(Untitled)

Dec 13, 2009 16:20

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... )

Leave a comment

Comments 24

fionavere December 13 2009, 21:26:45 UTC
Ok, I'm with you on the smoking ban and the discrimination against smokers which is RAMPANT in our society (people should be THANKING smokers, who pay ridiculously high cigarette sales taxes so they don't have to, but I digress), but since when was it cool to drive drunk? I'm pretty sure driving drunk (if caught) will get you in a good bit of legal trouble in every state in the union.

And no, it's not about smoking. It's about control. Most people who don't smoke don't think too much about it, it's not them right? Plus they have been brainwashed by the years of "SMOKING IS TEH EVIL!!!1!!1!!!ONE!!!" propaganda they're been bombarded with for decades now. But they'll eventually come for something that matters to all of us, it's just a matter of time.

Reply

pizzaslices December 13 2009, 21:55:33 UTC
I love your opinion regarding this! you are spot on! You are my best friend when it comes to this matter.

Let me throw this at you, (what is it called, and allegory?)

drinking is to smoking,
what Drunk driving is to second hand smoke

People say they are concerned about workers safety, but where is the workers safety when they have to share the road with a bunch of drunk drivers at 2:30am? its not that drunk driving is now "cool", its just that the same people who dont want smoking, are perfectly comfortable drivng home drunk and accutely endangering lots of people, but use the second hand smoke as a crutch to legislate there opinion.

Reply

fionavere December 14 2009, 23:09:22 UTC
I know you weren't saying it was "cool", just that it's illegal to drive drunk everywhere in this country. So your point that "everyone is cool with driving drunk but they don't like secondhand smoke?" is based on a logical fallicy as driving drunk is illegal. It still happens, but when caught by the authorities, those people must face consequences.

Sure, some of the same people who cry about second hand smoke may also drink and drive (your other commenter thinks walking through a cloud of second hand smoke is bound to kill her, but she and her friends run up an $80 bar tab whenever she goes. Does she drive after she leaves the bar? I have no idea, but drinking has health risks in and of itself, so clearly her concern isn't merely for her own health). I don't have any statistics to back that up however, and neither do you. So I was just pointing out that while I agree with you wholeheartedly, that's a faulty way to back up your point.

Your example is a mathematical analogy. An allegory is (according to dictionary.com): a ( ... )

Reply


miss_sassy December 13 2009, 21:35:33 UTC
I would prefer everyone be more responsible and not force their bad decisions on me. If someone drives drunk, they can kill me with their car. If someone smokes around me, I'm taking in the same crap they're willingly putting in their lungs, which can eventually kill me. In either case, I am not asking to be hit with a car or to breathe in second-hand smoke ( ... )

Reply

pizzaslices December 13 2009, 22:06:36 UTC
i understand your point of view. its cool. But i just think the smoking ban is an extremist solution to a common sense problem.

"At the local bar that i work at, every night there is this band that plays blues... they are terrible. I don't want to hear them, ever. I don't like the music, and I should be able to work at the bar without hearing it. I need to find a way to stamp it out.

Ah! Every morning when I wake up, my ears are still ringing. I will go to a doctor and have the doctor tell me that this ringing could be damaging to my eardrum! Yes! Now I have found away to use medical science to legally enforce what happens to be my opinion... a high majority of the patrons in the bar may love the band, and have paid for them to be there, but because they are a problem to me, i will find a way to get them banned."

(now the above story is ridiculous on purpose... it goes to show you that if you take the smoking ban arguement to a logical extreme, it will be proved false...

What are you gonna do? ban nasty bar bands?

Reply

miss_sassy December 13 2009, 22:49:19 UTC
Your example is not the same thing as the smoking issue. "My ears ring, what do I do?!" "Get eat plugs." "Stop whining about blues music, what a stupid thing to stress over ( ... )

Reply

pizzaslices December 13 2009, 23:00:53 UTC
you know what? i wouldnt smoke an electric cigarette if a gun was to my head. they have commercials for those on the radio. they make me laugh.

the reality is i quit smoking about 7 months ago... the smoker-discriminators up in lansing taxed me out of the business.

The point i am making is that business owners already developed a solution. the smoke free bar. and, i live in a little hillbilly towns, and none of the places that are smoke free have enough business to stay open past midnight. the places that allow smoking, are much more crowded in the evening hours, and are filled with 70-90 percent smokers... people who have paid the insane takes, and the bar tabs that keep the bars open.

I don't know one college that allows smoking inside. and i am certainly sure that any smokers you might find huddled outside are not endangering you because of your birth control.

And i don't know exactly where you live, but i would be happy to offer smoke free dining solutions that have great food.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up