goosebumps
Posts: 1,058
May 25, 2012 10:02am
Gblock;1181618 wrote:yes but the people who are in there getting their health ruined by smokers are also in killing themselves with alcahol so it just is kind of an oxymoron. my point is that for almost every type of devient behavior in this country there is place or a forum where you can participate in that activity and i see smoking as no different. smokers should have a right to have places they can smoke at imo. and i dont smoke i cant stand it.
It's called a Hookah bar
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
May 25, 2012 10:19am
Non-smokers ARE far superior to smokers.Big_Mirg_ZHS;1181613 wrote:I'm poisoning the air?? Hahaha. Your probably one of those people who fake coughs when I'm my requirede 30 feet from the entrance and you smell my smoke. Its the perception that non smokers think they are better than smokers. That's the part that pisses me off. And the whole we voted on it. Yeah I don't like people I don't agree with making my choices. Go be uppity non smokers some more and call us idiota.
S
Sonofanump
May 25, 2012 10:37am
I'm all for smokers doing what they want in private, it helps with the tax base. Public poisoning is not warranted.
Does it bother anyone else to drive by a vehicle that has an adult smoking in it, then you see a four year old in the child seat. Nothing like harming your offspring for life.
Does it bother anyone else to drive by a vehicle that has an adult smoking in it, then you see a four year old in the child seat. Nothing like harming your offspring for life.
cruiser_96
Posts: 7,536
May 25, 2012 10:40am
My brother and I made with two smoking parents. It happens.
gerb131
Posts: 9,932
May 25, 2012 10:50am
Um no no your not.sleeper;1181757 wrote:Non-smokers ARE far superior to smokers.
W
WebFire
Posts: 14,779
May 25, 2012 11:01am
Doesn't make it right. That's just a common sense issue though.cruiser_96;1181767 wrote:My brother and I made with two smoking parents. It happens.
cruiser_96
Posts: 7,536
May 25, 2012 11:15am
I've made it this far without common sense. It happens.WebFire;1181781 wrote:Doesn't make it right. That's just a common sense issue though.
pmoney25
Posts: 1,787
May 25, 2012 11:29am
I probably developed bladder cancer through second hand smoke growing up with two parents who smoked.
Luckily they caught it early. That obviously can never be proved but that is what I and my Dr think.
Luckily they caught it early. That obviously can never be proved but that is what I and my Dr think.
cruiser_96
Posts: 7,536
May 25, 2012 11:44am
My bladder was funny. I peed the bed unitl I was 12 or 13. Also, I have a very low tolerance for holding my pee. It doesn't take drinking much to make me have to go.
ts1227
Posts: 12,319
May 25, 2012 12:27pm
cruiser_96;1181767 wrote:My brother and I made with two smoking parents. It happens.
Yeah, but it's still a piece of shit thing to do regardless of the outcome.
2kool4skool
Posts: 1,804
May 25, 2012 2:13pm
Better in what way? In regards to decision making and willpower, they certainly are. I'd also venture a guess that the average IQ of non-smokers is higher than that of smokers.Big_Mirg_ZHS;1181613 wrote:Its the perception that non smokers think they are better than smokers
Q
queencitybuckeye
Posts: 7,117
May 25, 2012 2:29pm
At least one study has been done that indicates that this is true.2kool4skool;1181978 wrote:I'd also venture a guess that the average IQ of non-smokers is higher than that of smokers.
Big_Mirg_ZHS
Posts: 2,079
May 26, 2012 3:00am
I have a high enough of an IQ to be in mensa so try again bud.
B
bigkahuna
Posts: 4,454
May 26, 2012 9:11am
Typical OC responseBig_Mirg_ZHS;1182289 wrote:I have a high enough of an IQ to be in mensa so try again bud.
We all have the following
1. Six figure jobs
2. Super model gf's/wives
3. 4.3 40 speed
4. 8.5" members
5. IQs of 150+, even though we don't know the difference between there, they're, their, your, you're, and to, two, too.
5a. We should probably just rename this sight mensachatter.com
W
WebFire
Posts: 14,779
May 26, 2012 9:34am
Not to mention, a sample of 1 always seems to be enough proof.bigkahuna;1182334 wrote:Typical OC response
We all have the following
1. Six figure jobs
2. Super model gf's/wives
3. 4.3 40 speed
4. 8.5" members
5. IQs of 150+, even though we don't know the difference between there, they're, their, your, you're, and to, two, too.
5a. We should probably just rename this sight mensachatter.com
GOONx19
Posts: 7,147
May 26, 2012 10:01am
Big_Mirg_ZHS;1182289 wrote:I have a high enough of an IQ to be in mensa so try again bud.
FIFY. You may be a genius, but there's no way you passed middle school English. I didn't even mess with your sentence structure.Big_Mirg_ZHS;1181614 wrote:I'm poisoning the air?? Hahaha. You're probably one of those people who fakes a cough when I'm my required 30 feet from the entrance, and you smell my smoke. It's the perception that non-smokers think they are better than smokers. That's the part that pisses me off. And the whole we voted on it. Yeah, I don't like people I don't agree with making my choices. Go be uppity non-smokers some more and call us idiots.
I don't have a problem with anyone smoking, but you'd think a genius would realize that smoking causes irreversible genetic mutations that result in a suboptimal DNA repair capacity. The connection between that subpar capacity and an quickened rate of carcinogenesis has been proven time and time again. If you do realize that but continue smoking, then it's time to question your decision-making abilities. There aren't many ways that humans have more control over their well-being than by not smoking. Staying fit and avoiding tanning beds are just about it.
As for non-smokers having more rights than smokers, that's just a ridiculous statement.
GoPens
Posts: 2,339
May 26, 2012 10:11am
Mark the date. I actually agree with Sleeper about something...sleeper;1181253 wrote:As for the law, smokers are the worst. I wish they would make a pack of cigarettes $100; they could make a ton of money because the morons would still buy them.
S
Sonofanump
May 26, 2012 10:42am
I felt inferior because I thought these were past tense Portuguese words from our mensa (or is it mense?) member.Big_Mirg_ZHS;1181614 wrote:requirede idiota.
W
WebFire
Posts: 14,779
May 26, 2012 12:17pm
I bet most pit bull owners are smokers.2kool4skool;1181978 wrote:Better in what way? In regards to decision making and willpower, they certainly are. I'd also venture a guess that the average IQ of non-smokers is higher than that of smokers.
2kool4skool
Posts: 1,804
May 26, 2012 3:26pm
But apparently not high enough to understand what the word "average" means.Big_Mirg_ZHS;1182289 wrote:I have a high enough of an IQ to be in mensa so try again bud.
HitsRus
Posts: 9,206
May 26, 2012 3:46pm
So we should just do away with the health department?
????what does that have to do with what I posted? "The Health Department" has been existence long before cigarettes and tobacco became unpopular.
ts1227
Posts: 12,319
May 26, 2012 3:52pm
Yes, but the argument has to do with why this particular health department statute should be a property right issue in the mind of some, but only that statute.HitsRus;1182436 wrote:????what does that have to do with what I posted? "The Health Department" has been existence long before cigarettes and tobacco became unpopular.
One could argue that if a business should have a choice to affect patrons health negatively by allowing smoking, why wouldn't it be a property right for everything else they enforce, thus eliminating the need for health departments? Smoking just hits home because so many people do it, but what really makes it special compared to anything else that the health department enforces?
HitsRus
Posts: 9,206
May 26, 2012 4:34pm
The health department is necessary for unseen dangers, ones that the public cannot easily ascertain. Smoking is easily identifiable so people are aware. All of these nanny state health issues can easily be solved by simply making the public aware via clear obvious posting of warnings and then letting them choose if they wish to be in a smoky bar/restaraunt...eat high fat content food, etc.
As the majority of people are nonsmokers, there would be plenty of establishments willing to cater to them.
As the majority of people are nonsmokers, there would be plenty of establishments willing to cater to them.
G
gut
Posts: 15,058
May 26, 2012 4:38pm
Because most of what the health department and FDA do is to protect people from what they can't observe - you don't usually see the kitchen or how the food is prepared.ts1227;1182439 wrote:... but what really makes it special compared to anything else that the health department enforces?
I've looked at a lot of the research and the only thing I can conclude with confidence is that ETS is a new approach to prohibition, likely motivated by soaring health costs of smokers (although there is also research questioning the actual social costs of smokers vs. non-smokers when you factor in life expectancy).
G
gut
Posts: 15,058
May 26, 2012 4:43pm
A very common sense approach, and hardly ground-breaking nor an elusive idea. But tolerance/accommodation does not fit with the prohibition-minded agenda. It's working, too - smoking rates have dropped significantly and continue to decline. High taxes weren't particularly effective, but gradually taking away opportunities/places to smoke is proving to be very effective.queencitybuckeye;1179872 wrote: The number of bars in an area is already controlled by law. Add to the licensing process a distinction between smoking and non-smoking bars and grant licenses for each in proportion to the percent of smokers. IOW, if a city has 10 bars and 20% of the population smokes, 8 of the bars would be licensed as non-smoking, 2 as smoking.