Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Smoking in public....should this be banned?

page: 7
0
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 15 2005 @ 10:05 AM
link   
oh.....and I insist we ban this crap!!!

Fla. Vegetable Grower Hit With Record Fine

"The violations were uncovered during an investigation into the births several months ago of three malformed babies to Mexican farmworkers in Immokalee. The babies' parents worked in Ag-Mart tomato fields in Florida and North Carolina and lived near each other during a critical time period. "

www.local6.com...




posted on Oct, 15 2005 @ 05:52 PM
link   
MCory1, I'm actually for them having "zones" set up where smoking [including minor drugs] could be done as well as having smoking clubs and other "zones" in larger areas where smoking can't take place.

However, the chance of the Government being smart and doing such a thing are slim to none so you have to look at the next best option and smoking involves a minority of people and harms innocent people. It boils down to that a lone. I do not have the right to punch someone because I dislike them nor do I have the right to poison them through the air or by injection and smoking is a form of posion.



posted on Oct, 15 2005 @ 06:07 PM
link   
I fail to see why smoking should be tolerated in enclosed public places.....unless we have a designated bar/café system specifically for smoking (whatever) like they have in Amsterdam.
Ditto restaurants.

The problem there is with staff, why should they be subected to others' smoke?

I do not accept the civil liberties arguement in relation to everyone else's right to clean air (and that is an issue not just confined to cig smoke either).

If you wish to smoke in the privacy of your own spaces (home, car, your own private office) fine but I don't see why my rights to a smoke free athmosphere should come second to a smokers addiction and inability to go without when in the company of others.



[edit on 15-10-2005 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Oct, 15 2005 @ 07:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
The problem there is with staff, why should they be subected to others' smoke?


There's no law stating that someone must work in a bar. There's plenty of other jobs they could have. And aside from that, virtually every bartender I've ever met smoked themselves. I know there's plenty of non-smokers, but that's just my experience.



I do not accept the civil liberties arguement in relation to everyone else's right to clean air (and that is an issue not just confined to cig smoke either).

If you wish to smoke in the privacy of your own spaces (home, car, your own private office) fine but I don't see why my rights to a smoke free athmosphere should come second to a smokers addiction and inability to go without when in the company of others.


My main argument is this: if I want to allow smoking in a bar I own, and you don't like it, there's no reason you have to go there. If you feel that strongly about it, open up your own non-smoking establishment. But if I and my customers want to smoke in the bar that I've put my time and money in getting started, then that should be up to us.

As long as I give you fair enough warning that the establishment you're about to walk into is hazardous to your health, then you have every opportunity to go to the next bar. And if someone is so worried about their health that they're trying to force everyone around them to put their smokes out, then what are you going in a bar anyways? Alcohol is just as dangerous, and is more of a public nuisance than smoking--you can see and walk around a smoker, but in what way does a car with a drunk driver behind the wheel look any different from a car with a sober person?

My complaint is the right of the business owner to decide how they want to run their business. That's it. If the customers don't like the way the business is run or the atmosphere there, they don't have to patronize it, simple as that.



posted on Oct, 16 2005 @ 03:17 AM
link   
Of course not! Look how many people who never smoked and avoided second hand smoke are diagnosed with lung cancer every day. If you truly believe cigarettes are solely responsible for all lung cancer, than your just the moron are governments banking on to believe it's propaganda.

The tobacco industry has become the scapegoat for the growing numbers of lung and heart related diseases. Sure smoking is bad for you, but so is our air, our water our food our medicine....

But if people are stupid enough to think cigarettes are the only culprit here, then the government's diversionary tactics are working.

Don't assume the tobacco industry is hurt by the negative propaganda. It continues to thrive and most likely with the help of corporate welfare.

Those of you afraid to breath second hand smoke, you'd better start living in a bubble, because your chances are one in three you're going to get cancer anyway. And the other two-thirds of you will probably die of heart disease or diabetes.

So stop looking down on smokers, because we're all killing ourselves every day by eating processed foods, drinking tap water, breathing the air.........



posted on Oct, 16 2005 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by dollmonster
So stop looking down on smokers, because we're all killing ourselves every day by eating processed foods, drinking tap water, breathing the air.........


- Just because every type of ill that confronts us has not been tackled does not mean an obvious one like smoking should be completely ignored.

I have no problem with people who wish to smoke smoking but (as I said in my original post) if there is a way of confining it only to those who wish to smoke then work away.





new topics

top topics
 
0
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join