PDA

View Full Version : California; First No Smoking State



dirty old man
10-10-2006, 07:28 AM
So today they are voting a whole new list of no smoking sites in CA. Thats really good news. I've already seen a reduction in SMOG when I visit there

Kilrtoy
10-10-2006, 07:30 AM
SMOKING IS DISGUSTING :yuk:

Tom Brown
10-10-2006, 07:32 AM
What is happening to our civil liberties? Nobody is going to tell me I can't smoke anywhere I like and blow smoke in the face of anyone I damn well please. Nobody. :mad:

Beer-30
10-10-2006, 07:33 AM
SMOKING IS DISGUSTING :yuk:
Amen. Ya gotta love 23111.
I call the last 3 smokers at the office (out of 110 people) Beta machines. Like the old BetaMax VCRs. They just aren't made anymore and you rarely see them around.

Hardly Satisfied
10-10-2006, 07:35 AM
SMOKING IS DISGUSTING :yuk:
well said

OGShocker
10-10-2006, 07:36 AM
What is happening to our civil liberties? Nobody is going to tell me I can't smoke anywhere I like and blow smoke in the face of anyone I damn well please. Nobody. :mad:
Just wait for the "Non's" out cry for civil liberties when blue dot pasties are no longer allowed...:D

Kilrtoy
10-10-2006, 07:39 AM
Amen. Ya gotta love 23111.
I call the last 3 smokers at the office (out of 110 people) Beta machines. Like the old BetaMax VCRs. They just aren't made anymore and you rarely see them around.
I scratch those bad boys like they are going out of style.... :boxed:

OutCole'd
10-10-2006, 07:42 AM
I hope Nevada is the second.

dirty old man
10-10-2006, 07:43 AM
Brownie, "you're doing a hell of a good job here" Well, I really think you're taking a knife to a gun fight

Tom Brown
10-10-2006, 07:43 AM
Just wait for the "Non's" out cry for civil liberties when blue dot pasties are no longer allowed...:D
Do the blue dot pasties go over the mouths of smokers? Do the smoker's hands need to be tied to prevent them from removing the pasties?

Jyruiz
10-10-2006, 07:47 AM
I am not a smoker, but I guess the next thing this state will do is sue all the cigarette manufacturers for the smog here in CA.

little rowe boat
10-10-2006, 07:49 AM
I am not a smoker, but I guess the next thing this state will do is sue all the cigarette manufacturers for the smog here in CA.
Sounds good to me.

OGShocker
10-10-2006, 07:56 AM
I would love to see some pencilneck politicain have the balls to promote a BAN on all tabacco sales in the state of California. Should this happen you would see other pol's come out of the woodwork to save their precious TAX BASE!
Excerp...
Reflecting the industry's historic political clout, California's tax on cigarettes was just 10 cents a pack before 1988, when voters approved a 25-cent increase for public health purposes.
Ten years later, voters added another 50 cents, a 137 percent hike that pushed the state bite on each pack of cigarettes to 87 cents. That's the nation's fourth highest rate, behind only Alaska and Hawaii, $1 each, and New York, $1.11.
Taxes Paid
Tobacco Taxes and Payments for California
California's excise tax per pack of cigarettes: $0.870
California's excise tax collection for the fiscal year ending June 2005: $1,032,871,000
Sales tax on tobacco products: 7.25%
Tobacco products sales tax collection for the fiscal year ending June 2005: $329,023,000
Local tax on tobacco products: $0
Federal excise tax per pack of cigarettes: $0.39
Total federal excise tax collections in fiscal year 2005: $7,778,569,117

dirty old man
10-10-2006, 07:58 AM
yeah, OG, but you know how CA politico's like to shoot themselves in the foot

OGShocker
10-10-2006, 07:59 AM
yeah, OG, but you know how CA politico's like to shoot themselves in the foot
Sometimes I wish they would do us all a favor and AIM HIGHER.. :crossx:

Sleek-Jet
10-10-2006, 08:06 AM
I say we ban liquor while we are at it... prohibition, after all, has been proven to work throughout history... :idea:
And really, liquor affects the public health at least as much as smoking does...

Tom Brown
10-10-2006, 08:07 AM
CA politico's like to shoot themselves in the foot
Guns are messy. They should take up smoking and die of cancer instead.

Jbb
10-10-2006, 08:08 AM
Guns are messy. They should take up smoking and die of cancer instead.
Next they will ban words featuring the letter..Q.... :p

Tom Brown
10-10-2006, 08:08 AM
And really, liquor affects the public health at least as much as smoking does...
I'd say way more.
How come when a discussion about smoking pops up, every jack hole smoker tries to change the subject? Is it too embarrassing to admit you were a total moron in 6th grade when you took it up and have been too weak between then and now to give it up?
Where the hell is RD?

Jbb
10-10-2006, 08:09 AM
What is happening to our civil liberties? Nobody is going to tell me I can't smoke anywhere I like and blow smoke in the face of anyone I damn well please. Nobody. :mad:
And your favorite pastime ...of snuffing out your ciggy on someones forearm?.... :jawdrop:

OGShocker
10-10-2006, 08:11 AM
I'd say way more.
How come when a discussion about smoking pops up, every jack hole smoker tries to change the subject? Is it too embarrassing to admit you were a total moron in 6th grade when you took it up and have been too weak between then and now to give it up?
Where the hell is RD?
Hi, my name is Mark and I am a total moron.

Sleek-Jet
10-10-2006, 08:14 AM
I'd say way more.
How come when a discussion about smoking pops up, every jack hole smoker tries to change the subject? Is it too embarrassing to admit you were a total moron in 6th grade when you took it up and have been too weak between then and now to give it up?
Where the hell is RD?
I don't smoke, but just trying to fill in the time till RD get's here... :D

Tom Brown
10-10-2006, 08:14 AM
Let's see... I'm going to draw some tarry, caustic shit into my lungs for pleasure. Yeah... sounds smart.
My favorite is the way women develop that witch laugh after 15 years of smoking. When they start cackling, you can hear the tobacco rosin based phlegm moving around in their lungs. :D

Tom Brown
10-10-2006, 08:15 AM
I don't smoke, but just trying to fill in the time till RD get's here... :D
Aren't we all. I've got a hopper full of material here that's going to burst if he doesn't arrive soon.

Jbb
10-10-2006, 08:28 AM
Let's see... I'm going to draw some tarry, caustic shit into my lungs for pleasure. Yeah... sounds smart.
My favorite is the way women develop that witch laugh after 15 years of smoking. When they start cackling, you can hear the tobacco rosin based phlegm moving around in their lungs. :D
It's especially sexy when they can spit it clear across the bar ....on a line drive... :p

CARLSON-JET
10-10-2006, 09:15 AM
It is really to bad the majority of smokers could just not police themselves. As a smoker I don't smoke in public buildings just as a I don't smoke in my own house. I don't throw butts all over the ground nor in waterways. I do have a problem if government wants to ban smoking outside though. Smokers have become an ever increasing easy target. What's one more law on the books limiting a persons freedoms.
Soon there will be MORE laws about waisting precious resources. When that group of laws start effecting the majority of members on this board we will see an outcry of "what about my right". I have a right to burn 50+ gallons or 300+ lbs. of fossil fuels every weekend. Not to mention the other byproducts that occur from this sport.
One freedom at a time... Devide and conquer. When will the book burnings begin?

Riverless
10-10-2006, 09:17 AM
i say ban smoking from as many places as possible. it is a nasty, dirty habit that also effects people that are around the smoker. my first and only husband so far, was a cigar smoker. we were married for seven years. last year i had a chest x-ray that showed possible spots on my lungs. lucky for me they were just shadows and nothing that looked damaging, but i was still very scared until i was given the green light.
look at dana reeve, she wasn't a smoker, but she worked as a cocktail waitress in a bar for several years.

little rowe boat
10-10-2006, 10:03 AM
It is really to bad the majority of smokers could just not police themselves. As a smoker I don't smoke in public buildings just as a I don't smoke in my own house. I don't throw butts all over the ground nor in waterways. I do have a problem if government wants to ban smoking outside though. Smokers have become an ever increasing easy target. What's one more law on the books limiting a persons freedoms.
Soon there will be MORE laws about waisting precious resources. When that group of laws start effecting the majority of members on this board we will see an outcry of "what about my right". I have a right to burn 50+ gallons or 300+ lbs. of fossil fuels every weekend. Not to mention the other byproducts that occur from this sport.
One freedom at a time... Devide and conquer. When will the book burnings begin?
I appreciate a considerate smoker, unfortunately they are rare. I hate walking outside of a store and having to walk through a wall of cigarette smoke. Outside smoking areas should be designated away from entrances and exits.

RitcheyRch
10-10-2006, 10:28 AM
Effective Jan 2007 there will be no smoking or chewing of tobacco on company property.

RiverDave
10-10-2006, 10:34 AM
It's a dangerous road when people are willing to impose on others freedoms for their own personal gain. "It's a nasty habbit we should make it illegal" sounds something that would be said more in the days of the gustapo in germany, then in the days of a patriotic america.
Nasty or not it should be left up to the individual, it's not the job of the government to protect us from ourselves. There's already laws in place regarding littering, pollution, as well as restrictions on the distance someone can smoke from an entrance/exit to a government building. Enforce what's on the books, don't create more laws, limiting more freedoms, I think as boaters we would all as a group get that simple concept. Especially when our hobby is one of the ones that most consistently under attack from those very same people trying to take our freedoms away.
The people that responded the way they did in this thread are the exact reason that california is so ****ed up in the 1st place. How do you think it got this way? From the same mindset of "It doesn't benefit me, so take it away from them." Sometimes we as americans should make sacrifices for the greater good of our way of life. It's funny how these same guys will laugh and point at mexicans going to these parades and participating in lockouts when in effect half of them don't even know what it's about or for.. They are just participating becuase they think it benefits them and that's all they care about. What do ya think y'all are doing by encouraging things of this nature? Same thing.
RD

NorCal Gameshow
10-10-2006, 10:38 AM
Flashback...
tom brown as a new hobby (http://www.***boat.com/forums/showthread.php?t=29012&highlight=smoking) :hammer2:

dirty old man
10-10-2006, 10:50 AM
rd, I don't want to sacrafice my life for your right to smoke

NorCal Gameshow
10-10-2006, 10:59 AM
rd, I don't want to sacrafice my life for your right to smoke
:confused: :confused: :confused:

Beer-30
10-10-2006, 11:07 AM
It is absolutely correct that it is everyone's right to do legally whatever they want. However, the problem with some things is when it affects other peeps.
Drinking doesn't affect other people in the same way as smoking. You can walk right by a person that is drinking and not even know it. Not so with smoke. Similarly, even if you caught a "whiff" of the vapor from an alcoholic beverage as you walk by them, it is harmless. Not so with second-hand smoke.
I don't think they should stop selling tobacco prods, because they would technically have to stop selling alcohol and coffee also - to be fair. I have lately figured that there should be "smoking kiosks"; similar to the trendy Oxygen cafes and Starbuck's-style coffee/meeting joints. Smokers (and non-smokers, if they wish) could walk right into a climate-controlled air-purified building. Sophisticated filters would purify the air out exhaust vents so as not to spread the smoke into the atmosphere. Cars could similarly have the purification-vent option so that people could smoke inside the car with the windows up and the smoke would exit from vents.
The way smokers are quitting/dying these days, there would probably only be about 5 or so left worldwide by the time something like this became popular.

Sleek-Jet
10-10-2006, 11:10 AM
All kidding aside... prohibition never has proven to work... ever...
Let me repeat that... E V E R....
I can't stand cigarette smoke, but I don't want to see the choice to smoke being outlawed for "the greater good". The greater good for whom??
And I've got news for people who are conviced that walking through a cloud of smoke once in a while is going to kill you... it isn't. It takes repeated long term exposure to run the risk of lung cancer. It might be annoying to you, but people think that loud boats are annoying to. I think your screaming focking kid in the middle of a restaurant is annoying. The fact that you park sideways in a parking spot in your new blinged out Escalade is annoying. Nothing really unhealthy about it... but there shouldn't be laws passed banning everything that annoys the general public.
Now, maybe... maybe... the people that are forced to work around second hand smoke have a beef... but we all have choices in this world. Don't like you work enviroment, or think it's unhealthy?? Change jobs. 30 years ago you could claim you didn't know any better, that's total bullshit these days.

AzMandella
10-10-2006, 11:30 AM
Drinking doesn't affect other people in the same way as smoking. You can walk right by a person that is drinking and not even know it. Not so with smoke. Similarly, even if you caught a "whiff" of the vapor from an alcoholic beverage as you walk by them, it is harmless. Not so with second-hand smoke.
.
Your kidding right?Tell that to the child who's parent gets drunk and beats the crap out of them.Or why don't you call MADD and tell all the people that's family has been slaughtered on the road.Alcohol causes more social problems in this country than tobaco any day.Not to mention all the medical problems associated with alcoholism.But I guess you won't get a bunch of senators to give up there booze.Or the 30' boozin boat club.

Beer-30
10-10-2006, 11:41 AM
Your kidding right?Tell that to the child who's parent gets drunk and beats the crap out of them.Or why don't you call MADD and tell all the people that's family has been slaughtered on the road.Alcohol causes more social problems in this country than tobaco any day.Not to mention all the medical problems associated with alcoholism.But I guess you won't get a bunch of senators to give up there booze.Or the 30' boozin boat club.
Settle down there, career smoker.
I never condoned UNDER THE INFLUENCE beatings or driving. My example was simply walking down the street or outside of a building, as was mentioned before. If two people were standing side by side, and one was drinking (alcohol) and the other was smoking; only one of the odors would be HARMFUL. The alcohol odor may be OFFENSIVE to someone walking by, but it won't have any lasting effects and evaporates. Not so with smoke.
There's alot of decaffinated brands that taste just a good as the real thing.
And, there should be two spaces after every period. And, it's THEIR 30' boozin' boat club, not THERE.

Tom Brown
10-10-2006, 12:00 PM
Hi, my name is Mark and I am a total moron.
You know Mark, I think I see your point. It's not such a bad thing. In fact, it's a sign of intellect.
I think you should get OGShocker Jr. going on a nice little habbit. You can start him on lights and work him up to a real smoke with no filter. He could have a 2 pack a day habbit by the time he's 15. Why not let people see that your son is smart too?
:cool:

Angry Inch
10-10-2006, 12:09 PM
Can we please legalize marijuana?

racecar.hotshoe
10-10-2006, 12:12 PM
rd, I don't want to sacrafice my life for your right to smoke
But drinking is still ok.I dont wish to sacrifice my life for those of you that feel the need to drink and drive but I almost did......Have another one!
http://www.***boat.com/image_center/data/500/1917crash1.JPG

dicudmore
10-10-2006, 12:23 PM
But drinking is still ok.I dont wish to sacrifice my life for those of you that feel the need to drink and drive but I almost did......Have another one!
http://www.***boat.com/image_center/data/500/1917crash1.JPG
that pic is still horrifying :220v:

OGShocker
10-10-2006, 12:25 PM
You know Mark, I think I see your point. It's not such a bad thing. In fact, it's a sign of intellect.
I think you should get OGShocker Jr. going on a nice little habbit. You can start him on lights and work him up to a real smoke with no filter. He could have a 2 pack a day habbit by the time he's 15. Why not let people see that your son is smart too?
:cool:
Kind of unlike you to bring the children in on this. I mean, I expect you to wanna talk about pounding my wife's ass into the shape of your pelvis, but my son? Damn, so much for the Saskatchewan brotherhood. :)
BTW, you need to remember, Rabbit has two b's but only one habit..:D

jbone
10-10-2006, 12:26 PM
I think the new tax is crazy. Over $2 a pack in tax is obsurd.
I am glad about the bans in parks and beaches though. It doesn't stop all the smoking, but it helps. It drives me crazy when my little girls play at parks and the beach, and there are cigarette butts all around.
If you just look around for them, you will them everywhere. Smokers don't consider them dirty, since they just had them in there mouths, but to a non-smoker they are disgusting.
I think if smokers cleaned up after themselves and were considerate of others, there would be no bans today.
In the past, I asked smokers to either move to another area or put the cig out and they get an attitude like phuk you, I can smoke where I want.
Hence the bans. Keep them coming!!!
J

Riverless
10-10-2006, 12:30 PM
Nasty or not it should be left up to the individual, it's not the job of the government to protect us from ourselves.
RD
Problem is, and other's have said it, it would be nice if it was just left up to you, I wouldn't care in the least, problem is second-hand smoke effects others as well, and we don't get a say in the matter. We could ask you if you could please put out your cigarrette, but I think most people are afraid to do this. I asked my husband on numerous occassions to take his stoggies outside, but he didn't care enough to do that and I got tired of fighting about it, so I just gave in and he joyously smoked away on his $10 cigars inside the house. :rolleyes: and, no, he didn't smoke this much when we were dating, it increased as his workload got heavier and as he sunk into depression.

Tom Brown
10-10-2006, 12:41 PM
Kind of unlike you to bring the children in on this.
None of this is about him. In fact, I don't see how he was brought into this at all.
I think pretty much any good parent, such as yourself, would be horrified at the thought of their child smoking. Even extremely socially liberal parents might not say anything if their child was older and started but even they would wish their child would stop. Why do you suppose that is?
My Dad is a heavy smoker. He's currently got emphysema. I don't expect he'll be around much longer. He's told us how it's a big pleasure in his life and how he has no regrets yet he has tried to scare us into not smoking. If it's that wonderful of a thing, why do you suppose he doesn't want us to do it? Do you suppose that focker doesn’t want us to enjoy life? :mad:
BTW, you need to remember, Rabbit has two b's but only one habit..:D
Maybe my poor spelling comes from never having been a smoker? :D
BTW, the problem is not about the greater good, it's about non-smokers being exposed to that putrid smell and nauseating shit. I could care less if anyone want's to smoke but I want to be able to decide not to.
When I was working my way through university, I worked in a warehouse that shipped food products. This guy I worked with was a heavy smoker and, despite regulations to the contrary, he smoked all day. It wasn't too bad but he would come into the freezer and blow smoke on me (because he was always huffing) and I puked several times. I eventually quit and it left them in a bad spot but I'm not going to work somewhere that makes me sick.
... so the problem isn't smoking generally... it's the jack hole who comes into the bus stop shelter on a -40 degree day with a smoke going. Seriously, I'm surprised there isn't more violent responses to that shit.

talbert450r
10-10-2006, 12:42 PM
"This year will go down in history! For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!"
Adolf Hitler 1935
Not to long after this quote he slaughtered 21 million people.
The more rights you are willing to give up the more power the Govt has. The Govt is not supposed to have any power over the people according to the U.S. Constitution.
:crossx:

OGShocker
10-10-2006, 01:20 PM
My Dad is a heavy smoker. He's currently got emphysema. I don't expect he'll be around much longer. He's told us how it's a big pleasure in his life and how he has no regrets yet he has tried to scare us into not smoking. If it's that wonderful of a thing, why do you suppose he doesn't want us to do it? Do you suppose that focker doesn’t want us to enjoy life? :mad:.
Sorry about you dad Tom. Today would have been my dad's 82nd birthday. I recommend you call him today.
Maybe my poor spelling comes from never having been a smoker? :D
I no what you meen.:D
BTW, the problem is not about the greater good, it's about non-smokers being exposed to that putrid smell and nauseating shit. I could care less if anyone want's to smoke but I want to be able to decide not to.
I HATE the smell of smoke as well. Rude people suck! Smokers not smokers, rude flat out sux! I hate being next to the farting guy on the airplane, cuz people can't decide who to hate. Maybe God should have made our asses smoke so people would know who to point at in the plane
... so the problem isn't smoking generally... it's the jack hole who comes into the bus stop shelter on a -40 degree day with a smoke going. Seriously, I'm surprised there isn't more violent responses to that shit.
You might wanna move to an area that stays above -40F/C.
BTW, I had your T-shirts (including the orange one) in Demaine last July. It seems my friends decided they needed them more then I/you did.:D I'll bring some up in February.

SnakeWrench
10-10-2006, 01:35 PM
I'm sorry. I believe that everyone has a right to do to themselves pretty much what they want. My sister was killed by a drunk driver. She was decapitated when his drunk ass drove into her. All you right wingers need to study Hitler. What you think is" Our right to make illegal" Is right along the lines of Hitlers thinking and I don't like it. Wanna do some good? Ban Alcohol. It has affected my life and more people that you all know at the river than smoking has. Yes it is a dirty habit, but so is getting drunk, thinking you are the greatest driver ever and killing an innocent person. Sorry, I have never killed anyone because I smoked too much.

SnakeWrench
10-10-2006, 01:47 PM
"This year will go down in history! For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!"
Adolf Hitler 1935
Not to long after this quote he slaughtered 21 million people.
The more rights you are willing to give up the more power the Govt has. The Govt is not supposed to have any power over the people according to the U.S. Constitution.
:crossx:
My point exactly

Beer-30
10-10-2006, 01:51 PM
C'mon people. We are not talking about driving while chemically altered. Smoking (controlled substances) and driving is, of course, just as bad as beverages containing alcohol and driving. That is a different conversation all together.

SnakeWrench
10-10-2006, 01:53 PM
I think the new tax is crazy. Over $2 a pack in tax is obsurd.
I am glad about the bans in parks and beaches though. It doesn't stop all the smoking, but it helps. It drives me crazy when my little girls play at parks and the beach, and there are cigarette butts all around.
If you just look around for them, you will them everywhere. Smokers don't consider them dirty, since they just had them in there mouths, but to a non-smoker they are disgusting.
I think if smokers cleaned up after themselves and were considerate of others, there would be no bans today.
In the past, I asked smokers to either move to another area or put the cig out and they get an attitude like phuk you, I can smoke where I want.
Hence the bans. Keep them coming!!!
J
There is the truth. I am very considerate when it comes to when and where I smoke. I look to see if it is anywhere that someone may be imposed by it. I have had people ask me to move or put it out and depending on how they ask, my answer is usually, "No problem, sorry about that." and that is the end of it.
I had someone ask me if the walls in my house are orange from smoke. "Nope, I smoke in my backyard. I don't smoke in my house or cars." They thought I was full of it.

talbert450r
10-10-2006, 01:58 PM
C'mon people. We are not talking about driving while chemically altered. Smoking (controlled substances) and driving is, of course, just as bad as beverages containing alcohol and driving. That is a different conversation all together.
Your right, were talking about taking away yet one more of our freedoms.

talbert450r
10-10-2006, 02:03 PM
Did everyone forget why this country was founded?
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Beer-30
10-10-2006, 02:12 PM
Your right, were talking about taking away yet one more of our freedoms.
Ok, then. What about my right to walk outside and not smell the smoke from my neighbor's nasty addiction. Or my right to have my windows down at an intersection and not smell the smoke from the people on either side of me that have cancer-sticks burning and hanging outside their windows because they don't want the smoke INSIDE THEIR OWN VEHICLE(s)!
If you wanna keep comparing to alc: Sure, alcohol can kill your liver and kidneys just like smoking can kill your lungs. I don't think there is any question that alc is probably just as bad for you. But, if a person decides to drink themself to death right next to the person that smokes themself to death; nothing second-hand-deadly comes out of the drunk person (except maybe the occasional fart or burp).

SnakeWrench
10-10-2006, 02:16 PM
Ok, then. What about my right to walk outside and not smell the smoke from my neighbor's nasty addiction. Or my right to have my windows down at an intersection and not smell the smoke from the people on either side of me that have cancer-sticks burning and hanging outside their windows because they don't want the smoke INSIDE THEIR OWN VEHICLE(s)!
If you wanna keep comparing to alc: Sure, alcohol can kill your liver and kidneys just like smoking can kill your lungs. I don't think there is any debate that alc is actually GOOD for you. But, if a person decides to drink themself to death right next to the person that smokes themself to death; nothing second-hand-deadly comes out of the drunk person (except maybe the occasional fart or burp).
That is were my point is. If I smoke too much, I can operate a vehicle, if you drink too much, you THINK you can operate a vehicle.

talbert450r
10-10-2006, 02:17 PM
Ok, then. What about my right to walk outside and not smell the smoke from my neighbor's nasty addiction. Or my right to have my windows down at an intersection and not smell the smoke from the people on either side of me that have cancer-sticks burning and hanging outside their windows because they don't want the smoke INSIDE THEIR OWN VEHICLE(s)!
If you wanna keep comparing to alc: Sure, alcohol can kill your liver and kidneys just like smoking can kill your lungs. I don't think there is any debate that alc is actually GOOD for you. But, if a person decides to drink themself to death right next to the person that smokes themself to death; nothing second-hand-deadly comes out of the drunk person (except maybe the occasional fart or burp).
Sorry you feel that way, my biggest gripe is the govt. telling me what to do.(Isn't that called communist?) We are supposed to tell the Govt what to do not the other way around. :)

Tom Brown
10-10-2006, 02:17 PM
I HATE the smell of smoke as well. Rude people suck! Smokers not smokers, rude flat out sux!
Yeah.
I used to work with a guy who was a heavy smoker. He's a real nice guy and I've learned more from him that probably anyone.
He would go on about how he couldn't stand the smell and how he hated sitting in the smoking section of restaurants because people would smoke while he was eating. .... of course, he would light up as soon as he was done... at which time, I would set my fork down because I can't eat when he's doing that shit.
It's tough to see yourself sometimes.

racecar.hotshoe
10-10-2006, 02:18 PM
Ok, then. What about my right to walk outside and not smell the smoke from my neighbor's nasty addiction. Or my right to have my windows down at an intersection and not smell the smoke from the people on either side of me that have cancer-sticks burning and hanging outside their windows because they don't want the smoke INSIDE THEIR OWN VEHICLE(s)!
If you wanna keep comparing to alc: Sure, alcohol can kill your liver and kidneys just like smoking can kill your lungs. I don't think there is any debate that alc is actually GOOD for you. But, if a person decides to drink themself to death right next to the person that smokes themself to death; nothing second-hand-deadly comes out of the drunk person (except maybe the occasional fart or burp).
I don't think there is any debate that alc is actually GOOD for you.........Your funny tell that to my wife!27 years old and will limp for rest of her life!what a a$$clown!

RiverDave
10-10-2006, 02:18 PM
Ok, then. What about my right to walk outside and not smell the smoke from my neighbor's nasty addiction. Or my right to have my windows down at an intersection and not smell the smoke from the people on either side of me that have cancer-sticks burning and hanging outside their windows because they don't want the smoke INSIDE THEIR OWN VEHICLE(s)!
If you wanna keep comparing to alc: Sure, alcohol can kill your liver and kidneys just like smoking can kill your lungs. I don't think there is any debate that alc is actually GOOD for you. But, if a person decides to drink themself to death right next to the person that smokes themself to death; nothing second-hand-deadly comes out of the drunk person (except maybe the occasional fart or burp).
And what about my right to run a low freeboard boat on the river? And what about my rights to not listen to loud boats on the water? And what about my right to watch the natural habitat on the water that those noisy ***boaters scare off?
If there's a car with a cigarette next to you.. You should put up with it for the 2 seconds your at the intersection. If your neighbor is on his property, then I think he can do whatever the "F" he wants.
Your logic is beyond me. All that I know is if your standing to remove freedoms, then at heart you are a communist, not an american. That might come off kind of harsh beer - 30, but think about what your saying? It is an annoyance to you so it should be illegal?
RD

talbert450r
10-10-2006, 02:24 PM
Some people are missing the bigger picture. It dosn't matter if were talking about Smoking, Bearing Arms, Alcohol, etc, etc. Soon They will tell you you cant be outside after 11pm because it disturbes the peace, and I bet alot of people would be okay with that. It's scary when you step back and think about it.

Tom Brown
10-10-2006, 02:30 PM
what about my rights to not listen to loud boats on the water?
No problem there, Dave. It's being taken care of. :D
You should put up with it for the 2 seconds your at the intersection.
Let's say we have a smoker who wants to smoke and a non-smoker who wants to not smoke. If we put the two together, why are you suggesting the smoker should get to smoke and the non-smoker should put up with it? Why shouldn't the smoker put it out for the duration of the stop light?
If your neighbor is on his property, then I think he can do whatever the "F" he wants.
That's great, Dave. I'm going to move in next to you and have a tire fire burning 24/7. :)
Your logic is beyond me.
As yours is beyond me, Dave. Why is your right to smoke the default? What about my right to not smoke?
What about my right to shit on your living room floor? What about my right to throw water balloons at your truck? I enjoy these things and won't stand for these rights being taken away. :cool:
I could care less if anyone want's to smoke. If I had a child, I would probably care deeply about their smoking choices. I don't. I just want to be able to not smoke.
Hell... I used to not go to restaurants because.... let's face it, there were no non-smoking sections until recently. Having a no smoking sign, doesn't provide any air quality improvement from the jack hole at the next table who is in the smoking section.
Have you ever noticed that when a restaurant is near empty, they will put the smokers and non-smokers at the border between the two sections? I assume that's because the service people want to save some foot steps.
Fortunately, we have no smoking restaurants here anymore. :)

Sleek-Jet
10-10-2006, 02:35 PM
Ok, then. What about my right to walk outside and not smell the smoke from my neighbor's nasty addiction. Or my right to have my windows down at an intersection and not smell the smoke from the people on either side of me that have cancer-sticks burning and hanging outside their windows because they don't want the smoke INSIDE THEIR OWN VEHICLE(s)!
How is that hazardous to your health??
Smoking annoys you, you find it offensive obviously... but so what?? The amount of gas you burn on a weekend at the lake is offensive to some people.
Once you start to regulate these types of behaviors, it's a slippery slope.
Any further bans on smoking in California is more about being PC than public health.

Jbb
10-10-2006, 02:35 PM
No problem there, Dave. It's being taken care of. :D
Let's say we have a smoker who wants to smoke and a non-smoker who wants to not smoke. If we put the two together, why are you suggesting the smoker should get to smoke and the non-smoker should put up with it? Why shouldn't the smoker put it out for the duration of the stop light?
That's great, Dave. I'm going to move in next to you and have a tire fire burning 24/7. :)
As yours is beyond me, Dave. Why is your right to smoke the default? What about my right to not smoke?
What about my right to shit on your living room floor? What about my right to throw water balloons at your truck? I enjoy these things and won't stand for these rights being taken away. :cool:
I could care less if anyone want's to smoke. If I had a child, I would probably care deeply about their smoking choices. I don't. I just want to be able to not smoke.
Hell... I used to not go to restaurants because.... let's face it, there were no non-smoking sections until recently. Having a no smoking sign, doesn't provide any air quality improvement from the jack hole at the next table who is in the smoking section.
Have you ever noticed that when a restaurant is near empty, they will put the smokers and non-smokers at the border between the two sections? I assume that's because the service people want to save some foot steps.
Fortunately, we have no smoking restaurants here anymore. :)
Look at Brown,.....going all....Chuck Norris ......and shit.... :p

Beer-30
10-10-2006, 02:47 PM
And what about my right to run a low freeboard boat on the river? And what about my rights to not listen to loud boats on the water? And what about my right to watch the natural habitat on the water that those noisy ***boaters scare off?
If there's a car with a cigarette next to you.. You should put up with it for the 2 seconds your at the intersection. If your neighbor is on his property, then I think he can do whatever the "F" he wants.
Your logic is beyond me. All that I know is if your standing to remove freedoms, then at heart you are a communist, not an american. That might come off kind of harsh beer - 30, but think about what your saying? It is an annoyance to you so it should be illegal?
RD
The alc is good for you didn't come out in text like I meant it. About the only difference between the two is that no one has seen any relation to cancer and alc. Other than that, they are both bad for us. That's what I meant.
If the neighbor could keep the smoke ON HIS PROPERTY, then there is no problem.
It's not that I am for not having liberties for crying out loud. I guess I am just biased because the smell of smoke or even being in close quarters with poeple who just-smoked is bothersome. Additionally, the facts are in: Second hand smoke kills just like the real thing. So, beside the fact that it personally bothers me, it is unhealthy for anyone around it. So, if it becomes a law NOT to participate in it - then so be it.
It is not that I wish hateful crap on anyone, and sorry if my outlook bothers you. My offer of a place for people to engage in this filthy habit was an attempt at providing a happy-medium.
Basically, If we choose to have a habit that is harmful to us and doesn't implicate anyone else, then that is our right.
If, on the flip side, we choose to have a habit that is harmful to ourselves AS WELL AS people around us - if we aren't responsible enough to keep it from people around us, I guarantee someone like "the Government" will step in and do it.
So, it's not me that is making it happen. It's the inconsiderate ones. So, if they keep it up, the laws will soon follow.

Boatcop
10-10-2006, 02:50 PM
Studies recently conducted have thoroughly blown the myth that second hand smoke kills. Sure, non-smokers who live with smokers in a closed environment (cars, homes, etc.) for their entire lifetime may show a slight increase in susceptibility to breathing problems, but there's no evidence that infrequent passive exposure to cigarette smoke is physically harmful.
I won't go into all the arguments. You can find them yourselves. Do a Google search on "Second hand smoke myths" Including an article by a guy that wrote to the American Lung Association, and a host of other Anti-smoking groups, asking for the names of 3 or 4 people who've died from second hand smoke. After all. They claim millions of people have died from second hand smoke. Surely they could come up with a name or two.
Well. They couldn't. Ask for smokers who died from smoking and they could provide thousands. But of the millions they claim died from second hand smoke, they couldn't come up with a single one.
Smokers should be responsible and do their best to avoid non-smokers, as it does cause some annoyance to non-smokers. Smelling smoke doesn't mean you're going to die. One of the most hazardous substances known to man is methane gas. Does that mean when you smell some one's farts every once in a while you're going to die? No. The same applies to passive cigarette smoke.
Tobacco is a cash cow for the States and the Federal Government. After all, who's going to oppose new taxes on something as vile and disgusting as smoking. California alone took in nearly 1.4* Billion (with a "B") dollars from cigarette taxes in 2005. You really think they are going to ban the sale of something that brings in that much money? You think Kalifornia's fiscal shape is bad now, wait till they get 1.4 Bil sliced off its annual income.*
*Edited..Federal intake on Cigarette Taxes was almost 8 Billion. I read the wrong line.
The original idea behind the Cigarette taxes were to off-set the supposed costs of caring for people with tobacco related health problems. BS! Then Smoking Education. BS! Then general Education. BS. The majority of tobacco taxes go into the general budgets of the states.
Sorry Smoking Nazis. We're not buying the BS any more. What's next? Higher alcohol taxes? How about fast food? Junk food? There's more big mac and potato chip wrappers along the highway that cigarette butts. Hell, raise taxes on dog food, since dog crap is a public safety issue. Why not tax the hell out of anything bad for us. Gasoline? Sky's the limit. It causes smog. (Far greater health hazard to more people than second hand smoke)
It's all about the Benjamin's.
Should smokers be considerate of non-smokers? Sure. But don't deny us one simple pleasure just because it "offends" you.

talbert450r
10-10-2006, 02:55 PM
Studies recently conducted have thoroughly blown the myth that second hand smoke kills. Sure, non-smokers who live with smokers in a closed environment (cars, homes, etc.) for their entire lifetime may show a slight increase in susceptibility to breathing problems, but there's no evidence that infrequent passive exposure to cigarette smoke is physically harmful.
I won't go into all the arguments. You can find them yourselves. Do a Google search on "Second hand smoke myths" Including an article by a guy that wrote to the American Lung Association, and a host of other Anti-smoking groups, asking for the names of 3 or 4 people who've died from second hand smoke. After all. They claim millions of people have died from second hand smoke. Surely they could come up with a name or two.
Well. They couldn't. Ask for smokers who died from smoking and they could provide thousands. But of the millions they claim died from second hand smoke, they couldn't come up with a single one.
Smokers should be responsible and do their best to avoid non-smokers, as it does cause some annoyance to non-smokers. Smelling smoke doesn't mean you're going to die. One of the most hazardous substances known to man is methane gas. Does that mean when you smell some one's farts every once in a while you're going to die? No. The same applies to passive cigarette smoke.
Tobacco is a cash cow for the States and the Federal Government. After all, who's going to oppose new taxes on something as vile and disgusting as smoking. California alone took in nearly 8 Billion (with a "B") dollars from cigarette taxes in 2005. You really think they are going to ban the sale of something that brings in that much money? You think Kalifornia's fiscal shape is bad now, wait till they get 8 Bil sliced off its annual income.
The original idea behind the Cigarette taxes were to off-set the supposed costs of caring for people with tobacco related health problems. BS! Then Smoking Education. BS! Then general Education. BS. The majority of tobacco taxes go into the general budgets of the states.
Sorry Smoking Nazis. We're not buying the BS any more. What's next? Higher alcohol taxes? How about fast food? Junk food? There's more big mac and potato chip wrappers along the highway that cigarette butts. Hell, raise taxes on dog food, since dog crap is a public safety issue. Why not tax the hell out of anything bad for us. Gasoline? Sky's the limit. It causes smog. (Far greater health hazard to more people than second hand smoke)
It's all about the Benjamin's.
Should smokers be considerate of non-smokers? Sure. But don't deny us one simple pleasure just because it "offends" you.
Very well put boatcop :rollside:

SnakeWrench
10-10-2006, 03:01 PM
Here is the thing to me. If everyone lets the gov't define our lives, we as voters loose. Why? Because of this simple question. When has the gov't actually done what they say they will do? When have they said, "We are taxing this stuff so we can do this." And actually do it. I agree with boatcop. If we let them take our freedoms, they will start making things illegal that we all like to do.

Tom Brown
10-10-2006, 03:02 PM
...there's no evidence that infrequent passive exposure to cigarette smoke is physically harmful.
There's no evidence that pissing on someone's leg is physically harmful, is there? :idea:
Come over here, Alan. I've got something for you. :D
Don't deny me this simple pleasure.

Beer-30
10-10-2006, 03:05 PM
There's no evidence that pissing on someone's leg is physically harmful, is there? :idea:
Come over here, Alan. I've got something for you. :D
Don't deny me this simple pleasure.
There ya go! Good idea!
If drunk, we piss down our own leg. If a smoker is near by, smoking, we piss on their leg. Fair is fair. No government involvement.

SnakeWrench
10-10-2006, 03:07 PM
There ya go! Good idea!
If drunk, we piss down our own leg. If a smoker is near by, smoking, we piss on their leg. Fair is fair. No government involvement.
Ok so is it ok for me to off a drunk driver??

Beer-30
10-10-2006, 03:11 PM
Ok so is it ok for me to off a drunk driver??
Dude, what's with you and the driving thing. Let it go. It's not about driving. For sake of discussion, just pretend we are in a world without vehicles.

SnakeWrench
10-10-2006, 03:14 PM
Dude, what's with you and the driving thing. Let it go. It's not about driving. For sake of discussion, just pretend we are in a world without vehicles.
It is an example and one that affected me directly. Personally, I think if you drink and drive, and kill someone, you should be sentenced to death. I have never accidentally killed someone because of smoking. That's all.
I will say one thing, I would hate to be the next Drunk driver I meet.

Beer-30
10-10-2006, 03:18 PM
It is an example and one that affected me directly. Personally, I think if you drink and drive, and kill someone, you should be sentenced to death. I have never accidentally killed someone because of smoking. That's all.
I will say one thing, I would hate to be the next Drunk driver I meet.
Well, ok, I am sure I would feel the same way, but that is not THIS discussion. I understand you're a smoker and we are going to disagree on THIS matter, but let's not spool off onto other things that I have not done or do. YOU haven't personally blown smoke in my face, so I feel no reason to lash out at you personally. This is all just general. K?

SnakeWrench
10-10-2006, 03:19 PM
Well, ok, I am sure I would feel the same way, but that is not THIS discussion. I understand you're a smoker and we are going to disagree on THIS matter, but let's not spool off onto other things that I have not done or do. YOU haven't personally blown smoke in my face, so I feel no reason to lash out at you personally. This is all just general. K?
Sorry, bored at work. lol
I understand and that is why I am conciderate of others when I smoke. That's all.

Tom Brown
10-10-2006, 03:24 PM
I understand and that is why I am conciderate of others when I smoke.
Here's the bottom line for me. There have been times when I've gone to play pool with the boys and I've left with a crazy headache and vommitted when I got home. Later that night, I've gotten out of bed to remove my clothes from the house because of the unbearable stench.
I've also hung out with people who blow it away, don't smoke in confined spaces when I'm there, etc. It was no problem at all. Hell, I barely notice it.
If it absolutely came down to it, I'd get a ride home with a drunk driver before I'd get a ride home with someone I knew would smoke in the car.

Beer-30
10-10-2006, 03:24 PM
Sorry, bored at work. lol
I understand and that is why I am conciderate of others when I smoke. That's all.
Fair enough. I appreciate you being a considerate smoker. If the world was full of your type, it wouldn't be an issue anyway. Consider yourself elite, 'cause there's not many.

talbert450r
10-10-2006, 03:26 PM
"If it absolutely came down to it, I'd get a ride home with a drunk driver before I'd get a ride home with someone I knew would smoke in the car." Tom Brown
That has got to be one of the dumbest things I've ever read. :rollside:

Tom Brown
10-10-2006, 03:30 PM
Why do you say that?
I'm surprised it's not in someone's signature already.

Sleek-Jet
10-10-2006, 03:31 PM
If it absolutely came down to it, I'd get a ride home with a drunk driver before I'd get a ride home with someone I knew would smoke in the car.
Does that drunk know that section of road better than a sober person?? :D

Beer-30
10-10-2006, 03:33 PM
:argue:

Beer-30
10-10-2006, 03:34 PM
Does that drunk know that section of road better than a sober person?? :D
I think he means that the driver would be able to see out of the windshield better than the brown film covered one. :rollside:

Tom Brown
10-10-2006, 03:35 PM
The drunk's judgement is impaired but the smoker's vision is impaired. It's pretty much a saw-off.

Tom Brown
10-10-2006, 03:40 PM
I think he means that the driver would be able to see out of the windshield better than the brown film covered one. :rollside:
My first vehicle was my Dad's old service truck. He sold it to me for next to nothing.
It was pretty gross so I cleaned it up before using it. I'll never forget scraping the windshield with an ice scraper and getting that brown shit off like a tobacco flavored fruit roll-up.
That story will make for some levity at his funeral after he dies of emphysema. It’s going to be a shame to lose him.