It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: TiredofControlFreaks
NO - it is NOT their choice to go out and freeze. They are told continuously that they can smoke OUTSIDE and they are merely following the law that was imposed on them!
So that is what you call giving smokers a "choice" - smoke and freeze to death or quit smoking and we will let you have life-saving shelter? Give up your dignity and bow to me as your master or die?
What excuse can anyone possibly have for denying smokers their own separately ventilated smoking areas?
originally posted by: TiredofControlFreaks
For someone who is so concerned about asthmatics, I am truly amazed that you have not said one single word about how asthma has kept increasing in the face of descreasing smoke exposure.
I hope - at the end of the day - that we don't find out the theory that smoke challenges a developing respiratory and immune system and makes it stronger. That asthma rates will only decrease when children are exposed to smoke. That would make for some pretty strong embarrassment.
originally posted by: TiredofControlFreaks
This thing you have with the idea of choice. Understand this - smoker CHOOSE to smoke. The whole idea of anti-smokers was to harrass smokers to point of FORCING them to quit.
We simply refuse to quit. Get over it. Accept it! Move on!
It doesn't matter what laws you impose. Smokers will not quit smoking.
So anti-smokers can continue to be inhumane in their attitude or can actually seriously start looking at compromise
For one - no one should be setting the rules on smoking on private property.
Nobody HAS to go into a pub or restaurant that allows smoking - they CHOOSE to expose themselves to smoke. All they have to do is CHOOSE to go to a pub or restaurant that doesn't allow smoking.
No patient in any hospital or home setting needs to be exposed to cigarette smoke. The government has designed separately ventilated smoking rooms and has merely to take a pittance of the 10 bn tobacco tax dollars to built them. They don't even have to be in the main building. They can be in a separate building with only a corridor to the main building.
No mental patient should be strip searched for cigarettes and their property should be stored in the locked cabinets along with the rest of their things.
Prisoners should at least be allowed to smoke outside!
Between people of sound hearts and good intentions - there is always a solution and a comprise.
But when one party is out to dominate and subjegate the other - there will never be a solution
originally posted by: TiredofControlFreaks
Even if what you say is true - you do NOT require smoking bans to manage your health.
Draconian smoking bans are relatively new. How did you manage your health prior to them?
You have stated that cigarette smoke is not your only trigger. Even if tobacco was eradicated, you would still have asthma attacks and still end up in hospital.
Like I said - no one can truly help you
originally posted by: TiredofControlFreaks
And if you were listening to me.... my continual question has been...why does every building everywhere need to be non-smoking.
It is not the smokers (or me) that are not willing to compromise. It is anti-smokers, who are far more interested in imposing their will and tastes on others.
originally posted by: TiredofControlFreaks
a reply to: ArMaP
ArMap - I don't know how old you are but smokers have been living with smoking bans since the 1960s! It has been over 70 years since people have been allowed to smoke "whereever they like"