luineul Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Smoking is not a good habit, that is true. People start for whatever reason and then they are pretty much hooked, and it's very hard to get unhooked. To call it dumb is unfair however in my opinion. People get addicted to lots of things and smoking might be one of the least harmful if you look at the big picture. I'd rather be hooked on smokes than crack, heroin, cocaine, fast food, or gambling for example. These are habits that many people have and I personally consider all of them to be more harmful than cigarettes. If a person has no bad habits whatsoever then they can consider themselves very fortunate, but just about everybody has one bad habit which is hard to break. You say if someone smokes next to you then they have taken away your right not to smoke, I disagree. Unless the smoker has handcuffed you to them or immobilized you in some other way, you can most often quite easily remove yourself from the situation if you feel strongly enough about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-DLC- Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 I know this, but like I said, some workers would have no problem working in such an environment, so if beforehand the workers were notifed that there was a risk of secondhand smoke, and they were still willing to work there, what would be the issue? There are many "unsafe" work environments that workers can choose to be employed in. The unsafe work environments are generally related to the work production, not personal choices made by some that is unrelated to the work. Can you give some examples? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 The unsafe work environments are generally related to the work production, not personal choices made by some that is unrelated to the work. Can you give some examples? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Ambien Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Given the restriction of it being purely a personal choice, no there aren't any examples that come to mind, but honestly, in this case I don't see why it should matter. These would be consenting adults that would be saying they are willing to work in an environment where people partake in an unhealthy, yet legal activity. And in the end, it would technically be related to the work production, as I'm sure the fact that the establishment allows smoking would lure in some customers who may not have gone in. I stress the fact that these would be consenting adults, and that smoking is a legal activity. With those 2 points in mind, I just don't understand why there would not be the option for establishments to allow smoking. I'm sure it would not be an overly popular option for owners anyways and that not many would take it, but why stop the few that would? I guess I'm just of the mind that people should be free to do with their own bodies as they please, so long as it doesn't truly have an aversive affect on others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolfxHaley Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 ill take a sip of alcohol and you can blow your second hand smoke at me. My sip of alcohol did zero to you. Your one puff of second hand smoke has already done damage to me... Hippies...there must be a reason there are less of them these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daebak! Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 I had my last cigarette a year ago. Yay for me! I know when I smoked I always made sure to hack a bud where it was allowed (those designated smoking areas), if I was at a bus stop I would go far away as possible and if I happened to be there alone then having someone come I just move aside, and if someone walks is coming towards me I don't take that puff until I'm sure they are clear of my smoke. I know there are smokers out there that are real d bags, but there seems to be so much hate towards smokers in general, not of them are like that. At the end of the day non smokers are just asking those select few to be a little more courteous. There is no need to go into an argument about whether it's bad for you, gives second hand, and etc. we smokers know... trust me. My 2 and a half cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Hartnell's Mane Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Umm... All the addictions you listed are dumb, as is smoking. To say constantly gambling or getting high isn't dumb... Is dumb. Sorry. Again, this is all my opinion and people are allowed to disagree, but if society in general does not think these things are dumb, than our standards have indeed, fallen dangerously. This is not to say people don't often do dumb things or have dumb habits, but to say it's not dumb because these habits are common is just silly and isn't going to help the situation. What wetcoaster has said about this already makes sense, but I can just imagine too many scenarios where people who desperately need jobs would willingly work in smoking environments, even when they would prefer not to. It just makes sense for these laws to be in place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lowest common denominator Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Nothing Wetcoaster says makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Hartnell's Mane Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 I think your dealer might be lacing your weed with pcp or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lowest common denominator Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Are you flushing that crap proper or is it moldy or are you on bath salts? Considering I grow my own there you go again being wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-DLC- Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Back on track please guys.... Given the restriction of it being purely a personal choice, no there aren't any examples that come to mind, but honestly, in this case I don't see why it should matter. These would be consenting adults that would be saying they are willing to work in an environment where people partake in an unhealthy, yet legal activity. And in the end, it would technically be related to the work production, as I'm sure the fact that the establishment allows smoking would lure in some customers who may not have gone in. I stress the fact that these would be consenting adults, and that smoking is a legal activity. With those 2 points in mind, I just don't understand why there would not be the option for establishments to allow smoking. I'm sure it would not be an overly popular option for owners anyways and that not many would take it, but why stop the few that would? I guess I'm just of the mind that people should be free to do with their own bodies as they please, so long as it doesn't truly have an aversive affect on others. Unless you think smoking should be illegal, I don't see why you think a place that allows people to smoke inside should also be illegal. So most businesses aren't free standing structures...what about the second hand smoke seeping into neighbouring businesses of people who didn't sign on for smoke? I, too, am very much a supporter of "people should be free to do with their own bodies" thing, but this affects others' bodies and their freedom is then hampered. I come from a time where everyone had a smoke in their hand...God, even the Rat Pack had a drink and a smoke during TV performances. But as we learn, we grow/evolve and this is just one example of that. Smoking has no benefits besides possibly lowering stress and, at least psychologically, relaxing people. But, with that, nicotine actually raises blood pressure and constricts blood vessels so this is really a perceived notion and smoking doesn't really contribute to any "wellness" or actual benefits. Again, as a long time ex smoker whose Mother went to her death bed fighting for her smokes, I don't get hostile or rude toward smokers but I do think it is they who need to "adjust" and be inconvenienced....NOT the people trying to look after their own health interests. As for the argument about "smokers paying taxes"....how about my tax dollars that are wasted on looking after smokers who do develop health issues and then require health care? That's money wasted, as their issues could likely be avoided if they'd quit smoking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Hartnell's Mane Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Back on track please guys.... So most businesses aren't free standing structures...what about the second hand smoke seeping into neighbouring businesses of people who didn't sign on for smoke? I, too, am very much a supporter of "people should be free to do with their own bodies" thing, but this affects others' bodies and their freedom is then hampered. I come from a time where everyone had a smoke in their hand...God, even the Rat Pack had a drink and a smoke during TV performances. But as we learn, we grow/evolve and this is just one example of that. Smoking has no benefits besides possibly lowering stress and, at least psychologically, relaxing people. But, with that, nicotine actually raises blood pressure and constricts blood vessels so this is really a perceived notion and doesn't really contribute to any "wellness" or actual benefits. Again, as a long time ex smoker whose Mother went to her death bed fighting for her smokes, I don't get hostile or rude toward smokers but I do think it is they who need to "adjust" and be inconvenienced....NOT the people trying to look after their health interests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Hartnell's Mane Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Following up on the above post because it's a bit away from topic but still on the topic of Big Tobacco...I have heard stunning reports that have made me angrier than I've ever been. It now seems that even should we get cannabis legalization passed nationwide, Big Tobacco is poised to jump all over my sweet lady Mary Jane and violate her with their poisons...just the way they did to tobacco. This cannot happen...it just can't...We can't ALLOW this atrocity to take place...Leave the herb alone..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 So most businesses aren't free standing structures...what about the second hand smoke seeping into neighbouring businesses of people who didn't sign on for smoke? I, too, am very much a supporter of "people should be free to do with their own bodies" thing, but this affects others' bodies and their freedom is then hampered. I come from a time where everyone had a smoke in their hand...God, even the Rat Pack had a drink and a smoke during TV performances. But as we learn, we grow/evolve and this is just one example of that. Smoking has no benefits besides possibly lowering stress and, at least psychologically, relaxing people. But, with that, nicotine actually raises blood pressure and constricts blood vessels so this is really a perceived notion and smoking doesn't really contribute to any "wellness" or actual benefits. Again, as a long time ex smoker whose Mother went to her death bed fighting for her smokes, I don't get hostile or rude toward smokers but I do think it is they who need to "adjust" and be inconvenienced....NOT the people trying to look after their own health interests. As for the argument about "smokers paying taxes"....how about my tax dollars that are wasted on looking after smokers who do develop health issues and then require health care? That's money wasted, as their issues could likely be avoided if they'd quit smoking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wetcoaster Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Deb I must say that with the advent of e-cigarettes and providing they become affordable for everyone who needs one to give up tobacco, and with that just a straight shot of nicotine whenever needed, in vapor form..I'd be happy to see the number of "smoke" cigarettes dwindle. If I had enough money to give every smoker friend I know an E-Cig starter set I would do it in a heartbeat...it's certainly made my life a lot less hectic. These are smokeless, odorless, and they do an effective job of providing that nicotine relief. I hope some day they become available, cheaper...so that everyone can tell Big Tobacco to go suck an egg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luineul Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Nothing Wetcoaster says makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Hartnell's Mane Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Not that my post was directed at you, but please tell me how this doesn't make sense. Why shouldn't smoking establishments be banned? Regardless of where you live, what positive benefit would a smoking establishment bring to the general population that a non-smoking establishment can't? I'm not sure if Jagermeister has been swayed yet, but this is more in response to his question on the last page than it is to your comment... But feel free to point out what doesn't make sense about Wetcoaster's point above, if you can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUPERTKBD Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 You know what? I think there should be a compromise. All over the US (not sure if it would fly in Canada) there ought to be like a community smoking lounge, for people who enjoy a fine cigar or a hookah...There should be special places where you can go and get your smoke on without risking offending one of you bleeding hearts who can't take the time to walk the **** away from someone who is smoking. But YOU all can pay for them, since you're so worried about secondhand smoke and have seen fit to ban it from everyplace else and presume that YOU alone are entitled to the outdoor air. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 Why shouldn't smoking establishments be banned? Regardless of where you live, what positive benefit would a smoking establishment bring to the general population that a non-smoking establishment can't? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Hartnell's Mane Posted January 3, 2013 Share Posted January 3, 2013 In BC we have WorkSafe BC, which is the provincial version of OSHA in the US. Since any worker who contracted lung cancer, or other smoking-realted disease as a result of second hand smoke in the workplace could claim benefits from WCB, (what we used to call WorkSafe) the rules banning smoking have been put in place. People do not have the right to agree to work in conditions that can be hazardous to their health, since it is the taxpayers of BC that would be on the hook for the bill. (as well as the employers of BC, who all pay WCB premiums) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.