smoking and littering problem

I am not a smoker. Never have been and never will be. Don't like to be around smokers. I don't let folks smoke in my car or my house. I do not like to go to places where there are smokers.

All that being said, I am against the anti-smoking crusade being carried out over much of the country. To me its nothing more than the majority of folks banning something that the minority of folks do that the majority of folks do not like all under the guise of health. I think its a bad and dangerous precedent.

Jennacide said:

Well, apparently I'm going to have to, since certain people here prefer to troll instead.

Pot; Kettle.

Jennacide said:

Okay,I hate to point out the obvious, but the obtuse sometimes need a goodreality check. First of all, the two words I've heard over and over foryour designation of smoking areas that are incorrect. They are neitherrules, nor are they policies. If they were, they would technically bebreaking Ohio law. Due to the size of the outdoor venue, it is illegal(please feel free to look this up yourself or ask your local smokingadvocate attorney to do so for you, he may be able to recite it withoutcracking a law text!) I assure you, as obscure as it may be, it is inthe law books, and was not covered in the new anti-smoking laws thathave been causing issue with so many adult oriented indoor buisnesses,leading our already cripplingly poor economy to suffer even more soever since they were passed. What Cedar Point has are guidelines. Theonly spots that may be fully enforced are within 15 ft of a doorway toa public store, enclosure or eatery, or anywhere that may containflammable gases, or other ignitors.

Jennacide said:

Well, apparently I'm going to have to, since certain people here prefer to troll instead. I'll call my lawyer & have him send me the law that states you must supply smoking areas in any outdoor venue where the general public is invited when said venue is over 50 acres within the state of Ohio. The only exception I have ever heard of is where they store dynamite and gunpowder, or on government property.

I noticed something!!!

What does the law about smoking areas matter? They provide those, however if you do not utilize them, then they might as well throw your ass out with the seagulls in the parking lot, maybe you can share your smoke with them. While they leave you a gift on your head.

The law you shared on page four is very different from the one you share now.

They should put some gunpowder in frontiertown, then ban smoking parkwide. ;)

Moron.

^^^Um are you serious?

It is private property. If you come to my home and choose not to follow my rules I am fully within my rights to kick you out. You said that the parks policy regarding the smoking areas is merely a guideline... when it is clearly stated in the park guide and at the entrance (pointless because its not enforced well enough). If you light up outside of the smoking areas they have every right to through you out if they choose to do so. Just as restraunts and bars and clubs can refuse service so can amusement parks.

Thanks for playing.

^^Good One!!! :)

btw guys theres a smoking area in front of red garter... so why would they put out there cigarettes there geesh give em a break a lil

Morons are dumb.

And instead you go and post in this thread and follow it up with post after post of personal attacks. No wonder you "win" arguments, you just avoid the subject until the rational person gets tired of listening to your BS.
If you wanted to talk about Halloweekends, you should have posted in a Halloweekends thread rather than trolling around in the smoking/littering thread and acting like you're all high an mighty.

Well, I tried quoting part of your post, but even the system thinks you're too crazy to be repeated.

PrawoJazdy said:

dammie16 said:
Im glad that smoking is provides you happiness that is all well and good but I don't want to be killed because of something YOU do.

I may die of problems from all the fast food I eat, but that is my choice. If you want take the health risks associated with smoking so be it but please leave my health out of it and smoke where you are told to.

I like to follow the rules at the park and smoke in the designated area. Because its the right thing to do.

However in an open air environment, especially one as windy as Cedar Point even on 'calm' days, I'm going to say that unless you are standing right next to a person and inhale more than 3 or 4 lung fulls of smoke, you're fine. Please stop being over dramatic. You're just as bad as defiant smokers.

NO NO please don't misunderstand, I have no problem with smokers if they are doing it where they are told! I use this argument for people who say it is their right to do it anywhere and bosh off health remarks and compare to fast food. If I am somewhere, like a bar, and know there is going to be smokers it is my choice to be in that environment. When I go to CP I am not choosing to be put in harms way from SH smoke (And yes there are risks so don't say there arent.) I am not claiming I will die or even have any problems from one smoker in a line for TTD bu the risk is there and thats what I don't like. If I am going to put my health at risk it will be by choice. If you are smoking somewhere you shouldn't be you are at fault, I should not have to leave the line to avoid any risks (no matter how small).

Way, way, way over the line, Jennacide.

You're done.

I guess she finally lost an argument. ;)

Thanks Walt.

To me, businesses should be able to set their own policies on smoking (including to what extent they enforce their own stated policies). And folks who do not like that policy (or the enforcement or lack thereof) do not need to patronize that business. Same is true for employees. If you don't like it, don't work there. And that is how it should work for inside and outside businesses (though the anti-smoking crusaders convinced the Ohio voters otherwise with respect to inside businesses).

The only inside business that comes to mind right now is food establishments, in all reality the laws passed should have been done long ago. Just about every place allowed smoking on one side of the restaurant, which would work fine if it was a closed off room, with separate a/c system, however it is not. So if you want to eat out, you have basically no choice but to suffer from it, or stay home.

Now the employees on the other hand did not have that choice, they were required to breathe that crap night in and night out. I believe that was the bigger argument in the whole decision.

In Florida however, if you have a beer or liquor license you are exempt from the law, unless greater than 10% of your sales are food items. Allowing the establishment to then decide. Not sure about how it works in Ohio.

I always hate smoking establishments, they always stink, burn your eyes, very glad I no longer need to put up with that.

You didn't need to put up with it before either, but you chose to.

Why didn't the employees also have a choice? If they don't want to be around smoking, they can get a job in a non-smoking business.

And I understand that some people don't like to be around smokers (I am actually one of them). But I don't understand why that dislike should dictate what everyone else must do. In Ohio, I would be unable to open up "My Smoking Restaurant" where I permitted smoking. Why? If people don't like smoking, they should go somewhere else. Folks to don't like smoking shouldn't apply to work there. And folks who want to open non-smoking restaurants are free to do that as well. People who want to smoke wouldn't go there. Why is that so difficult?

Because of the lack of non smoking restuarants.

I can think of one, Outback Steakhouse.

Even if management/owners wanted a non smoking establishment, they were hard pressed to try it for potential loss of customers. If a guest wanted to smoke, why not go when he/she could do so? So everywhere i can think of, was smoking.

Solution, stay home.

I can't believe I've skipped reading this thread for so long. I imagined it to be one more in a line of warmed over rehashes about the usual topics, and wound up missing the most hilarious thread in a long time. Priceless.

GibsonSoft said:
Because of the lack of non smoking restuarants.

I can think of one, Outback Steakhouse.

Even if management/owners wanted a non smoking establishment, they were hard pressed to try it for potential loss of customers. If a guest wanted to smoke, why not go when he/she could do so? So everywhere i can think of, was smoking.

Solution, stay home.

Tells me there wasn't a market for smoke free restaurants. If there were large numbers of folks who really wanted smoke free restaurants who were sitting at home rather than going out to eat because of smoking at restaurants, someone would have opened a smoke free restaurant and make a ton of money as the only one of a sought after item in town. But that didn't happen so the market clearly wasn't there.

And no one has a right to work in a restaurant. If you do not like the options out there, find another job in a different industry. And if you really want to work in a smoke free restaurant but there are none, open one on your own.

One would think that having a smoke free restaurant would be a larger money maker anyway, i would rather turn over tables, then have someone sitting there enjoying every minute of their existence. Granted i want the guest to feel as if they are the only one who matters, but in the grand scheme i want to turn over as many pph, just like anyone else.

Also who wants that yellow **** all over everything in their business. Ever clean an a/c coil in a smoking house? Nasty i must say.

The market for the smoke free restaurant was there, just wasn't a prevalent factor in many people's decision making. Food choice ranks higher for one.

Why someone would allow smoking in their restaurant is not fully understandable to me, even as i write this. Only situation i see it as being beneficial i guess would be in a bar?

It offers nothing more than a mess, and health concerns, so why not ban it I guess? Not fully sure on the logic of the laws.

From what I see, the smoking or non smoking restaurants did good either way, but no one really cared. It became a big stink of course when the motions to ban it began, the smoker were in an uproar, and the non smokers meh. It seems as if the owner bans it everyone is jolly, but if big brother bans it, it becomes a travesty.

Yes, there is a big difference between the business owner banning something and big brother doing it. Its called freedom. The owner should get to make the decisions not the government on how to run the business. And you could run a restaurant how you see fit based on the factors you note about smoking. And others might agree with you and still others will view the issue differently. And customers and potential employees can make their own decisions as well. To me, that is how it should work. But it doesn't under smoking bans. As I noted, I dislike smoking and personally find the smoking ban in Ohio to be a good thing. However, I voted against the ban because I am a strong believer in freedom and believe that businesses should make decisions as to how to run their business and the market is left to act accordingly. I think its a bad precedent.