Update: What's New for 2007

Honestly I'm a smoker, I have no problems to be limited to the areas in which I am able to smoke. Matter of fact were I work we must smoke in our cars. I understand when people complain about the smell of second hand smoke, it makes me sick sometimes to. As for being out side I can still smell it, it still lingers. I have respect for the nonsmokers, when I was at CP last season someone asked me to put my cigarette out and I did. As for insurance rates smokers or nosmokers they are out of control. But that is just so those companies can make a profit just like the oil industries.
*** Edited 4/25/2007 12:22:58 PM UTC by CPCoasterFanatic***

This is the last time I’m going to mention my deal on the smoking discussion. My point (from the very beginning) was focused to the proximity of the Frontier Town smoking section being a little close to Maverick......NOT about smokers. Never at any point did I put in a bad word about smokers. They’re Americans too and it doesn’t make them bad people (unless they’re already a bad person to start with). It’s just that I still have the feeling that a small southern gust will knock the smell (and maybe the smoke along with it) over the path of an oncoming train. Will it be the worst thing in the world? No, because you’re only on that turn for a few seconds. But I still feel that it's not the smell one wants to have fly up their olfactory on a coaster...never mind the duration of the smell. Some people probably won’t notice it, some might. Will they make a deal out of it, probable not. And while the fence will prevent most of the low-lying smoke from passing over the track, it's the smoke that's just high enough to pass over the fence and over the path of a moving train that will cause a smell problem.

And let me get this across. The only time I have a problem with smokers is when they deliberately light one up while in line. Other than that, I don’t give a rats behind about smoking outside the queues.

Again, all I am, is a little upset on the location of the smoking section....NOT smokers or the smoking sections overall.

Chief Wahoo said:
Health insurance is out of control and costs are rising. So yes, I think people who abuse their bodies in any way (smoking, drinking, eating poorly) should have to pay more than I do. I think that is perfectly fair.

What about people who have a family history of cancer or any other disease? Should they pay more than someone who doesn't?

*** Edited 4/25/2007 12:47:23 PM UTC by Walt***

And my point was, Adam, that your posts prove that no matter what, people will still bitch about smokers/smoking/smoking areas/cigarette butts/etc. I realize that you're not trying to make a big deal about it, but a complaint is a complaint, regardless of the degree.

^Walt, I don't see the connection between a genetically-predisposed condition and a self-imposed one, such as poor eating habits, smoking, etc.
*** Edited 4/25/2007 12:49:07 PM UTC by djDaemon***

Good question Walt. I think these days doctors can determine the cause of health concerns. If you have a genetic history of diesease then no, I don't think you should have to pay more. But, if you have a genetic history and you CHOOSE to abuse yourself anyway then yes...I think you should have to pay more.

To me it comes down to choice. If you choose to increase your risk of A,B,C then I think and insurer or a company should be able to choose to charge you higher premiums as you are a greater risk...just as the skydiver is a greater risk to the life insurance folks.

djDaemon said:
Walt, I don't see the connection between a genetically-predisposed condition and a self-imposed one, such as poor eating habits, smoking, etc.

If Person A has a family history of some disease, and Person B does not, Person B will pay more, in general, to offset Person A. Whether or not Person A has any control over the condition is irrelevant. Person B still has a higher cost. Doesn't family medical history play a factor in life insurance costs? Why not health insurance as well?

I'm playing devil's advocate here. I'm not saying that's necessarily my belief.

djDaemon said:
And my point was, Adam, that your posts prove that no matter what, people will still bitch about smokers/smoking/smoking areas/cigarette butts/etc. I realize that you're not trying to make a big deal about it, but a complaint is a complaint, regardless of the degree.

And I was the lucky one to be picked on eh?:)

It's obvious that there's going to be people complaining about it. No matter what Cedar Point puts in, or any decision they make, there will always be a group of people that'll complain about it.....its natural. But I’m not complaining about the smoking sections or the new policy or even smokers for that matter....I’m complaining about the one location. Not necessarily to get rid of it, but maybe to move it. IMO, a better place would be the spot to the left of Mean Streaks entrance. Obviously few people would know about it since it's not a high traffic spot but I still feel it'd be a better location.

If only they had built the cave/mine at the turn!!!;)

Topthrill10 said:

As a health care professional I can tell you that everyone should be more worried about the food they are eating at CP than the second hand smoke in an open air environment. If they were really concerned about health risks they would stop selling footlong chili cheese dogs at the Round up and they wouldn't be introducing new oversized pizza slices. Maybe they should lose the candy and soda machines that are way overpriced.

Most people go to CP only 1 or 2 times a summer. I really doubt that a day spent eating chili cheese dogs, pizza, cheese on a stick, etc. will do any harm if a person's normal eating habits are healthy. CP is in the entertainment business, not the nutrition business. Guests want their park food when going to an amusement park, it's fun and causes no nutrition problems for the average 1 or 2 times a year visitor.

Everyone is looking at the designated smoking area's from a guest's point of view. But what about the workers, like the midway sweeps, that are always out on the midway day after day. I bet the no smoking policy will make their lives better.

Maybe outdoor smoke isn't a big health concern, but a smoking ban makes the time spent on the midway more pleasant, which is a good reason to have it.

Earlier in this thread, before all the exciting smoke talk, several people mentioned they were glad they got their Jr. Gemini "credit". What is a Jr. Gemini credit?

I believe it has to do with riding Jr. Gemini. Ask the person who posted it.

If you were over a certain height requirement for Jr. Gemini, you had to accompany a child on the ride to be able to get on. A credit is getting to ride the ride and say you did. You're essentially taking "credit" for riding the ride.

As the new rule states, it seems as though no one over 54" will be permitted to ride at all. So if you didn't get your credit for riding prior to the height change then you probably won't get it now.

As I pointed out on page 2 of this thread before all of the smoking business took over - you can still ride Jr Gemini if you are over 54" per the CP website. Just need a kid with you.

Now back to the smoking - I am curious as to how well this will be enforced. There is no smoking allowed in Soak City but I see many people smoking every time I go there. If they cannot enforce it there why do they think they will be able to limit smoking to certain areas?

Yes, you're correct.

Now that I re-read the post I see that the only requirement that has changed is that a person has to be at least 36" now.

So, yes, adults can still ride as long as they are accompanied by a child within the height requirement.

Actually, if you're not part of a group policy, you DO pay more for insurance if you have a history or preexisting condition. Why should health insurance be any different than car insurance or home insurance? If I'm less prone to NEED the insurance, why should I pay the same as someone who uses it constantly? Since I'm self employed, I have to pay a FORTUNE for health insurance and i rarely, if ever, use it. They wouldn't even insure my right knee because I had my ACL replaced FIVE years ago. How's that for insurance?

Consider this, smokers die younger; therefore they use less health care product. Figure that someone who smokes will not make it to the age group where you are constantly draining on the health insurance companies. Thirty years of going in and out of the hospital for hips and heart surgery (and whatever else fails you) far outweighs the cost that a smoker makes for their final farewell. Some i've heard argue that the smoker should get a break for not further clogging up the health care system down the line.

Insurers want people who will live long (ie pay for a long time) with no problems and die in their sleep. Smoker, while they do die quicker also get diseases such as lung cancer, COPD (chronic bronchitis,) emphysema, atherosclerosis and congestive heart failure. Every single one of these is extremely expensive to treat in fact, they are among some of the most expensive diseases to manage. Just because they die younger does not mean they use less health care products.

"smokers die younger"

My grandparents were lifelong smokers and lived well into their 80s.

What did they die of?

If I didn't know better, I would say this was a health website and not Cedar Point ;)

Does it really matter anymore? CP has made the changes about smoking and that's all there is to it. No one from either side is getting anywhere from this conversation and it's distracting. I'd hate to see some Opening Day people pissed off at each other before they even got there.

Let's just move along?