My mom earned her living as a teacher until she met a rich guy. Yet she still had the gumption to take all my siblings out of school(I have eight) and home school them until junior high so they could (get life lessons or whatever). Take into account that this a very stringent southern baptist lady but still trapped me in her stationwagon so I could vote against anti- smoking laws.

1. I think the evidence that secondhand smoke causes cancer is compelling, but it doesn't have to cause cancer to be bad for you. Being in a rock band and touring one of the coasts--California followed by Seattle, or NYC/Boston followed by Pittsburgh--will demonstrate its effects and the lack of such in smokeless environments. If you don't notice it, well, that's another matter. I think it's pretty obvious.

2. People will get used to not being able to smoke in bars. They have gotten used to it in other places. It's going to be OK.

3. I love that the free market is going to regulate itself with regard to this issue. It's nice you guys have such faith in it. I mean, it works great in so many other ways, esp. regarding worker safety issues. No need for any government regulation at all.

4. We don't live in a free country. I doubt you'd really WANT to live in a free country. We don't even live in a democracy. We live in a republic, and our 'freedoms' are regulated by law, which is made by our elected representatives. The people elected to represent us think this is a good idea. If enough people think it's a bad enough idea, these representatives will get voted out, and the smoking ban will be overturned.

I think those of you who are pissed off are doubly pissed off b/c you know that will never happen. You are in the distinct minority. It is painful to be in the minority sometimes. But in the grand scheme of minority pain, this erosion of rights, if that's what it is, is penny-ante stuff.

Do you think there should be a ban on smoking pot in public places? There´s folk advocating this in my government recently. Purists. Fuck that.

sunlore wrote:Do you think there should be a ban on smoking pot in public places? There´s folk advocating this in my government recently. Purists. Fuck that.

Public or private isn't even an option for us over here so I'd day start a new thread.

sunlore wrote:Do you think there should be a ban on smoking pot in public places? There´s folk advocating this in my government recently. Purists. Fuck that.

Does your country not want tourists?

steve wrote:

vockins wrote:Why does an employer have a right constantly expose his employees to carcinogens? What is it about the activity of smoking that is necessary for a bar to conduct its business, besides tradition?

The wishes of the patrons. Kitchen staff are exposed to carcinogens every day, as are gas-pump jockeys, as are thousands of other categories of worker. It comes with the job, as they say, but even people who don't like smoke want gas for their cars and sear marks on their mahi-mahi, so they don't complain about it.

A cook cannot make mahi mahi without using a stove. A gas station attendant cannot deliever gas without exposing himself to fumes. A steelworker cannot smelt iron without breathing blast furnace dust.

But a bartender is just as able to make mine Ballantine with cigarette smoke in the room or no. There's nothing about smoke that is necessary for a bartender to do his job. A bartender serves spirits, not tobacco.

If the bar makes the majority of its receipts from tobacco sales, it comes with the job. Otherwise, it doesn't come with the job.

Even if a condition does come with the job, that doesn't dismiss restaurants, gas stations, and steel mills from doing everything in their power to ensure the health of their employees.

vockins wrote:But a bartender is just as able to make mine Ballantine with cigarette smoke in the room or no. There's nothing about smoke that is necessary for a bartender to do his job. A bartender serves spirits, not tobacco.

true dat.

I wear ear plugs when exposed to loud music.

I dont eat meat. Not even mahi mahi.

I always pump my own gas.

I dont drink alcohol. Or do drugs.

I spend a lot of time at rock clubs and bars, often as an employee.

Exposure to ass-fucking? Minimal. Babies? Even less.

Am I allowed to ban smoking?

Following the "logic" of the last three or four pages, I think I am.

I believe I have found my calling.

Mayfair wrote:What is bullshit? We ARE entitled to as good of air as possible. That is why there is such a thing as government agencies like the EPA...

"As good of air as possible"?!?! What's with this radically different standard? The EPA doesn't set requirements along the lines of "cars cannot produce exhaust that increases the ambient pollution level AT ALL".

But isn't that what the anti-smoking law is doing? Saying that you're okay so long as you don't do one single thing to make the air quality even the slightest bit worse than ambient? Can you imagine if that sort of standard were applied, by the EPA, to something like the automobile or factory? It's absurd. So why is it okay to have that level of strictness for smoking, especially in a goddamn bar!

Legislated smoke-free bars... that's just so monumentally fucked up. It's a BAR. A FRICKEN BAR!

BadComrade wrote:How can the FDA have released the "unbiased" and "credible" figure that said "second hand smoke kills 3000 people a year" then?

3000 people?!?!? My sincerest apologies to anybody who's lost a loved one to second hand lung cancer, but changing the way city after city's bars work in the name of a measly 3,000 people a year?!?!? If it was 300,000 or 3,000,000 then let's talk. But 3,000?!?! Check the stat on how many people die annually in the US from falling down stairs and then get back to me. This makes me really mad, if they *have* a stat, and it's one that shows the problem to be very, very small?!?! WTF!!