That's nothing- California now is trying to ban smoking on the beach.
There is already about 5 beaches in San Diego that ban smoking on the beach- now some yahoo is trying to make it statewide.

Next they will ban smoking on freeways.

i think they should ban smoking worldwide for everyone who is going to be born after june 22 2004 @00:00GMT!! that way no one wont be addicted anymore in the next century!

quote:

Originally posted by djshan i think they should ban smoking worldwide for everyone who is going to be born after june 22 2004 @00:00GMT!! that way no one wont be addicted anymore in the next century!

seriously

Yup, because everyone who smokes is addicted. Just like everyone who drinks is an alcoholic and everyone who smokes pot is a pothead, and everyone who drives a car mows people down and everyone who eats fast food becomes morbidly obese. Let's just ban everything, because someone somewhere can abuse it. Sounds great!

Why do we have this urge to shelter ourselves by stooping down to the lowest common denominator?

quote:

Originally posted by djshan that way no one wont be addicted anymore in the next century!

Anybody catch the double-negative here? "No one will not be addicted anymore" means "Everyone WILL be addicted".

quote:

Originally posted by NeoPhono Yup, because everyone who smokes is addicted. Just like everyone who drinks is an alcoholic and everyone who smokes pot is a pothead, and everyone who drives a car mows people down and everyone who eats fast food becomes morbidly obese. Let's just ban everything, because someone somewhere can abuse it. Sounds great!

Right...so why is it so hard to quit smoking if its not addictive Besides i dont remember seeing a paerson that had a need to always drink or to run people down with their car, however i see a lot of people getting really nervous if they hadnt smoked for a while, and it gets worse and worse as the time increases. If that isnt an addction i dont know what is.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka Fair to whom? To you? To non-smokers? What about the owner of the restaurant? He owns the property and everything under the roof--if people want to go there shouldn't they abide by the house rules? I find it much more unfair to invade the physical property rights of the owner of the establishment. Rights anyone? Supply and demand will dictate the atmosphere in the end.

Notice that I said only a part of the restaurant. The owners of the restaurant are forced to do a number of things regarding safety of their guests, like the fire escape exits I mentioned earlier. Is it an owner's right to have a restaurant in an unsafe building? What if there are structural errors that the owner decided are not worth fixing and a roof falls on your head? It's the owner's right not to have a safe roof, right? He'll get sued for it, but you unfortunately might end up injured for life.

There are also some things which people are not allowed to do regardless of whether the owner of the estate agrees with that or not. What if an owner of the restaurant decided it's ok to have brawls and fights between his guests? So an unsuspecting person comes in and gets punched in the face. Is that ok? That person could have stayed outside of the restaurant for a minute or two, checked if there was anything troublesome going on and then decided whether to come in or not.

It is ok to have a restaurant that's for smokers, but there should be some government action that would encourage non-smoking restaurants, otherwise even if 1% of the people are smoking, it's enough to cause unsatisfaction in the rest 99% of the people.

___________________
1+1=10

Wow neo, didnt know you were in Columbus...I am here too. The smoking ban is totally from the deal in Toledo, where alot of the bars are just snubbing their noses at the law. Thereve been something like 200 citations since the law went into effect.

Smoking should be the choice of the bar/club/restaurant owner. If they want to have both smoking and non-smoking, they should have seperate ventilation. but banning it totally is an insane violation of rights and should be stopped. If non-smokers dont liek a place to allow smoking, I feel their will be plenty of non-smoking places avaliable for them.,...

quote:

Originally posted by Moongoose Right...so why is it so hard to quit smoking if its not addictive Besides i dont remember seeing a paerson that had a need to always drink or to run people down with their car, however i see a lot of people getting really nervous if they hadnt smoked for a while, and it gets worse and worse as the time increases. If that isnt an addction i dont know what is.

I never said smoking can't be addictive...everything can be addictive to the right person. I'm saying that just because someone can abuse a certain drug or situation doesn't mean that it should be banned for everyone. If that were the case everything would be illegal. And if you have never seen an alcoholic or a morbidly obese individual, you're lucky. I'm a health care worker and I see both smokers, alcoholics and the morbidly obese everyday. Of the three I would much rather deal with a smoker going through nicotene withdrawl then an alcoholic suffering delirium tremens or an obese individual that sucks money from the health care system faster than any late stage lung cancer patient. Everything is relative, but if we only concentrate on the extreme negatives of a situation, including smoking, nothing would be legal, because there is always a way to make something harmful...I'd love to give examples if you like them.

quote:

Originally posted by NeoPhono I never said smoking can't be addictive...everything can be addictive to the right person. I'm saying that just because someone can abuse a certain drug or situation doesn't mean that it should be banned for everyone. If that were the case everything would be illegal. And if you have never seen an alcoholic or a morbidly obese individual, you're lucky. I'm a health care worker and I see both smokers, alcoholics and the morbidly obese everyday. Of the three I would much rather deal with a smoker going through nicotene withdrawl then an alcoholic suffering delirium tremens or an obese individual that sucks money from the health care system faster than any late stage lung cancer patient. Everything is relative, but if we only concentrate on the extreme negatives of a situation, including smoking, nothing would be legal, because there is always a way to make something harmful...I'd love to give examples if you like them.

In the same way that consuming too much of anything always seems to lead to or cause a cancer of sorts.

quote:

Originally posted by NeoPhono I never said smoking can't be addictive...everything can be addictive to the right person. I'm saying that just because someone can abuse a certain drug or situation doesn't mean that it should be banned for everyone. If that were the case everything would be illegal. And if you have never seen an alcoholic or a morbidly obese individual, you're lucky. I'm a health care worker and I see both smokers, alcoholics and the morbidly obese everyday. Of the three I would much rather deal with a smoker going through nicotene withdrawl then an alcoholic suffering delirium tremens or an obese individual that sucks money from the health care system faster than any late stage lung cancer patient. Everything is relative, but if we only concentrate on the extreme negatives of a situation, including smoking, nothing would be legal, because there is always a way to make something harmful...I'd love to give examples if you like them.

Well i agree with you on the point that just becouse someone can abuse the drug it should not be banned for everybody. The trouble with smoking is that when you smoke you force it on everybody else either they like it or not. For instance if you get drunk your not hurting anybody, well unless you throw up on the floor, beat up somebody or get into a car and drive around a bit, but those are extreme cases...not rare, but you wont beat up somebody after one drink. But in the end you are not forcing your drink to everybody. If you smoke however, everybdy has to smell it.

I woudnt have such a grudge agains smoking if the idea of seperated places for smokers and nonsmokers actualy worked, but too may times i have seen a waiter bringing an ashtray to a person in a nonsmoking section just becouse he asked for it, and then when i complained about it they either ignored me or said it wasnt any of my busines And its not just restaurants, a person cant go out for a good time without coming home without his lungs full of smoke and clothes stinking as if he workedin the damn tobacco factory.

To go back to abusing, the sad thing is that there are to many people abusing this drug. Honestly i fell (and im 110% sure im right) that at least over here, non smokers are a minority. I know how bad alcoholism is (as i said i havent seen one yet, but i have family and friends that work in health care and they talk...) but i wery much doubt that in any country non alcoholics are a minority. Yes alcoholism is bad, but having a few family members and family friends die of lung cancer even though they havent smoked a day in their lives is bad as well.

___________________