NYC Smoking ban extended

13

Comments

  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    know1 wrote:
    No. I already said I would favor stricter enforcement of littering laws, didn't I?

    There needs to be some laws to protect people from each other, but I do not believe banning an otherwise legal substance from everywhere including outside should be done. I also think smoking v. non-smoking is just one more way a business can differentiate itself from its competition.

    there are plenty of things that are "legal" but still have regulations ... alcohol, guns, etc ...

    look - if there was no such thing as second hand smoke ... i could care less what, where and when ... but smoking in public places is a matter of public safety ... and therefore requires regulation ...
  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    HeidiJam wrote:
    FYI. This article has to do with smoking outside. I am sorry but there is no correlation between speed limits regulations, and texting bans that = safety.

    FYI ... this conversation started because Know1 does not believe smoking should be banned ANYWHERE ...

    i'm not sure why you can't see the correlation ... smoking bans are for safety ... laws related to speed limits and alcohol while driving are for safety ...
  • dunkman
    dunkman Posts: 19,646
    eyedclaar wrote:
    dunkman wrote:
    pandora wrote:
    I'm just for personal freedom, this will never change with me :D

    I think Scotland has gotten accustomed to the loss of personal freedom.
    That's just my opinion which we all have the right to still have....
    hopefully that won't be banned anytime soon.


    i too am for personal freedom... which kinda highlights your ignorance of another countries innate sense of freedom... fuck, even William Wallace in Braveheart shouts FREEEDDDDDOOOOMMMMM ;)

    i believe my personal freedom includes the right to not be shot (whole other thread) as well as not possibly die as a result of second hand smoke being blown about in a bar. I believe my and others personal freedom includes the right to live a long and decent life.

    is it really too much for a smoker to walk 20 paces to a doorway and smoke a 3 minute ciggie and then come back into a smoke-free bar? really... is that too much to ask?

    oh.. by the way... America restricts personal freedom more than Scotland... give me an example of where you are more freer than I.


    Can you buy a 75 round drum for your AK-47 and go on a killing spree anytime you see fit? Huh? Can you? Huh?

    *wipes tear from cheek

    God bless America!

    the irony of me saying God Bless America and then going on a killing spree using a Russian gun would actually make that worthwhile! ;)
    oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
  • know1
    know1 Posts: 6,801
    polaris_x wrote:
    HeidiJam wrote:
    FYI. This article has to do with smoking outside. I am sorry but there is no correlation between speed limits regulations, and texting bans that = safety.

    FYI ... this conversation started because Know1 does not believe smoking should be banned ANYWHERE ...

    i'm not sure why you can't see the correlation ... smoking bans are for safety ... laws related to speed limits and alcohol while driving are for safety ...


    Again - not accurate.

    I am in favor of private business being allowed to decide whether to ban smoking.

    And the car thing was in response to the non-statement that exposure to second hand smoke isn't safe. To which I said NOTHING is safe.
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • Blockhead
    Blockhead Posts: 1,538
    polaris_x wrote:
    HeidiJam wrote:
    FYI. This article has to do with smoking outside. I am sorry but there is no correlation between speed limits regulations, and texting bans that = safety.

    FYI ... this conversation started because Know1 does not believe smoking should be banned ANYWHERE ...

    i'm not sure why you can't see the correlation ... smoking bans are for safety ... laws related to speed limits and alcohol while driving are for safety ...
    Show me where speed limits = safety
    Show me where no texting = safety
    should we ban radio's in car because they can cause as a distraction, what about people talking in a car. You can't like list rules out and say that they make things safer. Yes to DUI, but the others your posted are all individual based just like age, some 16 year olds can drvie safely others can not.
  • pandora
    pandora Posts: 21,855
    dunkman wrote:
    pandora wrote:
    I'm just for personal freedom, this will never change with me :D

    I think Scotland has gotten accustomed to the loss of personal freedom.
    That's just my opinion which we all have the right to still have....
    hopefully that won't be banned anytime soon.


    i too am for personal freedom... which kinda highlights your ignorance of another countries innate sense of freedom... fuck, even William Wallace in Braveheart shouts FREEEDDDDDOOOOMMMMM ;)

    i believe my personal freedom includes the right to not be shot (whole other thread) as well as not possibly die as a result of second hand smoke being blown about in a bar. I believe my and others personal freedom includes the right to live a long and decent life.

    is it really too much for a smoker to walk 20 paces to a doorway and smoke a 3 minute ciggie and then come back into a smoke-free bar? really... is that too much to ask?

    oh.. by the way... America restricts personal freedom more than Scotland... give me an example of where you are more freer than I.
    Perhaps look back on the last smokers thread
    I am all for restaurant bar and workplace bans...most public places
    It is an all out ban on streets etc that I am against,
    there should be places for smokers to smoke.

    I am for responsible gun ownership which we have also been through before.
    I do not own a gun but sure as hell want to be able to if I ever need to.

    So I am more for reasonable bans and allowing people to have freedom of choice,
    that seems to be more restricted in Scotland.

    Perhaps it is restricted in a way you want so you don't feel it a loss of freedom.
    But if I was there, I would keenly feel the loss .

    Therefore you appear to me to have lost some rights to personal freedoms.
    Give an inch take a mile....this a very true threat when giving up your rights to
    personal freedom of choice. I won't ever be in favor of that.

    Now grand doggies are calling I must go enjoy their company :D

    But take the last word if you like.... I've explained myself.
  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    polaris_x wrote:
    know1 wrote:
    Exactly. As I said in my post, I HATE smoking, but I do not think it should be banned anywhere.

    Too many people put their own personal preferences over correct ideology.

    uhhh ... second hand smoke is the leading cause of lung cancer amongst non-smokers ... there is definitely a need for a ban ...

    i'm not sure about everywhere but i don't think too many people are up in arms here in toronto where it is currently banned - mostly restaurants and commercial buildings ...

    how was my statement inaccurate?
  • Blockhead
    Blockhead Posts: 1,538
    dunkman wrote:
    i too am for personal freedom... which kinda highlights your ignorance of another countries innate sense of freedom... fuck, even William Wallace in Braveheart shouts FREEEDDDDDOOOOMMMMM ;)

    i believe my personal freedom includes the right to not be shot (whole other thread) as well as not possibly die as a result of second hand smoke being blown about in a bar. I believe my and others personal freedom includes the right to live a long and decent life.

    is it really too much for a smoker to walk 20 paces to a doorway and smoke a 3 minute ciggie and then come back into a smoke-free bar? really... is that too much to ask?

    oh.. by the way... America restricts personal freedom more than Scotland... give me an example of where you are more freer than I.
    I belive my personal freedom include the right not to be in a car wreck, as well as my wife not possibly die as a result of perfume/fragrance being blown about in a bar. I belive my and other personal freedom include the right to line a long and decent life. hahahaha YOU don't the right to live a long and decent life, life is unperdictable. That like saying I belive in my right to live a long and decent life so the gov. should provide me a bubble so that nothing ever happnes to me. That why we as humans have choices, to make decisions that has associated risks. Such as driving, if you are afraid to drive then you have a choice not to drive, and you don't want to die from smoke, then you have a choice not to be around smokers. When and where have you been forced to smoke second hand smoke???
  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    HeidiJam wrote:
    Show me where speed limits = safety
    Show me where no texting = safety
    should we ban radio's in car because they can cause as a distraction, what about people talking in a car. You can't like list rules out and say that they make things safer. Yes to DUI, but the others your posted are all individual based just like age, some 16 year olds can drvie safely others can not.

    show me where laws based on speed limits and texting AREN'T about safety!!???? ... why do you think speed limits in residential areas or near schools are lower? ... why are there speed limits if not for safety reasons then?
  • Kel Varnsen
    Kel Varnsen Posts: 1,952
    mikepegg44 wrote:
    :lol:
    dunkman wrote:
    mikepegg44 wrote:
    why are cigarettes even legal, why make all these laws limiting their use to basically your closet, that is unless you live in an aparment. If it is illegal to do it everywhere, why are they legal? I cannot for the life of me fiure out why cigs are legal and I cannot go buy a joint from the gas station.

    I understand the health risks, I cannot believe people still do it, but it isn't up to the government to make that choice so half assed...They basically are saying, "we still want you to buy the cigarettes, we still want all that tax money, but ....you cannot actually use the cigarettes anywhere."

    New york city is such a cool place, I cannot believe the people there put up with this non-sense

    it just got even cooler imo.
    :lol:

    for a minute there I thought you were talking about smoking!! :lol::lol:

    I think smoking in doors should be regulated a bit, as it is a proven health risk to the employees(don't really care about the patrons who choose to be there).

    Exactly, for me it is all about safety of employees. I mean an employer is pretty much obligated to provide a safe workplace for their employees. Should an employer be allowed to not fix a hole in the floor and cover it with a tarp or not fix electrical equipment that gives people shocks, and just say that if people don’t like it they can just quit. In those cases if the employer did that they would be liable for any worker injuries. So if that is the case why should an employer be allowed to choose if they fill their establishment with toxic smoke?
  • dunkman
    dunkman Posts: 19,646
    pandora wrote:
    Perhaps look back on the last smokers thread
    I am all for restaurant bar and workplace bans...most public places
    It is an all out ban on streets etc that I am against,
    there should be places for smokers to smoke.

    I am for responsible gun ownership which we have also been through before.
    I do not own a gun but sure as hell want to be able to if I ever need to.

    So I am more for reasonable bans and allowing people to have freedom of choice,
    that seems to be more restricted in Scotland.

    Perhaps it is restricted in a way you want so you don't feel it a loss of freedom.
    But if I was there, I would keenly feel the loss .

    Therefore you appear to me to have lost some rights to personal freedoms.
    Give an inch take a mile....this a very true threat when giving up your rights to
    personal freedom of choice. I won't ever be in favor of that.

    Now grand doggies are calling I must go enjoy their company :D

    But take the last word if you like.... I've explained myself.

    we agree on the smokers part. Now NYC has banned smoking in parks and beaches right? so thats one less personal freedom than Scotland who have not.

    We never had the personal freedom to own a gun so we can't have lost it... whereas you have 'lost' certain parts of that freedom... i.e. size of gun, maximum amount of rounds per magazine, etc.


    now i'll give you one that we have... In Scotland i have the right, personal freedom if you wish, to walk on any part of the land here under the Freedom to Roam laws we have.... i can walk up mountains, paths, fields, rivers, wherever I want basically as long as i do it courteously. This includes private land... but doesnt really include my neighbours garden (although technically i wouldnt be breaking any laws... weird huh?)

    whereas in the US you have great swathes of land that you simply are not allowed to walk on and look at... that goes against a personal freedom surely... a beautiful landscape and yet you have no freedom in your own country to walk in it?
    oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
  • Blockhead
    Blockhead Posts: 1,538
    polaris_x wrote:
    HeidiJam wrote:
    Show me where speed limits = safety
    Show me where no texting = safety
    should we ban radio's in car because they can cause as a distraction, what about people talking in a car. You can't like list rules out and say that they make things safer. Yes to DUI, but the others your posted are all individual based just like age, some 16 year olds can drvie safely others can not.

    show me where laws based on speed limits and texting AREN'T about safety!!???? ... why do you think speed limits in residential areas or near schools are lower? ... why are there speed limits if not for safety reasons then?
    Just because it says its for safety does not make it safer.... You are clueless. Would you be for a law the requires you to wear a helmet when you drive??? Its for safety...
    Speed limist are there because people do not practice correct judgement, such like when you are in a rush to go somewhere and you speed, or you don't fully stop at stop signs. They are there because there are 16 year olds driving. Please tell me why 65mph is safer than 75, or 55 or 45. Please enlighten me on this. air bags do more harm than good, buts its says its safer... So it must be true.
  • Jeanwah
    Jeanwah Posts: 6,363
    pandora wrote:
    Perhaps look back on the last smokers thread
    Yes, this thread does bring me back to that other smoking thread...
    Speaking of which, anyone hear from SCB lately? She hasn't been around since. :(
  • dunkman
    dunkman Posts: 19,646
    HeidiJam wrote:
    dunkman wrote:
    i too am for personal freedom... which kinda highlights your ignorance of another countries innate sense of freedom... fuck, even William Wallace in Braveheart shouts FREEEDDDDDOOOOMMMMM ;)

    i believe my personal freedom includes the right to not be shot (whole other thread) as well as not possibly die as a result of second hand smoke being blown about in a bar. I believe my and others personal freedom includes the right to live a long and decent life.

    is it really too much for a smoker to walk 20 paces to a doorway and smoke a 3 minute ciggie and then come back into a smoke-free bar? really... is that too much to ask?

    oh.. by the way... America restricts personal freedom more than Scotland... give me an example of where you are more freer than I.
    I belive my personal freedom include the right not to be in a car wreck, as well as my wife not possibly die as a result of perfume/fragrance being blown about in a bar. I belive my and other personal freedom include the right to line a long and decent life. hahahaha YOU don't the right to live a long and decent life, life is unperdictable. That like saying I belive in my right to live a long and decent life so the gov. should provide me a bubble so that nothing ever happnes to me. That why we as humans have choices, to make decisions that has associated risks. Such as driving, if you are afraid to drive then you have a choice not to drive, and you don't want to die from smoke, then you have a choice not to be around smokers. When and where have you been forced to smoke second hand smoke???

    well then its my choice to punch someone in the face if they light up next to me.

    forced to smoke second hand smoke!?!? you kidding me?

    ok..

    1. growing up... every restaurant we ever visited had people smoking in it.
    2. the bus to and from school every single day had smokers in it
    3. the multitude of bars and clubs i visited up to and until the 26th March 2006
    4. The cinema!


    now you will argue the semantics of 'forced' but I kinda had to go to school... and it was 6 miles so i couldn't walk. My parents took me to the cinema and to restaurants.. so i couldn't just leave and watch the movie through a window or eat a small meal on the doorstep outside.

    since 2006 we have had a huge decrease in heart conditions, lung cancer rates are down 17%... some laws are for the common good and not the one selfish fuckwit who harps on about 'personal freedoms' .. that fuckwit is the one I punched in the face for smoking next to me at the start of my post. Which i believe was my choice to do so.
    oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    HeidiJam wrote:
    Just because it says its for safety does not make it safer.... You are clueless. Would you be for a law the requires you to wear a helmet when you drive??? Its for safety...
    Speed limist are there because people do not practice correct judgement, such like when you are in a rush to go somewhere and you speed, or you don't fully stop at stop signs. They are there because there are 16 year olds driving. Please tell me why 65mph is safer than 75, or 55 or 45. Please enlighten me on this. air bags do more harm than good, buts its says its safer... So it must be true.

    look ... you said it yourself! ... it's for safety! ... end of discussion ... why should i have to go pull articles to actually prove they make it safer? ... that isn't the point ... the point is the laws are in place because of public safety whether actual or perceived ... for the same reasons why NOT everyone will die from cancer who visits a restaurant that allows smoking ...

    why don't you ask your state transportation rep why they set speed limits where they are!?? ... i don't study this stuff ... i just know that there are regulations put in place for public safety ... i'm not sure what you are arguing here ...

    as for calling me clueless - all i gotta say is that i am glad to finally confirm you are indeed a man and not a woman ...
  • Blockhead
    Blockhead Posts: 1,538
    polaris_x wrote:

    look ... you said it yourself! ... it's for safety! ... end of discussion ... why should i have to go pull articles to actually prove they make it safer? ... that isn't the point ... the point is the laws are in place because of public safety whether actual or perceived ... for the same reasons why NOT everyone will die from cancer who visits a restaurant that allows smoking ...

    why don't you ask your state transportation rep why they set speed limits where they are!?? ... i don't study this stuff ... i just know that there are regulations put in place for public safety ... i'm not sure what you are arguing here ...

    as for calling me clueless - all i gotta say is that i am glad to finally confirm you are indeed a man and not a woman ...
    So then you support the Patriot Act, since its for safety??? You shouldn't need to pull articles, thats why I said you are clueless beause if you use logic you will see that airbags do way more harm than good, just because they use the tag word SAFETY does not make it so. Same with smoking, How can smoking outside cause cancer??? What about car exhaust, should we ban cars also since you are of support of the outside smoking ban.
  • polaris_x
    polaris_x Posts: 13,559
    HeidiJam wrote:
    So then you support the Patriot Act, since its for safety??? You shouldn't need to pull articles, thats why I said you are clueless beause if you use logic you will see that airbags do way more harm than good, just because they use the tag word SAFETY does not make it so. Same with smoking, How can smoking outside cause cancer??? What about car exhaust, should we ban cars also since you are of support of the outside smoking ban.

    listen ... before you continute to call me clueless ... at least know who and what you are debating ... have i ever said that they should ban smoking outside? ... my first post was in a response to someone who said that they should not ban smoking ANYWHERE which i indicated to you already ... i ALSO stated that i'm not sure if i agree with the banning of smoking everywhere ... so, at least get your clues correct before calling someone else clueless ... [see my original post in page 1]

    as for the safety issues - i'm not arguing whether or not they actually are safer ... my point is that they are put in place for public safety ... obviously there will be some you agree with and some you don't ... that's what critical thinking allows one to do ... i am guessing you are for some and not for others ... that point is irrelevant in the discussion ... all i am saying is that there are other rules and regulations put in place in the interests of public safety ... this isn't like the first one ... that's it ... nothing more nothing less ...
  • BinauralJam
    BinauralJam Posts: 14,158
    Less Freedom, ya
  • MotoDC
    MotoDC Posts: 947
    polaris wrote:
    ... perhaps i should be allowed to ahve a pet lion and be allowed to go wherever i want ...
    That would be fucking cool. I'd hang out with you.

    edit: screw you guys, I'm going outside for a smoke. Dunkman, wanna join? :twisted:
  • eyedclaar
    eyedclaar Posts: 6,980
    MotoDC wrote:
    polaris wrote:
    ... perhaps i should be allowed to ahve a pet lion and be allowed to go wherever i want ...
    That would be fucking cool. I'd hang out with you.

    edit: screw you guys, I'm going outside for a smoke. Dunkman, wanna join? :twisted:

    We're not supposed to have pet lions? Even mountain lions? Not that I have several or anything...
    Idaho's Premier Outdoor Writer

    Please Support My Writing Habit By Purchasing A Book:

    https://www.createspace.com/3437020

    http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000663025696

    http://earthtremors.blogspot.com/

Categories