Smoker's Rights vs. Everyone Else's Rights

[Revoltingest]

The point is you don't have to go back. Some percentage of people that went once and said HELLL NOO I am never coming back here still ended up with lung cancer from that one visit.

One visit, & cancer is it?
Amazing argument you have there.

 

[McBell]

The point is you don't have to go back. Some percentage of people that went once and said HELLL NOO I am never coming back here still ended up with lung cancer from that one visit. (Or perhaps from a myriad of other restaurants they also said they would never return too) Then again... it was probably a small percentage though so meh... Their rights probably mean less.

That is rationalization and not reason.

So, who forced them into the smoking establishments?
I mean, who held the gun to their head and told them if they did not enter they would be shot?

or perhaps someone kidnapped their family and told them that if they do not enter a smoking establishment that their family would be killed?

 

[McBell]

One visit, & cancer is it?
Amazing argument you have there.

I am waiting for them to start claiming that merely seeing someone smoke on television or in a movie caused then to get cancer...

 

[Sententia]

How on earth are you seriously comparing crack to tobacco?

In the sense that they are both inadvertently harmful to others if you choose to use them in a proximity close enough to be harmful to others.

You know what? BRING ON the tobacco PROHIBITION. I'll make a fortune selling Marlboros and Newports to your kids. No, really

Cause making money is more important then your kids health. Yay for yosi the good guy.

If I don't like the atmosphere at a restaurant, I won't be back.

Especially if you die. You clearly won't be back in that case.

Hooka party at my house. We can sit on the patio and blow smoke in the direction of my neighbor's house. It's an acre away but hey...it just might work. I don't like them anyway.

Cause maybe, just maybe they might be harmed by what we are free to do... hell lets sit on the very edge of Kathryn's property and burn kilos of tobacco in bon fires... perfectly legal and might possible cause these neighbors I don't like to die... woot...

Would it be OK to smoke bacon at your house.....if I share?

Again minimizing and proving my point. Do you believe that smoking is harmful to other people?

I think that is what is really being disputed. That you believe smoking is not harmful to others. (even though it clearly is.)

So long as you can rationalize that you can smoke wherever it is allowed and Kathryn is allowed to argue smoking restriction are nanny states gone wild I think you are arguing with yourselves to rationalize smoking...

Sure you can smoke... just don't do it in a way that endangers the lives of others.

 

[McBell]

I am waiting for them to start claiming that merely seeing someone smoke on television or in a movie caused then to get cancer...

OMG!
I got lung cancer because the gas station has cigarettes for sale behind the counter!!

 

[Kathryn]

Would it be OK to smoke bacon at your house.....if I share?

I don't know - I've never tried bacon in the hooka...but I'm willing to give it a shot.

 

[Revoltingest]

Again minimizing and proving my point. Do you believe that smoking is harmful to other people?
I think that is what is really being disputed. That you believe smoking is not harmful to others. (even though it clearly is.)

Actually, I wanted to smoke bacon at Kathryn's house.
Yes, smoking harms 1st & 2nd hand smokers. But I figure that if I'm in another building, I'm safe.

 

[Sententia]

One visit, & cancer is it?
Amazing argument you have there.

Sleeping with someone unprotected who has aids is also unlikely to transmit aids to you... but if it does and they did it knowingly they can be imprisoned or killed for murder. Beyond that my argument was more than one visit so bone up on reading comprehension and learn how selective quoting may be politically fun with your friends but not something you want to brag to your children about.

Do you even get the core point I am arguing?

 

[Revoltingest]

Sleeping with someone unprotected who has aids is also unlikely to transmit aids to you...

And the amazing analogies continue.
Your point would benefit from fewer & milder comparisons.

 

[Kathryn]

It's unbelievable,really. Amazing insight into the workings of such people's minds...

 

[Sententia]

And the amazing analogies continue.
Your point would benefit from fewer & milder comparisons.

So smoking around people is unlikely to give you lung cancer but having intercourse with people who have aids is more likely to give you aids...

First off.. smoking... produces a cloud... people who didn't agree to smoke with you are smoking with you... especially indoors. Sex with someone who has aids is by definition more your choice. Despite being your choice... if the person who is pleasing you has aids and you contract it then you have a legal recourse against them and you likely know who they are since you chose to sleep with them. If however you contracted lung cancer from another person who was smoking around you then you probably don't know who it was. You just died of lung cancer and said I don't get it... I never smoked...

That person doesn't hate the smoker cause he doesn't know the smoker gave him cancer and the smoker doesn't care because he is unaware that his actions may actually cause people to die. The smoker may not actually even get lung cancer at all but others may because of the choices they made. Evolution? Survival of the fittest?

 

[Revoltingest]

Summary:
I don't like smoking. (I even prefer unsmoked bacon.)
Smoke is unhealthy to breathe.
I favor minimal gov't regulation of it.

 

[Kathryn]

Summary:

I don't smoke.
I don't care if others smoke.
If I don't like the smoke in a restaurant, I'll let the manager know - and if it doesn't subside, I may choose not to go there anymore.
You can't smoke in my house, but you can smoke in yours.

 

[McBell]

Well, I am like so totally screwed.
I have a doctors appointment Monday but I cannot get to the doctors office without going past a field of tobacco.

How will I ever make it without getting cancer?!

 

[Sententia]

Summary:

I don't smoke.
I don't care if others smoke.
If I don't like the smoke in a restaurant, I'll let the manager know - and if it doesn't subside, I may choose not to go there anymore.
You can't smoke in my house, but you can smoke in yours.

I used to smoke. I don't anymore.

I care if others smoke if it is harming other people inadvertently and think
that the smokers should insure they are not unknowingly harming others by smoking in a manner that insures others won't be affected by their actions.

I don't care if people smoke in a restaurant and occasionally attend such restaurants... having smoked for many years I doubt I am personally genetically going to be susceptible to second hand smoke but I realize that many others may be... and they may have decided to not smoke and risk getting cancer and dying or having their kids get cancer and die and I realize that having restaurants that allow such conditions to exist while simultaneously marketing to the majority that does not smoke and may end up profiting the business but only by promoting cancer is a bad thing. (however it is justified.)

Even if someone who comes to my restaurant chooses to never come back I may have been the straw that gave their family cancer and for what? For a buck or because I serve good food?

I agree... you can't smoke in my house... in my car or at most public spaces. Smoking should be done privately and in a manner guaranteed to insure it wont affect the people around you. When you drink alcohol it goes into your belly... not some into your belly and some into my 6 month old, or my pregnant wife or my grand-papa on oxygen.

Being unaware of how smoking affects other people is not reason to rationalize that you can smoke wherever it is allowed and in fact misses the reasoning behind "Where it is allowed."

 

[Kathryn]

Hey, I am totally screwed. We've had wildfires around here for nearly a week now, and I've been living, eating, sleeping, working, and - yes - breathing - in a cloud of smoke the whole time. If I get lung cancer, who do I blame?

 

[McBell]

Hey, I am totally screwed. We've had wildfires around here for nearly a week now, and I've been living, eating, sleeping, working, and - yes - breathing - in a cloud of smoke the whole time. If I get lung cancer, who do I blame?

Duh,

...smokers.

 

[Sententia]

Hey, I am totally screwed. We've had wildfires around here for nearly a week now, and I've been living, eating, sleeping, working, and - yes - breathing - in a cloud of smoke the whole time. If I get lung cancer, who do I blame?

How do you think this relates to my argument? If someone started these fires would you not want to hold them accountable if you or your family died or developed lung cancer? (Why does this always go back to my main point that no one ever addresses?)

You can rationalize death and suffering but smoking tobacco produces smoke which other people are subjected too and because of their genes may end up dying because of the smokers decision. The smoker might be fine but other people are dying because of his or her actions and the nanny states are trying to prevent people from needlessly dying due to the people who think they were born with the right to smoke and if some people have to die because of it than so be it because smoking legal things is good. (Unless your smoking crack... or any other illegal substance...)

My argument is if smokers knew their actions could kill others they would insure they never did that among people who might die from the byproduct of their habit.

Your argument is even if people would die from the actions of others then they should chose not to be around others doing said act even if they don't know. But even if smokers don't know that they are killing people around them then they should be allowed to kill so long as they don't know?

sigh.

I can't follow your justification anymore. Smoke from tobacco cigarettes kills people who have chosen not to smoke because people who smoke tobacco cigarettes do so around people that may be susceptible to death from their smoke.

People who smoke should chose to smoke in a manner that guarantees they won't affect people susceptible to death from smoking tobacco cigarettes but they chose not to. Instead they chose to smoke where it is permitted and blame people they kill for being in their vicinity while smoking as if smoking is some right akin to suckling breast milk from your mother.

Smoking is a choice and a choice that could negatively affect others and possibly the smoker. Please do not smoke around me or my children. Ever.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Why is that a wow? I grew up in apartments where what went on on the 1st floor affected the second and third. I grew up in projects where what went on in 1b affected 1c, 1a, 2a, 2b, 2c.

Sounds like the apartment I lived in. I didn't smoke; the person below me did. The smoke managed to make its way into my apartment anyhow.

Fail.

Care to try again with an example that is legal?

I already gave one: huffing paint fumes.

And unlike cigarettes, even kids can buy paint.

So WHAT?

If a restaurant or other business starts losing business because enough people don't want to be around smokers, they will most likely make sure that their majority customers are made more comfortable. If not - it should be their choice.

If I don't like the atmosphere at a restaurant, I won't be back.

Would you deign to answer the question I've asked (and you've ignored) at least three times now:

- we've established as a general principle that workers should be protected from avoidable hazards in their workplace, and any unavoidable hazards should be mitigated as much as possible.

- it's clear that second-hand smoke is a hazard.

Given these two facts, how is it not unreasonable to ban smoking in restaurants?

Tobacco smoke is a workplace hazard. The risks associated with it are on par with industrial chemicals that I've had to use in past jobs, except those chemicals came with a list of instructions as long as my arm about acceptable conditions and required personal protective equipment. If we left a container open just evaporating into the lab and the Ministry of Labour found out, we'd have gotten a hefty fine.

So... how is smoking different? What about tobacco smoke warrants this different approach?

 

[Rakhel]

How do you think this relates to my argument? If someone started these fires would you not want to hold them accountable if you or your family died or developed lung cancer? (Why does this always go back to my main point that no one ever addresses?)

Because we don't know what kinds of carcinogens are in the smoke.

You can rationalize death and suffering but smoking tobacco produces smoke which other people are subjected too and because of their genes may end up dying because of the smokers decision. The smoker might be fine but other people are dying because of his or her actions and the nanny states are trying to prevent people from needlessly dying due to the people who think they were born with the right to smoke and if some people have to die because of it than so be it because smoking legal things is good. (Unless your smoking crack... or any other illegal substance...)

My argument is if smokers knew their actions could kill others they would insure they never did that among people who might die from the byproduct of their habit.

Your argument is even if people would die from the actions of others then they should chose not to be around others doing said act even if they don't know. But even if smokers don't know that they are killing people around them then they should be allowed to kill so long as they don't know?

sigh.

I can't follow your justification anymore. Smoke from tobacco cigarettes kills people who have chosen not to smoke because people who smoke tobacco cigarettes do so around people that may be susceptible to death from their smoke.

People who smoke should chose to smoke in a manner that guarantees they won't affect people susceptible to death from smoking tobacco cigarettes but they chose not to. Instead they chose to smoke where it is permitted and blame people they kill for being in their vicinity while smoking as if smoking is some right akin to suckling breast milk from your mother.

Smoking is a choice and a choice that could negatively affect others and possibly the smoker. Please do not smoke around me or my children. Ever.

Nothing worse than a born-again clean-airer.