countdown to no-smoking thread

[Destroit]

what if i don't consider it being wronged?

selfish? really? second hand smoke obviously has an effect on people - ever been at a party where people are smoking weed & gotten a contact buzz? how do you think that happens? yeah. the same shit that the active smoker takes in, is also taken in by people who are just around it.

hearing all of these smokers complain about "not being able to do as they wish" with their bodies is irritating as hell. you know, i really don't care what people do to themselves - they can smoke all they want. thing is, a smoker *can't* restrict their habit to only themselves. it's not like liquor, or orally ingested drugs, where the effects are self-contained. who the hell do smokers think they are? what gives them the right to say, " you don't like smoke, go somewhere else!", but yet, complain about non-smokers saying the same thing? it doesn't make any sense...

and for the record, i've mentioned before that i do think there are better ways to go about this, such as air filtration requirements/inspections for smoking establishments, or the creation of "smoking licenses" for businesses. i do think there need to be better accomodations for smokers, such as separate rooms, or outdoor patios, etc. this business about "25-100 ft from a public building" is fucking stupid...

Okay, fine. You don't consider it being wronged. There's also people out there who don't think molesting children is wrong...so I should just back down and agree that they're right just because they don't FEEL that it's immoral? Nope. Just because YOU don't feel people are being wronged doesn't mean that they aren't. I feel pretty damn wronged in the matter.

I've also never gotten a contact buzz being in a room with green stuff being consumed. But there's a different reason for that altogether that I'm not going to disclose .

And by the sounds of your last paragraph, it seems we're actually on the same side for this. As I said before, I don't WANT people to be angry at me because I'm smoking. I want proper accommodations or at least an enthusiastic effort toward such.

Okay, fine. You don't consider it being wronged. There's also people out there who don't think molesting children is wronged...so I should just back down and agree that they're right just because they don't FEEL that it's immoral? Nope. Just because YOU don't feel people are being wronged doesn't mean that they aren't. I feel pretty damn wronged in the matter.

I've also never gotten a contact buzz being in a room with green stuff being consumed. But there's a different reason for that altogether that I'm not going to disclose .

And by the sounds of your last paragraph, it seems we're actually on the same side for this. As I said before, I don't WANT people to be angry at me because I'm smoking. I want proper accommodations or at least an enthusiastic effort toward such.

Edited April 26, 2010 by Chernobyl

[torn asunder]

Okay, fine. You don't consider it being wronged. There's also people out there who don't think molesting children is wrong...so I should just back down and agree that they're right just because they don't FEEL that it's immoral? Nope. Just because YOU don't feel people are being wronged doesn't mean that they aren't. I feel pretty damn wronged in the matter.

I've also never gotten a contact buzz being in a room with green stuff being consumed. But there's a different reason for that altogether that I'm not going to disclose .

And by the sounds of your last paragraph, it seems we're actually on the same side for this. As I said before, I don't WANT people to be angry at me because I'm smoking. I want proper accommodations or at least an enthusiastic effort toward such.

wait, you're comparing smoking with child molestation? you're kidding, right? i was disagreeing with the statement you made that "if one of us is wronged, we're all wronged". you're predicating your argument on the idea that smokers are being wronged, and i'm just saying that that's not *necessarily* true.

as for the contact buzz issue, just because you haven't had it happen doesn't mean it doesn't. i'm talking about non-*smokers* getting a buzz. if someone is already stoned the point is moot.

lastly, if you don't want people to be angry with you for smoking, maybe it would be a good idea to not intentionally blow smoke in their face!

[Destroit]

wait, you're comparing smoking with child molestation? you're kidding, right? i was disagreeing with the statement you made that "if one of us is wronged, we're all wronged". you're predicating your argument on the idea that smokers are being wronged, and i'm just saying that that's not *necessarily* true.

I wasn't trying to correlate smoking with kid fondling, it was an example. I was trying to use it as a reason to explain that just because someone deems something wrong doesn't mean it is (and vice versa of course)

Here's another example. Yeah, it's kind of extreme because it was the only thing I could think of. Hitler killed a massive amount of people (not even just in the war itself, I'm talking strictly concentration camps). There is no doubt in my mind HE felt as though he was NOT wrong in doing such as he did not consider the people he was killing as actual "people". There's no doubt in my mind that the people who were murdered in his genocide rampage felt wrong (and in my opinion, for what it's worth, obviously they were severely wronged). There are probably members of the KKK and/or Aryan Brotherhood who do not believe Hitler was wrong. "Wronged" is usually a matter of opinion.

How I base "wrong" is...does it directly harm an individual, their property, or their livelihood? If the answer is "no" I do not consider it wrong. I do not consider people damaging themselves as wrong either, for the record. I do not believe there should be a such thing as a victimless crime, it's stupid, but that's an entirely different topic.

Why do I believe smokers were wronged? Because, as you've stated, it IS possible to accommodate smokers. Smokers, if accommodated properly, will not be exposing non-smokers to smoke. In this case, smoking would be almost a "victimless crime" of sorts and the consumer would only be damaging their own health. So at this point in time I believe it was wrong morally and ethically for legislature to lock out an entire population of the country who could potentially be harming nobody but themselves if given the opportunity. We were wronged because we were not given that voice and that opportunity. That's why I believe our freedom was collectively violated.

lastly, if you don't want people to be angry with you for smoking, maybe it would be a good idea to not intentionally blow smoke in their face!

Hey man, I didn't use to but I don't care about making most non-smokers angry now. They didn't care about making me angry. Sure, eye for an eye leaves everyone blind...but it also leaves me incredibly satisfied emotionally. Sorry, but I'm human, I thoroughly enjoy revenge.

I wasn't trying to correlate smoking with kid fondling, it was an example. I was trying to use it as a reason to explain that just because someone deems something wrong doesn't mean it is (and vice versa of course)

Here's another example. Yeah, it's kind of extreme because it was the only thing I could think of. Hitler killed a massive amount of people (not even just in the war itself, I'm talking strictly concentration camps). There is no doubt in my mind HE felt as though he was NOT wrong in doing such as he did not consider the people he was killing as actual "people". There's no doubt in my mind that the people who were murdered in his genocide rampage felt wrong (and in my opinion, for what it's worth, obviously they were severely wronged). There are probably members of the KKK and/or Aryan Brotherhood who do not believe Hitler was wrong. "Wronged" is usually a matter of opinion.

How I base "wrong" is...does it directly harm an individual, their property, or their livelihood? If the answer is "no" I do not consider it wrong. I do not consider people damaging themselves as wrong either, for the record. I do not believe there should be a such thing as a victimless crime, it's stupid, but that's an entirely different topic.

Why do I believe smokers were wronged? Because, as you've stated, it IS possible to accommodate smokers. Smokers, if accommodated properly, will not be exposing non-smokers to smoke. In this case, smoking would be almost a "victimless crime" of sorts and the consumer would only be damaging their own health. So at this point in time I believe it was wrong morally and ethically for legislature to lock out an entire population of the country who could potentially be harming nobody but themselves if given the opportunity. We were wronged because we were not given that voice and that opportunity. That's why I believe our freedom was collectively violated.

Hey man, I didn't use to but I don't care about making most non-smokers angry now. They didn't care about making me angry. Sure, eye for an eye leaves everyone blind...but it also leaves me incredibly satisfied emotionally. Sorry, but I'm human, I thoroughly enjoy revenge.

[torn asunder]

Here's another example. Yeah, it's kind of extreme because it was the only thing I could think of. Hitler killed a massive amount of people (not even just in the war itself, I'm talking strictly concentration camps). There is no doubt in my mind HE felt as though he was NOT wrong in doing such as he did not consider the people he was killing as actual "people". There's no doubt in my mind that the people who were murdered in his genocide rampage felt wrong (and in my opinion, for what it's worth, obviously they were severely wronged). There are probably members of the KKK and/or Aryan Brotherhood who do not believe Hitler was wrong. "Wronged" is usually a matter of opinion.

i'm not even going to engage in a discussion that hitler's brought into. it's ridiculous.

How I base "wrong" is...does it directly harm an individual, their property, or their livelihood? If the answer is "no" I do not consider it wrong. I do not consider people damaging themselves as wrong either, for the record. I do not believe there should be a such thing as a victimless crime, it's stupid, but that's an entirely different topic.

yes, it *directly* harms an individual non-smoker. *that* is wrong. i don't consider people damaging themselves as wrong either, but smoking does harm others.

Smokers, if accommodated properly, will not be exposing non-smokers to smoke. In this case, smoking would be almost a "victimless crime" of sorts and the consumer would only be damaging their own health. So at this point in time I believe it was wrong morally and ethically for legislature to lock out an entire population of the country who could potentially be harming nobody but themselves if given the opportunity. We were wronged because we were not given that voice and that opportunity. That's why I believe our freedom was collectively violated.

1) i agree that other, better accomodations could be made. 2) i disagree that smokers weren't given a voice, unless i'm missing something (and i might be, i'll admit). was there no debate on this law? was it passed in the dead of the night, with nobody around, snuck in with another bill? i may be making an incorrect assumption, but i figured this had been debated. i'm open to being educated if i'm wrong!

Hey man, I didn't use to but I don't care about making most non-smokers angry now. They didn't care about making me angry. Sure, eye for an eye leaves everyone blind...but it also leaves me incredibly satisfied emotionally. Sorry, but I'm human, I thoroughly enjoy revenge.

blanket "they" statements suck. so does the attitude that revenge is fun/worthwhile. for that matter, so is the assumption that the people against whom you're acting out deserve it. are you going to ask people if they supported this law before blowing smoke in their face? if you don't, you're being just as inconsiderate and rude as you seem to think all smokers are.

Edited April 26, 2010 by torn asunder

[DJ Nocker]

Well..so far its not being enforced at my work, lol. I figured.

Guess time will tell. Although I doubt it will effect anything with me or the places I go to.

Edited April 26, 2010 by DJ Nocker

[Destroit]

Well..so far its not being enforced at my work, lol. I figured.

Guess time will tell. Although I doubt it will effect anything with me or the places I go to.

Well technically they have until May 1st I believe.

Well technically they have until May 1st I believe.

[DJ Nocker]

Well technically they have until May 1st I believe.

Well, what I mean is, my manager shrugs at the mention of the law, probably because 90% of the staff smokes, lol.

[Destroit]

Well, what I mean is, my manager shrugs at the mention of the law, probably because 90% of the staff smokes, lol.

That's how it was at the last place I worked. The WHOLE office feel and setup was like walking into 1996. The computers, the fact that most agents still had pagers and not cell phones, everything was by fax, we still had dial-up, people's mannerisms, furniture...everything. Incluuuding the fact that we could just smoke wherever. I thought it was quite odd for an office setting but didn't care because I smoked at the time.

That's how it was at the last place I worked. The WHOLE office feel and setup was like walking into 1996. The computers, the fact that most agents still had pagers and not cell phones, everything was by fax, we still had dial-up, mannerisms, furniture...everything. Incluuuding the fact that we could just smoke wherever. I thought it was quite odd for an office setting but didn't care because I smoked at the time.

[candyman]

And what was all that supposed to prove? Yes I am passionate but using sentences out of context is not what I am looking for people to do with what I write.

Yes I said don't be a dick no matter which side you are on. However, with some of the actions I have seen and from what people have been saying (mostly outside of this forum) there are situations where the gloves come off. Notice where you cut off my one quote where I spent a whole paragraph explaining myself for the little bit that you quoted which seems to incriminate me?

From what I have been through on smoking decks in areas where there is a ban there is WAY too much bullshit going around. People will actually take the effort to go away from their original path just to come to the smoking decks to launch insults at us...no they don't really hurt because most of the insults seem to be on the 5th grade level. I have had stuff thrown at me by drunk people and I have seen it happen to other smokers.

Now what I said about sore winners and sore losers. No most people won't blow smoke in your face on purpose and you must feel really proud if you base your views on the actions of a few. Now when the ban hits everywhere and you walk by a group of smokers outside what do you do? Oh yeah thats right you keep walking and if you do say anything to them maybe try to exchange pleasantries or something...or is it that hard to say "hi" to people?

[torn asunder]

And what was all that supposed to prove? Yes I am passionate but using sentences out of context is not what I am looking for people to do with what I write.

Yes I said don't be a dick no matter which side you are on. However, with some of the actions I have seen and from what people have been saying (mostly outside of this forum) there are situations where the gloves come off. Notice where you cut off my one quote where I spent a whole paragraph explaining myself for the little bit that you quoted which seems to incriminate me?

From what I have been through on smoking decks in areas where there is a ban there is WAY too much bullshit going around. People will actually take the effort to go away from their original path just to come to the smoking decks to launch insults at us...no they don't really hurt because most of the insults seem to be on the 5th grade level. I have had stuff thrown at me by drunk people and I have seen it happen to other smokers.

Now what I said about sore winners and sore losers. No most people won't blow smoke in your face on purpose and you must feel really proud if you base your views on the actions of a few. Now when the ban hits everywhere and you walk by a group of smokers outside what do you do? Oh yeah thats right you keep walking and if you do say anything to them maybe try to exchange pleasantries or something...or is it that hard to say "hi" to people?

look, i was only pointing out how you were contradicting yourself, saying people shouldn't act like dicks, yet talking about acting like one. the supposed "explanations" you gave just come across as justification for rude behavior.

as for drunk people behaving badly, well, that goes without saying, they're drunk. i admit, though, that the following statement didn't register properly with me, so i misinterpreted your post;

If you talk shit to me about the ban while walking in the least you should expect is smoke in the face for acting like a bitch...

although i still don't condone it, i can see where you're coming from, blowing smoke at people who are insulting you in such a way.

still, i think the more mature thing to do is either ignore them, or laugh at them. but that's just me.

[Rev.Reverence]

what if i don't consider it being wronged?

selfish? really? second hand smoke obviously has an effect on people - ever been at a party where people are smoking weed & gotten a contact buzz? how do you think that happens? yeah. the same shit that the active smoker takes in, is also taken in by people who are just around it.

hearing all of these smokers complain about "not being able to do as they wish" with their bodies is irritating as hell. you know, i really don't care what people do to themselves - they can smoke all they want. thing is, a smoker *can't* restrict their habit to only themselves. it's not like liquor, or orally ingested drugs, where the effects are self-contained. who the hell do smokers think they are? what gives them the right to say, " you don't like smoke, go somewhere else!", but yet, complain about non-smokers saying the same thing? it doesn't make any sense...

and for the record, i've mentioned before that i do think there are better ways to go about this, such as air filtration requirements/inspections for smoking establishments, or the creation of "smoking licenses" for businesses. i do think there need to be better accomodations for smokers, such as separate rooms, or outdoor patios, etc. this business about "25-100 ft from a public building" is fucking stupid...

..that is ALL in the brain...

....if you are in a room with pot smoke, you do not test positive for THC, therefore, it must be in the head.

[Rev.Reverence]

You seriously think that smokers give a rats ass about non-smokers? If they did, they would restrict their smoking to private places or be a lot more courteous than most of them are. Non-smokers have had to be the ones who appear more aggressive because we're the ones who have to put up with someone elses unhealthy and unpleasant habit. My not smoking doesn't hurt a thing nor do people say: "Please stop not smoking, it irritates my eyes/lungs".

HEY NOW...I try as well as I can, with what I can try with.

...do I care if I'm at a bar..?..nope...it's that 'free-zone'...if I accidentally exhale IN someone's face, I am apologetic, in the extreme...

.....you know what....peoples really need to watch these mean spirited generalizations...it makes them seem like total XXXXXXXXXX.....

[Rev.Reverence]

1) i agree that other, better accomodations could be made. 2) i disagree that smokers weren't given a voice, unless i'm missing something (and i might be, i'll admit). was there no debate on this law? was it passed in the dead of the night, with nobody around, snuck in with another bill? i may be making an incorrect assumption, but i figured this had been debated. i'm open to being educated if i'm wrong!

I'm pretty sure, that it was pushed through, with $ from big casinos (note, they still have legal smoking there.), & under the cover of masses of media confusion.....like everytime they take a right away, or distort a privilage.

[Lillylu29]

I am a NON smoker and I for one think to ban smoking in bars is wrong. It dosent really bother me at all unless its excessive and even still I have 2 legs I know how to get up and walk the hell out of whatever area im in if I cant deal with it.

[Soulrev]

I have 2 legs I know how to get up and walk the hell out of whatever area im in if I cant deal with it.

Yeah only problem is 75% of Americans don't want to deal with their own problems. They'd rather have someone else do it for them.

[torn asunder]

..that is ALL in the brain...

....if you are in a room with pot smoke, you do not test positive for THC, therefore, it must be in the head.

you're kidding, right?

what do you base this on?

Edited April 27, 2010 by torn asunder

[Oh_My_Goth]

you're kidding, right?

what do you base this on?

Being a "Stoner" at one time & Having being sober for many months and then sitting in a room FULL of Marijuana smoke, I felt NO effects from the smoking going on in the room... Therefore I believe Rev is correct in stating that "contact high" is a purely a metal And/Or spiritual phenomenon.

[prick]

Again I would like to point out that I believe any place that wants to be non smoking should but it should be up to the individual establishment to decide.

[Epic_Fail_Guy]

I only disagree with the law for several reasons,

first up, in BASIC PRINCIPAL. It infringes on our freedoms. However there's a quote from some famous dead polititian, "I have the right to swing my fists around as much as I want, but my right to do so ends at your face" (didn't get it 100% but it's implying he DOESN'T have the right to knock someone's ass out) the analogy is based on the principal that ou rrights should not interfere or inhibit other peoples' rights.

That's why there is a grey area with this smoking. My right to smoke should end at other's right to not have to deal with it. However their right to not smoke ends at telling me that I can't smoke in buildings like bars or clubs.

Some places, I can understand, schools, churches, certain restaraunts, places of business and work, ect. My best idea is to offer alternatives, like have a special smokers room, or smokers lounge, like they have in the airports. Do I hate them? Yes, because they are so strong of that nasty smell however do I agree with them? Yes, because it gives me the option to finally get my fix after a long flight without bothering other people, or have to deal with the hastle of going out side, for a 5 minute drag, and since i gotta go through 2 hours of security again to get back to where I'm going, i might as well suck down 3 or 4 and make myself mildly sick.

Another alternative that I'm STILL waiting on, eagerly, is the E-cigarette. I tried it a few times from a friend, tastes and feels not like a real cigarette, but at the same time, it did give me a fix. It may not be the same, but in the long run, switching over to that I hope it can still give me my fix like a regular cigarette can.

Another reason why I disagree with this ban is because those businesses that are being affected are having their rights infringed upon. It's their business to run with how they see fit. There's plenty of higher end bars and pool halls that don't allow smoking and have a much safer feel to them than that typical smoked out hole in the wall bar. Just because one place allows smoking, doesn't mean that's your only option.

Another reason is, (From what i heard, still trying to dig up the recourse to this claim so don't shoot me if i'm wrong here...) but this ban has been voted down 3 times already before it was just signed into effect anyway. I won't go into too much detail about this but it's just typical of the government to pull shit like this. (this isn't meant to be a slam on republican or democrat.. just to clarify, i feel both in their own way oppress freedoms)

Now when I have to go outside to smoke.. will i be pissed about it? Not really unless it's in the winter time or I gotta pay a reentry fee, then i'm not even gonna bother goin to the joint, i'll just throw a party at my place, or bring along my e-cigarette.

Now, with all the babble above me, will i be a dick to non smokers about it? No.. because from what I understand until i find the facts out straight, the ban was forced after it's been voted down several times. What if someone makes a smart ass comment to me about having to smoke outside as if to mock me? Well one good burn deserves another, and like Chernobyl, will probably blow smoke in their face. Do 2 wrongs make a right? No.. But it's proving a point to an extent. I don't know, no pun intended but, i'm sort of torn between Chernobyl's point of view and Torn's counter argument... I can see both sides of the fence :S

[Raev]

And trust me, I do feel sympathies for non-smokers who do not want to be exposed to smoke. Problem is that you guys obviously don't have any fairness or empathy toward smokers.

Chernobyl, I have to take you to task on this one.

I date a smoker. I personally dislike smoke greatly - but I never complain to her about the smoking. I don't complain about the bars and clubs. If I don't want to be around it, I just go elsewhere. When at your house, while Pest, Siren and you smoked where was I? Up wind and not saying a word. You can't throw that sweeping generalization and remain fair, my friend.

I know many smokers who show me respect and try to keep smoke from blowing in my face when we are around each other. In return, I insist they enjoy their cig and tell them if it bothers me, ill just switch seats and enjoy my vice - my beer.

We all have our vices, addictions, habits etc. Just because mine has barley and hops instead of tobacco in it, it doesn't give me the right to bitch or try to force my opinion on another adult. Do what makes you happy, ill do what makes me happy (though, your habit is probably safer and less obnoxious than mine...replenish the Guinness yet? Muahaha)

Edited April 27, 2010 by Raev

[Tyger]

Doing into a bar like CC I always know what Im getting into. You walk into the place and you can see the cloud of smoke some times. I have had many a times smoke blown in my face from people walking around and they don't know/ care. After an evening at CC the next morning my throat is terrible, my eyes are crusty, and my nose is full of black boogies. I feel like poop too. Like I said though, I (And 90% of people) know what they are walking into. So it's our (non smokers) decision to enter.

Mind you, I don't think restaurants and places that sell food should allow smoking, or any place that deals with health care/ children/ the elderly (unless its there rooms, than they should be allowed too). One thing I hate is walking into a restaurant over there and smelling smoke from someone smoking on the other side of the place. And yes, I can. i can smell smoke from my neighbors below/ across from me in the same four-plex. Its terrible. When you are a smoker, you don't notice it. But smoke is a really strong smell for some people.

When Ontario did the ban everything got banned. At least MI is allowing the Casino's to stay smokefull, right? See, now I think that's ridiculous to ban smoking in a place like that. There pumping the place so full of oxygen that it doesn't matter. When they ban smoking here, lots of places closed/ lost business. Lots of bingo's closed. That was not fun.

Personally, I think the separate room idea is great. But wont work everywhere, of course. But bars you expect to have people smoking in them, that's just not fair.

[Raev]

But smoke is a really strong smell for some people.

I can smell the lady when she comes in from City from 2 rooms away.

[Tyger]

I can smell the lady when she comes in from City from 2 rooms away.

I always... ALWAYS shower when I get home from CC... Cause I hate waking up and smelling my pillows...

[freydis]

..that is ALL in the brain...

....if you are in a room with pot smoke, you do not test positive for THC, therefore, it must be in the head.

That's your opinion.

It's definitely not fact.

I've had contact issues with substances being smoked near me in public. At the time, I had no idea what they were smoking, and had never experienced effects like what I experienced. I simply felt really outside the realm of normal. I described what had happened to me to someone else in detail, and was told the experience matched their own experience smoking pot laced with angel dust. Scared the shit out of me. I do not do recreational drugs. Never have. At the time, I didnt even drink. I had no frame of reference for what I was experiencing, and it *definitely* was not in my head.

[freydis]

Being a "Stoner" at one time & Having being sober for many months and then sitting in a room FULL of Marijuana smoke, I felt NO effects from the smoking going on in the room... Therefore I believe Rev is correct in stating that "contact high" is a purely a metal And/Or spiritual phenomenon.

So just because someone who has been regularly partaking of substances and likely have built a tolerance doesnt get a contact buzz, then its a myth?

Folks who dont partake could also be rather substance and chemical sensitive.

Runs in my family.

Last time my ma tried to stain the wood fence, her eyelids swelled shut.