I just can't stand the hypocrisy of the smoking ban. If second hand smoke is to dangerous for the bar, then how come its ok for people to drive home drunk
( Read more... )
see i can totally work with you. You see, California passed a smoking ban, and then shortly after that (in a clear case of what seems to be interstate-peer pressure) new york passed one. then all the states around either passed them conn./new jersey, oregon/colorado ect, and stop smoking companies like nicorette and stuff started funding politicians to support bans...
(...and if that isn't scummy i dont know what is...)
discriminating politicians said "oh, we can't get a ban passed this year so we will add taxes" to cigarettes and now people get to pay $7-10 dollars a pack for something that should cost $1.50.
There has been articles for years and years about business going smoke free in the Detroit area newspapers, and in every one of them they interveiw the owner and they say "reaction has been really positive", but the only thing i have ever seen, for the most part is empty spaces at non-smoking establishments... the only thing i have seen at places with smoking and non-smoking places is crowded, happy smoking sections, and empty, glum non-smoking sections.
i dont know what else to say. how many drunk drivers endanger your life on the way home from the bar? and that guy next to you at the restaurant? smoking or not, that giant, fat-and-cholesterol-laden sandwich he is eating will cost you in the long run, as it drives your health insurance premiums up. That rock concert you went to a couple weeks ago? the smoke machine they used during the guitar solo? that shit is *nasty*. And not to mention the fireworks you sat under last fourth of july? The shit they put into those, that make them burn different colors? it was raining down on you. And what about the gas-powered mower your neighboor mows the lawn with.
i mean, anyone who was concerned about there environment around them, and the effects of second hand smoke would have to take all this into consideration.
my final point is... yes you can say smoking is dangerous, but everything else out there is just as impactful on your life... yet smoking is the bad guy? Thats where the anger comes from, the passion. That's where the stories about the shitty blues bands come up from.
It just seems to me that the better solution is to leave it up to the business owner. this isnt about letting people smoke on airplanes, or in offices (which really hasnt happened in about 30 years). This is soley about the bar, and the blatent discrimination and condescending, holier-than thou attitudes against smoking. You (not personally you) can endager my life with your drinking and driving, but I can't "endanger" your life with my smoking? When a person decides to spend there money, these are the things that should be taken into my account. not holier-than-thou smoking-ban shit.
What are they gonna do next? outlaw the 4th of july?
The reasoning about banning vs. not banning smoking has always been about money, and I will NEVER say that's a good thing to consider. Money shouldn't be a factor... either it's bad for people or it isn't.
As for our chubby friend with the fatty foods? The fat guy eating that food needs to be educated about what those foods are doing to him (better food education would do a world of good in this country... I took a 16-week nutrition class at college and my whole viewpoint has changed, as have my eating habits). If he knew exactly how his body worked with foods and still wanted to have those foods, then fine, but a lot of people don't know how that stuff works. Ignoring the food education thing, his food choices don't directly affect my health. Can it affect my premiums? Probably. His fatty sandwich doesn't fill my body with his food's fat, though, which is my argument about second-hand smoke.
The examples you mentioned are not something one generally comes into contact with everyday, and they're definitely not things you don't get legal control over if someone tries to force them on you. As for the specific things you mentioned, the ONLY thing I've done on that list in the past three years is 4th of July celebrations. Once a year is a risk I'm willing to take, but that's the whole point! I'm CHOOSING to go to that fireworks display. If I chose not to attend those celebrations due to health reasons (or any reason at all, really), I'm within my rights to do so. If someone comes to my house and fires them off on my lawn, I can call the cops, both for the trespassing and any damage to my property. Point is, if someone fired off fireworks on the property of someone else, they'd A) be in deep legal trouble, and B) be a class-A douchebag for doing it in the first place.
The only thing on that list that I can see being a valid comparison is the lawn mower, and considering there's not really a good alternative for that, I'm not gonna pick a fight about it. Smoking is different - nicotine is what causes the addiction, electric cigarettes provide nicotine. Case solved.
You're right, everything can hurt you. But moderation is key. Aside from that, every person has the right to decide what's worth the risk and what's not. When I can't go anywhere without running into someone blowing smoke into the air I'm breathing, my ability to dictate what risks I'm willing to take is being challenged, and legally, I can't do anything about it. That pisses me off and I don't think I'm being discriminatory to those who smoke for not wanting to be around that stuff. I'm not an asshole for wanting to go through my day without coming into contact with it, and I'm not going to accept the prejudice line when I'm trying to keep that out of body and can't do so without seriously changing the way I live my life. If smokers wanna pay for my education at a smoke-free college, then fine, but they don't, and I'm stuck with what I've got.
(...and if that isn't scummy i dont know what is...)
discriminating politicians said "oh, we can't get a ban passed this year so we will add taxes" to cigarettes and now people get to pay $7-10 dollars a pack for something that should cost $1.50.
There has been articles for years and years about business going smoke free in the Detroit area newspapers, and in every one of them they interveiw the owner and they say "reaction has been really positive", but the only thing i have ever seen, for the most part is empty spaces at non-smoking establishments... the only thing i have seen at places with smoking and non-smoking places is crowded, happy smoking sections, and empty, glum non-smoking sections.
i dont know what else to say. how many drunk drivers endanger your life on the way home from the bar? and that guy next to you at the restaurant? smoking or not, that giant, fat-and-cholesterol-laden sandwich he is eating will cost you in the long run, as it drives your health insurance premiums up. That rock concert you went to a couple weeks ago? the smoke machine they used during the guitar solo? that shit is *nasty*. And not to mention the fireworks you sat under last fourth of july? The shit they put into those, that make them burn different colors? it was raining down on you. And what about the gas-powered mower your neighboor mows the lawn with.
i mean, anyone who was concerned about there environment around them, and the effects of second hand smoke would have to take all this into consideration.
my final point is... yes you can say smoking is dangerous, but everything else out there is just as impactful on your life... yet smoking is the bad guy? Thats where the anger comes from, the passion. That's where the stories about the shitty blues bands come up from.
It just seems to me that the better solution is to leave it up to the business owner. this isnt about letting people smoke on airplanes, or in offices (which really hasnt happened in about 30 years). This is soley about the bar, and the blatent discrimination and condescending, holier-than thou attitudes against smoking. You (not personally you) can endager my life with your drinking and driving, but I can't "endanger" your life with my smoking? When a person decides to spend there money, these are the things that should be taken into my account. not holier-than-thou smoking-ban shit.
What are they gonna do next? outlaw the 4th of july?
Reply
As for our chubby friend with the fatty foods? The fat guy eating that food needs to be educated about what those foods are doing to him (better food education would do a world of good in this country... I took a 16-week nutrition class at college and my whole viewpoint has changed, as have my eating habits). If he knew exactly how his body worked with foods and still wanted to have those foods, then fine, but a lot of people don't know how that stuff works. Ignoring the food education thing, his food choices don't directly affect my health. Can it affect my premiums? Probably. His fatty sandwich doesn't fill my body with his food's fat, though, which is my argument about second-hand smoke.
The examples you mentioned are not something one generally comes into contact with everyday, and they're definitely not things you don't get legal control over if someone tries to force them on you. As for the specific things you mentioned, the ONLY thing I've done on that list in the past three years is 4th of July celebrations. Once a year is a risk I'm willing to take, but that's the whole point! I'm CHOOSING to go to that fireworks display. If I chose not to attend those celebrations due to health reasons (or any reason at all, really), I'm within my rights to do so. If someone comes to my house and fires them off on my lawn, I can call the cops, both for the trespassing and any damage to my property. Point is, if someone fired off fireworks on the property of someone else, they'd A) be in deep legal trouble, and B) be a class-A douchebag for doing it in the first place.
The only thing on that list that I can see being a valid comparison is the lawn mower, and considering there's not really a good alternative for that, I'm not gonna pick a fight about it. Smoking is different - nicotine is what causes the addiction, electric cigarettes provide nicotine. Case solved.
You're right, everything can hurt you. But moderation is key. Aside from that, every person has the right to decide what's worth the risk and what's not. When I can't go anywhere without running into someone blowing smoke into the air I'm breathing, my ability to dictate what risks I'm willing to take is being challenged, and legally, I can't do anything about it. That pisses me off and I don't think I'm being discriminatory to those who smoke for not wanting to be around that stuff. I'm not an asshole for wanting to go through my day without coming into contact with it, and I'm not going to accept the prejudice line when I'm trying to keep that out of body and can't do so without seriously changing the way I live my life. If smokers wanna pay for my education at a smoke-free college, then fine, but they don't, and I'm stuck with what I've got.
Reply
Leave a comment