Smoke-easies

[tinmanzzz]

EMBRACE THE CURSE

Attn. All Smokers,
We are doing this all wrong. First we must embrace the Idea that Smoking is an addition. And if it is an addition, then we are disabled. If we are Disabled, then we should get Disability Checks, We should get reserved parking spaces and the Government should be required ( under the American Disability Act) to make all Buildings to be Smoke Accessible.
Also, we should sue the Government over our addiction. For they subsidized Tobacco and they make more profit (i.e. Taxes) than the Companies selling it.
EMBRACE THE CURSE…….

 

[Diamondback]

Y'know, first it's tobacco, then trans-fats, after that it'll be something else.

Every so often (even though I don't actually "load and light" and the "small" one's usually in my equipment loadout as a prop), I am known to pack my MacArthur Colossal Corncob Pipe around just to toss the Health Nazis my own little version of the bird. ("Try and ban THIS one... *cackle*")

That said, it should really be between a business' owner, employees and customers. When government gets involved, its "solutions" generally spawn more problems, at least from my observations... (No matter who's running the show!)

 

[JB]

I don't smoke. If people wish to, that's fine.

I do play in a rockbilly band, so I spend a lot of time around a lot of people who smoke in the bars we play in. It's right in that the smell permeates everything - hair (especially when I've hairsprayed for style), clothes, my guitars, the microphones, the speakers.

To me, that's just an occupational hazard. Most of me thinks that if smoking were banned over here, fewer people would go to the pub, hear my band, and have a good time. Eventually, bands wouldn't play in bars as there would be no budget to pay them (admittedly the pay only just covers costs being about £20/$40 per person for the night, but without it, I'd be stuck!)

Extreme, maybe, but that's the logical progression. I'll be honest, if it was too smoky for me/us as a band, we wouldn't play that venue. We wouldn't make a big thing out of it, as we conduct ourselves as gentlemen (despite the rock 'n' roll rebellion culture!) but we would politely mention it to the owner.

It's a touchy subject all round. Too many strong feelings on both sides of the fence for it to pass off with no argument...

JB

 

[Marc Chevalier]

Most of me thinks that if smoking were banned over here, fewer people would go to the pub, hear my band, and have a good time.

If smoking were banned in your region, in all pubs, then there would be no *other* pub besides yours where those people could go to smoke. So, what would stop them from continuing to patronize your pub? I mean, what's the alternative for them? To stay at home smoking and drinking while listening to a CD of your band?

People, even those who smoke, will come to your pub and hear you play ... whether they can light up or not.

.

 

[Paisley]

IMost of me thinks that if smoking were banned over here, fewer people would go to the pub, hear my band, and have a good time. Eventually, bands wouldn't play in bars as there would be no budget to pay them (admittedly the pay only just covers costs being about £20/$40 per person for the night, but without it, I'd be stuck!)
JB

That's been the conventional wisdom. But the club I frequent voluntarily banned smoking a few years ago. When I asked one of the bartenders there how business had been since the ban, she said it had been better.

The ballroom there has been smoke-free for several years--and the place is usually packed.

So even when there are competing businesses that allow smoking, there's clearly a demand for a non-smoking environment.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

That's been the conventional wisdom. But the club I frequent voluntarily banned smoking a few years ago. When I asked one of the bartenders there how business had been since the ban, she said it had been better.

The ballroom there has been smoke-free for several years--and the place is usually packed.

Yes, because people who don't like cigarette smoke around them started to go there. I've seen this happen in many L.A. pubs which feature live music and dancing.

.

 

[RedPop4]

And that's the way it should be done, Paisley and Marc. Allow the owner of the business to make a decision that's in his or her best interest. There are more non-smokers than smokers. Like-minded people will associate with each other, and the sheer numbers will ensure success. After all, despite the fact that numbers of people congregate in restaurants and bars, they are, in fact, private property. They're not public buildings, and an owner can decide who he or she would like to patronize their establishment.

As for the smell issue, I get tired of that. It's weak. If you don't want to stink maybe we should ban public restrooms, or restrooms in bars and restaurants oh and GAS STATIONS. That's nasty. I'm permanently scarred because of having to urinate in these foul places. And the OTHER people in those are so offensive. Yuck. They're bodily functions offend me, and they make me stink, and I have to smell it. If you want to do that in the privacy of your own home, that's fine, but to have to smell other people's s*** is an invasion and contamination of the air I have to breathe. I defecate, but I'm in favor of a ban, as I don't want to have to smell it or come home with the smell on my clothes and in my delicately styled coiffure when I go out for recreation and entertainment.

 

[warbird]

And that's the way it should be done, Paisley and Marc. Allow the owner of the business to make a decision that's in his or her best interest. There are more non-smokers than smokers. Like-minded people will associate with each other, and the sheer numbers will ensure success. After all, despite the fact that numbers of people congregate in restaurants and bars, they are, in fact, private property. They're not public buildings, and an owner can decide who he or she would like to patronize their establishment.

As for the smell issue, I get tired of that. It's weak. If you don't want to stink maybe we should ban public restrooms, or restrooms in bars and restaurants oh and GAS STATIONS. That's nasty. I'm permanently scarred because of having to urinate in these foul places. And the OTHER people in those are so offensive. Yuck. They're bodily functions offend me, and they make me stink, and I have to smell it. If you want to do that in the privacy of your own home, that's fine, but to have to smell other people's s** is an invasion and contamination of the air I have to breathe. I defecate, but I'm in favor of a ban, as I don't want to have to smell it or come home with the smell on my clothes and in my delicately styled coiffure when I go out for recreation and entertainment.

Beautiful pop, just beautiful :eusa_clap

It'll never end. These lifestyle fascists want to control your every action and they will use the tool of the government fools and their scare tactics to succeed. It's funny how people will talk endlessly about liberties and freedoms and what folks have sacrificed their lives to preserve. But as soon as somebody comes to end a freedom that they don't like to are apathetic about and all of a sudden that's o.k. .

 

[warbird]

I will laugh when they come to tell all who wear old clothing that it contains material known to cause cancer and people will all conform to the government approved clothing or be fined, jailed and summarily shot for endangering the public with their old clothing.

 

[Paisley]

Actually, I think that the non-smoking sections in restaurants and such worked really well. I'd have been happy to leave it at that. But I remember how it was before that: you couldn't go anywhere without sitting in a haze of smoke. I was allergic to it as a child.

Redpop, I disagree with you about smell. (Perhaps you aren't sensitive to the smell of smoke.) I can use a restroom without smelling like a restroom. I can walk down a street that is being repaired without smelling like asphalt or tar. But I (really, anyone) cannot be around cigarette smoke without smelling like smoke. The smell is on me until I wash my hair and clean my clothes.

 

[RedPop4]

Well, I'm allergic to the smell of feces and I hate it when I go to a dirty restroom when I'm away from home and have to smell others. It offends me and nauseates me.

I am making a point. Now I have YOUR sacred cows ready for skewering and it's a problem. But skewer mine, and it's OK, since mine is smoking.

 

[Baron Kurtz]

If smoking were banned in your region, in all pubs, then there would be no *other* pub besides yours where those people could go to smoke. So, what would stop them from continuing to patronize your pub? I mean, what's the alternative for them? To stay at home smoking and drinking while listening to a CD of your band?

People, even those who smoke, will come to your pub and hear you play ... whether they can light up or not.

.

four months and we'll know . . .

http://www.thesite.org/drinkanddrugs/drugsafety/smoking/smokingban

(i'm assuming that the isle of man is a part of the UK for the purposes of this law)

bk

 

[Paisley]

Well, I'm allergic to the smell of feces and I hate it when I go to a dirty restroom when I'm away from home and have to smell others. It offends me and nauseates me.

I am making a point. Now I have YOUR sacred cows ready for skewering and it's a problem. But skewer mine, and it's OK, since mine is smoking.

Umm, I wasn't trying to skewer anybody. Just stating a few facts as I see them. [huh]

And yes, I know you were just trying to be funny.

 

[Maj.Nick Danger]

Gasoline.

Ban gasoline! Or bring back the smiling gas station attendant in the spiffy uniform to fill my tank. I hate the smell of gas when it gets on my hands, or far worse, when a few drops spills on my clothes!
But as a former smoker, I dislike tobacco smoke, but I think banning smoking in all public places is downright draconian. People should at least be able to smoke at the corner pub while enjoying a pint or two.

 

[GoldLeaf]

My dad worked for the American Legion part time after retiring from the Army. When New York banned smoking in all bars and restaurants, the Legion saw a SHARP decline in their patronage. NY does have a relief valve in place, so if you can prove that your profits have decline by x%, then you can get a waiver and install a smoking room.

By the time the waiver was granted and the smoking room put in place, it had been over a year, and people had found other social outlets. The profits of the Legion suffered so badly that my dad's part time job was cut. I don't know what people found to do instead, but it certainly wasn't hanging out at the Legion anymore.

I don't know what to think of the issue. I am a former smoker. I lived in NY during the ban, now I live in NC where smoking is permitted. I am not fond of the exposure, but I am also a bit less critical because of my past. As long as I don't have to be in an enclosed vehicle with a smoker, I am pretty ok with it.

 

[staggerwing]

Beautiful pop, just beautiful :eusa_clap

It'll never end. These lifestyle fascists want to control your every action and they will use the tool of the government fools and their scare tactics to succeed. It's funny how people will talk endlessly about liberties and freedoms and what folks have sacrificed their lives to preserve. But as soon as somebody comes to end a freedom that they don't like to are apathetic about and all of a sudden that's o.k. .

Ever notice when the Government usually trys to enact it's bans, it usually involves things that are divisive and polarizing? Smoking, guns, abortion, and at least in the DC area where I live, they've banned private aircraft from much of the city's airspace and from a taxpayer-funded airport. As we hear more about golbal warming, expect them to go after recreational boating (Jimmy Carter considered this one) and SUVs. What do these topics have in common? They elicit strong opinions. The powers that be can count on having a large segment of the population support the ban. What people need to realize when they speak out in support of a ban on something they don't personally like, is that our legal system operates largely on the concept of precedent. Get away with it once, and it's easier to get away with it the next time. A ban on something you don't like, that stands up to challenge in the courts, means it's going to be all that much easier for a ban on something you like to do to succeed the next time. If you take the list I suggested earlier, I'll bet every single reader is for some of these things, and against others. You may support the bans on the ones you're opposed to, but you can bet there are alot of folks trying to get the ones you like banned. Hence my rather simple philosophy - I may not like what you do, but I'll defend to the end your right to do it.

 

[jake_fink]

RedPop4,

You'll love this story.

Smelly lady refused bus service

 

[dhermann1]

2 points: First, I think the only legitimate basis for controlling something like smoking is if the smoker is materially harmimg somebody else, not just bothering them. I think a good case has been made scientifically that second hand smoke it harmful in the long term. Ten minutes of exposure isn't going to kill anybody, but a lifetime of it may. I don't think the law should prevent people from doing something bad to themselves, whether it's tobacco or even harder drugs. These issues should all be dealt with as public health problems, not crimes. I HATE being exposed to cigaret smoke, but I think it's wrong to prevent people from enjoying it privately which ought to include designated smoking areas in restaurants, etc. So that's my opinion on that subject.
Point number 2: I think this discussion has been an interesting case study of the issue of whether to allow political discussion in the FL. Tempers in these postings have gotten very near the boiling point, but not quite gone over. It's very hard not to get over emotional about these things. I'd like to get comments from the people who have posted in this discussion regarding how they feel about the way the conversation has been carried on. Civilized? Or over the edge?

 

[Orgetorix]

Well said, Staggerwing.

I can't count the number of times I've heard someone growl, when something they don't like happens to them, "There oughta be a law..."

When I hear people I'm close to say that now, I jump on it and explain that no, just because you think that's unpleasant, distasteful, or dangerous doesn't mean there should be a law against it. The government has no business regulating [that area], and when you say, "there oughta be a law," you just open the door for the government to regulate something that you enjoy.

Unfortunately, one of the downsides to living in a democratic society like ours is that the passage of laws can be (and usually is) influenced by whomever shouts the loudest--and money shouts loudest of all. I have little doubt that if I started a lobbying group and had enough funding, I could get just about anything I like outlawed or protected. It happens all the time, and that's why lobbying is such a huge industry in this city.

 

[RedPop4]

Has someone posted the recent one about the Scotsman kicked out of the public house in Dunfermline because of excessive flatulence? Seems no one noticed until the smoking ban. I'll review the thread and see if it's here, when I get time.

May not be until Monday, though. My cigar friends are coming over starting tonight and through Sunday morning. Lots of crawfish, oysters, and other South Louisiana specialties on tap. Maybe a glass of Port and home-roasted coffee as well.