Could we get a cite for this, please?
It seems to conflict with national statistics that show 4 out of 5 people don’t smoke.
You don’t know a thing about me. I’m certainly not going to feel bad that you called me a name. :wally
Most Americans don’t work in bars.
I don’t smoke at work (even outside in the smoking area). I don’t smoke on the sidewalk. I don’t smoke around children. I don’t smoke in my car. I don’t smoke in my apartment. I most certainly do not smoke in other’s houses…even if they say it is okay, I feel uncomfortable.
The one place I do smoke? My friendly little local neighbourhood pub where I have been going for years.
It is an Establishment What Allows Smoking. Why on god’s green ass you would go there as a non-smoker is completely beyond me. There are non-smoking bars in town. Nice ones. I go to them occasionally, and I don’t smoke, because they are Establishments What Don’t Allow Smoking. See, I get the difference.
So if any of you non-smokers, who I have nothing but deep respect for for not picking up this ungodly habit that I have been trying to shake for years now, decide to come to my pub and have a pint with me, and decide to get all butt-hurt when I light up a cigarette - you can eat me. Seriously.
(can I just add…I’ve been checking out this thread and the telemarketer thread, and I find it absolutely hilarious that, in that thread, telemarketers are demons because they won’t find another job, which is apparently the easiest thing in the world. And then, in this thread, WON’T SOMEONE THINK OF THE EMPLOYEES who are subjected to this horrible smoke and don’t have any other choice but to endure it???)
Ooops! I was painting with that broad brush I guess :eek:
You need to go back and read the rest of the post.
Non-smokers like to go to smoking bars because that’s where the cool people are.
Smoking might be a really dumb thing to do but the cool people still do it.
Yes, I’m joking.
But it’s true.
It’s anecdotal. Read the rest of the paragraph.
And you know nothing about me. On the other hand, your latest postings in this thread do show me a thing or two about you. Color me unimpressed.
People who live in a place or time where jobs are tight, of course. Did you think we lived in a utopia ?
That doesn’t mean that the percentage isn’t higher in certain subsets of people. At my work (software company), I am one of only two smokers in twenty-five employees. Far less than 20%. At the neighborhood dives I go to, at least half of the employees smoke, and not much less than that of the customers. It averages out.
Colorado’s new strict law kicks in tomorrow, by the way. I’ll either smoke on the patio or I won’t smoke at all. Somehow, I’ll deal. Though if someone will explain to me how fucking casinos got exempted, I’ll be much obliged.
Such as…?
I am a smoker.
I live in a country that has made it illegal to smoke in ANY workplace (bar, factory or even the cigar lover place that was closed by the law)
I have one question. If smoking is so terribly bad (and it is) why is it not illegal? Why can’t one country just step up and make it illegal? Dope is illegal in most countries. Heroin is illegal. Cocaine is illegal.
Why isn’t smoking? Could it be that many govts are VERY dependent on the tax revenue bought in by smoking?
As a smoker, I would love to see smoking made illegal…they made it bloody uncomfortable yet profitable, why not just outlaw it?
Why is it that a drug that has been proven to kill many of its users and almost as many non-users is a drug that is freely available to anyone.
Why? Because governments make MILLIONS from smokers. They have felt the pressure from non smokers to bring in restrictive anti-smoking laws but they can’t afford to lose the tax dollars smokers bring them.
Smoke free bars? ALL bars are smoke free here. If they make smoking illegal because of the health hazard when will bars become illegal. Surely alcohol kills many people?
Which country wil be the first to be decried as totalitariain yet applauded as healthy for making smoking illegal?
I am one of those sad, pathetic smokers who stick to the actual law and the ‘law’ of etiquette AND the addiction.
Go on make smoking illegal…I dread to think where the lost taxes will come from though.
As I mentioned earlier, outright prohibition of traditionally legal substances of abuse does not work. We had a huge mess in this country 1919-33 when booze was outlawed - smuggling and organized crime flourished, and law enforcement was corrupted. We could expect the same or worse with a total ban on smoking now. And there are considerable numbers of people who think that illicit drug bans may cost more than they’re worth, at least in some cases.
Actually, citizen initiatives in this country are heavily responsible for laws restricting smoking in enclosed public spaces. Governments adapt to decreasing tax revenue - and one way the pain is eased is through greater worker productivity and less public health cost from smoking-related diseases.
Children can legally buy tobacco products in your country??
Smokers who are upset over high taxes have two excellent options, the first of which can be followed by everyone - work to get government to devote more of its tax revenue and tobacco settlement money to fund health care and smoking cessation programs for smokers. Second - quit smoking. Stick it to the taxing authorities by denying them revenue. They may have to raise taxes elsewhere, but at least non-smokers will have to kick in too.
I don’t think any of those things should be illegal. They should be in the same category as tobacco, and yes, they should be taxed.
Other than one offhand comment in this thread, I don’t think anyone in here has said they want smoking to be illegal.
I am a smoker. I try my best to be a non-littering, smoking-ordinance-obeying, courteous smoker although I know I slip sometimes. I think we all slip when it comes to doing things in a “proper” way. How many personal driving pet peeves are we all guilty of doing sometimes? (and I am not comparing failing to use a turn signal in any way to the health risks associated with second-hand smoke or smoking in general)
Two years ago, a smoking ordinance was enacted in my town. At the time it was enacted, it was the most restrictive local smoking ordinance in New Mexico. It was enacted solely on the authority of the city council–six people, four of whom were avid anti-smokers. There was no public vote. There is no provision in our municipal laws for a public vote. The basis of the ordinance was (1) the health risks to employees of establishments that allow smoking and (2) the health risks to the clientele of establishments that allow smoking.
The ordinance prohibits smoking in all enclosed places including (but not limited to) restaurants, bars, private clubs, doctor’s offices & hospitals (did they really need to put that one in?), bowling alleys, bingo parlors, etc. Somehow, though, the framers of the ordinance managed to slip in one additional restriction: no smoking on attached outdoorpatios of restaurants & bars.
On the surface, this doesn’t seem out of the ordinary until one considers that “outdoor patios of restaurants & bars” is specifically written into the ordinance while other patios attached to public places are left alone. One of the art museums, for example, has an outdoor patio area where people can smoke unconcerned about whether they are breaking the law.
The ordinance provides that smokers must stay at least ten feet away from any public entrance to a building. There is no rule about how far one can stand from the perimeter of an outdoor patio, though. One of the restaurants in town is constructed in such a way that I can stand ten feet away from the front door and light a cigarette right next to the two-and-a-half-feet-high wrought iron fence that encloses the patio area. I am obeying the smoking ordinance, yet a non-smoker could be sitting six inches away from me while I do it. I won’t even get into the fact that this particular restaurant sits at a busy intersection surrounded by idling cars and trucks in a state that doesn’t require emissions inspections.
Because smoking is not allowed in restaurants or on patios, patrons and employees of my husband’s restaurant who wish to smoke must now cross the patio to an even-more-enclosed corridor to light up. While they smoke in the designated, legal smoking area, their second-hand smoke is filtering directly into the patio area because there’s nowhere else for it to go. This smoking area was designated by the owners of the bank building that the restaurant is attached to, by the way, to give the building employees an area to smoke.
Smokers cannot take their cocktails/beer/wine with them to smoke, either. The liquor license applies to a very strict perimeter that includes the entire restaurant/bar/lobby/kitchen/storage areas and the outdoor patio area. The smoking area is situated beyond the licensed area, therefore one must leave his/her drink unattended in order to go smoke a cigarette. Not necessarily a safe thing to do on a really busy bar night. Besides, it might get picked up by a server who has assumed the customer left creating yet another headache when he/she has to re-order a drink at no charge, which our computer system isn’t set up to do. A thought I, as well as others, have had: By enacting a smoking ordinance that concentrates its efforts mainly on restaurants & bars (oh yeah, and hospitals because that was of major concern 
) are they trying to eliminate tobacco use or liquor consumption? Is it possible that this is just another sly way for the neo-prohibitionists to further their cause without making noticeable waves?
From the point of view of the restaurant owner, when someone gets up from their table, and walks outside for a cigarette without announcing that he will come back, how do the employees know he will come back? Was he finished with that drink or meal? Should the bussers clear the table? Did he plan on coming back to pay his tab? Does anyone know what happened to the guy/girl at table 64?
I don’t mind a smoking ordinance in the least. I rather enjoy eating a nice meal in a restaurant without smoke billowing around me. I know from talking to my husband’s customers that most of them appreciate it greatly. What bothers me, though, is the inconsistent and illogical approach to the framing of some smoking ordinances, ours in particular. I have highlighted a few glaring (to me, at least) inconsistencies in my local ordinance. I’m sure there are more if I had the time to look closely enough.
This ordinance is just another example of feel-good legislation. The non- and anti-smokers now feel “safe” from the evil smokers, but no one seems to care that New Mexico doesn’t require old, nasty cars to have emissions controls or inspections while they spew noxious fumes at higher levels more frequently throughout the day as they whizz past the restaurant where 5 or 6 smokers gathered in a legal, designated smoking area ten feet away from the entrance as non-smokers glide past with their mocking, condescending chatter about how they finally managed to exile them from places labeled as “public.” :dubious:
Actually, you are correct. I apologize. I thought the quotation after the use of the smiley was another poster’s quotation and not a ‘source’ you were using to address me.
Are you seriously asking this question?
Yes. Not only do I want the freedom; I have the freedom. For it is my choice. This is a straw argument anyway. The two risks are very dissimilar. Also, If someone attempts suicide and fails, you can’t ‘finish the job.’ And why complicate one risk with additional risk?
I don’t. I think people should be free to choose one, the other or both, given that one person’s use does not impact other persons.
The distinction here is that driving a motor vehicle under the influence of mind altering chemicals is illegal. Of course, people still do it; but they are not ‘allowed’ to do it.
Amazing. The SG says SHS is bad for you (like that’s news!) and it generates a 6-page Pit thread. I was particularly impressed by him wanting people to make sure their day-care centers and schools were smoke-free. I suppose there might be some day-care centers with an attached smoking area but I’ve certainly never seen or heard of one.
I’m a smoker but not one of those that sits around and cries that they can’t quit. I enjoy the things and have for many years.
On the other hand, I would support a complete prohibition on tobacco in any form. As several posters have pointed out, Prohibition didn’t work that well in the US but I think tobacco is different. Admittedly, there would be some smugglers and dealers but I just don’t see people going to what would effectively be drug-dealers to buy a pack of Marlboros. The risk/reward ratio just isn’t there like it is for alcohol or other drugs. If tobacco is so bad for you (and it is) then the government should stop its prohibit its consumption, just like they’ve done with cocaine and heroin.
Regards
Testy
Anecdotal, I know, but here goes anyway, Testy. I’ve personally seen staff from daycare centers congregate in the entryway and puff away.
I don’t disbelieve you but I am somewhat startled by someone doing that. Of course, some people will do ANYTHING so it certainly isn’t impossible. Speaking personally, I might light-up in the parking lot but not closer. No sense in smoking at the kids.
As an aside, I kind of like the anti-smoking laws over here. They ban it in many places but only enforce it selectively.
Regards
Testy