Anti-Smoking Laws

[rahmota]

Just to correct another piece of your ignorance:

smoking, a creation of man.

No a creation of the godess for humans to use and enjoy. Tobacco is a natural substance and you know what nature sometimes isnt all that friendly or warm and fuzzy ala Disney co.

I don't think you understand how violently a smoke-intolerant person reacts to cigarette smoke. I used to be severely intolerant. Quite frankly, back then, I'd have preferred to be punched in the face. It would hurt less.

Then if you where that severely disabled you shouldnt have been out and about in the filthy urban air anyhow. At least not without an oxygen mask and tank. I've been in cities where I'd smoke a cigarette just to have the freash air.

One cigarette in a room the size of a typical movie theatre would get me coughing.

For real? wow you must not be able to go anywhere or do anything at all in an urban environment since the air in most urban environments I'vebeen in is much much worse and unhealthier and dirtier than 1 cigarette in the cavernous space of a movie theator. My condolences for not being able to enjoy the world.

What area of the country (what country) was this? People were not smoking in grocery stores, department stores and the like. Amusement parks, sure the asshole smokers will do that. But you haven't any people smoking indoors in public places since the mid to late 70's. At least not in the metropolitan area I have lived in my whole life.

Exactly I have never been in a department store, mall or movie theator in my life that allowed smoking. And we are talkign about rural appalachia here. Amusement parks are outside so whats the beef there?bars and retraunts are usually divided or one class only and the higher class ones will be so well ventilated that I've sat next to a smoker and not even smelled it. (the few times I've been in one of those swanky places that is) however you go to a redneck bar and sometimes you need a foglight to get to the bathroom. Big deal you know what a sort of place each place is so you go where you will be comfortable and not where you wont.

I also can't agree with comparing peanuts to cigarettes. There are people allergic to aspirin. If we ban peanuts because people are allergic to that, why not aspirin? What about dairy?

You begin to understand why banning items because of some arbitrary dislike or fear of potential harm is stupid and irrational.

Keep your cigarettes away from the places we need to go, and we're all cool.

Sad thing is too many of the intolerant (you hit the nail on the head there) anti-tobacco/anti-smoking whiny Beeches dont want to stop it just with a compromise and want to end all smoking and everythign. I bet you ask colcheck if he supported a total ban on tobacco products hed say yes. Which would just mean more people would be breakign the law (rightfully so as any law prohibiting that should be broken) to get their cigs.

I cross the line when I /purposefully/ put someone's life in danger, by doing my best to inflict upon them that which harms them

You are a free and adult person who has the capacity to leave or remove yourself from the situation at anytime. A smoker is not holding you down and breathig in your face so shut your BS up about that and acting like you are forced to breath in someone elses smoke. Because you arnt. And if someone did hold you down and breath in your face like that then you would be having a much bigger problem.

[rahmota]

Seshat: About my previous comments I didnt mean to sound disbelieving totally. I do find it hard to believe that someone could be that sensitive to cigarette smoke as I have never encountered someone like that that wasnt in the hospital/nursing home. And given how filthy and stinky most urban air is if you are that sensitive to a single cigarette how can you exist in an urban environment? There is more pollution, more poisonous chemicals and more filth in one average cities air than in an entire carton of cigarettes.

No insult intended just you are operating outside the bounds of my experiences. I have a couple friends who have asthma and they hang out with smokers. Most of the people I know dont throw a hissy fit everytime they get around someone smoking.

And yeah most of the people I have encountered that do that fake coughing and overacting BS are lying and faking it. Just to be an asshole about someone enjoyign a smoke. Ignorant assholes who dont want to see anyone enjoying themselves and overreact much too much get on my nerves when they have their little whiny hissy fit.

Unless a person is being held down or otherwise restrained you are not being forced to do anything. You are there of your own free will and need to get down off your high horse and join humanity by STFU about your moralistic agenda.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

And yeah most of the people I have encountered that do that fake coughing and overacting BS are lying and faking it. Just to be an asshole about someone enjoyign a smoke. .

How do you know?

[Colchek]

What's your next caveat, since that one doesn't work?

There isn't one, because I stand by my statement, and I do not accept your argument against it. I believe at this point, we are going to have to agree to disagree, because I don't think either of us is going to convince the other, and that's fine. I've made my opinion known.

No a creation of the godess for humans to use and enjoy. Tobacco is a natural substance and you know what nature sometimes isnt all that friendly or warm and fuzzy ala Disney co.

Smoking was created by man. Tobacco is a natural substance, drying it and burning it for the purpose of inhalation was invented by man.

[Norton]

To RecoveringKinkoid: Some people are obviously overdramatic about it - I've seen it myself when my sister smoked (I didn't smoke at the time). We were at an amusement park (outdoors), and these people 10 ft. away started fake-coughing and waving their hands under their nose. For Hell's sake, we were in the open air, and they could have walked a few feet away at any point instead of standing there hamming it up. I was right next to her, and I could barely notice the smoke.

Edit: My mother, a former smoker, is now one of those people who fakes coughing fits whenever they see (and I mean see, not smell) a cigarette. Then again, she's a bit of a hypocondriac.

[rahmota]

Kinkoid: Like Norton said its pretty obvious the ones who are hamming it up and faking it just to be jerks.

Tobacco is a natural substance, drying it and burning it for the purpose of inhalation was invented by man.

Wheat was created by the goddess. Drying it and grinding it up to turn it into bread was invented by man. Grapes where invted by the goddess. Squashign and fermentign them to turn them into wine was invented by man. Hops, and beer. Iron is arock in the ground. All the inventions of man can be argued to just be the opening of mans eyes to the world around him by the goddess.......

[Greenday]

Rahmota, I was being sarcastic with the dairy/aspirin comment. I also feel those two are a completely different situation than smoking. Dairy and aspirin aren't forced on you. Smoke is.

[ebonyknight]

There isn't one, because I stand by my statement, and I do not accept your argument against it. I believe at this point, we are going to have to agree to disagree, because I don't think either of us is going to convince the other, and that's fine. I've made my opinion known.

Well, while I may not be able to convince you that my analogy fits, it does appear that you are in the minority in your opinion. Cest la vie.

Be that as it may, I don't think that there is any room to believe that "purposefully" indicates anything other than intent or a desired outcome. Unless you have a different definition (which we can look up) you are in the wrong. Smokers are not "purposefully" trying to put your life in danger. If you left, they wouldn't follow you follow you to harm you. It's not about you. If you truly feel that way, then you are beyond debate and into the victim crowd. *shrug* There is too much of that in this country.

If they were purposefully trying to harm you, you could easily go to the police and file a complaint. Have you??????

The non-smoker mantra that the line is crossed when you do something that affects another is invalid, unless you want to apply it equally.

[Greenday]

The non-smoker mantra that the line is crossed when you do something that affects another is invalid, unless you want to apply it equally.

Why is it invalid? It's true. People smoke in areas I go to, it harms me. I NEED to get to my classes and I have to pass through people smoking at every entrance. Either I don't pass through the smoke and miss class, or I go through the smoke and inhale toxic chemicals. And being inside there's just no avoiding it if someone's smoking inside. I don't harm anyone by eating a PB&J sandwich and drinking milk or by popping an aspirin.

[DesignFox]

I don't harm anyone by eating a PB&J sandwich and drinking milk or by popping an aspirin.

And as an addendum to that, if I knew one of my classmates had a severe peanut allergy, I would NOT eat peanuts around them!

I only eat peanuts around people known not to have severe peanut allergies. And I rarely eat them by cracking shells...if I do, that happens only at home or in designated peanut eating places. NOT near random strangers.

Being an allergy sufferer (thankfully not of the deadly kind) I respect other people's rights to breathe. That means no peanuts near unknowns, no perfume and no smoking. Not only for my health, but also for the health (and pure courtesy) towards others.

(I'm not telling people to stop smoking. It is entirely that person's right to ingest whatever they please. I am only asking that they do it outside or in designated smoking areas...or their home...or their car.... I approve the ban because it protects me when I want to go out to eat! or work! or whatever...It protects workers who have no choice but to work whether they smoke or not...and it was approved by the people of my state...not forced on us by the government.)

[Seshat]

Well I can't argue with that, if you are willing to be even handed in your treatment.

Thank you.

The mantra non-smokers espouse (I mean publically, not just here) of "when what you do affects me, crosses the line", can't work if you are going to be selective. I just find that side of the argument to be a reverse of assholish (is that a word?) treatment. Going from one extreme straight to the other, without compromise.

That's part of what's been exasperating for me and several others on 'my' side of this thread: several of those on the 'smokers' side of this thread have been arguing against things that we never said!

Please try to distinguish between what people outside Fratching say from what people inside Fratching say. It's really hard to justify what 'we' said when we aren't the ones who said it.

Sad thing is too many of the intolerant (you hit the nail on the head there) anti-tobacco/anti-smoking whiny Beeches dont want to stop it just with a compromise and want to end all smoking and everythign.

I can't respond to this, because it's not what I feel. My personal choice would be a compromise situation.

You are a free and adult person who has the capacity to leave or remove yourself from the situation at anytime. A smoker is not holding you down and breathig in your face so shut your BS up about that and acting like you are forced to breath in someone elses smoke.

If a cluster of smokers is in the entrance of a medical or government building, they're barring me from entering the building without breathing their smoke.

It's true: I could simply choose not to do the medical or governmental task I went out to do. I could yell at them from a distance to get the hell out of my way (though if they're inconsiderate enough to smoke in the entranceway, they probably won't). I could call the receptionist for my doctor's office and tell them I can't get in until the smokers have left and their vile cloud has dissipated.

But these hypothetical smokers are being rude and thoughtless.
(Okay. I'll grant that the previous sentence was a moralistic judgement.)

Seshat: About my previous comments I didnt mean to sound disbelieving totally. I do find it hard to believe that someone could be that sensitive to cigarette smoke as I have never encountered someone like that that wasnt in the hospital/nursing home.

I appreciate this. It's not common, but for most people with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity, a hospital or nursing home is actually worse: the various cleansers and other such chemicals they use are trapped inside the building with you.

And given how filthy and stinky most urban air is if you are that sensitive to a single cigarette how can you exist in an urban environment?

Cigarette smoke was (and remains, to a lesser extent) one of my specific triggers. That said: yes, when I was that severely disabled I didn't go out and about except when absolutely necessary. Doctor's visits and the like. And yes, there's a lot of the world I can't enjoy. It sucks.

However, I'm not in an urban environment. I'm in the outer suburbs of a city which, by American standards, is a very small one. Larger than a town, but not truly 'urban'. It's in a region which gets a lot of wind, some of them very strong, which means the air is regularly changed. And the prevailing winds come from the ocean.

We chose our living place with care.

My own home is, as I mentioned in a totally different thread on CS, an eco-hippie's place. I clean without minimal chemicals, avoid formaldehydes, and so on.

This plus my improved health gives me enough margin to cope with normal living in my outer-suburban home region. And I do wear a mask if I need to go into the inner city.

But while I'm no longer hypersensitive to a single smoker, a cluster of smokers will still be enough to cause me to suffer.

No insult intended just you are operating outside the bounds of my experiences. I have a couple friends who have asthma and they hang out with smokers. Most of the people I know dont throw a hissy fit everytime they get around someone smoking.

I don't either. I simply move if it's a single cigarette, or leave if it's a bunch of them. I only throw a hissy fit if it's somewhere I need to be: like the aforementioned medical and government building examples.

And yeah most of the people I have encountered that do that fake coughing and overacting BS are lying and faking it. Just to be an asshole about someone enjoyign a smoke.

I understand. That's outside my experience, however. This is another case of you and I being in wildly different cultures with wildly different experiences, and misunderstanding each other due to those differences.

Unless a person is being held down or otherwise restrained you are not being forced to do anything. You are there of your own free will and need to get down off your high horse and join humanity by STFU about your moralistic agenda.

Now here, you're pushing your own moralistic agenda.

I can't see anywhere in the thread where I have claimed to be forced in a 'held down and smoke blown in the face' way. What I have said is that I resent it when smokers stand in the entrance to places where the (medically) smoke-intolerant must go.

Please understand that I'm not one of those hissy-fit throwing, fake-coughing killjoys you're accustomed to, and then think about whether or not I'm being moralistic. All I'm saying - and all I have said - is please don't smoke where I must be.

Okay, I've also said 'it'd be nice to have some non-smoking places of entertainment' and 'in my experience, before the rules banning smoking in bars & the like, there were no non-smoking bars etc in the city I live in'. The former is a statement of opinion, the second a statement of experience. Neither was intended to be moralistic. Just informative.

Being an allergy sufferer (thankfully not of the deadly kind) I respect other people's rights to breathe. That means no peanuts near unknowns, no perfume and no smoking. Not only for my health, but also for the health (and pure courtesy) towards others.

You and me both.

I very, very occasionally do wear perfume, but when I do, it's 'spray a cloud in front of me, wait for it to partially dissipate, step into it'. This gives an extremely subtle scent which someone has to be practically standing on my foot to smell.

I use unperfumed or very, VERY lightly perfumed soaps and cleaning products, including laundry detergents, shampoos and conditioners.

I and my clothing and the things I take out with me smell of 'clean human' (or 'clean cloth') and of outer-suburban off-the-ocean air. That's about it.

[DesignFox]

I very, very occasionally do wear perfume, but when I do, it's 'spray a cloud in front of me, wait for it to partially dissipate, step into it'. This gives an extremely subtle scent which someone has to be practically standing on my foot to smell.

I use unperfumed or very, VERY lightly perfumed soaps and cleaning products, including laundry detergents, shampoos and conditioners.

I and my clothing and the things I take out with me smell of 'clean human' (or 'clean cloth') and of outer-suburban off-the-ocean air. That's about it.

Thank you so much for being courteous with your perfume! I could start another thread on how I feel about perfume bathers... I get such debilititating headaches from most scents.

[ebonyknight]

The mantra non-smokers espouse (I mean publically, not just here) of "when what you do affects me, crosses the line", can't work if you are going to be selective. I just find that side of the argument to be a reverse of assholish (is that a word?) treatment. Going from one extreme straight to the other, without compromise.

That's part of what's been exasperating for me and several others on 'my' side of this thread: several of those on the 'smokers' side of this thread have been arguing against things that we never said!

Please try to distinguish between what people outside Fratching say from what people inside Fratching say. It's really hard to justify what 'we' said when we aren't the ones who said it.

Uh...I am not sure what you mean.

You can do what you want to yourself, but when it affects other people, that's when you cross the line.

Ahem. It's not about anger when someone else is enjoying something. It's me getting angry about needless pain and suffering that I get because someone else is being inconsiderate.

I don't feel the effects in my body if you drink a cup of coffee. I don't feel the effects in my body if you have a drink. I /do/ feel the effects if you smoke. That's the key difference that has been pointed out many times. You don't have the right to do to /my/ body what you see fit.

While you have stated that you are open to compromise, there several pages back and forth showing that Greenday and Colchek are not willing to compromise. They are more than willing to support something that benefits them, but if it affects something else (with even deadlier consequences), it doesn't seem to matter. It is just as easy to spread contaminiates by touch as by air. I even heard someone on CS say that METAL elicits an allergic reaction in them. All I asked was where does it end, you compromised.

Hell, I even thought that it wasn't even debatable that peanunts and their byproducts WERE deadly.

[ebonyknight]

Thank you so much for being courteous with your perfume! I could start another thread on how I feel about perfume bathers... I get such debilititating headaches from most scents.

Well, in the corporate world it is considered unprofessional to wear perfume/cologne for this very reason.

I mean other than possibly annoying other people, do you really want guys and girls sniffing up on each other at work, like dogs.

[Greenday]

While you have stated that you are open to compromise, there several pages back and forth showing that Greenday and Colchek are not willing to compromise. They are more than willing to support something that benefits them, but if it affects something else (with even deadlier consequences), it doesn't seem to matter. It is just as easy to spread contaminiates by touch as by air. I even heard someone on CS say that METAL elicits an allergic reaction in them. All I asked was where does it end, you compromised.

Hell, I even thought that it wasn't even debatable that peanunts and their byproducts WERE deadly.

I never said peanuts and their byproducts can't be deadly. I just said that if someone is eating peanuts, it's not going to affect someone on the other side of the room like smoking would. And yes, people can be allergic to specific metals. I have a friend who is allergic to nickel. Kinda made us partnering up and doing that nickel and zinc lab a lil bit harder...

Alls I want is for me to be able to go inside a building, enjoy whatever is going on inside or get whatever I need to get done done, and leave without having to walk through smoke or breathe a ton of it in. I agree with the bans in that they should apply inside buildings and at the entrances. After that, I couldn't care less where you smoke. Do you see me throwing a fit when my friend yesterday lit up on the way back from dinner? No. Do you see me throwing a fit when my friends smoked at work? No. Hell, half the time I'd go out and chill with them while they smoked. Alls I ask is you don't do it in areas that will FORCE non-smokers to breathe in the fumes.