More people ejected from SFGAm for smoking.

---

Charles Nungester said:
I consider GUM, Chew, SPitting, Farting, Cussing all offensive.

---

It has nothing to do with being offensive. I hope you understand the difference between those things and smoking.

---

You say I can't smoke? I say you can't be buddist

---

This document is a really interesting read.

It doesn't matter if you say I can't be Buddhist. I have a constitutional right to practice any religion. There is no constitutional protection for smoking. You don't have any more right to smoke than I do to use cocaine. Of course, tobacco is explicitly exempt from the Controlled Substances Act. But that's a reflection of our culture and our economy, and has nothing to do with anyone's right.

This society's view on smoking is actually very interesting - both in its growing intolerance and, yet, its continued acceptance. We would all consider it absurd if cocaine users were as vocal about their "freedoms" being taken away as smokers are. But in its basic form, it really isn't any different.

---

it should be any buisness owners decision to operate his property the way he sees fit.

---

Does that include, say, laws governing food preparation in restaurants? Why should a business owner be required to follow the numerous rigid standards our overbearing government enforces to protect us?

Are you against all government restrictions on business, or just the ones that personally affect you?

While I happen to disagree with Jeff on this particular example, I actually agree with what he's saying. I'm all about limited government and free market (vote Ron Paul). I just think this happens to be one of those cases where involvement is appropriate.

I still think the walls full of used gum stuck everywhere you see in parks where little kids can paw at it is more gross and disgusting than someone smoking in the outside air, but that's just me.....

I found the past couple years I would spend a day with my son and only smoke like 2-3 cigs the entire day. Don't care to waste much time sitting around when there's rides to be had!

Hidden advantage I suppose. :)

---

Gemini said:

---

it should be any buisness owners decision to operate his property the way he sees fit.

---

Does that include, say, laws governing food preparation in restaurants? Why should a business owner be required to follow the numerous rigid standards our overbearing government enforces to protect us?

Are you against all government restrictions on business, or just the ones that personally affect you?

---

See, that's where this whole thing gets sticky because you can't make straight comparisons. We can all agree that, for the most part, food, construction, etc., are reasonably safe and that there's no risk associated with eating or occupying a building. Smoking isn't in that realm, because it's a known danger with known risk that a segment of the population chooses to accept anyway. We don't all need to smoke the way we all need to eat or occupy buildings, and conversely, can choose not to be in places that people smoke.

Smoking bans also protect workers, not only in the food service industry, but in any business. Our organization allowed smoking in offices, but that ended last December. The smoke circulating through the ventilation system was a serious health risk. Sure people could work elsewhere, but the "if you don't like it, work somewhere else" argument could be applied to a lot of laws.

They don't have to work there?

Do you go where Crack Cocaine is being delt?

Im not bellittling you Gemini. I agree smoke and second hand smoke are a contributing factor to all sorts of health problems.

But you make no mention of firing your car up to go to the store. Even if it's electric. Sulphur ridden fuel is used to make that electric.

You'll sit by a campfire with no reguard to the smoke.

Everythings a risk and Im not saying you shouldn't be concerned but. sheesh. Hows your collesteral? Blood sugar.

Do you sit around every day worrying about whats gonna kill ya?

Enjoy life and let others do what they enjoy (As long as it's legal)

I grew up in a house with lead soldierd pipes. Went to a grade school that had 300 times normal radiation levels in the water and soil (Fernald/crosby elementary) The first ten years of my life there were basically no EPA standards on cars or power plants.

Let me go to a smoking lounge, bar, nightclub if I choose to do so.

Yeah there are some arrogant smokers out there but I honestly believe the majority are concious of not disturbing you.

Chuck

---

Jeff said:

---

We don't all need to smoke the way we all need to eat or occupy buildings, and conversely, can choose not to be in places that people smoke.

---

I have to disagree with this one. I LOVE bowling. Smoking has always been heavy at bowling alleys. Being that I live in Suburban Cleveland, I have a lot of bowling alleys to choose from. However, Someone who lives in BFE where there is one bowling alley in the county might have to drive 50 miles to find one that was smoke free. What if that person liked to bowl 2-3 nights a week on leagues? Wouldn't happen.

---

No, I don't sit around worrying about what's going to kill me. But I'm not going to pretend smoking presents no more of a risk to people than smoke from campfires. Or that tobacco has some special protection or freedom associated with it.

---

They don't have to work there?

---

No, they don't. But I assume, then, that you oppose all labor and safety laws that are in place to protect workers.

---

Enjoy life and let others do what they enjoy (As long as it's legal)

---

Smoking in places where it's banned is not legal.

---

Charles Nungester said:

Do you go where Crack Cocaine is being delt?

Enjoy life and let others do what they enjoy (As long as it's legal)

Yeah there are some arrogant smokers out there but I honestly believe the majority are concious of not disturbing you.

Chuck

---

I have! Crack is much less addictive than cigarettes.

Legal? Well I think it's only a matter of time. Some of the X-smokers I know are the biggest complainers of smokers. I mean, worse than me, and I hate smelling the stuff.

There are alot of arrogant smokers you are correct. This girl just moved into the apartment next door to me. I've been waking up every morning with splitting headaches since she moved in.

She came over to ask me to turn down the music the other day (I did, and I'm glad she let me know it was too loud). We got to talkin about our cats of all things. I just thought to ask her "do you smoke?" She said "yeah." I thought, geez, she doesn't look like a smoker. I wonder if she was thinking, geez, he doesn't look like an addict...

Anyway. I just said that I had been smelling smoke quite a bit. I would not ask her to change her habit or anything, no guilt given out. But since she asked, I told her I have been smelling it. Had she continued, I would have told her yes, it does give me very bad headaches...

She said "well I close the windows - cuz I'm cold" (trying to imply it wouldn't drift from window to window. I have towels on both sides of my front door now. Smokers just don't realize how stinky and annoying (whether or not if makes you sick, as it does me) they and they're habit are.

The guy just moved in downstairs from me also smokes. So now I want to move. It makes me that sick, literally.

I'll be at the park tonight, I'll keep my eyes peeled, and report what I see (to this board).

I'll concede to the workplace safety issue, to some extent. Some jobs have risks, some are outright dangerous, but it's a fine line.

As for the bowling thing, it has been on a decline for years (saw that in a newspaper years ago, though I can't directly attribute it). If that was a smoking issue, then certainly they should have responded to the market conditions.

I won't say that the law is entirely without merit, I just don't like the control aspect of it.

But I do enjoy going bowling again. :)

I can understand that. There's a small part of me that cringes whenever I agree with the government's involvement in something. :)

The part that made me cringe was that Ohioans voted for it.

I question whether it really is as strict of a punishment as people say. When you go to a theme park you are a guest in that park, probably why most theme parks call their customers "guests".

If you were to be a guest in my home and I told you there is no smoking in my home, but you can smoke on my deck, I would expect you to follow the rules. Say I leave the room for a moment and return shortly after to find you smoking in my living room. My next course of action will be ejecting you from my home. Is that too strict?

I understand the argument that guests at parks are paying where as in my home they are probably invited friends. Like Jeff was saying though, let the market determine if this is appropriate or not. If I get kicked out for smoking in the wrong area and I am not refunded, I have the choice to not come back again. I am guessing most of the people kicked out will return eventually, and they will be following the rules in the future. Then again maybe they wont return, but are rule breakers the guests the parks want to return anyway?

---

Jeff said:The part that made me cringe was that Ohioans voted for it.

---

The part that made me cringe is most didn't know what they were voting for or didn't vote at all.

Chuck

---

Charles Nungester said:

I grew up in a house with lead soldierd pipes. Went to a grade school that had 300 times normal radiation levels in the water and soil (Fernald/crosby elementary) The first ten years of my life there were basically no EPA standards on cars or power plants.

Chuck

---

Wow, now all your posts make sense!:) Seriously though, the first two items sound like some pretty hardcore stuff and you be glad that you suffered no longterm effects (yet).

I don't worry about it much :)

Death is part of life, I've seen so many lives ended so early. Smoking was involved in a very few number of those instances.

Chuck, who followed a 89 year old woman into the liquor store the other day to get his smokes. She ordered 3 cartons of Pall Malls and my thoughts were, RIGHT ON GRANNY! Enjoy yourself!

---

IntaminHater said:
When you go to a theme park you are a guest in that park, probably why most theme parks call their customers "guests".

---

BULLCRAP, this is the biggest fallacy of the amusement park industry. You are not a "guest" no matter how many times they say it. You are a CUSTOMER, a paying customer at that in the vast majority of cases (I suppose you *could* be there on a free pass). Disney started calling patrons that as part of their whole speil and the industry picked up on it. But it's (generally) not just some privillege bestowed upon you rather you *pay* to be there.

---

If you were to be a guest in my home and I told you there is no smoking in my home, but you can smoke on my deck, I would expect you to follow the rules. Say I leave the room for a moment and return shortly after to find you smoking in my living room. My next course of action will be ejecting you from my home. Is that too strict?

---

Not a fair comparison unless you generally charge a fee for your "guests" to visit your house. ;)
lata, jeremy
--"Moooooommmmm! Bart's smoking!"; Millhouse [iThe Simpsons