No smoking...

[Kanegrundar]

But smoking will ALWAYS lead to problems. Drinking is only if you've had too much, and not everyone who drinks is an alcoholic.

One of my relatives is 86 years old. He's smoked his entire life and never once been to the hospital for anything other than a broken leg. He rarely catches a cold, and is totally cancer free. So, smoking doesn't ALWAYS lead to problems. However, not all people that get into a wreck after having too much to drink are alcoholics, but people die just the same.

Let me clarify that I'm not pro-smoker. I do smoke upon occasion, usually at a bar or with my friends on poker night, but I respect others' rights to not have to breathe in my smoke. However, there appears to be a lot of people that complain about smoking right after they go into a bar they KNOW is going to be filled with smoke. They KNOW that many of the people there are going to be smoking. They KNOW there are other bars and places to go where smoking is not allowed, but they still go where it is seemingly just to stir up trouble. As far as any establishment allowing smoking or not should be up to the owner NOT the government. The government should be focusing on universal health care, the rising cost of living, alternative fuel legislation, and a myriad of other issues that truly deserve their attention, not something that can be handled by those that own businesses. The more we let government control for us, the more freedoms we risk losing in the long run.

Kane

 

[mojo1701]

One of my relatives is 86 years old. He's smoked his entire life and never once been to the hospital for anything other than a broken leg. He rarely catches a cold, and is totally cancer free. So, smoking doesn't ALWAYS lead to problems. However, not all people that get into a wreck after having too much to drink are alcoholics, but people die just the same.

Let me clarify that I'm not pro-smoker. I do smoke upon occasion, usually at a bar or with my friends on poker night, but I respect others' rights to not have to breathe in my smoke. However, there appears to be a lot of people that complain about smoking right after they go into a bar they KNOW is going to be filled with smoke. They KNOW that many of the people there are going to be smoking. They KNOW there are other bars and places to go where smoking is not allowed, but they still go where it is seemingly just to stir up trouble. As far as any establishment allowing smoking or not should be up to the owner NOT the government. The government should be focusing on universal health care, the rising cost of living, alternative fuel legislation, and a myriad of other issues that truly deserve their attention, not something that can be handled by those that own businesses. The more we let government control for us, the more freedoms we risk losing in the long run.

Kane

Although, if you DO check my location, you'll see that I'm in Canada, which HAS universal health care. So if the government wants to lower the chances for overloading the system with something that can be prevented, I'm all for it.

 

[Kanegrundar]

Although, if you DO check my location, you'll see that I'm in Canada, which HAS universal health care. So if the government wants to lower the chances for overloading the system with something that can be prevented, I'm all for it.

That's all well and good. I'm not from Canada, so that's why I brought it up. However, you ignored the point of my post. Government has better things to do with their time than managing the small deatils that we, the people, can do on our own.

Smoking is a choice, so is going to places that allow it.

Kane

 

[mojo1701]

That's all well and good. I'm not from Canada, so that's why I brought it up. However, you ignored the point of my post. Government has better things to do with their time than managing the small deatils that we, the people, can do on our own.

Smoking is a choice, so is going to places that allow it.

Kane

But what if EVERY place you go to has people smoking? Besides, this is a municipal law, and as such, Provincial and Federal governments have no jurisdiction. If people want to smoke at home and pollute their houses, that's their perrogative. However, I have a right to a smoke-free environment wherever I go.

 

[Vraille Darkfang]

Before this turns political,

I , personally, applaud areas than ban smoking. Not from any sense of 'For the Greater Good' or 'Nasty Tobacco Companies', but smoking (even in many non-smoking areas of restaurants) causes a allergic reaction. My sinuses drain. A lot. I mean an entire tissue box in under 20 minutes. To much smoking means I have to leave. Immediatly or blow snot over everything in sight. I have had to leave restaurants (from the non-smoking section) due to a sudden influx of smokers overwhelming the place's ventalation system. Nowdays I don't go to places unless it is completely smoke free. From a individual (mine) standpoint non-smoking doesn't exist unless it is either completely smoke free or a really expensive, high powered ventalation system. (I also suffer a similar reaction in really smoky areas, like some BBQ joints).

Thus, non-smoking doesn't mean, well non-smoking. While I don't think the governemnt needs to ban smoking, they should ban SMOKE. After all, it ain't the smoker I object to, its the poisonous fumes. If a place want's to cleary state its smoking. Fine, I won't ever go there. If you want to say smoke free, fine I know what I'm getting. You want to say non-smoking & smoking, get some testing equipment & prove you are able to keep the smoke IN the smoking section. If you can't, either spend the cash to remodel, get a super ventalation system, or go either smoke-free or all smoke.

I don't find a problem with the law, so much as the interpretation. I think, already legally, that if a restaurant claims this part of their restaurant is non-smoking, yet chemical test show enough smoke particultes to show otherwise, then what you got ain't non-smoking.

As a final note, don't start comparing tobacco to other stuff (alchol & pot being the 2 I see most often). The differences are so many that it just fails on so many levels. Porr arguments, really,

 

[Kanegrundar]

But what if EVERY place you go to has people smoking?

That's highly unlikely in this day and age.

Besides, this is a municipal law, and as such, Provincial and Federal governments have no jurisdiction.

That's not the way it appears to be going here in the States. State governments are buzzing about it a lot, and a few have passed bills.

If people want to smoke at home and pollute their houses, that's their perrogative. However, I have a right to a smoke-free environment wherever I go.

And what about the smokers? They have no rights to go out and have a smoke? That doesn't sound like a very freedom-loving society there. If you knowingly go out to bar that is filled with people that typically smoke like, for the sake of arguement, a small-town country bar, you being in the minority feel you have the right to make everyone else stop smoking? That's just plain silly. There are many, many places in most large cities that offer smoke-free environments for those that want it. Don't ram your feelings down the throats of everyone else that goes to their little corners of the city to enjoy their disgusting habit. It's their choice as much as it is yours. It's called freedom of choice.

Kane

 

[Mr. Lobo]

But what if EVERY place you go to has people smoking? Besides, this is a municipal law, and as such, Provincial and Federal governments have no jurisdiction. If people want to smoke at home and pollute their houses, that's their perrogative. However, I have a right to a smoke-free environment wherever I go.

Wherever you go? Does that include the aforementioned houses that people are polluting with their smoking habits?

Obviously there is a difference between places of public services (like restaurants) and an individuals home. I would like to think that a restaurant should be more like the home of the owner. Who invites people in for dinner (or whatever) that is prepared for people who are willing to pay. I realize that the society I live in doesn't work this way and have to agree to disagree.

And here I will stop.

 

[Kanegrundar]

Thus, non-smoking doesn't mean, well non-smoking. While I don't think the governemnt needs to ban smoking, they should ban SMOKE. After all, it ain't the smoker I object to, its the poisonous fumes. If a place want's to cleary state its smoking. Fine, I won't ever go there. If you want to say smoke free, fine I know what I'm getting. You want to say non-smoking & smoking, get some testing equipment & prove you are able to keep the smoke IN the smoking section. If you can't, either spend the cash to remodel, get a super ventalation system, or go either smoke-free or all smoke.

*This* I agree with. When I'm out to eat, I don't want to smell or taste smoke. If I smell smoke and I'm in the non-smoking section, then it's pointless. IMO, there should be standards that can be enforced for establishments that have both smoking and non-smoking areas. That's fine. I can live with that. What I can't live with is a section of society whose only "crime" is that they enjoy a habit that is not popular with the mainstream being treated like pariahs. That's simply wrong.

Bars and restaurant owners have the right to restrict or outright ban smoking, as long as if they allow both, they can keep it seperate then great. If not, they should be one or the other. If a person doesn't like it, they can move on. There are plenty of other places to go. By no means does this have to be an all or nothing issue.

Kane

 

[mojo1701]

That's highly unlikely in this day and age.

Ok, but that's not to say that I WANT to visit every establishment.

That's not the way it appears to be going here in the States. State governments are buzzing about it a lot, and a few have passed bills.

Ok, let's leave it at that. America will have its own legislation, as will Canada.

And what about the smokers? They have no rights to go out and have a smoke?

I'm not saying that, but if I don't want 100 cigarettes in a room, I don't want the first cigarette lit. I'm agreeing with Vraille Darkfang there, that a good ventilation, or a completely-sealed other room will be good.

That doesn't sound like a very freedom-loving society there. If you knowingly go out to bar that is filled with people that typically smoke like, for the sake of arguement, a small-town country bar, you being in the minority feel you have the right to make everyone else stop smoking? That's just plain silly.

Like I said, don't start. It's not like all the smokers come in all at once.

There are many, many places in most large cities that offer smoke-free environments for those that want it. Don't ram your feelings down the throats of everyone else that goes to their little corners of the city to enjoy their disgusting habit. It's their choice as much as it is yours. It's called freedom of choice.

Kane

What about my choice of not polluting my body? I'm not saying that they can't, say, smoke outside, but if it's inside with a poorly-ventilated room, I don't want that.

This is where I'm gonna leave this, since I don't want to start anything is, I know smokers. There's a lot in my residence, who go to the front doors for a smoke. Not always, but they're there. I don't mind it, since I don't stand there. And it's not like smokers need to smoke ALL the time. Can't they take a smoke before they go out, and then one after?

 

[Ranger REG]

And what about the smokers? They have no rights to go out and have a smoke?

IMHO, they have as much right as someone releasing sarin gas in a closed environment like subway, for every adult and children to breathe in.

If you want to smoke, go ahead and smoke your lungs out, but smoke near me and I consider that a serious threat to my life (by depriving me of oxygen and forcing me to inhale unfiltered, secondhand smoke). And don't tell me I should move. I have as much right to stand or sit where I'm at and not being suffocated by your deed. So whose right should yield?

Sorry about my passion. I have seen my uncle suffered from lung cancer due to his smoking. And though he died from it 20 years ago, that image and sound (of his rasping, congested heavy breathing struggling difficultly to get air) still stick in my mind. If you want to try and quit smoking? Spend one whole day with a lung cancer patient who have had been a smoker, and listen to the sounds he make.