Is the smoking ban a good thing.?

Staff Sergeant Dignam

i dont smoke but damn i got mad about this, it singles out quite a large majority and heavily taxes them, HOW come alcohol kills more people but doesn't get **** done to that?

firefly

Tip of the iceberg....
What next???????????

sway_26

It sux. I have no problem with restaurants either, but come on, our ban will go into effect for bars and lounges September 1st. Hello, if you are so worried about your health, why are you in the f-ing bar killing your liver and brain cells with alcohol.

Karma

I don't even smoke anymore, and I agree. The people who lose in this all-or-nothing policy is the small business owner. You know the type, the small bar on the corner or sports club down the street where people gather after work to chat with friends, have some drinks, and smoke. They'll lose money by and by as regulars stop frequenting, because they buy their alcohol in a store now so they can enjoy their choices where it's accepted - in their homes.

Bobby G

I find it interesting that politicians will get involved in our lives to make life better, so that they feel good. If they REALLY wanted to make a difference, they would ban the sale of tobacco products. Oh, that's right! They get funded by tobacco industry lobbyists. Why piss off the ones that line their pockets? Instead they piss off the ones that voted them into office.

mike d

Well I could write a book on this subject, but I will try to be as concise as possible.

First off, as for the "France" comparisons, you should note that France has similar bans in place. I recently visited Paris and was surprised to find that they are only a year or two behind the US on the bans, in fact, the bars and restaurant bans will go active this year

Now my stance on this issue is that it is a complex question with no simple answer, but if you want to polarize it to either "bad" or "good", then I side with "bad thing".

The furor and zealousness of the 'anti-smoking-save-our-children' brigade is demonstrating once again that they truly are "penny-wise-dollar-foolish". In other words, they are spending ridiculous amounts of money and effort to "save lives" yet that same money could be put to much better use elsewhere if they were truly interested in "saving lives".

Is second-hand smoke harmful? Yes, if you are constantly exposed to it on a daily basis than your RISK for lung or heart diseasse increases by 15-20%. Tell me, how many of you actually know a non-smoker that has lung cancer or emphysema? Probably not too many.

To me, that isn't enough of a risk to justify expanding the control that our government already has in our lives, not to mention forcing our imposed "morality" on others.

We sit here and rally behind nonsense like this, spending billions in government agencies to control the rules, wasting law enforcement resources to enforce, force small business to lose business and claim it is to "save lives", yet we ignore thousands of other issues that could save far more lives with a fraction of the money. A quick sampling:

-Tougher laws on speeding, car accidents take more lives than 2nd hand smoke, most car accidents are a result of speeding. Mandatory prison would cut speeding but of course no one would vote for that since it restricts our "freedom"

-Reduce pollutants/emmisions in the atmosphere. Of course most of the poison in the air is from industry, but our spineless representative are in the pocket of "Big Corporations". The evil of 2nd hand smoke is a much easier scape-goat

-Tougher DUI laws. Reduce BAC limit to .04 (2 drinks per hour instead of 4 drinks per hour); harsher penalties; random testing by law enforcement outside of bars/clubs - would impose on our "freedom" as much as smoking laws but save far more lives.

The real problem here is that non-smokers don't like the smell of smoke. They don't honestly believe they will get cancer from 2nd hand smoking, they simply don't like the smell on their clothes, plain and simple.

stewart_prsn

we should have a choice .. not a ban.
if a bar wants to have smoking in it then it should.
then the non smokers have a choice not to go in!!!
it should only employ smokers too , then its a fair choice!!
no eating should take place there and no kids allowed in them..
if a bar has choose non smoking then no one smokes there..
at least we have a choice... its just another one of our rights being thrown away!!!
i notice employers are banning it totaly from the work sites...
only allowing people to go out at lunch time ( unpaid break time) to smoke .
its a total disgrace an infrignement of rights....
this country is well fcuked up!!

SmartAce

Then move to France!

I hate cigarettes as much as anybody, but do not favor the gov't imposing any rules to curb behavior, for it is a behavior issue. People who do not smoke make a consious effort not to be around it.

Big Dave

I can't add any more to this, you pretty much nailed it.

Lewis O

Banning anything that is legal to purchase is wrong. When the Govt. starts dictating what is good for you and what is bad for you is when the Govt. has over stepped its boundaries. I am not a smoker, I do enjoy a good cigar every now and then. When is the ban on alcohol,cars,trucks, guns?The people behind the wheel or gun is the issue. Keep our Govt under control by VOTING, you have the right.
If it's legal to purchase DO NOT BAN IT!

Jess3e

I do somewhat agree with you on the taxing part... because there are tons of other problems going on especially with obesity, which is one of the major problems in North America(where fatty foods are cheaper than healthy foods and aren't taxed). I'm from the North, and it also applies here as well.

I actually had done a little bit of research.... and it appears that smokers who are heavily taxed doesn't really change their buying behaviour that much and still spend like crazy on cigarettes. Their choices are mostly affected by TV ads that explains what would happen if you continue to smoke, or simply by learning all types of chemicals within one little cigarette. Perhaps the government should invest more in increasing the awareness through TV or fund some sort of rehab with an increase in tax revenue.. 'cause the thing is, you never know what they REALLY do with it.

This is a very debatable subject, and I believe there is a more efficient way for the government to decrease the smoking. I'm a non-smoker BTW. Second-hand smoke affects other people unlike drinking, so I also believe it shouldn't be allowed in restaurants (unless there is a smoking area). Pubs & Clubs.... yea I think it should also be up to the owners, but still smoking will affect other people's health.... hhhmm seems very hard to say what is right or wrong when you add the word "freedom"... then again people still have a choice to be there or not.

---- Edit ---

I also dislike the smell of cigarettes but I just would like to add that second-hand smoke increases the health risk and it is REAL bad for those who has asthma. What makes this so difficult is determing what is best for the society as whole... of course not everyone will be satisfied since this is a free country after all.

Jack

Guess what I just found out.
The houses of Parliament are exempt from the ban?
Can you believe this s.hit?

kittysoma27

It is a bad thing and I agree with your arguments completely.Business owners should have the right to make up their own minds if they wish to allow smoking in their establishments or not as long as they have a sign posted on the door. For the people who said that the employees who work at establishments that allow smoking should not be forced to breathe in second hand smoke, you are correct. However they also have the option not to work at an establishment that allows smoking. I personally can not stand screaming children, so I would never work at a daycare or a school because I know that I would be dealing with screaming children. People who work at bars, pubs and nightclubs know that people smoke in such establishments before they even fill out an application to work there. If a non-smoker chooses a job at such place then they have no reason to complain about the cigarette smoke. I respect that not everyone chooses to smoke but we have a right to our choice too. I find it ridiculous that in some cities you can not even sit outside in the patio area and smoke at a restaurant.

Mat G

As a smoker i will obviously be biased, but i dislike smoking indoors. i started smoking when i was 14 and i would put money on a lot of people having started before the legal age, because of the biased rubbish that gets jammed into our heads in school. we're told it's bad, and what happens if you do it and that it's illegal, but we're not told that a cigarette is a nice way to relax or calm down or help get through the day. it would be a poor thing to encourage it but at least try and help us why people do it if they know it's bad for them, apart from showing us the mandatory 'look at this cool guy. he thinks it's cool to smoke, but will he be cool when he gets LUNG CANCER AND HEART FAILURE?!?' leaflets.

Loislane801

You agree with eating places but don't care about anyone working in a pub or club....nice.

It is meant to be a free country for all - not just for smokers

The smoking ban is already in place in Ireland (2yrs now) and has been a great success - the majority are behind it. I think it will be the same in England.

Norm

Yes

arida

hey, do u even know what cigarettes even do 2 ur body? how many ppl have died from it? what a selfish thing to do, endangering urself potentially causing pain for ones that love u. cigarettes shouldnt be legal. the gov keeps it legal b/c they can make money off of it. but they cant make money off of marijuana, so its illegal. so wat r they really robbing u of? either way, smoking is ur choice.

Dull Jon

I have to change my location to avoid people's horrible cologne and or the horrible things they say. Why shouldn't THEY have to go somewhere else if they don't like smoking? WHO and EPA reports (check their sites) say that secondhand smoke or "ETS" is statistically insignificant as a cause of cancer and health issues.Also, is it right to tax us smokers extra just because other people don't like it? Do we get an extra voice in government from this extra taxation? If not, then it sounds like taxation without representation. Time to start throwing their tobacco in the harbor I say!

morning star

yes it is a good thing. As a non-smoker I'm sick (literally) of inhaling other people's smoke

soccerbum1982

This country is free. Everyone in it should have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Smoking in the presense of another person puts their health in danger and shouldn't be allowed or tolerated. That is what those people died for. For you to be able to stand up and say....DON'T SMOKE IN FRONT OF ME!!!

msi_cord

The argument for smoking bans is a good one. You must put the health and welfare of workers in these establishments and other customers above the personal desire of one customer. If second hand smoke is really as bad as the American Lung Association and others say, than it is unfair to force workers and other non-smoking customers to breathe the smoke from tobacco. You are still allowed to smoke, step outside and light up.

Fedup Veteran

Yes, it is a good thing. Why endanger everyone else just because one person wants to light up....can't they go outside where most times they are not hurting others?

Legally Brunette

Yes it is a good thing.

moon_flower_unicorn_power

ban it all or at least deny smokers health insurance

lilangel

I think its a good thing second hand smoke is just as bad as if you are the smoker. The law should have been in affect a long time ago.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: