TexasCHLforum.com

jmra wrote:I have no problem with someone smoking on their private property. I do have a right not to have smoke blown in my face in a public place. And like someone else said it's the long term effects I'm worried about. Btw, the chain smoker wasn't stopped by our employer, he was stopped by the chain smoking. I hope you decide to stop before you suffer the same fate.

Honest question: how do you define a public place? Last I checked, most bars, restaurants etc. were private property. And I don't see how it's the government's business to tell the owner of said private property which lawful activities he may or may not permit, on his private property.

Slightly challenging question (I'm not attacking you, but I've never seen a smoker blow smoke in somebodies face unless he was trying to start a fight): Do you notice any similarity between your phrase "a right not to have smoke blown in my face" and the typical Brady Bunch expression "a right not to feel threatened by somebody brandishing a weapon."?

chartreuse wrote:

jmra wrote:I have no problem with someone smoking on their private property. I do have a right not to have smoke blown in my face in a public place. And like someone else said it's the long term effects I'm worried about. Btw, the chain smoker wasn't stopped by our employer, he was stopped by the chain smoking. I hope you decide to stop before you suffer the same fate.

Honest question: how do you define a public place? Last I checked, most bars, restaurants etc. were private property. And I don't see how it's the government's business to tell the owner of said private property which lawful activities he may or may not permit, on his private property.

Slightly challenging question (I'm not attacking you, but I've never seen a smoker blow smoke in somebodies face unless he was trying to start a fight): Do you notice any similarity between your phrase "a right not to have smoke blown in my face" and the typical Brady Bunch expression "a right not to feel threatened by somebody brandishing a weapon."?

Does being around guns give you cancer? Just asking

marksiwel wrote:Does being around guns give you cancer? Just asking

I'll bet you a dollar that we could find an anti-gun campaigner to say that it does.

There are a lot of other things that cause cancer not just smoking. My step dad never smoked a day in his life, yet he now at the age of 87 has lung cancer. The kind from being exposed to asbestos Mesothelioma. Like some one else also said here, fast food/fatty foods caused clogged arteries/heart attack/stroke. Lets just ban everything that isn't healthy and call it taking care of ourselves and others. Also lets get some law enforcement out there to check and make sure that everyone does 90 min. of cordio every day. And that carpet that has all that nasty left over cigarette stuff in it, what about all the chemicals already in it from the factory and that stuff that is used to stop spots. I think it is a bunch of hog wash that cigarette residue clings to all things out doors and is going to give cancer to who ever walks by a building. What else is outside? Pollen, mold, smog, etc. A smoker pays more taxes than the non-smoker so if everyone stopped smoking, where is government going to get that lost revenue from? This is my opinion on the smoking ban. Just couldn't resist putting in my 2cents worth.

seniorshooteress wrote:There are a lot of other things that cause cancer not just smoking. My step dad never smoked a day in his life, yet he now at the age of 87 has lung cancer. The kind from being exposed to asbestos Mesothelioma. Like some one else also said here, fast food/fatty foods caused clogged arteries/heart attack/stroke. Lets just ban everything that isn't healthy and call it taking care of ourselves and others. Also lets get some law enforcement out there to check and make sure that everyone does 90 min. of cordio every day. And that carpet that has all that nasty left over cigarette stuff in it, what about all the chemicals already in it from the factory and that stuff that is used to stop spots. I think it is a bunch of hog wash that cigarette residue clings to all things out doors and is going to give cancer to who ever walks by a building. What else is outside? Pollen, mold, smog, etc. A smoker pays more taxes than the non-smoker so if everyone stopped smoking, where is government going to get that lost revenue from? This is my opinion on the smoking ban. Just couldn't resist putting in my 2cents worth.

Did anyone force me to eat a Cheese Burger? But if I ate a Cheese Burger and you somehow got fat because of it, I could see you point. But when you smoke in a resturant and I'm 5 tables away and I'm getting hurt, too bad, so sad, no smoking.

seniorshooteress wrote:A smoker pays more taxes than the non-smoker so if everyone stopped smoking, where is government going to get that lost revenue from?

Now that's a good point. When I lived in England, we got the figures on this - turned out the government raised £9bn a year from tobacco taxes and the cost of socialized medicine for smoking related illnesses was £2.5bn a year. So the govt was £6.5bn in profit. That's before you factor in the pension stuff, with smokers dying younger so claiming less, etc.

NB: I'm no fan of socialized medicine - but it sure did make it easy to do the math in that one case.

marksiwel wrote:Did anyone force me to eat a Cheese Burger? But if I ate a Cheese Burger and you somehow got fat because of it, I could see you point. But when you smoke in a resturant and I'm 5 tables away and I'm getting hurt, too bad, so sad, no smoking.

Ah, well now we get into the free market argument. Nobody forced you to go to a smoking restaurant either. If enough folks feel like you do, somebody will open a smoke free restaurant, and he'll make a lot of money. Then other folks will copy him, before you know it, you'll have loads of smoke free restaurants, without the government getting involved.

They actually do this in Spain. Each place has to have a sign on the door saying if it's smoking permitted or smoking banned. That way, folks know what to expect before they walk through the door.

chartreuse wrote:

marksiwel wrote:Did anyone force me to eat a Cheese Burger? But if I ate a Cheese Burger and you somehow got fat because of it, I could see you point. But when you smoke in a resturant and I'm 5 tables away and I'm getting hurt, too bad, so sad, no smoking.

Ah, well now we get into the free market argument. Nobody forced you to go to a smoking restaurant either. If enough folks feel like you do, somebody will open a smoke free restaurant, and he'll make a lot of money. Then other folks will copy him, before you know it, you'll have loads of smoke free restaurants, without the government getting involved.

They actually do this in Spain. Each place has to have a sign on the door saying if it's smoking permitted or smoking banned. That way, folks know what to expect before they walk through the door.

So what kind of Hazard pay do you get as a Waitress or bus boy?

marksiwel wrote:So what kind of Hazard pay do you get as a Waitress or bus boy?

Last I checked, none, on account of nobody put a gun to your head and forced you to take the job.

Edited to add: This whole conversation is becoming increasingly bizarre to me. The "research" on passive smoking is at least as dubious as all those so-called studies "showing" that if you own a gun you'll get murdered. I'm astonished that we seem able to tolerate in one sphere a lack of rigour that we'd reject outright in another. I guess Pastor Neimoller was right.

marksiwel wrote:But when you smoke in a resturant and I'm 5 tables away and I'm getting hurt, too bad, so sad, no smoking.

Who forced you to go to that restaurant? How about no telling other people what they can do with their property? Don't like the way they're using it, go elsewhere. Can't find an elsewhere you like, start your own business and run it the way you want.

KD5NRH wrote:

marksiwel wrote:But when you smoke in a resturant and I'm 5 tables away and I'm getting hurt, too bad, so sad, no smoking.

Who forced you to go to that restaurant? How about no telling other people what they can do with their property? Don't like the way they're using it, go elsewhere. Can't find an elsewhere you like, start your own business and run it the way you want.

Heh, if you're mad about the goverment telling people what they can and cant do with their property when it comes to something reasonable like smoking, you are in for a shock if you ever have to deal with zoning laws

marksiwel wrote:

KD5NRH wrote:

marksiwel wrote:But when you smoke in a resturant and I'm 5 tables away and I'm getting hurt, too bad, so sad, no smoking.

Who forced you to go to that restaurant? How about no telling other people what they can do with their property? Don't like the way they're using it, go elsewhere. Can't find an elsewhere you like, start your own business and run it the way you want.

Heh, if you're mad about the goverment telling people what they can and cant do with their property when it comes to something reasonable like smoking, you are in for a shock if you ever have to deal with zoning laws

Err... perhaps I'm being particularly dumb this evening, but I fail to see the humour in that...

One of the things that I find most repugnant about the ACORN folks and the like is they way that they'll decry injustice in one sphere, then turn around and perpetrate the exact same injustices in another. I'd hoped we all on here were better than that.

chartreuse wrote:

marksiwel wrote:

KD5NRH wrote:

marksiwel wrote:But when you smoke in a resturant and I'm 5 tables away and I'm getting hurt, too bad, so sad, no smoking.

Who forced you to go to that restaurant? How about no telling other people what they can do with their property? Don't like the way they're using it, go elsewhere. Can't find an elsewhere you like, start your own business and run it the way you want.

Heh, if you're mad about the goverment telling people what they can and cant do with their property when it comes to something reasonable like smoking, you are in for a shock if you ever have to deal with zoning laws

Err... perhaps I'm being particularly dumb this evening, but I fail to see the humour in that...

One of the things that I find most repugnant about the ACORN folks and the like is they way that they'll decry injustice in one sphere, then turn around and perpetrate the exact same injustices in another. I'd hoped we all on here were better than that.

ACORN? What? I'm not following you.
Look I dont like smoking, I wish people would just stop on their own. I realize legislating away Behavior isnt the "American Way" but I just really hate Smoking, gives me headaches, kills my nose, ect. Also I've seen too many people get hurt from it.
If you want to smoke, go ahead, but as for restaurants I like how they have it in Austin. Basically you can smoke, but, there has to be a totally separate AC unit in the building (Well atleast thats how they do it in Trudys)
I grew up in Dallas where people still smoke indoors, moved to Boston for a few years, where you can barley smoke, and then moved to Austin, where its the same. Whenever I go to Dallas its like a SMACK in the face.
Pass laws against smoking? Maybe. Hope people will smarten up and stop smoking all together? Maybe

marksiwel wrote:ACORN? What? I'm not following you.
Look I dont like smoking, I wish people would just stop on their own. I realize legislating away Behavior isnt the "American Way" but I just really hate Smoking, gives me headaches, kills my nose, ect. Also I've seen too many people get hurt from it.
If you want to smoke, go ahead, but as for restaurants I like how they have it in Austin. Basically you can smoke, but, there has to be a totally separate AC unit in the building (Well atleast thats how they do it in Trudys)
I grew up in Dallas where people still smoke indoors, moved to Boston for a few years, where you can barley smoke, and then moved to Austin, where its the same. Whenever I go to Dallas its like a SMACK in the face.
Pass laws against smoking? Maybe. Hope people will smarten up and stop smoking all together? Maybe

I'm sorry that other folks smoking makes you feel poorly and I promise you that, should the government ever mandate compulsory smoking in all establishments, I will be one of the first to take part in the civil disobedience campaign of keeping my smokes unlit when you're around and politely requesting that others do likewise.

But it isn't like that, is it? Nobody is mandating anything (in greater TX, at least) and I'm free to go to a place that permits smoking and you're free to go to one that doesn't. I'm not trying to defend smoking - speaking frankly, as a smoker, it's indefensible. But property rights are very much defensible and I'm concerned that some folks*, in their zeal against smoking, are willing to sanction the exercise of the threat of violence by the government in a way that they would never do if the subject were firearms.


* I'm also aware that there are other folks, for whom the exercise of violence by the government against the citizens is the end itself, rather than a means. And I wouldn't much like being in bed with such folks. But there's a lot of them in the anti-gun, anti-smoking, anti-what you will lobbies.