Isn’t it rather strange that in a group of over a hundred people, most of whom started smoking in their teens, all of whom were exposed to smoke from infancy, and all of whom smoked a pack or more a day, that not one of them has died from lung cancer or contracted throat or mouth cancer?
How’s that for a statistic?
I hate you. 
(In my age group they call 'em Depends.)
Actually, price wasn’t the reason I quit eighteen years ago. They were already a dollar a pack then, and I figured out that I could have paid for my car insurance for what I spent on cigs. It wasn’t really health either, although I was concerned. Hell, when I started smoking in high school (class of '61) the kids all called them cancer sticks and coffin nails, and then sucked away. I smoked for about 24 years.
What finally made me quit was that I was a singer (emphasis on the word was), and I kept losing my voice. It was screwing up what I loved to do most, so I quit. Too late.
As someone once said, “Too soon old, too late smart.” I get uppity about other people who smoke once in a while. Then I remember that I used to be one of them. If they are stupid, I was too.
And if even the majority of restaurants did that, it would be a relevant answer. But since at least near where I am most of the places that allow smoking keep it seperated by a half-height wall, which the damn stuff floats right over, they may as well not bother. Not to mention the irritating habit a few of them have of not doing a damn thing when someone lights up in hte non-smoking section. So no, a rude woman with a cigarette wasn’t necessarily in the smoking section.
Come and live in California and you won’t have to deal with any of that
I hear there are a few localities here in the Golden State that actually ban smoking out of doors, SLO for one.
Not that any of that has actually helped smokers to quit in California, but the anti’s actually think it has. Myself, I used to smoke until about a year and 3 months ago. The health issue is what got me to stop, the money is what kept me stopped.
FTR, my mother never smoked and live to 88; my dad smoked from the time he was 10 and died at 92. He was one smoker that got it all back, 27 years of social security collected.
Once again; I’m not a smoker.
But I’m really really sick of people who complain about ‘second hand smoke’.
It’s easy to pick on a handfull of smokers.
Why don’t you complain at your goddamn government and tell them to do something about air-pollution on a higher scale.
Or get out of your goddamn car and take a bicyle.
Have you ever compared the shit you’re breathing near a factory, or in a traffic jam against a smoker?
Go, complain to Bush, who ran out of the Kyoto treaty.
Squish,
As a heavy and quite dedicated smoker who believes in his right to addiction and possible premature death from it, even I have to say that you’re being totally unreasonable.
Second hand smoking is dangerous, it’s unquestionable. Some research even indicates that the second hand smoke is more dangerous than the first hand filtered smoke is. I care not to link, Google if you will.
Smoking during pregnancy has been proven to have effects on the fetus, as does what you eat, drink, inject or ingest in any other way. Google again.
Smokers do tend to get certain types of cancer at a higher rate than non-smokers, denying that is pure idiocy. Your survey group seems somewhat oddly chosen and non-representative. The risk of cancer for smokers increases significantly after 15 years of smoking. Smokers that continue smoking beyond that point run up to 60% higher risks of developing lung cancer for instance. Now, this risk decreases dramatically and very fast the moment you stop. If you have not developed cancer of some sort within 8 years of quitting the risk has returned to close to normal rates. Yet the fact remains that there is a risk. Keep on Googleing.
I only bother to correct you, since it really doesn’t do us smokers any good to debate the way you are. IMHO it is my goddamned right as a knowledgeable adult to make the choice of ignoring those risks and lighting up as much as I want. It is also non-smokers goddamned right to not be forced to partake in that choice.
Now the US model of banning smoking from all remotely public places is a fuck up. I’ll agree with banning in public places that the general public must have general access to such as schools, hospitals, bus stations, trains stations, airports, shopping malls and so forth. Privately owned establishments such as restaurants and shops should be allowed to choose themselves. If I don’t like the choice they make I don’t go. When I lived on the West Coast and when I go there these days I make that choice as often as I can, which means that the solid majority of locales will not enjoy my patronage since they haven’t worked out how to circumvent the idiotic anti-smoking laws in place.
I know from several owners of establishments in LA that a good number would like to since a large majority of their patronage either want outdoor tables so that their party can smoke or absurdly have to go stand on the curb. I don’t know how many times I have laughed myself into stitches at the sight of half of a LA restaurant standing on the curb smoking while the better part of the remaining half just went back in after finishing theirs. At better establishments the recognizable fame level of of the crowd gathered smoking on the curb adds an extra bit of humor to it all if you ask me.
All that being said I have to say that 18 years down the road of a bad habit that I started heavily way to young I wish that I would have been more reasonable as a child. Now, I wasn’t and I am an adult and I choose to go on smoking – my fucking problem, but let’s agree that it’s a good idea to help young people not make that choice though, don’t you say?
There is much evidence that making cigarettes more expensive does have a positive long term effect on the rates of early addiction. Sweden has pioneered this and was the first nation according to WHO to achieve less than 20% smokers in the adult population. What was brought up earlier regarding the black market also holds true. There is a threshold where the price crosses into an area where the risk of committing a misdemeanor like buying contraband becomes worth it as does then naturally the more serious crime of smuggling. In Sweden it turned out that the level was around $5, I would surmise that it will depend on purchase power where that figure actually ends up. Raising the prices to that level or beyond is counterproductive since the deterring effect disappears when availability of cheaper contraband rises. The Swedish state lowered taxes and purchase of legal cigarettes went back to normal.
To claim that states are not being rather pragmatic and cynical in using us a nice and nifty source of income that no one feels really sorry for is also silly, but hey who said the state had to be nice to you. Vote for the Smokers Democratic Union or go live in SE Asia if you disagree.
All that being said; all you condescending, sorry ass, misocapnist, authoritarian, besserwissers can go suck in some other fucking air than mine.
Sparc
Swoosh
…Fizzle
Ahh
Sparc: In California, the ban on smoking in bars and restaurants was to protect the health of the employees there, not the health of the other customers.
Well actually Monty, the anti-smoke lobby in CA used that as a way to get the smoking ban in place since there was room provided due to the passive smoking cases that gave precedence in workplace protection regulation.
In Oregon they used a protection of minors as a ground and ended up with a ban on smoking in locales where minors are permitted or locales that are directly connected to such.
NY has gone a different way yet again and the actual rule is that if one single patron requests another to not smoke the responsibility under penalty of fine to enforce this request resides with the establishment. The argument being that the establishment bares certain responsibility in providing an environment that is not health hazardous. By this ruling what is hazardous is left up to the patrons to decide, with one opinion being deemed enough to rule the rest.
(CA and OR I am 100% on having followed the process closely, but NY I have by hearsay albeit from several restaurant and bar owners, it could be that the situation is slightly different than I portray)
In any case prohibiting Smoking is not that easy since you immediately get into the quandary of restricting the use of a substance which is not illegal per se. Hence to forbid its use if not for some other reason than the use itself would be illegal.
Sparc
Several shipments of illegal cigs have been caught coming into Ireland over the last few years. Millions of Euro worth of cigs.
as the price goes up the criminals enter the playing field. If people want to buy them they will. If people can’t afford them they’ll buy them off the local wideboy to get them. Very soon the criminals will be able to make more money from cigs then hash. There is less risk (jailtime/fines) with illegally importing tobacco.
I smoke and bitch about the price. Has it made me even think about giving them up? Nope.
Well, I’ll see what the trendiness and the statistics look like when I’m in my 80s.
You won’t make it. You’ll be killed by a drunk driver before then. Ironically, you could have avoided the accident, but your attention was diverted at the crucial moment when you attempted to light a cigarette.
What? You mean the drunk driver jumped the curb? Why, that never happens!
Well, I could always link to the article by the one source you can always trust…
02-Jun-2000: Does second-hand smoke really cause cancer?
07-Jun-2000: Followup: Does second-hand smoke cause heart disease?
I’m more likely, even as a non-smoker, to take Cecil’s skeptical view of the issue than anyone who “knows” that second hand smoke kills more people than the plague, homicide, suicide, pesticide, and O.J. Simpson combined.
This is what I hate… by opening up the debate on passive smoking, we end up in the gaga land of politically loaded science. We might as well debate global warming. Cecil puts it pretty well in the first linked column:
Settle for that, end of discussion is my point of view on it. That’s why I don’t link to any ‘proof’.
The whole thing boilds down to informed choices in an environment of hazy knowledge about addiction rates and such matters.
Fact is some of us smoke (I do A LOT) and we like it. Others don’t smoke but couldn’t give a diddly about second hand smoke. Others care a lot about second hand smoke either because they are afraid that it is harmful, or because they are bothered by it due to allergies, or because they just find it disgusting. All of us are entitled, as adults to chose what we do as a result.
We also have a responsibility towards the young uns. I leave that up to their parents with some relief when it comes to passive smoking and for that matter smoking in general. although my previous point about prices is hard to ignore.
Sparc
My problem with over-reliance on statistics is that they too often aren’t part of a whole picture. Hmmn… I don’t know how to express this well, so let me use an analogy: I regard the part of North Central Pennsylvania that I’m from as a rather mountainous region. Anyone comparing elevations of that area with elevations of the area of Central Arizona I live in will say, no, Arizona is more mountainous. However, I base my opinion on the experience that in Lycoming and Sullivan counties (Pennsylvania) one is either going up a hill, down a hill, or around a hill, whereas in Yavapai county (Arizona), one crosses large areas of fairly flat land.
I will never claim that smoking is healthy. What sticks in my craw is that people in a bar, downing one alcoholic drink after another and listening to high-decibel live music, can object to someone smoking on the basis of their health being endangered: they’re already endangering their own health! As for restaurants, in the US at least, there are many restaurants to choose from that are entirely non-smoking or that confine smoking to the bar area, which is usually well-separated from the main restaurant.
Similarly with smoking outdoors. Earlier this year I was in the courtyard of the “dirty” arts section of my college (metalworking, sculpture, ceramics, woodworking, etc.) at a picnic table. A woman was sitting there vigorously sanding a pot she’d made, without an air filter/mask, breathing in clouds of red clay. When I lit a cigarette, she became offended. :rolleyes:
The argument in this thread is that what we smokers do endanger non-smokers, while their actions don’t endanger us. I find a flaw in this argument in that many choose to endanger their own lives through obesity, alcohol and other lifestyle choices. While it’s true that your obesity doesn’t endanger me, I find it a little precious to think that your obesity is less dangerous to you than my smoke.
Both my (smoking) parents told me that they hoped I would never start, as I would find it nearly impossible to quit.
As a 6’7’’ 170 lbs smoker, I found reading that sentence oddly and absurdly humorous for some reason.
Squish, I agree with you on most of what you posted, except maybe the mountain analogy on statistics… but I think I see your point.
My original point to you was that flat out denial of harmfulness of passive smoking will only get you into a pissing contest with the misocapnists that you are bound to loose. Likewise it doesn’t work to use statistics rhetorically in the way you did with your example about the hunderd or so folks that haven’t gotten cancer despite smoking for so and so long.
Otherwise we seem to be in agreement.
Sparc
Hmmn… maybe this is better: statistics are generally considered more reliable than ‘anecdotal’ evidence, yet we know that statistics can be unreliable, skewed, and most times don’t give a complete picture.
At the risk of sounding like a suck-up, Sparc, I admire your posts and wish I could be as measured and clear.
Squish,
As Mark Twain famously quoted Benjamin Disraeli to have said:
…on the other the very same man also said:
Maybe the truth is often to be found in the narrow space between factual logic and emotional opinion, which we sometimes call reason.
As for the kind words you spent (however undeserved) I’ll quote Disraeli again;
Respectfully,
Sparc
So, am I the only one who is completely repulsed by the smell?
Tenebras