Colorado Statewide Smoking Ban

[M@]

Supposed to go into effect July 1, 2006.

http://9news.com/acm_news.aspx?OSGNAME=KUSA&IKOBJECTID=04de7110-0abe-421a-00b8-0cd6b580e84b&TEMPLATEID=0c76dce6-ac1f-02d8-0047-c589c01ca7bf

"DENVER - The Colorado State Senate has approved a statewide smoking ban, prohibiting lighting up in the vast majority of places throughout the state."

[Weston]

It's about time. :thumbup:

[Kwando]

good... smoking is bad for you anyway

[KennyKen]

:thumbup:

[M@]

Yep. I'm definatley happy about it. Gives my mom one more reason to stop smoking.

[J.Dub]

thats Awesome i hate smoking it smells bad. and i am allergic

[nicklk]

I came from Oregon just 2 weeks ago, where they banned every public location from smoking......AND banned you from smoking within 15 feet of any public location (library, restraunt, etc) going to the restraunts here SUCK!!! In one year, every restraunt/bar will be so better off!

[Pang]

fuck smoking.

[Terry]

smoking is retarded

[60-1teg]

how fucking gay

[Nightfall]

I smoke :(

I R teh retard

[doctorstupid]

How lame.

Why don't they ban something that actually kills innocent bystanders? Like drinking.

Double standards are the gay.

[Nightfall]

Smoking does kill innocent bystanders... very... very... slowly ;P

I agree on the drinking thing though. Every single car sold should have a fingerprint scanner and a breathalizer built into it. The fingerprint scanner is to prevent friends from passing the breathalizer test for you so you can drive.

[HondaPower]

So there won't be smoking in bars/clubs or what?

[Nightfall]

They had this law in Wisconsin before I left. It seemed to be different there though. Their law was that you could still smoke in an establishment if a certain % of the sales were alcohol related sales. This law is just lame. You can't smoke in bars?? WTF?

[HondasTrail]

They had this law in Wisconsin before I left. It seemed to be different there though. Their law was that you could still smoke in an establishment if a certain % of the sales were alcohol related sales. This law is just lame. You can't smoke in bars?? WTF?
Yea there goes alot of the business for down town bars and clubs. I'm for it but kind of against it since my second job is at a local restaraunt,

[doctorstupid]

So there won't be smoking in bars/clubs or what?
That's pretty much the idea, I'm used to that though, living inside by Boulder county.

It's not that bad to go outside for a smoke, but all this antismoking propoganda is getting on my nerves, if we're banning smoking for fear of public health, ban drinking for fear of public life.

As I said, double standards are the gay.

[doctorstupid]

They had this law in Wisconsin before I left. It seemed to be different there though. Their law was that you could still smoke in an establishment if a certain % of the sales were alcohol related sales. This law is just lame. You can't smoke in bars?? WTF?
They'll help you get plastered and go drive down the sidewalk, but heaven forbid someone who's too stuck up to leave if they don't like the environment has to breath some second hand smoke. Waaawaaa :rolleyes:

On that note, I'm going outside for a smoke :D

[Nightfall]

On that note, I'm going outside for a smoke :D
Sounds like a good idea... brb. :cheers:

[Moe]

Cool, hopefully I will be done before then.

[Martian]

The smoking bans are wrong on so many levels. I can understand why people don't like smoking. But where does the government get off telling businesses what kind of activity can go on in their establishment. I'm all for adding regulations that call for seperated and ventilated rooms, but to outlaw it ouright? Then on top of that, for the government to step in and tell me how I have to live my life. It's just more FCC type BS. They're just using the "Public Health" excuse because it's convinient and easily beleivable, even though it has no factual basis. These laws will all fall one day. It's a prohibition, and prohibitions don't work.That much has been proven before.

[Nightfall]

This is what my friend had to say on the issue:

"Whats wrong with the way things are now? Who gets the victory? No one owns anything anymore. Even a right to freedom. 'Genuine choice' is at a root the makeup of freedom; and giving to those from which that has been forcefully taken away from is not a compliment to freedom, or human dignity. Fuckin politicians!! "Its a health issue"..cry me a fuckin a river, so is mercury and plutonium, I dont see you giving that shit up. Fuck you!"

[JL LGT]

I've been not only smoking for too long, but TALKING about quitting for too damn long!

Here's another blatant reason for me to quit.

As for those who complain... .they need to look at it as somebody who's doing them a favor (those who smoke).

Smoking's a dangerous nasty habit... that should be out-lawed! Sure the law-makers and shit could do a LOT better.... but a baby step is better than anything else! Would you rather they made drunk-driving legal with no penalties?

What's wrong with helping society kick the habit? I'd rather be smoke free! I've been thinking that it would take re-hab with a lock up in a padded room like they do for junkies to get me to smoke-free!

Besides.... the chicks dig it!

[/slightly lit up post]

[smithz]

They'll help you get plastered and go drive down the sidewalk, but heaven forbid someone who's too stuck up to leave if they don't like the environment has to breath some second hand smoke. Waaawaaa :rolleyes:
It's not the issue of someone being too stuck up to just leave. The issue, as I understand it, is more about someone who does not smoke that is working in that environment and doesn't have the option to just leave. Ok, so you might argue at the point they can just go get another job. Well servers/bartenders tend to stay in that profession. So where then do they go if they are a non-smoker?

Personally I have to say the one thing I hate most about going out to bars and clubs is the sore throat I have the next day from breathing in the smoke soup all night. Could I just leave? Yup. But since pretty much all those types of places are the same, that doesn't leave you with many options. So does that then mean that all non-smokers should just stay the fuck home? Certainly an option I guess. I like the send-the-smokers-outside-to-smoke option better. It's their habbit, why should I suffer for it?

[Bedlam]

If people are drinking and driving (seems to be the main arguement from all the bitter smokers here) they deserve to be KILLED not just "have their rights taken away." Who are you trying to kid...really? Whens the last time someone died from going out and having a few drinks every now and then? Just how many cigs can you smoke in your lifetime and not have to worry about the health risks? Oh yeah..thats right...ZERO. They kill you. That is all.

I for one would be a lot more tempted to go to bars/clubs if they were non-smoking..its freaking GROSS going in those places now. :(

[Dave_L]

This is a good thing. I smoked for 3 years and quit a year ago. W00t! Best thing I ever did. Now I hate going to smokey bars. As soon as I get home, all my clothes go straight to the washing machine. I'd rather go to a bar that doesnt allow smoking.

Also, if it is a statewide ban, it won't effect anyone's business. There's no place to go for them to smoke except outside. Its not like you'll be able to go to another bar to smoke. You smokers will just have to learn to deal with it. :)

[Brian]

About freakin time. I'm tired of smelling like a smoker when I go out. I can't stand that

[chibianh]

Do people go to clubs and bars just to smoke? Thought so.. it's just a minor inconvenience for smokers to step outside to smoke. Then they can step right back in when they're done! no biggie..

[David]

Ban cigarettes, legalize weed FTW!

[Weston-work]

... I hate going to smokey bars. As soon as I get home, all my clothes go straight to the washing machine. I'd rather go to a bar that doesnt allow smoking.

:werd:

Also, if it is a statewide ban, it won't effect anyone's business. There's no place to go for them to smoke except outside. Its not like you'll be able to go to another bar to smoke. You smokers will just have to learn to deal with it. :)

:werd: There are already local bans in some areas, but that just causes people to go to another city where it's still allowed, so the smoke-free places and cities lose money. A state-wide ban prevents that from happening.

[Steve_C]

Now all they need is to make a couple of casino's smoke free. going out to the clubs and coming back smelling like smoke is almost as bad as going gambling and smelling of smoke.

Ban cigarettes, legalize weed FTW!I concur :D

[Seved]

Ban cigarettes, legalize weed FTW!

:werd:

California Cannabis Club Cards for the Win.. making it legal to buy it.

[doctorstupid]

What's wrong with helping society kick the habit? I'd rather be smoke free! I've been thinking that it would take re-hab with a lock up in a padded room like they do for junkies to get me to smoke-free!
Because the assumption there is that society WANTS to kick the habbit, personally I enjoy smoking in full, and have exactly zero complaints about it. So you want to quit, fine, good for you; quit trying to force your agenda on others.

If people are drinking and driving (seems to be the main arguement from all the bitter smokers here) they deserve to be KILLED not just "have their rights taken away." Who are you trying to kid...really? Whens the last time someone died from going out and having a few drinks every now and then? Just how many cigs can you smoke in your lifetime and not have to worry about the health risks? Oh yeah..thats right...ZERO. They kill you. That is all.You missed the point, the point is going out once and getting shit faced then hoping in your car can, and does about 48,000 times each year, kill innocent people who were NOT chosing to drink at the time.

So we can spend tax money passing laws against people who chose to do something that nets a lung cancer rate of 30.5% to themselves, not all of those cases being fatal, or focus on something that is a direct and immediate threat to people not taking part in the activity (drunk driving killing otherwise uninvolved parties). "but what about the other health effects?!" You mean like the increased frequency of ACS? Good point! The chance of getting ACS increases almost 30% when you smoke! *gasp* Sounds scary right? Until we consider that 0.6% of the world's population is diagnosed with accute coronory syndrome, making your risk a whopping 0.78% if you're actually smoking. This passive smoking bullshit can stop right now, any risk to me as the smoker is almost *nothing* to you, consider the concentration of smoke in the whole room, compared to in my lungs. Then consider that I have a 30.5% chance of developing lung cancer from that high concentration about 20 times per day, over a span of many years (average cancer diagnosis age for smokers is between 50 and 65), with the average smoker having their first cigarette at age 13, your risk is so negligable it's not even funny. And unless I'm mistaken, one pack per day is actually UNDER the national average, meaning at one pack per day, the risk is even lower.

Just for fun, if we're in a 50 x 50 room with 10' ceilings (very small for any self respecting restaurant/bar/club), that's a total airspace of 25,000 ft³. The average adult can inhale 4.5 liters (0.159 ft³) in a deep breath. I would venture to say one can get about 13-15 drags off a cigarette, actually smoking roughly 2/3 of it. Assuming that figure of 15 drags, one could assert that a single cigarette will put out 3.6 cubic feet of smoke, 2.39 of which pass through the smoker. It would take 69,444 individual cigarettes (3,472 packs, that is an ASSLOAD of smoking going on in that room, and we're also assuming that it's completely sealed, i.e. air-tight) to fill the room to the same concentration as a single smoker inhales, a room in which you would need to be inside 100 minutes each day (20 x 5 minutes cigarettes) for approximately 30 (being generous on that one, assuming smoking from age 20 to 50 to develop cancer, when in fact numbers suggest 37-52 year span) years to have a 30.5% chance of developing lung cancer, or 0.78% of ACS. And more than likely you would just asphyxiate in this theoretical room long before you had a chance to develop cancer.

But there's more! "Sidestream" smoke, that has not passed through the filter or the smoker is considered the largest threat to others, as many of the toxins/carcinogens/tar/etc are absorbed by the smoker, who exhales relatively clean and harmless smoke. So in reality, only about 33% of the aformentioned smoke is actually a "hazard," we'd need to triple the smoking going on in that broom closet (can't find figures for side stream vs exhaled carcinogen and toxin levels) to actually level the playing field, so to speak.

Forgive me for not seeing a considerable threat to "public health." And since nicotine is soooo addictive and second hand smoke is soooos trong, why don't you find yourself needing to go down to the bar for a nic fix every hour or so? Could it be because the smoke you're complaining about is actually present in an extrememly light concentration, and you're just a cry baby?

As I said before, I'm used to this ban already, as I live inside boulder county. But I have seen restaurants, for example, in other parts of the state with big signs out front saying "SMOKE FREE!" Someone who didn't like it, instead of bitching and forcing their agenda on others, changed the rules of THEIR establishment. It's not hard to do, if you don't like the environment, whether your work there or are a patron, go elsewhere. As business owners see public demand for smoke free bars, restaurants, etc, such establishments will be come much more common, giving you the option to go, and work, elsewhere if you can't cope with it.


(alos, im tired, I'm pretty sure my numbers are correct. If not bite me :) )

[Brandon]

I can see where you're coming from Dr. but I'm all for banning it.

[Weston-work]

I care more about the stench than the health risks. Smelling like smoke is teh suck.

[Bedlam]

You missed the point, the point is going out once and getting shit faced then hoping in your car can, and does about 48,000 times each year, kill innocent people who were NOT chosing to drink at the time.

Ohh..so you are saying that because these people arent responsible for their own actions, and chose to break the law...thats its the fault of alcohol? Thats about the most retarded arguement I've EVER heard.

Thats like saying if I own a gun, and decide to go out and shoot someone...its the GUN DEALERS fault! Maybe the manufacturer! Thats a freaking great idea! I'm going to shoot everyone and sue those people!!!

You act like the act of smoking has never caused a traffic accident..?

[Weston-work]

Ohh..so you are saying that because these people arent responsible for their own actions, and chose to break the law...thats its the fault of alcohol? Thats about the most retarded arguement I've EVER heard.

Thats like saying if I own a gun, and decide to go out and shoot someone...its the GUN DEALERS fault! Maybe the manufacturer! Thats a freaking great idea! I'm going to shoot everyone and sue those people!!!

You act like the act of smoking has never caused a traffic accident..?

"Guns kill people, just like spoons made Rosie O'Donnell fat!"

[Dave_L]

I care more about the stench than the health risks. Smelling like smoke is teh suck.

:werd: I hate that plus the smoke burns my eyes which pisses me off.

[Skaterkid]

For those of us with asthma, this is a good thing.

[Zach]

i wish they would ban it down here in AZ. coming from Boulder county to here absolutely sucked, seeing as how almost everyone down here smokes.

there is the point that was mentioned earlier about how business owners should have a say in whether or not they allow smoking in their own establishment. i mean, if someone doesnt like smoke they can go somewhere else, its really not that hard.
i dunno, its a hard call either way. on one hand it helps keep places cleaner, and healthier. on the other it starts to infringe on personal rights and freedoms.... so who knows.

[Weston-work]

i wish they would ban it down here in AZ. coming from Boulder county to here absolutely sucked, seeing as how almost everyone down here smokes.

there is the point that was mentioned earlier about how business owners should have a say in whether or not they allow smoking in their own establishment. i mean, if someone doesnt like smoke they can go somewhere else, its really not that hard.
i dunno, its a hard call either way. on one hand it helps keep places cleaner, and healthier. on the other it starts to infringe on personal rights and freedoms.... so who knows.

The problem is that it's not a "personal right and freedom" when it affects other people. Do whatever you want in your home or areas that are designated for it, but don't expect me to tolerate it elsewhere.

[myshtern]

When I was in France, the restuarants were very funny. Lots of the restuarants have 2 levels of seating, one above the other but everything in the middle is open. Because rent is so expensive in Paris, the sqaure footage of the restaurants is tiny.

Because we the non-smokers were a minority, they always seated us on the second level where the ceilings are 4-5 feet high. So basically, the non smoking section was where the most smoke was because your head is right at the ceiling and there is like a dozen people smoking right underneath you.

Abosolutely everywhere I went I smelled like smoke. I hate the anti-smoke propaganda, but out of self interest, I like the smoking bans. If you're a smoker, its not that big of deal, just go smoke outside, big whoop.

[robstamina]

:werd:

California Cannabis Club Cards for the Win.. making it legal to buy it.


I lived in San Francisco for a summer right down the way from a club...feds took it out 2 weeks after it opened...

federal law>state law

[Mark_H]

I have to come clean...I do occassionally smoke when I'm drunk as hell or when I'm getting frustrated working on a car. I've never been a full-time smoker but several of my close friends smoke so cigs are always available when drunk and when working on cars:)
Anybody else closet smokers like me that light up when drunk? I know there are some of you out there.
Regarding smoking bans, I think it's fine. I like having to go outside and get some fresh air while poluting my lungs.
Mark

[smithz]

...
I'm not goling to qoute all that but, I like your mathematical approach. Unfortunately you miss your own point completely in all your calculations. It really doesn't matter how little the additional risk is to someone else, even if there is only 0.00001% chance that a non-smoker hanging out in bars with smokers will get cancer, that's still a chance that that person will be affected by someone else decision. Now, granted you have a chance of being killed or injured by a drunk driver, also a form of being affected by someone else's decision. But drunk driving is already illegal. Smoking in public places is not, well not quite yet.

I understand that smokers feel they need to have the right to smoke whereever the fuck they feel like it and whenever the fuck they want. But that really isn't that different than someone feeling they have the right to drive drunk whenever and whereever the fuck they like. Both are personal, statistically dangerous, choices that not only affect the person making that choice, but all those in the vicinity as well.

[smithz]

...
I'm not goling to qoute all that but, I like your mathematical approach. Unfortunately you miss your own point completely in all your calculations. It really doesn't matter how little the additional risk is to someone else, even if there is only 0.00001% chance that a non-smoker hanging out in bars with smokers will get cancer, that's still a chance that that person will be affected by someone else decision. Now, granted you have a chance of being killed or injured by a drunk driver, also a form of being affected by someone else's decision. But drunk driving is already illegal. Smoking in public places is not, well not quite yet.

I understand that smokers feel they need to have the right to smoke whereever the fuck they feel like it and whenever the fuck they want. But that really isn't that different than someone feeling they have the right to drive drunk whenever and whereever the fuck they like. Both are personal, statistically dangerous, choices that not only affect the person making that choice, but all those in the vicinity as well.

Normally you always have a calculated and intelligent viewpoint on matters. This one however, I'm guessing you are too close to to see both sides of the argument. I guess I just expected a different response from you, regardless of whether you smoked or not. Maybe that's my fault...

[Martian]

It really doesn't matter how little the additional risk is to someone else, even if there is only 0.00001% chance that a non-smoker hanging out in bars with smokers will get cancer, that's still a chance that that person will be affected by someone else decision.
No one has ever forced a non smoker to sit in a smokey bar. They chose to do so. All you guys that are saying just go out side, it is not that simple. The new ban states "Smoking within 35 feet of any establishment covered by this new legislation will result in a $250 fine for the first violation and a $400 fine for each subsequent violation." We can't just step outside obviously. This law takes the right of the business owner away. It's no different than Califonia's CARB laws that forbid you from modifying your vehicle. Regardless of whether or not it affects emmissions. It is not right to take away peoples rights just to make others more comfortable, regardless of your stand on smoking.

[Steve_C]

No one has ever forced a non smoker to sit in a smokey bar. They chose to do so.
only problem i see with that, are people who work around smokers. technically they aren't forced, but they are exposed to smokers and 2nd hand smoke

[smithz]

No one has ever forced a non smoker to sit in a smokey bar. They chose to do so. All you guys that are saying just go out side, it is not that simple. The new ban states "Smoking within 35 feet of any establishment covered by this new legislation will result in a $250 fine for the first violation and a $400 fine for each subsequent violation." We can't just step outside obviously. This law takes the right of the business owner away. It's no different than Califonia's CARB laws that forbid you from modifying your vehicle. Regardless of whether or not it affects emmissions. It is not right to take away peoples rights just to make others more comfortable, regardless of your stand on smoking.
When every bar in town, short a very, very few, is a smoking bar, their isn't much of a choice other than just don't go to any bar ever. Not a good choice. Why should smokers get 99% of all bars when it's their choice that is the one invading on others choices. My choice to not smoke doesn't hurt anyone at all whereever I happen to be. See the differenence?

[Martian]

only problem i see with that, are people who work around smokers. technically they aren't forced, but they are exposed to smokers and 2nd hand smoke
They still make the choice to work there, knowing full well the conditions they would face. If we were to transfer this to say my field of work, they would need to remove all the other drivers off the road to eliminate the risks they put forth for me while driving tractor trailers.

[JL LGT]

I understand this may violate a God given right to F* yourself up... but dayum people!

It's a ban to make you STOP doing something seriously F*'d up to yourself!

If I wasn't so pathetic and didn't have such an addictive personality... I would have quit years ago!

Why not get a little kick in the ass to assist!? It's not like they're taking away our right to breathe!

[/AlmostDrunkPhase]

[Steve_C]

what they should do is give us the god given right to pull any parent out of their car and give them a good thrashing if they are smoking with children in the car. so many times i see that, i just want to slap the (cig) butt out of their mouths

[smithz]

Oh yeah, and make it equal to littering if you see someone throwing a fucking butt out the window. STOP LITTERING. That's what your fucking ashtray is for. If you car doesn't have an ashtray deal with it and throw that shit in a fucking trashcan. I want to punch motherfuckers for doing that shit.

[M@]

Oh yeah, and make it equal to littering if you see someone throwing a fucking butt out the window. STOP LITTERING. That's what your fucking ashtray is for. If you car doesn't have an ashtray deal with it and throw that shit in a fucking trashcan. I want to punch motherfuckers for doing that shit.
Fucking :werd:. I was behind a guy a couple days ago that did that.. I wanted to get out and grab it while it was still lit and put it out on his forehead.

[Weston]

Oh yeah, and make it equal to littering if you see someone throwing a fucking butt out the window. STOP LITTERING. That's what your fucking ashtray is for. If you car doesn't have an ashtray deal with it and throw that shit in a fucking trashcan. I want to punch motherfuckers for doing that shit.

:werd: I do believe it is considered the same as regular littering, or possibly worse since it's on fire, but it's way too common and too hard for them to get caught. I even saw a lit cigarette butt fly out the window of a firetruck once. :rolleyes:

[exciv2000]

I'm all for it. California residents haven't been allowed to smoke in establishments for what, almost 10 years now? They aren't complaining. As a former smoker, it's the right thing to do for all of the other patrons.

[john]

Good. Fuck smoking.

[doctorstupid]

Ohh..so you are saying that because these people arent responsible for their own actions, and chose to break the law...thats its the fault of alcohol? Thats about the most retarded arguement I've EVER heard.

Thats like saying if I own a gun, and decide to go out and shoot someone...its the GUN DEALERS fault! Maybe the manufacturer! Thats a freaking great idea! I'm going to shoot everyone and sue those people!!!

You act like the act of smoking has never caused a traffic accident..?
No, I'm saying that the establishment should have final say in what goes on in their location. The state telling them what the can and can't do under the pretense of public health is absurd when the "victims" have the ability to leave. In contrast, people getting tipsy in the bar and killing someone as a result is a greater threat to public health as the victim didn't really have any say in their exposure to that danger, and it isin fact a real danger.

My point, above all else, is that the double standards of this law are absurd.

And not that it's the point, but can you cite an incident in which smoking did cause a traffic accident?

[myshtern]

can you cite an incident in which smoking did cause a traffic accident?
You need to watch more TV.
Fallen cigars and coffee mugs cause 100s of deaths per year.

[Nightfall]

As opposed to 10's of thousands? Good comparison!

How many deaths are there, then, from people fucking with there car stereo. Including swapping CD's? Perhaps car stereos should be banned! ;)

[doctorstupid]

You need to watch more TV.
Fallen cigars and coffee mugs cause 100s of deaths per year.
And your source for this is.... TV?

[Bedlam]

And not that it's the point, but can you cite an incident in which smoking did cause a traffic accident?

My ex girlfriends dad crashed his car because of it. However, I'd bet that 99% of the time when people crash/cause accidents because of smoking "issues" that they dont report it as such. Because if they said "well my cig fell and burned my lap" instead of "omg my car just veered out of control!" they would be admitting fault. Everyone knows that nobody in the US is ever at FAULT for anything!

[B20badboy]

OWned < Smokers!

[V8SpankR]

I'd love to go to a bar and not come home smelling like an ashtray. I don't see why people still smoke when they know the end results. I know people that struggle to pay their bills but will never fail to spend $4 a pack to curb their nic fits for 1 day.
I also hate the fact that people don't consider cig butts litter since people throw them around too casually like it's ok to do so.

I don't care if people smoke in their own homes or cars but in public places I'd like to see it banned but if there are bars that cater to the smoking crowd then they should have the right to operate the way they choose since I can avoid those places if I choose.

[doctorstupid]

Everyone knows that nobody in the US is ever at FAULT for anything!
Hell no they aren't. That's why we need to tell business owners how to run their businesses, because we can't expect people that don't like it to take some god damn initiative in their life and go elsewhere in stead of stamping their feet and crying that their clothes smell. Right?

[smithz]

Hell no they aren't. That's why we need to tell business owners how to run their businesses, because we can't expect people that don't like it to take some god damn initiative in their life and go elsewhere in stead of stamping their feet and crying that their clothes smell. Right?
So what you are saying is that the non-smoker has to go around everywhere trying to avoid smokers if they choose not to be affected by your bad habbits?

And this feet stamping and crying you are referring to, would that resemble the same type of childish response from tobacco addicts when they are told to go fucking outside to smoke? The point is that I don't want to smell like an ashtray because of your bad choices, and I certainly don't want to have to stay locked inside my house to have to avoid it.

[Martian]

Somehow I think it was missed, we don't mind going outside. I have no problem with that. But this new ban won't let us just step outside. You have to understand why were pissed off here. We're not pissed because we can't smoke inside. We're pissed bacause there will be virtually nowhere that we can smoke except at home. This is clearly not a law for public saftey. Its a law for public convienience.
Also, any of you guys that smoke Pot, should be standing on our side of the fence here. This is a nanny law, same as the laws against pot, and the government has no place being anyones nanny.

[V8SpankR]

Pot and cigarettes are not the same. I can't just step outside to smoke pot and that's how it should be plus I don't think pot smokers HAVE to have a smoke throughout the whole day. Nicotine is very addictive and smokers can't go long without a smoke without a serious nic fit.

[smithz]

Somehow I think it was missed, we don't mind going outside. I have no problem with that. But this new ban won't let us just step outside. You have to understand why were pissed off here. We're not pissed because we can't smoke inside. We're pissed bacause there will be virtually nowhere that we can smoke except at home. This is clearly not a law for public saftey. Its a law for public convienience.
Also, any of you guys that smoke Pot, should be standing on our side of the fence here. This is a nanny law, same as the laws against pot, and the government has no place being anyones nanny.
That point wasn't missed. There is also a very good reason for that part of it as well. Because if all you do is ask smokers to go outside, where do you think they will go? 2" away from the doors. And since there will be so many more out there now, it would end up being like walking the gauntlet to get into anywhere. Now I agree that saying they need to be 35' or whatever it is away from the building is ridiculous, but saying they need to stay 35' away from entrances/exits I think makes perfect sense.

What's funny is when smokers say "Fuck this I have the right to smoke" it's considered standing up for yourself and your freedom to kill yourself slowly. When a non-smoker says "Fuck this stop polluting my air" it's considered crying and whining. Funny...

[Kwando]

I have to come clean...I do occassionally smoke when I'm drunk as hell or when I'm getting frustrated working on a car. I've never been a full-time smoker but several of my close friends smoke so cigs are always available when drunk and when working on cars:)
Anybody else closet smokers like me that light up when drunk? I know there are some of you out there.
Regarding smoking bans, I think it's fine. I like having to go outside and get some fresh air while poluting my lungs.
Mark



i quit in 2000 and i haven't touched a smoke since...but sometimes i do want to light up...

[Bedlam]

we can't expect people that don't like it to take some god damn initiative in their life and go elsewhere in stead of stamping their feet and crying that their clothes smell. Right?

Well..I could go around and punch everyone in the face that was smoking..but then "I" would get in trouble for trying to protect my health.

[Dave_L]

i quit in 2000 and i haven't touched a smoke since...but sometimes i do want to light up...

:werd: I'm at just over a year of smoke free but there are times when I crave a cigarette. But then I think of how it would feel to smoke that cig. It won't be the smoothing feeling like before. I'll probably hack up a lung like the first time you tried a cig.

Back to the main point, I don't really care how the smokers feel about this. No offense to them on a personal level to them but we've been putting up with the inconvenience of you smoking inside for a long time. Now its your turn to be inconvenienced by smoking.

[smithz]

Well..I could go around and punch everyone in the face that was smoking..but then "I" would get in trouble for trying to protect my health.
Classic, and so very, very true.

I'm at just over a year of smoke free but there are times when I crave a cigarette. But then I think of how it would feel to smoke that cig. It won't be the smoothing feeling like before. I'll probably hack up a lung like the first time you tried a cig.
And I'm sure it's even harder for you to fight that craving when in a bar and there are 50 people around you all smoking. Good work Dave and Simon.

[Dave_L]

Good work Dave and Simon.

Thanks!

[Martian]

<!--StartFragment --> I think that if they want to go through with a statewide ban, they should put it up to the voters. I don't want the government making decisions like this for me. I want the oppotunity for a say in it. If it passes then, I'd keep my mouth shut on the whole deal. But going about it like this isn't right. Once again, I don't mind going outside to smoke, but this legislation goes far beyound making us just go outside.
<!--StartFragment --> Pot and cigarettes are not the same. I can't just step outside to smoke pot and that's how it should be plus I don't think pot smokers HAVE to have a smoke throughout the whole day. Nicotine is very addictive and smokers can't go long without a smoke without a serious nic fit.
I'm not saying that pot and cigs are the same, I'm saying that the law against pot and this new legilation are the same. The government is trying to tell us whats right and wrong instead of allowing people to make their own decisions. You can legislate out all the bad things you want, but once its done what are you left with. A government slapping you on the wrist every five min. for being yourself. There are more laws just like this that will continue to go through in the name of "Public Health". They're trying to pass a law that allows cops to pull you over for no seat bealt. Right now they have to pull you over for something else first. They want to make a statewide helmet law. They want to put Electronic speed govenors on your vehicle so its impossible to speed. The list goes on and on. Now, you're going to say, those are all good things. It is all fine and dandy to be safe and all, but it isn't right for the government to step in and say you have to be safe, or smart. These are peoples choices, smart or dumb its their choice. These are all called a "nanny law". I don't know about you, but I don't need or want a nanny. This is supposed to be a free country. Yet we have more laws limiting our actions, good or bad, than any other country in the world. The only thing that makes some countries worse legal wise, is that our counrty doesn't penalize you with death for breaking laws (death penalty for murder excluded). This is suppposed to be a democracy, and if you think it still is I've got no problem telling you you're a dumbass for thinking so. It's only a matter of time before a law is passed that limits you, and that you disagree with. I hope that when that time comes you think back to this and issues with a similar outcome. I can understand everyones dislike for tobacco. I even agree with you all on a lot of your arguments on why it should be gone all together. Its okay for the government to regulate for the purpose of public saftey. It's not okay for them to legistlate against one group, for the benefit of another, in the name of public saftey.

[Weston-work]

The government is trying to tell us whats right and wrong instead of allowing people to make their own decisions.

:werd: The government really needs to stay out of people's own decisions. It's not their place to tell us what's right and wrong... If it's unhealthy, then we will face the consequences. If it's immoral, then we will take it up with God. I don't see how what other people choose to do is my problem when it doesn't affect me. As long as there is no victim, or everyone involved accepts the risks, then the government should stay out of it. If I ruled the world, there would be no such thing as victimless crimes... do whatever the hell you want, as long as you don't violate the rights of someone else. There would also be no such thing as welfare and crap like that... people need to pull their own damn weight and stop abusing the system.

However, in the case of smoking, there is a victim... Us non-smokers don't want to smell like cigarettes for the rest of the night, nor do we want to breathe that filth. What you do in your own home or in designated areas is fine by me, but if you're in an enclosed area with other people, it's not fair to poison their air with your bad habits. We will avoid designated smoking areas, and accept the risk if we choose to enter them, but when almost everywhere we go is contaminated, it's a real problem. We shouldn't have to avoid public areas because of smoke. It is not our problem to solve... the air is fine the way it is, until the smokers contaminate it, therefore the problem needs to be solved with the smokers. It's pretty damn clear who the cause of the problem is here. You can smoke cigarettes, pot, crack, etc., all day long for all I care, just as long as I don't have to be around it or otherwise deal with the consequences of your bad choices.

[Martian]

:werd: The government really needs to stay out of people's own decisions. It's not their place to tell us what's right and wrong... If it's unhealthy, then we will face the consequences. If it's immoral, then we will take it up with God. I don't see how what other people choose to do is my problem when it doesn't affect me. As long as there is no victim, or everyone involved accepts the risks, then the government should stay out of it. If I ruled the world, there would be no such thing as victimless crimes... do whatever the hell you want, as long as you don't violate the rights of someone else. There would also be no such thing as welfare and crap like that... people need to pull their own damn weight and stop abusing the system.

However, in the case of smoking, there is a victim... Us non-smokers don't want to smell like cigarettes for the rest of the night, nor do we want to breathe that filth. What you do in your own home or in designated areas is fine by me, but if you're in an enclosed area with other people, it's not fair to poison their air with your bad habits. We will avoid designated smoking areas, and accept the risk if we choose to enter them, but when almost everywhere we go is contaminated, it's a real problem. We shouldn't have to avoid public areas because of smoke. It is not our problem to solve... the air is fine the way it is, until the smokers contaminate it, therefore the problem needs to be solved with the smokers. It's pretty damn clear who the cause of the problem is here. You can smoke cigarettes, pot, crack, etc., all day long for all I care, just as long as I don't have to be around it or otherwise deal with the consequences of your bad choices.
I can agree with that completely.

[smithz]

This is supposed to be a free country. Yet we have more laws limiting our actions, good or bad, than any other country in the world. The only thing that makes some countries worse legal wise, is that our counrty doesn't penalize you with death for breaking laws (death penalty for murder excluded).
Apparently you haven't studied to many other countries... pick nearly any one in the Middle East. :D

This is suppposed to be a democracy, and if you think it still is I've got no problem telling you you're a dumbass for thinking so. It's only a matter of time before a law is passed that limits you, and that you disagree with. I hope that when that time comes you think back to this and issues with a similar outcome.
It is a democracy, not a true republic. Did you vote in the elections where the current legislature members were chosen? If you did, then you should be voicing your concerns with your elected representatives. If you didn't than I have some bad news for you. You can't blame "the system" for your freedom to not participate.

I've been to been to a couple other countries, namely Russia and Kazakhstan. And as much as I despise our fucked up government, it still seems to be the most functional in the world. Well at least up until now, it does seem to be spiraling the drain as of late.

Its okay for the government to regulate for the purpose of public saftey. It's not okay for them to legistlate against one group, for the benefit of another, in the name of public saftey.
Slippery slope there. I'm sure if you have suggestions for balancing these two things while keeping everyone happy, politicians would love to hear it. They are afterall only concerned with majorities. And I believe the shift in the demographic is toward a non-smoking public.

Easiest way for smokers to deal with this issue is to just changes sides. ;) j/k

[Martian]

Apparently you haven't studied to many other countries... pick nearly any one in the Middle East. :D


It is a democracy, not a true republic. Did you vote in the elections where the current legislature members were chosen? If you did, then you should be voicing your concerns with your elected representatives. If you didn't than I have some bad news for you. You can't blame "the system" for your freedom to not participate.

I've been to been to a couple other countries, namely Russia and Kazakhstan. And as much as I despise our fucked up government, it still seems to be the most functional in the world. Well at least up until now, it does seem to be spiraling the drain as of late.


Slippery slope there. I'm sure if you have suggestions for balancing these two things while keeping everyone happy, politicians would love to hear it. They are afterall only concerned with majorities. And I believe the shift in the demographic is toward a non-smoking public.

Easiest way for smokers to deal with this issue is to just changes sides. ;) j/k
I'll leave it as "I disagree with you". My stance is known and I really can't go further on this debate. Some see my point others don't, and right now I can't think of any other way to express them.

[integra_drk]

very good to hear

[Martian]

very good to hear
What a profound and insightful statement. What was I thinking.