not while Yookeroo is around. But they should be grateful; after all, they’re being allowed all of outside, not to mention their own homes. They don’t know they’re born.
You’re from Bakersfield, CA, where the temperature ranges from 39 to 69 degrees Fahrenheit during the winter.
I’ve never been to New York, but here in Spokane, we have to deal with things like this and this for a few months every year - and it isn’t just the stuff falling from the sky that’s cold, but everything outside. In my opinion (as a nonsmoker), it’s unreasonable to ask someone to leave their home every time they want a cigarette.
I’m saying that New York City Housing Authority projects are not built with private money, although I expect it’s a mix of city, state and federal funding. The rent is paid to the housing authority and based on the household income of the tenant, maintenance is done by housing authority employees, there used to be a separate city police department which patroled the housing projects ( which along with transit, has now become a bureau of the NYPD). None of which occurs in buildings which accept Section 8 or privately owned buildings which received subsidies or tax breaks. And if the city’s ownership is somehow different from that of a private landlord, please explain how, because I don’t get it.
There are thousands of hazards I don’t think it’s worth avoiding. I’m just pointing out that, like the lady who church who shouted out “Amen!” when the preacher condemned adultery, drinking, and smoking, but switched to “meddler!” when he condemned dipping tobacco, you have to be careful to avoid hypocrisy in these cases. Once you give government the right to draw a line, they’ll draw it where they want, not where you want. If you have ever been in favor of a law which restricts the right of an individual to engage in private activity you’ve got no business being against a law restricting smoking in public housing or school dorms.
Now I think that all of this can be avoided by eliminating the laws governing private activity and letting a privately funded court system handle the inevitable conflicts. If I want to smoke marijuana, crack or tobacco; if I want pet pit bulls, goldfish, or cobras; if I want to manufacture doilies, methamphetemines, or motorcycles in my apartment that should be my choice.
So you’re saying the rest of us shouldn’t let you use candles or incense in your room or apartment? After all, there’s a very real fire hazard, and some people have allergic reactions to the smoke.
Apparently you belong to the Sanctimonious Meddlesome Old Maids Party.
So what you’re saying is that smoke can pass directly through drywall? That’s very interesting. How does that work, exactly?
Damn. I just realized I have peanut butter in my pantry. Some people are allergic to peanuts. If I have a PB&J while I’m watching *Law and Order * tonight, I’m liable to get some peanut butter on my fingers, and if I touch the stairway railing I might get some peanut butter residue on it, and my neighbor in the apartment across the landing might get some of the residue on him and he might be allergic to peanuts, so obviously I’m threatening his health when I have my PB&J, and I shouldn’t object to meddlesome assholes telling me I can’t have my PB&J …
… but the jelly has sugar in it, and excessive sugar can cause diabetes, and if I get diabetes I drive up health care costs for everyone, and obviously I don’t have the right to drive up health care costs, so obviously kidchameleon should have the right to confiscate my jelly, too …
… but, hey! I can smoke all the pot and have all the hookers I want, right?
Depends. Do you have enough for everyone?
Huh? Why go to all that trouble when the peanut butter fumes can pass directly through the drywall?
Eh? Since when do candles or incense release cyanide, formaldehyde or Polonium-210? I think that if your neighbor asks you to stop burning your incense or smoking ciragettes because it’s bothering them you should. You should also turn your stereo down if they’re trying to sleep.
Of course. Because I think that owners should be able to choose not to allow smokers or pet owners to rent their property. I’m so freaking meddlesome.
Diffusion? How the hell do you think you get air into your place if the windows and doors are closed? Houses are far from airtight.