Smoking Ban part 2, original by Timber Loftis

[Yorick]

On another note, do you know what used to sicken me???

The countless hordes of cigarette butts that I'd see washed up on Maroubra beach each morning. Especially after rain. Not content with ruining their health, or a nonsmokers health, countless numbers of smokers don't give a shyt about the planet, the oceans, or anything else but the next tobacco fix - LIKE ANY OTHER ADDICT.

I would watch a smoker finish, then flick. A lighted cigarette. On a hot summers day. In a country PLAGUED BY BUSHFIRE!!

I'd see them fly out of car windows into bush on the side of the road. I'd see them flicked into drains as they got on the bus.

One day I got fed up, picked one up and handed it back to the guy that flicked it.

"Here you dropped this" I said.

The choices a smoker makes pollutes their lungs with crap. Pollutes others lungs with crap, our clothes with foul smelling gunge, and leaves millions of little filters everywhere - everywhere, polluting the land and sea.

Pollution on every level.

So do yourself, others and the planet a favour and quit the addiction. Don't be a slave.

Oh, and I can't even begin to describe the difference between kissing a smoker and kissing a nonsmoker...

Originally posted by Yorick: quote: Originally posted by MagiK: People who do not like smoke..should not visit establishments that allow it...it is very simple.

So we become second class citizens. Denied jobs, entertainment and access because of the inconsiderate choices of others?



Taking things out of context aren't you Yorick? we were talking about privatley owned establishments which by the way are allowed to be selective about their clientel.

Let's get this clear. The smoking ban makes everyone equal. Smokers and nonsmokers can go to the same bars, get on the same planes, have the same jobs, and no-one is affected any more or less.



It also denys property owners their own rights to do as they please on their own property. It also forces people to give up their rights to satisfy a larger group, and it also is permitting government power it should not have. You may want a Nanny state, I do not, I grew up being taught to make my own choices not to have them dictated to me..

What is easier MagiK? Having the life of a monk with zero access to bars, public transport, entertainment or reasonably paid service jobs OR WALKING OUTSIDE FOR TWO MINUTES. The blatant disregard for others is astounding me here. The violent anger towards those who care enough about their health to battle addiction and quit is frightening.



You seem to be assuming that you canot socialize in non-smoking bars and other venues..you know I lived for 30 years or so before they banned smoking in public places, and I never felt like I was being monkified.
Proprietors are free or should be free to open smoking and non-smoking establishments....not dictated to what kind of business they are going to run.

You decry the disregard for others but what you mean is for those you identify with...not all others..just your select group.

There is NO REASON why a person whop decides not to smoke should be effeectively barred from entering a place. NO REASON why a person should have two careers - music and service - closed to them because of others choices.

The argument "you can always leave" is the rudest, stupidest, most inconsiderate and totally discriminatory solution I've seen.

One side can never visit
or
The other side can walk out for two minutes.

Which is fairer? Get over the RIGHTS offense and have some concern for the health of your fellow human beings. Your children. You may make the decision to kill yourself with tobacco but HOW DARE YOU make that decision for another, and DEMAND it is a RIGHT to do so!!??


You seem to be sidestepping the whole real issue here. You seem to just want to dictate that there will be no smoking in any establishment you decide on....despite what environment the owner wants to make of his business and his money. You seem to me to be promoting quite a dictatorial environment.[/QUOTE]

[ 05-13-2003, 11:21 AM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Thorfinn: Nonsense, Yorick, it does not make everyone equal. Or thinking of Timber's reference to Animal Farm, it may make all people equal, but some more equal than others... You have had your way imposed upon them, with government guns being used to enforce it. Congratulations. Step One on the road to tyranny...

You've got it the wrong way round. Allowing smoking makes some more equal than others, banning smoking makes everyone equal.

Either way, someones choice is overridden. The banning means no-one's health is ADVERSELY effected by the other side.

It's not like smokers will die while they're going without a cigarette. Oh and it's so so hard for dem to walk out sidey widey for just a widdle bit to isn't it? Such a restwiction on fweedoms.

"There's the door, get your fix then come back inside"

Simple.

[Yorick]

You seem to be sidestepping the whole real issue here. You seem to just want to dictate that there will be no smoking in any establishment you decide on....despite what environment the owner wants to make of his business and his money. You seem to me to be promoting quite a dictatorial environment.

No, a HEALTHY environment.

Need I remind you a DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT set up this ruling?? Australia is hardly a dictatorship. Neither is America. THe will of the people made this. THe same people that impose rules that effect private property accross the country. Dictatorial impositions like - no murder, no rape, no incest, no assault. ALL THESE APPLY ON PRIVATE PROPERTY. Are these elements of a dictatorship.

To those who cry "dictatorship" I have a one word response.

P.A.R.A.N.O.I.D.

[Thorfinn]

Willow, sorry but you are mistaken. Using government exposure limits, assuming risk factors are simply additive, we can prove that the thousands of chemicals in a single apple would exceed the LD-50, i.e., lethal dose 50% of the time. The problem is that the exposure limits are at least one order of magnitude on the side of safety, so if you start combining them, the margins of safety, which are 10-fold larger than the effect itself rapidly make the effect itself irrelevant, lost in the uncertainty of the margin of error.

You know the other error, of course. Not all chemical exposures are additive. Many/most cancel out others. This is common sense. Otherwise, there would be no need of antivenin, or atropine, or heck, of any medication. The fact is that the effects of some chemicals offset the effects of others. Acids cancel out bases. It is literally impossible to predict the effect of 2000 random chemicals on human physiology, particularly when human physiology is so poorly understood at this point, anyway...

I can't tell you what the risk is, but I'll bet my paycheck against yours that multiplying by 2000 is going to be at least two orders of magnitude too high...

Originally posted by Yorick: On another note, do you know what used to sicken me??? The countless hordes of cigarette butts that I'd see washed up on Maroubra beach each morning. Especially after rain. Not content with ruining their health, or a nonsmokers health, countless numbers of smokers don't give a shyt about the planet, the oceans, or anything else but the next tobacco fix - LIKE ANY OTHER ADDICT. I agree I dislike sloppy disgusting smokers who have no regaurd for the law, the offender should be punished...fortunately in the USA we do not promote the idea of punishing whole groups for individual actions....so we cannot just arrest all the smokers. I would watch a smoker finish, then flick. A lighted cigarette. On a hot summers day. In a country PLAGUED BY BUSHFIRE!! Havn't had a brush fire in this part of the country in ages...but then we don't have a bunch of econuts stopping us from manageing the underbrush the way they do out on the other coast. I'd see them fly out of car windows into bush on the side of the road. I'd see them flicked into drains as they got on the bus. One day I got fed up, picked one up and handed it back to the guy that flicked it. "Here you dropped this" I said. You might consider not spending all your days watching for smokers to flick their buts out...there are other things to do in life you know [img]smile.gif[/img] Seriously. You are trying to justify condemning every smoker for what indviduals do....so should we round up every kid that hangs out on a street corner because thats where the dealers hang out? The choices a smoker makes pollutes their lungs with crap. Pollutes others lungs with crap, our clothes with foul smelling gunge, and leaves millions of little filters everywhere - everywhere, polluting the land and sea. Pollution on every level. So do yourself, others and the planet a favour and quit the addiction. Don't be a slave. Oh, and I can't even begin to describe the difference between kissing a smoker and kissing a nonsmoker...

All you are doing is trying to justify why one group should be persecuted. You don't care about their rights, or that the idea of legislating this kind of thing can be equally and as validly applied to rock music....Its all about "I hate this activity so it should not have the same rules as the ones I like."

You just don't seem to want to play fair.

[Yorick]

Taking things out of context aren't you Yorick? we were talking about privatley owned establishments which by the way are allowed to be selective about their clientel.

And what would happen if the private establishment banned blacks from entering? Apartheid mk III?? The rights to exclusion are nonsense.

Clarification about my "Brushfire" comment...we don't have them here...but we do have tire fires.....terrible to see those mountains of used tires burning....and please ...can anyone tell me...what are these people doing...the ones who end up having fully engulfed car fires? It seems like we get two or three a week here....I have never had a car burst into flames while I was driving it....its a mystery to me...but back to brush fires...you can't just blame smokers..there are also idiots with fireworks, and dumbass campers...and mother nature...don't forget that lightning starts large numbers of forest fires every year.

[Thorfinn]

Originally posted by Yorick: quote: Originally posted by Thorfinn: Nonsense, Yorick, it does not make everyone equal. Or thinking of Timber's reference to Animal Farm, it may make all people equal, but some more equal than others... You have had your way imposed upon them, with government guns being used to enforce it. Congratulations. Step One on the road to tyranny...

You've got it the wrong way round. Allowing smoking makes some more equal than others, banning smoking makes everyone equal.

Either way, someones choice is overridden. The banning means no-one's health is ADVERSELY effected by the other side.

It's not like smokers will die while they're going without a cigarette. Oh and it's so so hard for dem to walk out sidey widey for just a widdle bit to isn't it? Such a restwiction on fweedoms.

"There's the door, get your fix then come back inside"

Simple. [/QUOTE]Wrong. No one forced you at gunpoint to go onto any particular private property. You are forcing people, using government guns, to vacate their own property, while you sit on your duff, enjoying his property.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by MagiK: All you are doing is trying to justify why one group should be persecuted. You don't care about their rights, or that the idea of legislating this kind of thing can be equally and as validly applied to rock music....Its all about "I hate this activity so it should not have the same rules as the ones I like." You just don't seem to want to play fair.

If one side has been persecuted it's been the NONSMOKERS!! Forced inot breathing the crap that comes out of a smokers lungs!!

How, pray tell, is being asked to take your habit outside persecution might I ask? You can always choose not to smoke and stay inside, or delay the smoke and do it once the show's finished? Or take two minutes and go and do it.

How is this persecution?

Could ONE SMOKER please tell me what is so hard about going outside for two minutes?? ANYONE? or is everyone so blinded by the LOSS OF RIGHT TO HARM OTHERS issue here?