smoking and littering problem

crazy horse said:
The needs of the many, outweigh the needs of the few(where have I heard that before?)

Yours is a classic argument thrown out by those who would usurp freedom from someone else because they don't see it as necessary.

I did notice that you spent all day arguing about straw-men though rather than responding to the fact that we live in a constitutional republic, not a democracy. But I guess its hard to debate something when the facts aren't on your side.

Ralph Wiggum said:
As far as the business aspect ofsmoking bans goes, many restaurants and bars in Ohio reported an uptickin business after the smoking ban was enacted due to more non-smokersfrequenting their establishments. I'm not sure the idea works as wellif only one business does it, as the place next store/down the streetwould likely lure their smoking crowd away and they would likely haveto advertise heavily in order to see an increase in the non-smokingpatrons.

You mean... those businesses would have to engage in free market activity like *gasp* advertising?!? Oh, the horror!!!

;)

I think its pathetic that we've reached a point in society where the government regularly tells private businesses how to operate. Would any of you in favor of this legislation like the government telling you that you're not allowed to permit smoking in your private residence?

JuggaLotus said:
But I guess its hard to debate something when the facts aren't on your side.

To be fair, there are other handicaps in play, I presume. ;)

Hopefully government can come up with some more mandatory changes which businesses are otherwise free to make on their own that will increase business. We need more czars in DC and restaurant/bar czar should definitely be on the list.

djDaemon said:

I think its pathetic that we've reached a point in society where the government regularly tells private businesses how to operate. Would any of you in favor of this legislation like the government telling you that you're not allowed to permit smoking in your private residence?

Well, are you allowed to snort cocaine in your residence? In most states, are you allowed to buy a hooker in your residence?

Government has a long history of regulating or prohibiting substances or activities that are considered harmful to society at large if abused. The smoking in public building bans are no different.

If someone smokes in a building I'm in, their smoke can be harmful to me. Do we take away my freedom of being a customer or employee of that establishment if I don't want to breath a harmful substance? Or, do we take away what is harmful so both the smoker and I can be in that building? Freedom can be looked at from many angles and I prefer to be free to go where I want without another person harming me.

Pete said:

Well, are you allowed to snort cocaine in your residence? In most states, are you allowed to buy a hooker in your residence?

Since when are either of those activities legal? Yeah, you're also not allowed to murder and rape people in your home. What's your point?

Do we take away my freedom of being a customer or employee of that establishment if I don't want to breath a harmful substance?

You have the freedom to give your money to companies you feel offer a good value to you. If you enjoy a product/service enough to put up with the smoke, you find value in it. If you don't enjoy a product/service enough to put up with smoke, you don't find value in it. Its no more complicated than that. You're suggesting its OK to infringe on the rights of business owners to operate as they see fit within the law.

As I said before, many people find the environment of a strip club to be harmful to society. Should we ban nudity in strip clubs as well? Personally, I just don't give them my money. I find that preferable to bitching about how awful nudity is while handing over $40 for a lap dance.

The smoking in public building bans are no different.

Except we're NOT talking about banning smoking in public! We're banning smoking on PRIVATE PROPERTY!

I agree with dj. If you don't like how the business operates, don't go there and don't apply for a job there. I know a lot of people who won't shop at a given store, go to a given restaurant/bar or work at a given business for a variety of reasons. The same should be true for smoking. If you don't want to patronize businesses or work for businesses that allow smoking, that is your decision. No one has a right to shop or to go to a restaurant/bar (smoke free or otherwise). If you don't like the options out there, encourage businesses to change or better yet, start your own and you can do whatever you want. What is the problem with that?

Exactly, GoBucks. Its an embarrassment that the US, supposedly the best Country EVAR, gets so many things so horribly wrong. We have TONS of morality legislation, and rather than pull that back (as would be appropriate in a "free" society), we just keep adding more.

No, you can't smoke weed, but you can drink alcohol, despite the latter being far, far worse for both individuals and society as a whole.

No, two dudes/chicks can't get married, because marriage is "sacred". Its OK, though, that our divorce rate in this Country hovers around 50%.

And what's worse is that a large segment of society actually celebrates the passage of crap like these smoking bans. People expect the government to do everything for them, including force businesses to do what should be incredibly easy for a ~70% majority to simply do with their wallets.

GoBucks89 said:
I agree with dj. If you don't like how the business operates, don't go there and don't apply for a job there. I know a lot of people who won't shop at a given store, go to a given restaurant/bar or work at a given business for a variety of reasons. The same should be true for smoking. If you don't want to patronize businesses or work for businesses that allow smoking, that is your decision. No one has a right to shop or to go to a restaurant/bar (smoke free or otherwise). If you don't like the options out there, encourage businesses to change or better yet, start your own and you can do whatever you want. What is the problem with that?

There you go.....

If your a smoker, don't go to a buisness that does not allow smoking. Simple as that. Or move to one of the few states that still allow it . Problem solved.

Six flags banned smoking, but there were plenty of people still enjoying there parks without smoking. It's also another thing I like about disney parks as well. You can walk around all day and not catch one wiff of ciggerette smoke.

Now that it's a blanket law, smokers are just going to have to deal with it. Kinda like us non smokers always have.

"The Surgeon General said smokefree workplace policies
are the only effective way to eliminate secondhand smoke
exposure in the workplace. The report concluded that separating
smokers from nonsmokers—a trend in previous decades—
cleaning the air and ventilating buildings cannot
eliminate exposure.
“The good news is that, unlike some public health hazards,
secondhand smoke exposure is easily prevented,”
Carmona said. “Smokefree indoor environments are proven,

simple approaches that prevent exposure and harm.”
Tegan thinks that report, and the changing public attitude,will eventually lead to a smokefree law in every state.
“Everyone deserves to breathe smokefree air,” she said.
“It’s been such a shift in the social norms. It’s no longer
about the right to smoke. We’re not restricting anyone from
the right to smoke. People are still certainly allowed tosmoke. We’re just asking them to go outside to do it.”

^^^ What she said.

crazy horse said:

If your a smoker, don't go to a buisness that does not allow smoking. Simple as that.

Except that smokers no longer have that choice. Non-smokers have ALWAYS had that choice. They just never had the conviction to do that, so they whined and had the government step in. Its the American way.

Smokers still have a choice. They can smoke outside.

It's the same as going on a flight. You can wait a few hours to light up, so why can't you wait untill you are done eating a meal?

You can also make the argument about a movie theater. You can't smoke in a movie theater, but people still go to the movies.

Wow. That's exactly what I'm talking about when I mention the whiny, self-centered attitude people have toward legislation.

People that don't want to inhale toxic air are whiny self centered people? I guess that means that the majority of people that walk this earth are. I guess the same can be said about smokers that think it's all about them as well.

I have never thought it was all about the smokers. To me its about the freedom of the business owner to operate its business assets in the way it best sees fit. If a given business bans smoking on its own, no smoker has a right to do anything other than live with the ban (or go somewhere else). And if all businesses ban smoking on their own, smokers have the same choice that non-smokers had: try to persuade businesses to allow smoking or start up your own business and run it how you see fit. See it works in reverse too. We just didn't need to run to the government to address the issue.

crazy horse said:
what I've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard.
Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it.
I award me no points, and may God have mercy on my soul.

Fxed

JuggaLotus said:

crazy horse said:
what you just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard.
Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it.
I award me no points, and may God have mercy on my soul.

Fxed

Fixed

crazy horse said:
People that don't want to inhale toxic air are whiny self centered people?

No, people that don't want to inhale toxic air, but complain about it while refusing to find an alternative are whiny self centered people.

There's a difference.

Kinda like smokers that refuse to find an alternative?

There is an alternative now. Smokers can still go to eat at there favorate restaurant and smoke. They just have to step outside to smoke. Or they can make the choice to stay inside and not smoke....it's there choice. You got options.

JuggaLotus said:

crazy horse said:
People that don't want to inhale toxic air are whiny self centered people?

No, people that don't want to inhale toxic air, but complain about it while refusing to find an alternative are whiny self centered people.

There's a difference.

Again....

That would mean that the majority of the people that walk this earth are self centered people.

No, there is not an option.

A business owner cannot open a store that allows smoking, which, unless something changed, is still a perfectly legal activity (as opposed to snorting cocaine off a hookers ***).

So no, there is not an option for smokers.

Up until now though, there was an option for everyone. Everyone could find a restaurant/bar that either allowed or didn't allow smoking based on their personal preference and without government interference. Now, no one has a choice.

Is it that hard of a concept to understand?

crazy horse said:
Again....

That would mean that the majority of the people that walk this earth are self centered people.

What part about that would be a surprise?