Smoking Ban

Posted By Phathead on 04/24/2008 11:39 AM
So I heard a rumor about this last night at the bar that some bars are going to charge a membership fee every year to come in there bar for like a dollar that way they could be considered a private organization and allow smoking in the building but I dont know how much truth to this there really is. I can tell you from working at a bar that owners of most bars in cedar rapids are FREAKING OUT!!!
I personallly think it is a great idea because I smoke and I would love to quit but it is so hard when everywhere you go there is cigarettes. I think eventually cigarettes will be illegal all together but they do it in these small waves of banning them to generate fines and tickets people would get and then later totally ban them everywhere. If they made cigarettes illegal in all the states at once the government would not make near as much money from people breaking that law as they do spanning it over 10-20 years. Kindof like they will never make marijuana legal becuase it generates way to much money through fines and arrests. When a large drug bust with hundreds and thousands of dollars and product get seized where do you think that goes?
There is a bar near my place (in Des Moines) that has a big sign attached to their normal sign that says "Casino Smoking, July 1st". I'm not sure if its just a protest or if they're planning on turning their bar into a casino - but i'll have to stop in sometime and see what the story is.
On a side note, when police seize drugs they or the government don't see any money from it....the only way they could would be if they sold it and obviously that's not gonna happen.
Also I don't know that cigarette's will ever be outlawed/banned, because then they wouldn't be able to tax them. I bet they make VERY LITTLE money from writing "smoking" tickets much less than they make from taxes. In fact the law isn't even going to be enforced by the police if I remember correctly, but by the department of Health or some random group that doesn't really have the staff to walk around writing smoking tickets...

 

You should be able to still smoke on golf courses cause your outside but I guess well find out in july.

 

It's all got it's ups and downs. People who want to quit will have it a little bit easier, but people who do smoke obviously feel like they are being stripped of their freedom, which they are.

Either way I'm for the ban because I am a former smoker, and I still have moments when I'm out where I want one, but without others doing it, those urges will subside alltogether.

If they are trying to "phase out" tobacco that will be very Ironic, due to the fact that this country only started turning a profit when they learned to grow tobacco plants. I would love it if they phased out tobacco but that's just me To each their own!

 

I support smoking....as long as I don't have to breathe the smoke if I choose not to or make compromises in where I choose to go, based on whether it is a smoking establishment or not.

I do believe that my right to clean air trumps others rights to fill it with smoke as clean air hurts no one unlike smoke filled air.

eins

 

Posted By einsteins on 05/07/2008 9:51 AM
I support smoking....as long as I don't have to breathe the smoke if I choose not to or make compromises in where I choose to go, based on whether it is a smoking establishment or not.
I do believe that my right to clean air trumps others rights to fill it with smoke as clean air hurts no one unlike smoke filled air.
einsI kinda disagree with that Bill.  I don't have the right to say that no one can drive cars, even though it pollutes the air I breath.  Or telling people that they can't cut there lawn with a lawnmower or that they must shovel there drives instead of using a snowblower (again pollution of the air).  What about all the factories that put off polutants to make plastics and other items, can I have them shut down because I want the cleanest air possible. 
You kinda have to look at the bigger picture.  It should be the establishments choice as to whether or not to allow smoking.  If enough people got up and said under that premise that they wanted non-smoking environments.  Business owners would answer, they are in the business of making money.  They will go with what their patrons want in order to still bring in their buisness.
There are several ways they could have gone with something like this that would have satisfied both sides of the public.  If you ask most smokers if they were provided a decent closed off area (even without wait staff service) that was ventilated out of the elements, most smokers would be satisfied. 
All people should be worried when the government gets into the business of curbing the rights of its citizens.  This event may have gone in a direction that you like.  However, what if they banned reefing because of the power consumption that is causes and the reefs that are hurt in the process because of coral trading.  You would probably sing a different tune.  Or how about they passed a law saying you could no longer eat red meat because it is bad for you (assuming you are a meat eater).  There are endless examples of things that the government can ban that would cause everyone here to live in a state less desireable then they do right now. 

 

I don't think smoking produces anything to our society anymore. I just can't see any good things coming from smoking, except for personal enjoyment for those that do. It has no real purpose and for that I think it has no real purpose in society.

 

Posted By acidlittle on 05/07/2008 4:20 PM
I don't think smoking produces anything to our society anymore. I just can't see any good things coming from smoking, except for personal enjoyment for those that do. It has no real purpose and for that I think it has no real purpose in society.
That's a really poor argument. First of all, when did smoking provide anything besides personal enjoyment??
Second, what is the benefit of video games other than personal enjoyment? What about pornography? Alcohol? Cuss Words? Reality TV? Hunting/Fishing for sport? Junk Food? Are you suggesting the government put restrictions around other things that are soley for personal enjoyment?
Finally, the tax money generated from the sale of cigarettes provides money to our governments who (hopefully) use it for the good of the entire community.
I think our country has reached its status because of capitolism, ie supply and demand. If enough people think smoking, and second hand smoke is detrimental to their health they will demand a place where they can do whatever activity they please in a non-smoking environment and business owners will step up and provide it for them (and many were, at least in the Des Moines area).
IMO, there's a level of personal responsibility that the general public in this country has lost and whenever something happens to them they always want to blame someone else and/or want the government to step in and tell them what they can and cannot do.

 

Posted By Philby on 05/08/2008 5:36 AM
That's a really poor argument. First of all, when did smoking provide anything besides personal enjoyment??
Second, what is the benefit of video games other than personal enjoyment? What about pornography? Alcohol? Cuss Words? Reality TV? Hunting/Fishing for sport? Junk Food? Are you suggesting the government put restrictions around other things that are soley for personal enjoyment?
It may be a poor arguement but there are Video games that can teach, (i got nothing for porn), reality tv is worthless that is why I don't partake in watching it at all, Hunting and fishing for sport is a rediculous idea, I don't think it should be allowed unless what is killed is used for the whole animal.
And when did video games kill somebody who watched somebody play them?  The same with porn, or reality TV.  So you see all arguements are flawwed.  And I, am one who is terrible at arguing so I hope we can call this playful banter and not an arguement.
I'm just saying that as a former smoker I could careless if the goverment banned smoking alltogether.  It would end up being better for society in the long run, as the healthier people are the more productive they are.  Yeah it gives the government money (and a boatload I'm assuming) but I'd rather have a workforce that is working into their 60's+ then getting cancer in their 40's and spending money on medical bills for the next 20 years if they are lucky.

 

I am definitely not arguing to piss you off - but its not quite playful banter either.

Video games specifically may not kill someone, but leading a lifestyle sitting in front of the TV and becoming obese certainly has health implications and can cause someone to have higher medical costs than someone who is not obese.

So yes you can chose not to watch reality TV or eat junk food, just as you can choose to not smoke (congrats on quitting btw) - but those are lifestyle choices that can have health implications just like smoking and it shouldn't be the governments job to tell people whether or not they can do those things. Could you imagine government enforced exercise programs to ensure its citizens are healthy???

 

Actually, during WW2, cigarettes were issued to soldiers because of the stimulant effect they provided.

Not support or arguing either point as I have very strong view points about how the governments of this nation seem to think they can govern our lives SO much better than we can.

 

Ultimately keeping reef tanks is bad for you.  What does us reefing add to society.  It adds to your personal enjoyment nothing more.  You have to go beyond the simple direct relationships.  If you look down the line of things, the production of energy causes polution (in most cases)  Therefore anything that you do that uses energy is bad for you aka reefkeeping.  In fact anything but a natural environment living in caves scavaging for food ultimately are bad for you. 
Also driving a car is extremely bad for everyone.  More cancer causing agents are put off by car emissions than if everyone in the world smoked.  Just because it adds to society, that makes it ok.  A snow blower is a personal convenience that really does not add anything to soceity, however many of us enjoy having them. 
This is not the smoking issue for me.  As a matter of fact I plan on surprising my daughter for her Birthday on the 16th of this month with a pack of cigarettes for her to throw in the garbarge.  I figured it is time to quit smoking for my sake, hers, and my families.  But, I still don't believe that it is the governments place to tell me I can't.  Like I said earlier, it is not so much the fact of what is good for you or bad for you.  When the government gets into the business of limiting personal freedoms all should be concerned.  As I pointed out to Bill this one went down a path that some of you support.  But what if it was something else (example reefing).  I am not arguing that giving up smoking would not be better for everyone.  What I am arguing is that live is a balance between societies needs and personal freedoms.  So we must always ask ourselves is this required by society for it to function better?  Are we taking to much from the individual to benifit society?  These are questions that should always be considered before passing any law.

 

I see all of your points, but for me it's just I still don't see any kind of positives from smoking therefore, I agree with the smoking ban. I DO see how it will piss people off because people want to be free, we are in the land of the free, I understand this.

Well basically why don't they work on ways to making smoking harm only the person partaking, and not others around, then I could care less where people used tobacco, just not around me!

And I do think this is playful banter as I am not a die-hard and I do listen to other's points, I am stubborn and believe what I say is true. This doesn't mean I think that what you'll say is untrue, I just agree with my thoughts more

Cheers all!

Thanks for the congrats on quiting by the way, a woman's love is POWERFUL! (we are engaged now!)

 

Posted By CyberJester on 05/07/2008 2:51 PM
Posted By einsteins on 05/07/2008 9:51 AM
I support smoking....as long as I don't have to breathe the smoke if I choose not to or make compromises in where I choose to go, based on whether it is a smoking establishment or not.
I do believe that my right to clean air trumps others rights to fill it with smoke as clean air hurts no one unlike smoke filled air.
einsI kinda disagree with that Bill.  I don't have the right to say that no one can drive cars, even though it pollutes the air I breath.  Or telling people that they can't cut there lawn with a lawnmower or that they must shovel there drives instead of using a snowblower (again pollution of the air).  What about all the factories that put off polutants to make plastics and other items, can I have them shut down because I want the cleanest air possible. 
You kinda have to look at the bigger picture.  It should be the establishments choice as to whether or not to allow smoking.  If enough people got up and said under that premise that they wanted non-smoking environments.  Business owners would answer, they are in the business of making money.  They will go with what their patrons want in order to still bring in their buisness.
I beleive that if an establishment is going to be open to the public they should ensure that the air for everyone is safe. A person should not be denied a public offered goods or services because they choose not to enter an unsafe enviroment.
There are several ways they could have gone with something like this that would have satisfied both sides of the public.  If you ask most smokers if they were provided a decent closed off area (even without wait staff service) that was ventilated out of the elements, most smokers would be satisfied. I agree
All people should be worried when the government gets into the business of curbing the rights of its citizens.  This event may have gone in a direction that you like.  However, what if they banned reefing because of the power consumption that is causes and the reefs that are hurt in the process because of coral trading.  You would probably sing a different tune.  Or how about they passed a law saying you could no longer eat red meat because it is bad for you (assuming you are a meat eater).  There are endless examples of things that the government can ban that would cause everyone here to live in a state less desireable then they do right now.
The examples you use here are of things where there are alternative choices....if Meat is unsafe then there are other foods that can be eaten. If reefkeeping is not safe there are other hobbies....However AIR is not a choice, it something that non of us can choose an option on, so if a public place is making an unsafe enviroment for people, especially for an activity that has no common good for anyone I believe that is wrong. Other things that polute the air in general have a common good such as providing electricity, transportation, etc. I dont like the fact that those things effect the air I breathe also but at least its a bit more acceptable to me since it is providing important and neccessary goods and services and most of those things are at lot lower level of contamination than a second hand smoke filled room. GREAT DISCUSSION!

 

Posted By CyberJester on 05/08/2008 10:28 AM
Ultimately keeping reef tanks is bad for you.  What does us reefing add to society.  It adds to your personal enjoyment nothing more.  You have to go beyond the simple direct relationships.  If you look down the line of things, the production of energy causes polution (in most cases)  Therefore anything that you do that uses energy is bad for you aka reefkeeping.  In fact anything but a natural environment living in caves scavaging for food ultimately are bad for you. 
Also driving a car is extremely bad for everyone.  More cancer causing agents are put off by car emissions than if everyone in the world smoked.  Just because it adds to society, that makes it ok.  A snow blower is a personal convenience that really does not add anything to soceity, however many of us enjoy having them. 
This is not the smoking issue for me.  As a matter of fact I plan on surprising my daughter for her Birthday on the 16th of this month with a pack of cigarettes for her to throw in the garbarge.  I figured it is time to quit smoking for my sake, hers, and my families.  But, I still don't believe that it is the governments place to tell me I can't.  Like I said earlier, it is not so much the fact of what is good for you or bad for you.  When the government gets into the business of limiting personal freedoms all should be concerned.  As I pointed out to Bill this one went down a path that some of you support.  But what if it was something else (example reefing).  I am not arguing that giving up smoking would not be better for everyone.  What I am arguing is that live is a balance between societies needs and personal freedoms.  So we must always ask ourselves is this required by society for it to function better?  Are we taking to much from the individual to benifit society?  These are questions that should always be considered before passing any law. Smokers wont police themselves to respect non smokers so unfotunately laws must be made to ensure they are not harming other people it unfortunate but true. The only other thing that gets me about smoking is that I cant look down on the ground almost anywhere without seeing cigarette butts laying everywhere, why is it that throwing your butts on the ground in public areas is acceptable?
Bill

 

Posted By einsteins on 05/09/2008 10:00 AM

Posted By CyberJester on 05/07/2008 2:51 PM

Posted By einsteins on 05/07/2008 9:51 AM
I support smoking....as long as I don't have to breathe the smoke if I choose not to or make compromises in where I choose to go, based on whether it is a smoking establishment or not.
I do believe that my right to clean air trumps others rights to fill it with smoke as clean air hurts no one unlike smoke filled air.
einsI kinda disagree with that Bill.  I don't have the right to say that no one can drive cars, even though it pollutes the air I breath.  Or telling people that they can't cut there lawn with a lawnmower or that they must shovel there drives instead of using a snowblower (again pollution of the air).  What about all the factories that put off polutants to make plastics and other items, can I have them shut down because I want the cleanest air possible. 
You kinda have to look at the bigger picture.  It should be the establishments choice as to whether or not to allow smoking.  If enough people got up and said under that premise that they wanted non-smoking environments.  Business owners would answer, they are in the business of making money.  They will go with what their patrons want in order to still bring in their buisness.
I beleive that if an establishment is going to be open to the public they should ensure that the air for everyone is safe. A person should not be denied a public offered goods or services because they choose not to enter an unsafe enviroment.
There are several ways they could have gone with something like this that would have satisfied both sides of the public.  If you ask most smokers if they were provided a decent closed off area (even without wait staff service) that was ventilated out of the elements, most smokers would be satisfied. I agree
All people should be worried when the government gets into the business of curbing the rights of its citizens.  This event may have gone in a direction that you like.  However, what if they banned reefing because of the power consumption that is causes and the reefs that are hurt in the process because of coral trading.  You would probably sing a different tune.  Or how about they passed a law saying you could no longer eat red meat because it is bad for you (assuming you are a meat eater).  There are endless examples of things that the government can ban that would cause everyone here to live in a state less desireable then they do right now.
The examples you use here are of things where there are alternative choices....if Meat is unsafe then there are other foods that can be eaten. If reefkeeping is not safe there are other hobbies....However AIR is not a choice, it something that non of us can choose an option on, so if a public place is making an unsafe enviroment for people, especially for an activity that has no common good for anyone I believe that is wrong. Other things that polute the air in general have a common good such as providing electricity, transportation, etc. I dont like the fact that those things effect the air I breathe also but at least its a bit more acceptable to me since it is providing important and neccessary goods and services and most of those things are at lot lower level of contamination than a second hand smoke filled room. GREAT DISCUSSION!Your first point is inaccurate you are not being denied a good/service, you are being presented with a choice, there are other non-smoking establishments that provide the same goods and services (food & beverages).  Again if there is such a great demand for it.  A capitalistic society will respond by providing these items to their citizens in order to gain the market.
You say they have alternative choices on meat if it is unsafe.  So you would be fine with the government telling you that you have to be a vegetarian.  That No more meat or meat containing products are to be sold for human consumption and that you are to be fined or imprisoned if you are caught consuming meant.  Again reefkeeping, you are fine with the government telling you that you are unable to do it.  That you will be fined or imprisioned if you are caught.  I think it would anger you greatly for either one of these.
You ought to do some research on the topic then.  Most studies have shown that car polotion in the air contains more cancer causing agent then if everyone on the planet smoked.  Also almost all of the studies you have heard of have been funded by anti-smoking groups.  The independent ones that I have seen have shown that there is not conclusive data linking second hand smoking to cancer.  You should do some research into the topic and see what you can find I think you would be suprized if you looked at the results of independent testing on the subject.

 

Posted By einsteins on 05/09/2008 10:12 AM

Posted By CyberJester on 05/08/2008 10:28 AM
Ultimately keeping reef tanks is bad for you.  What does us reefing add to society.  It adds to your personal enjoyment nothing more.  You have to go beyond the simple direct relationships.  If you look down the line of things, the production of energy causes polution (in most cases)  Therefore anything that you do that uses energy is bad for you aka reefkeeping.  In fact anything but a natural environment living in caves scavaging for food ultimately are bad for you. 
Also driving a car is extremely bad for everyone.  More cancer causing agents are put off by car emissions than if everyone in the world smoked.  Just because it adds to society, that makes it ok.  A snow blower is a personal convenience that really does not add anything to soceity, however many of us enjoy having them. 
This is not the smoking issue for me.  As a matter of fact I plan on surprising my daughter for her Birthday on the 16th of this month with a pack of cigarettes for her to throw in the garbarge.  I figured it is time to quit smoking for my sake, hers, and my families.  But, I still don't believe that it is the governments place to tell me I can't.  Like I said earlier, it is not so much the fact of what is good for you or bad for you.  When the government gets into the business of limiting personal freedoms all should be concerned.  As I pointed out to Bill this one went down a path that some of you support.  But what if it was something else (example reefing).  I am not arguing that giving up smoking would not be better for everyone.  What I am arguing is that live is a balance between societies needs and personal freedoms.  So we must always ask ourselves is this required by society for it to function better?  Are we taking to much from the individual to benifit society?  These are questions that should always be considered before passing any law. Smokers wont police themselves to respect non smokers so unfotunately laws must be made to ensure they are not harming other people it unfortunate but true. The only other thing that gets me about smoking is that I cant look down on the ground almost anywhere without seeing cigarette butts laying everywhere, why is it that throwing your butts on the ground in public areas is acceptable?
Bill
Bill, the same thing can be said about almost everyone.  Look at the use of cell phones in our country.  This angers me as well.  People are consently unable to police themselves with these thing.  I hear the most inapropriate conversations as well as see dangerous drivers using them in a carefree manner endangering the lives of others on a daily basis. 
You trash point does not make much sense either.  I see plenty of other litter on the streets.  Mcdonalds wrappers, beer cans, ect...  I take it that now all fast food establishments should be banned because the food served is bad for you and produces all kinds of litter.

 

I can't see this thing as much more than a huge "smokescreen" topic to get peoples minds off the bigger issues, sadly it's working. I sometimes think that the government just passes stuff like this to cause a commotion and get peoples minds off what is really going on. I think it breaks down to what freedoms are included in the land of the "free". No one is honestly going to tell me that second hand smoke even blips the radar of harmful things in the air, if you really want to break down "bad" things in the air, get a list of the chemicals expelled everytime a bomb hits a building in iraq. If you've ever done demo work you'll know exactly what I'm talking about. Nobodies worried about how "healthy" things are going to be after this new law is passed, it's just one more thing to nitpick the citizens about.....why? because this country has nothing better to do with itself, why spend time fixing the problems we have when we can make more. Sound recurring but what happens to the structure of the country and it's people when it costs so much to go to work that people stop going? Does anyone honestly beleive that millions of people are going to just hand over everything they've worked there whole lives for because they cant afford to fill there cars up with gas. It's going to get really ugly if we cant find a way around all this piddly crap and worry about something that really matters

 

^^^agreed! 100%

 

These are some of my favorite quotes...I believe they pertain to this discussion.

"I disagree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." --> Voltaire
"What man wants is simply independent choice, whatever that independence may cost and where ever it may lead." --> Dostoevsky
"A free society is one where it is safe to be unpopular." --> Adlai Stevenson
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." --> Hume

And my favorite...
"America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." --> Abraham Lincoln

The simple fact that we can have a debate in a public forum is testament to our forefathers believe that all men have the ability to think and choose for themselves. When that ability is taken away we lose the very essence of what makes us Americans.