PDA

View Full Version : Smokers Have Until Feb. 1 To Light Up



PQQLK9
12-09-2003, 10:59 AM
But for businesses like Orange Ball Billiards that have a large smoking clientele, the ban is expected to be devastating. The pool hall recently experienced a spike in business after the county passed the ban in October, because customers from nearby Champions Billiards flocked to Orange Ball.

http://www.nbc4.com/news/2692144/detail.html

woody_968
12-09-2003, 11:12 AM
Well I personally think this is total B.S.
I understand that non-smokers have rights, but smokers have rights also! But that to me is not as bad as the fact that government can make a decision like this that could put a once profitable business into the dumps!

Im sure many wont agree with me, but thats life.

Scott Lee
12-09-2003, 11:20 AM
Nick...As a dedicated NONsmoker, I don't mind this one bit (sorry if I offend all you nicotine addicts), and truthfully, I don't believe it will have the gigantic negative effect that these business owners think it will. California passed a statewide ban more than 3 years ago, and to my knowledge, few poolrooms or pool bars have gone out of business, for lack of a "smoking" atmosphere (although some have closed for other reasons...i.e: Chaulkers in San Francisco). In fact, I posted before, about being in San Diego the day the ban went into effect, at a popular pool bar, where 150 APA players were having a tournament, and NONE even bitched about the ban. They just went outside en masse, lit up to get their fix, and returned inside the bar. I was actually very surprised at their reaction to the ban...kind of a "Oh well, we'll just smoke outside!" LOL Naturally this post will generate lots of responses on both sides...as they have perpetually, every time this issue surfaces here on the board! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Scott Lee

Iowashark
12-09-2003, 11:42 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Scott Lee:</font><hr> In fact, I posted before, about being in San Diego the day the ban went into effect, at a popular pool bar, where 150 APA players were having a tournament, and NONE even bitched about the ban. They just went outside en masse, lit up to get their fix, and returned inside the bar. Scott Lee <hr /></blockquote>


Yes Scott, but that was in San Diego. This ban is in Maryland where it might not be as pleasant to go smoke outside on the 1st of February, or any winter month for that matter. Although I too am a non-smoker, I sympathize with the smokers that will have to endure the winter weather to get their fix.

Dave~~non-smoker, cold-hater.

RailbirdJAM
12-09-2003, 11:55 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote PQQLK9:</font><hr> But for businesses like Orange Ball Billiards that have a large smoking clientele, the ban is expected to be devastating. The pool hall recently experienced a spike in business after the county passed the ban in October, because customers from nearby Champions Billiards flocked to Orange Ball.

http://www.nbc4.com/news/2692144/detail.html <hr /></blockquote>

That is an interesting article, and it is true that Montgomery County, Maryland, passed this smoking ban, but since Orange Ball Billiards was located in the City of Rockville (within Montgomery County), they were able to bypass the new smoking ban law.

They tried the same thing in Friendship Heights, Maryland (within Montgomery County), a year or so ago, and the smoking ban did not pass at that time.

A month or so ago, I went to a Joss tournament in Syracuse, New York, where there is an existing smoking ban. As I drove into town late at night, there were numerous folks standing outside in front of the taverns, and I thought these businesses must be booming. I soon found out that these patrons were smokers. You could not smoke inside any public place in Syracuse or the State of New York.

Later, we drove up the road a piece to Turning Stone Casino, an Indian gaming facility, and this must be the only place in New York State you can smoke. They sold cigarettes there by the carton-loads and you could smoke as much as you want, but there was no alcohol served at all, which was sad news for my road partner.

Business owners in Syracuse, New York, complained that they have lost 50 percent or more of their business.

I think jurisdictions will soon be giving out smoking licenses to business establishments to bring in more revenue.

I hope tobacco companies come out with half-sized cigarettes, short cigarettes for those smokers who live in jurisdictions where they have to smoke outside. Will cut the cost of cigarettes in half, too.

RailbirdJAM

tateuts
12-09-2003, 11:56 AM
My suggestion is that you get used to it. In California it's been banned for years. We virtually can't smoke indoors anywhere except our own homes. I think a majority of people who live here agree, smokers and non-smokers alike, that it's a good thing in most cases. People just go outside to smoke.

There are some pool halls here that illegally allow smoking. That's about all they get - the smokers flock there. They also lose a lot of business from non-smokers who won't play there.

Chris

eg8r
12-09-2003, 11:57 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I understand that non-smokers have rights, but smokers have rights also! But that to me is not as bad as the fact that government can make a decision like this that could put a once profitable business into the dumps!
<hr /></blockquote> Since you brought it up, I was wondering, if all the businesses were subject to this, where do you think all the customers would go? Nowhere. They will still go to the pool halls, restaurants, etc. Whether it is BS or infringing on someones rights is another subject. I don't believe there was a huge fallout in CA when they put the law into effect.

eg8r

Rod
12-09-2003, 12:10 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I don't believe there was a huge fallout in CA when they put the law into effect.
<hr /></blockquote>

I don't know for sure but I'll assume your right from what I have heard. What does make a difference is when a city declares no smoking like happened here. Smokers just go to the next closest city. A number of business closed or some sold out. One large pool room closed and another just threw in the towel. I don't know specifics other than it was the smoking ban that really hurt business. Had it been a state wide ban that most likely would not have happened.

Rod

Kato
12-09-2003, 12:18 PM
Scott, as a dedicated smoker I can honestly say this................I can't wait until the day they ban smoking in pool rooms in Florida!!!!!!!!! I'm positive it's the only way I'll ever be able to quit smoking. My only other option is to quit playing pool and I don't like that option.

Kato

Voodoo Daddy
12-09-2003, 12:46 PM
Kato, I quit playing pool in August and has been a proud smoker ever since!!! I'll smoke outside if thats what it is but where I live &lt;Miami&gt;, you can smoke where I used to play. I was in Disney last month and they have dedicated smoking areas...didnt phase me one bit. Sorry for my northern brotheren, that snow must make it a tough smoke break.


Voodoo~~~smoked on his porch this morning...73 degrees

woody_968
12-09-2003, 12:52 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;

<hr /></blockquote> Since you brought it up, I was wondering, if all the businesses were subject to this, where do you think all the customers would go? Nowhere. They will still go to the pool halls, restaurants, etc. Whether it is BS or infringing on someones rights is another subject. I don't believe there was a huge fallout in CA when they put the law into effect.

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>

It all depends on how big the ban is, if it were in my town I would be going to somewhere out of town to play most of the time. And would be having friends over to my house to play more often.
One could never really know if a business would be hurt, you would loose some smoking players, and possibly pick up some new players that dont smoke.
Dont get me wrong, I understand smoking is a problem in pool rooms. I smoke and have been in buildings where the filtration system is so bad that the smoke even bothers me. I just dont know that I like a flat out ban on smoking, there should be other options. Setting guide lines for air filtration, seperate smoking rooms - not just areas, and other options could be looked at. Yes this would still cost the business owners money to upgrade to the new rules, but at least they would have that choice. As it is they have nothing they can do about it other than hope smokers will just go along with it as you suggest.

eg8r
12-09-2003, 12:53 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I was in Disney last month and they have dedicated smoking areas...didnt phase me one bit. <hr /></blockquote> It is hilarious to walk by and see this. A bunch of smokers all corralled successfully in a little section. I don't understand why this was done at Disney though. The park is outside (where the rest of Orland sends the smokers) so why can't these people walk around smoking? My only guess is it is easier to clean up their mess in one spot instead of paying people to sweep cig butts off the street all day.

eg8r &lt;~~~Hopes Kato kicks the nasty habit /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

eg8r
12-09-2003, 12:59 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I just dont know that I like a flat out ban on smoking, there should be other options. Setting guide lines for air filtration, seperate smoking rooms - not just areas, and other options could be looked at. Yes this would still cost the business owners money to upgrade to the new rules, but at least they would have that choice. As it is they have nothing they can do about it other than hope smokers will just go along with it as you suggest. <hr /></blockquote> Well, I am not a smoker, and really despise the smell and mess that smokers make, however, I disagree with the smoking bans. I make a choice to go or not to go where I know there will be smoking. I am not a big fan of the government flexing their muscles and interfering with private businesses. It just seems like one day there is going to be a new law making smoking illegal and smoking bans are the beginning.

eg8r

eg8r
12-09-2003, 01:02 PM
That is definitely a problem. Why on earth one city would do something like this without the surrounding cities agreeing makes no sense.

eg8r

Scott Lee
12-09-2003, 01:15 PM
Ed...An interesting sidelight on the power of tavern owners, especially here in MT! A year ago, the city of Helena (state capital) banned smoking in all public places. After a year, the hospital had kept close track of smoking-related problems (heart attacks, etc), and confirmed a 50% drop in hospital visits for these things (this was reported on 60 minutes a month or so ago). Even with these startling statistics, the Montana Tavern Owners Association lobbied to have the law repealed, and won! Recently, the city of Bozeman tried to pass a similar law, and it was defeated, due to intense lobbying by the same MTA. Just goes to show ya how strong one group can be, regardless of health benefits to the masses. I'm with you, on not wanting gov't to dictate my rights, but I still intensely dislike cigarette smoke, and it's side effects.

Scott

BLACKHEART
12-09-2003, 02:12 PM
My son lives in Boulder Co. &amp; if I'm not mistaken, there is no smoking in public places there. This includes walking down the street or standing outside a building. Sounds like you can smoke in your own homes, but that's it...JER

eg8r
12-09-2003, 02:55 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I'm with you, on not wanting gov't to dictate my rights, but I still intensely dislike cigarette smoke, and it's side effects.
<hr /></blockquote> Caught in a catch 22. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

eg8r

ted harris
12-09-2003, 03:07 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Iowashark:</font><hr>This ban is in Maryland where it might not be as pleasant to go smoke outside on the 1st of February, or any winter month for that matter. Although I too am a non-smoker, I sympathize with the smokers that will have to endure the winter weather to get their fix.

Dave~~non-smoker, cold-hater. <hr /></blockquote>
Tough luck, hey! If they need to smoke so bad, they can go outside in subzero weather, catch pneumonia and die....weaklings! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Sid_Vicious
12-09-2003, 03:39 PM
"This includes walking down the street or standing outside a building."

NOW THAT'S REDICULOUS! Heck, let's outlaw driving a fossil fuel car on the street, only drive inside your own garage. far more crap spewed around by emissions than the general population smoking. This issue has simply become an easy target for overly conservative conservatives to beat their chest's over...sid

woody_968
12-09-2003, 04:08 PM
I would have to agree with ya here Sid, seems like they always pick something to "take a stand on". Not saying smoking isnt an isue, but there are many other things that go on that could also be addressed.
As an example Ill bring up cell phones, and the fact that many people want laws against driving while talking on one. Like talking to another person in the car isnt just as destracting. Some say its because it takes your hands off the wheel, but I would say more accidents are caused in this regard by people eating in their car. And I sure dont see people lobbying to outlaw drive-thrus.

I know its a totally different topic, just always curious how they decide to take such a hard drive some things and only do lip service on others.

ted harris
12-09-2003, 09:25 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Sid_Vicious:</font><hr>This issue has simply become an easy target for overly conservative conservatives to beat their chest's over...sid <hr /></blockquote>
Would you please clarify what the conservative conservatives are beating their chests over?
Last I looked, it is the conservatives who don't care who smokes or who dies because of it.

JPB
12-09-2003, 09:38 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Sid_Vicious:</font><hr> "This includes walking down the street or standing outside a building."

NOW THAT'S REDICULOUS! Heck, let's outlaw driving a fossil fuel car on the street, only drive inside your own garage. far more crap spewed around by emissions than the general population smoking. This issue has simply become an easy target for overly conservative conservatives to beat their chest's over...sid <hr /></blockquote>


Um, the people in Boulder are not exactly conservative and many would ban cars completely. Boulder has passed many ridiculous laws, although it hasn't banned cars YET.

My only happy memory of boulder was when I was driving my Buick smoking a marlboro and a hippie on a bike cut me off. He looked at me with a big smug look on his face because he knew he cut me off and a big car driving smoker would have to stop for him and he felt very superior on his human powered transport. So I stopped for him and he was pedaling away. Except he kept looking at me and while he was looking at me he hit a pothole and wiped out. I hit the electric window so he could hear me laugh as I drove away, and maybe he could get a whiff of smoke. I have since quit smoking, but if that guy were around I'd gladly fire one up just to bother him. /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

BLACKHEART
12-09-2003, 10:00 PM
Boulder is where all of the Hippys from the 60's went. I swear I've never seen so many VW buses, as I did this past June, in that city. All that aside,I love the town...JER

JimS
12-09-2003, 10:22 PM
I'm an ex-smoker ex-drinker ex-pot smoking ex-lsd taking ex-hippy who thinks it's ridiculous to ban smoking anywhere! If people don't want to be in second hand smoking conditions they can leave and go to a non-smoking establishment. /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif

But, addicts don't have any right to allow their addiction to cause harm or even inconvenience to others. That's abuse of the freedom to use their drug of choice. You can do what you want until it harms or diminishes anothers ability to live a full and happy life. So, a responsible addict won't light up in public. Sheeeeeeeeeit....that'll be the day! /ccboard/images/graemlins/cool.gif

Qtec
12-09-2003, 10:53 PM
Just recently,I think it was in HongKong,McDonalds was ordered to change its sweetener that is added to its fries because of potential health risks.

Fancy a Danish?

Apple Danish: Enriched flour (wheat and malted barley flour, niacin, iron, thiamine mononitrate, riboflavin), apples, sugar, partially hydrogenated vegetable oil (soybean and cottonseed oils), corn syrup and high fructose corn syrup, eggs, modified corn starch, water. Following ingredients 2% or less: mono- and diglycerides, yeast, salt, cellulose gum, brown sugar, cinnamon, dextrin, lemon juice, lecithin, beta carotene, potassium sorbate and sodium benzoate (preservatives), dried apples, glyceryl lactoesters of fatty acids, propylene glycol monoesters, polysorbate 60, yeast, dextrose, nonfat dry milk, soy flour, apple juice concentrate, pineapple juice concentrate, propylene glycol alginate, agar, xanthan gum, gelatin, natural and artificial flavors, calcium sulfate, wheat gluten, sodium stearoyl lactylate, citric acid, annato extract (color), l-cysteine, ascorbic acid, corn flour, calcium carbonate, tapioca dextrin, carob bean gum, sodium acid pyrophosphate, sodium bicarbonate, maltodextrin, mono-calcium phosphate, sodium caseinate, carrageenan, spice, gum tragacanth, corn starch

You dont want to know whats in the fudge topping! /ccboard/images/graemlins/shocked.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Lets remember, the justification for the ban is on health grounds,not because smoke is annoying to non-smokers.
I think there are many other factors contributing to ill health and I am not convinced that there is a serious health risk posed from occasional second hand smoke.

Whats wrong with smoking clubs and non-smoking clubs?

Although some clubs have closed because of the ban, I notice that the Cig.Comps are actually making more money.

Q

ted harris
12-10-2003, 06:02 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> Just recently,I think it was in Fancy a Danish?

Apple Danish: Enriched flour (wheat and malted barley flour, niacin, iron, thiamine mononitrate, riboflavin), apples, sugar, partially hydrogenated vegetable oil (soybean and cottonseed oils), corn syrup and high fructose corn syrup, eggs, modified corn starch, water. Following ingredients 2% or less: mono- and diglycerides, yeast etc...
Q <hr /></blockquote>
Sure is nice to know that if you want to know the ingredients of the product you are ingesting, all you have to do is read the package. Funny how all the danish companies, and ALL other products found in the grocery store have an ingredients list, not just the ones that are ingested (shampoo, deodorant, bug spray, laundry detergent, etc...) with the exception of cigarrettes! Too bad smokers don't have that right, eh? Ever notice that tobacco products do not have an ingredients list. Ever wonder why?

JimS
12-10-2003, 06:27 AM
Now there's a point I'd not even thought about Ted. I guess it wasn't important to me when I was addicted to cigs and now that I kicked I'm just grateful I don't have to do that anymore. I was a little disappointed in that if I'd just kept smoking for another year I'd have gotten my 50 year pin. /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Wally_in_Cincy
12-10-2003, 07:46 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote JimS:</font><hr>
...if I'd just kept smoking for another year I'd have gotten my 50 year pin. /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif <hr /></blockquote>

I'm saving my Marlboro miles for an iron lung.

Wally_in_Cincy
12-10-2003, 07:49 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote woody_968:</font><hr>
...As an example Ill bring up cell phones, and the fact that many people want laws against driving while talking on one. Like talking to another person in the car isnt just as destracting. Some say its because it takes your hands off the wheel, but <font color="red">I would say more accidents are caused in this regard by people eating in their car</font color> ..... <hr /></blockquote>

according to published statistics, this is true. Eating in your car is the most common cause of "distraction" accidents.

Wally_in_Cincy
12-10-2003, 07:51 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Sid_Vicious:</font><hr>
...This issue has simply become an easy target for overly conservative conservatives to beat their chest's over...sid <hr /></blockquote>

Please name one "conservative" who is an anti-smoking nazi.

piglit
12-10-2003, 08:16 AM
Three words for you:

<font color="red">SKOAL, BROTHER </font color>

No intrusive smoke... And there's not much evidence that spit all over the floor and walls causes health problems.

Whats a little Hepatitis when compared to lung cancer?!

-pigg

eg8r
12-10-2003, 08:26 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Although some clubs have closed because of the ban, I notice that the Cig.Comps are actually making more money.
<hr /></blockquote> So you have been tracking profits of the major tobacco companies. Where do you find the time?

eg8r

eg8r
12-10-2003, 08:31 AM
Sid probably will not answer. Reason is that whenever he rants on something someone has to take the fall. For him, that person must be a conservative. Who else would he have to disagree with if it wasn't some conservative. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif One good example would be California. The whole state is run by Dems, how could the overly conservative Conservatives ever get a majority vote in that state?

eg8r

PQQLK9
12-10-2003, 08:34 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote piglit:</font><hr> Three words for you:

SKOAL, BROTHER <hr /></blockquote>

that's two words pigshit

eg8r
12-10-2003, 08:37 AM
LOL.

eg8r

Qtec
12-10-2003, 09:11 AM
Rush Limbaugh. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Next question. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Q

Qtec
12-10-2003, 09:18 AM
It took me about 30 seconds to find a graph of their share price over the last 10 years.

Your question should have been,
"How can they make more money while at the same time the whole country is on an anti-smoking crusade?".

/ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
Q

eg8r
12-10-2003, 09:29 AM
Any proof on this?

Here is a web page (http://members.tripod.com/~mighty_pen/chapter4.html) that talks about Rush and smoking. This was found in a very quick search on Google. I was wondering if you had found anything different?

Rush likes to smoke cigars. Why would he be pro-anti-smoking? He was even on the cover of the Cigar Aficionado magazine.

eg8r &lt;~~~Doesn't think Q has ever listened to Rush, just reads BBC reports

Qtec
12-10-2003, 09:31 AM
I never said smoking was a good thing or that it should be encouraged.
For decades smoking has been promoted as acceptable and , in moderation, not harmful.Cig companies actively enhanced their product with the specific intention of making the customer an addict.
Smoking should be phased out , but a total ban is not going to stop people smoking.It only hurts bars and our case ,pool halls.

Let people choose.

Q

eg8r
12-10-2003, 09:36 AM
[ QUOTE ]
It took me about 30 seconds to find a graph of their share price over the last 10 years. <hr /></blockquote> Did you mean the shareholders were making more money, because that is not what you posted. You said they (tobacco companies) were making more money (I understood this to mean there were more profits).

[ QUOTE ]
Your question should have been,
"How can they make more money while at the same time the whole country is on an anti-smoking crusade <hr /></blockquote> No that is not what the question should have been. It is plain to see you could not answer the question you were given, so now you want to make up the questions also. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif Nice try.

eg8r &lt;~~~Did not expect an answer to the question since it was rhetorical

Qtec
12-10-2003, 09:39 AM
You got me. I didnt check. Silly of me to think that Rush wasnt into drugs. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Q

Qtec
12-10-2003, 09:42 AM
Profits are up.

ted harris
12-10-2003, 10:06 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> Cig companies actively enhanced their product with the specific intention of making the customer an addict.
Smoking should be phased out , but a total ban is not going to stop people smoking.It only hurts bars and our case ,pool halls.

Let people choose.

Q <hr /></blockquote>
Okay, I choose to breathe clean air indoors at a poolroom. For generations, businesses with a portion of their customer base being smokers, have been "stealing" the money at non-smokers expense (employees and customers). Looks like they got caught with their hand in the cookie jar, and will now suffer the burden of irresponsible business operation. They could have put up glass walls and segregated the smokers from the non smokers. Well, guess what? The largest majority did not...they chose their smoking customers over the non-smokers. Greed took over and they pocketed the money, rather than try to protect my interests. I personally have no sympathy for them whatsovever. The smokers and business owners have shown their lack of initiative in this respect, and now the voters will take care of it for ourselves. There is an old saying that "Nothing is forever!" This is one case where it rings very true in many forms relative to tobacco usage and pool rooms. As evolution goes, the strong will survive. I look forward to the poolrooms of the future. Alas, I will be able to play again. As far as it hurting the poolrooms, many would rather breathe clean air indoors than sell our souls to multi-billion dollar corporations!
Since the cig companies have been adding addictive substances to their product as you say, how can there still be a choice?
As an aside, I would like to thank the Champion Billiards chain in Maryland for their efforts to segregate smokers from non-smokers. The Champion Billiards in Rockville had the best segregation system I have ever seen. It no longer needs it now as the whole room is non-smoking. I know they will survive, and I wish them luck!

woody_968
12-10-2003, 11:12 AM
If a non-smoking pool room would be more profitable than a smoking room dont you think more people would be starting non-smoking rooms?
And if Champion billiards went through the trouble of setting smoking players away from non-smoking, why should they now have to tell a room that only contains smoking players that they can no longer smoke?

Scott Lee
12-10-2003, 11:28 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote piglit:</font><hr> Three words for you:

<font color="red">SKOAL, BROTHER </font color>

No intrusive smoke... And there's not much evidence that spit all over the floor and walls causes health problems.

Whats a little Hepatitis when compared to lung cancer?!

-pigg <hr /></blockquote>

Piglet...You need to brush up on your medical knowledge. Chewing tobacco does not cause hepatitis. It DOES cause oral cancer...not to mention it is nearly as nasty a habit as smoking. Nothing more disgusting than finding a cup or bottle sitting around with black spit in it. There is still the offensive odor, when people spit tobacco juice into wastebaskets in the poolroom. I've always said about Skoal, Cope, or whatever...REAL men SWALLOW! LOL jmo

Scott Lee

ted harris
12-10-2003, 11:39 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote woody_968:</font><hr> If a non-smoking pool room would be more profitable than a smoking room dont you think more people would be starting non-smoking rooms?
And if Champion billiards went through the trouble of setting smoking players away from non-smoking, why should they now have to tell a room that only contains smoking players that they can no longer smoke? <hr /></blockquote>
Everything in life is not about profit. Just ask all the rich people that are dead from cancer.
Smokers will have to go outside now, as smokers and greedy business owners that place their own needs above the common good have demonstrated that they can not police themselves will be outvoted at the polls, and laws will be changed to protect those that wish only to breathe clean air indoors. If you had read my previous post completely, you would not have had to ask this question.
And isn't it usually customary to answer the question posed first and then pose your rebuttal?
Again, Champion Billiards efforts will not go unnoticed.

eg8r
12-10-2003, 12:07 PM
[ QUOTE ]
You got me. I didnt check. Silly of me to think that Rush wasnt into drugs. <hr /></blockquote> This has nothing to do with whether Rush is a user (a smoker in this case). You need to work on your comprehension problem.

If your statement was to make any sense whatsoever then Rush would have had to be out on the airwaves condemning those that smoke. He has not done that. This makes your post stupid, not silly.

eg8r

eg8r
12-10-2003, 12:18 PM
I thought this was pretty funny...

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote ted harris:</font><hr> Everything in life is not about profit. Just ask all the rich people that are dead from cancer.
Smokers will have to go outside now, as smokers and greedy business owners <hr /></blockquote> If it is not about profit, why are the business owners greedy?

Have you ever sold a cue to a smoker? Instead of answering that question, do you consider yourself to be part of the greedy business owner population from your quote?

eg8r

Nostroke
12-10-2003, 12:28 PM
Has anyone whoever quit regretted it? Neither will you. Nothing more ridiculous than being the slave to something that is only good because you are addicted to it. Drugs make more sense.

Fred Agnir
12-10-2003, 12:29 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> I thought this was pretty funny...

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote ted harris:</font><hr> Everything in life is not about profit. Just ask all the rich people that are dead from cancer.
Smokers will have to go outside now, as smokers and greedy business owners <hr /></blockquote> If it is not about profit, why are the business owners greedy? <hr /></blockquote> The two sentence are clearly addressing different points and are not contradictory, as I read it. Plus you snipped the meat of the second sentence.

[ QUOTE ]
Have you ever sold a cue to a smoker? Instead of answering that question, do you consider yourself to be part of the greedy business owner population from your quote?<hr /></blockquote> I thought this discussion was about smoking in public pool halls, not selling to someone who is a smoker. That's a different argument altogether. There's rules against doing this.

Fred

ted harris
12-10-2003, 01:05 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> I thought this was pretty funny...

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote ted harris:</font><hr> Everything in life is not about profit. Just ask all the rich people that are dead from cancer.
Smokers will have to go outside now, as smokers and greedy business owners <hr /></blockquote> If it is not about profit, why are the business owners greedy?

Have you ever sold a cue to a smoker? Instead of answering that question, do you consider yourself to be part of the greedy business owner population from your quote?

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>
I am glad that you were able to find humor in my post. Likewise, it is humorous that you cannot grasp such a simple concept. The business owners have sold themselves into believing that their business (money in their pocket) is more important than the health of their fellow man, which it most certainly is not. That is not far from the same thinking that the tobacco companies have implemented into their business model for decades. However, the local business owner cannot be held with the same contempt because they did so with no malice. However, that does not alleviate him from the responsibility of protecting his employees and customers. Owning a poolroom or bar or restaurant, or whatever the case may be, that opens it's doors and allows smoking does cause harm to others. Along with business ownership comes the social responsibility to protect the employee and customer base. And allowing smoking simply does not do that.
Every chance I get to make a difference in helping to educate about smoking the opportunity is taken. I have not been indifferent in any shape or fashion. And selling my cue to a smoker does not enable them to violate someone's personal space and do them bodily harm as a direct result of it's intended usage. My house and my shop are non-smoking. And when I open a poolroom, or any other indoor business, it too will be non-smoking.

woody_968
12-10-2003, 01:07 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote ted harris:</font><hr>
Everything in life is not about profit. Just ask all the rich people that are dead from cancer.
Smokers will have to go outside now, as smokers and greedy business owners that place their own needs above the common good have demonstrated that they can not police themselves will be outvoted at the polls, and laws will be changed to protect those that wish only to breathe clean air indoors. If you had read my previous post completely, you would not have had to ask this question.
And isn't it usually customary to answer the question posed first and then pose your rebuttal?
Again, Champion Billiards efforts will not go unnoticed. <hr /></blockquote>

I fully agree everything in life is not about profit, but in business if profit is not a concern than you are in trouble. Just because they want to make a profit does that make them greedy? Im sure many people woulrd run their business a little different if they could but are willing to do what it takes to make them successfull.
You act like smokers never consider other people, and maybe some dont, but I do. Does that mean I never light up indoors? NO, but I always try to move away from people that I know dont smoke. Im sure they can still smell it as you will let me know, but I do consider them and try to be as courtious as I can while still allowing myself to have a good time.
Yes I did read your entire post, and that is why I asked the question. Saying they will be rememberd doesnt mean a thing if they would loose enough of there clientel to hurt there bottom line.
Its pretty typical of people to say if you want to smoke go outside, if you have the right to have someplace to play without smoke why dont we have the right to play in a place that allows smoking if we so choose?

eg8r
12-10-2003, 01:26 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Likewise, it is humorous that you cannot grasp such a simple concept. The business owners have sold themselves into believing that their business (money in their pocket) is more important than the health of their fellow man, which it most certainly is not. That is not far from the same thinking that the tobacco companies have implemented into their business model for decades. However, the local business owner cannot be held with the same contempt because they did so with no malice. However, that does not alleviate him from the responsibility of protecting his employees and customers. <hr /></blockquote> I don't think it is I missing the simple point, rather you failing to make one. It is not the business owners duty to protect the customer. Your post is no different than some fat guy suing McDonalds for selling fattening food. It is the customers decision whether they value clean air enough to sacrifice it for an afternoon of pool. All the business owner needs to do is make sure the opportunity is there for the customer to play pool. The blame is on the customer for frequenting a smokey pool if they detest the smell. I am one that hates the smell of smoke and the mess that smokers leave.

As far as employees, I do feel the business should make it safe for the employee to do their job. At this point I don't have an idea to fix the problem, and no one else does (outside of a smoking ban). Your idea is not the perfect solution, and no other has been put on the table. Because the businesses continue to conduct business however does not make them greedy, it makes them intelligent (how else would the bills get paid).

[ QUOTE ]
And selling my cue to a smoker does not enable them to violate someone's personal space and do them bodily harm as a direct result of it's intended usage. <hr /></blockquote> A business owner offers a customer the opportunity to play pool on a pool table. You offer a customer the opportunity to buy a custom cue stick. You are no different than the pool hall business man. You are feebly trying to make the point that the pool hall owner is offering a place for people to smoke. I am sorry but that is not what they are in business for. If we were to stretch the situation like you are, then you are making cues to enable the same smokers to go out to these smoke joints. It is almost like your product is the cigarette and the addiction to play pool is the nicotine, you enable these people to go to smokey pool halls and breathe in smokey air. There is no difference and I believe you are blindly part of the greedy business owner group you have singled out.

eg8r

ted harris
12-10-2003, 01:35 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote woody_968:</font><hr>&lt;el snipo&gt;
You act like smokers never consider other people, and maybe some dont, but I do. Does that mean I never light up indoors? NO, but I always try to move away from people that I know dont smoke. Im sure they can still smell it as you will let me know, but I do consider them and try to be as courtious as I can while still allowing myself to have a good time.
Yes I did read your entire post, and that is why I asked the question. Saying they will be rememberd doesnt mean a thing if they would loose enough of there clientel to hurt there bottom line.
Its pretty typical of people to say if you want to smoke go outside, if you have the right to have someplace to play without smoke why dont we have the right to play in a place that allows smoking if we so choose? <hr /></blockquote>
Sorry I had to snip the beginning of your post, but I simply do not have the wherewithall to teach you everything. Some of this stuff you will have to figure out for yourself.
Most smokers are not courteous. And in a way you are not being as courteous as you think. Most smokers think just like you and think you have the right to smoke somewhere as long as we have the right to have smoke free air. Well, guess what? We haven't had the choice for generations, and now we do. So now when you are spending five, six, or seven bucks a pack to stand outside in the rain and snow, you will have plenty of time to think about the damage you are doing to yourself. Maybe you can take some solace in the FACT that the some of the nonsmokers that are walking by you to get in to the poolroom will be thinking how pathetic it is that you are standing there smoking, being a slave to the stockholders of Phillip-Morris, Brown &amp; Williamson, etc. Others will just think you are stupid. FTR, I am in the former group, not the latter.
Good luck!

ted harris
12-10-2003, 01:40 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> &lt;el snipo&gt;
eg8r <hr /></blockquote>
It's okay, I know you cannot see the light 'cause the smoke is blocking your view. I hope for your sake that one day you will quit. Then you will understand.

eg8r
12-10-2003, 01:40 PM
[ QUOTE ]
The two sentence are clearly addressing different points and are not contradictory, as I read it. Plus you snipped the meat of the second sentence.
<hr /></blockquote> Go back and read it again, there are 3 sentences there (one snipped). I am guessing if you missed that, then the point was equally easy for you to miss.

[ QUOTE ]
I thought this discussion was about smoking in public pool halls, not selling to someone who is a smoker. That's a different argument altogether. There's rules against doing this.
<hr /></blockquote> My post was about one type of business and another. The first offers a place to play pool, the second offers a place to buy a cue stick. Neither offers smoke. That is my point. Ted is trying to twist the pool hall into a place that offers a place for someone to smoke, and that is not what a pool is in business to do (it is merely a by-product). If Ted wants to stretch the situation that much, then he is as much an enabler as the pool hall. He is offering custom cues to be sold to people who will gladly take them up to play pool and smoke while using them. Sure I agree it is a stretch. My point is that there is nothing greedy about running a business and especially one that allows smokers. It is hard enough to keep a pool hall open, let alone a non-smoking one. This is not being greedy, it is being intelligent.

There is nothing wrong with smoke free ph's and if they survive and the owner can support his family then that is fine, but it does not make the next ph owner greedy if smokers are in his ph.

eg8r

eg8r
12-10-2003, 01:44 PM
[ QUOTE ]
It's okay, I know you cannot see the light 'cause the smoke is blocking your view. I hope for your sake that one day you will quit. Then you will understand. <hr /></blockquote> This statement is as foolish as everything else you have said. I am not a smoker and do not encourage smoking. If you are this asinine in your business ventures I am really suprised you come this far in life.

eg8r &lt;~~~Standing up for business not smokers, one day Ted will understand

eg8r
12-10-2003, 01:47 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Has anyone whoever quit regretted it? Neither will you. Nothing more ridiculous than being the slave to something that is only good because you are addicted to it. Drugs make more sense. <hr /></blockquote> Who are you talking to? I am guessing you think I smoke? Go back and read where I was defending the smokers.

eg8r

ted harris
12-10-2003, 02:00 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr>&lt;snip&gt;
My point is that there is nothing greedy about running a business and especially one that allows smokers. It is hard enough to keep a pool hall open, let alone a non-smoking one. This is not being greedy, it is being intelligent.
eg8r <hr /></blockquote>
My implication was that because business owners did not take a proactive role in the prevention of the demise of indoor smoking, that is what makes them greedy. It's like a two year old's mentality. Get the money NOW, smoke the cigarette NOW, instead of figuring out how to seperate and provide an atmosphere that accomodates ALL customers for now and in the FUTURE! I want what I want when I want it! Seems to me that for a room owner to seperate smokers from non-smokers would have been quite a cheap price to pay, considering that some say business is off 50%.
Seems pretty opposite of intelligent, don't you think?

Iowashark
12-10-2003, 02:15 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote ted harris:</font><hr> Seems to me that for a room owner to seperate smokers from non-smokers would have been quite a cheap price to pay. Seems pretty opposite of intelligent, don't you think? <hr /></blockquote>

No, sounds like discrimination to me. If the same lady who burnt herself with coffee and sued McDonalds was also a pool-playing smoker, these poolhalls would be out of even more money. That's just what we need, lawsuits against poolhalls and making out poolhalls non-smoking. Pretty soon they will be all out of money and will have to close down. But at least then nobody will be smoking and bothering you. Hooray, death to pool. You win.

~~Dave&lt;&lt; not sure if there is an intelligent side to any of this thread.

eg8r
12-10-2003, 02:17 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Seems to me that for a room owner to seperate smokers from non-smokers would have been quite a cheap price to pay, considering that some say business is off 50%.
Seems pretty opposite of intelligent, don't you think? <hr /></blockquote> Sounds to me like you are tooting a different horn. That is alright, this post makes 10 times more sense then the rest. I have been in rooms that had the smokers seperated from the non-smokers. When you walked in the place, the non-smoking side was dead. All the action was in the smoking section. Having said that, there were a lot of tables not being used wasting space. I cannot remember a time when the non-smoking side ever pulled it weight in paying the bills.

My point is that there is nothing wrong with a non-smoking establisment, but because the neighbor allows smoking does not make them greedy. Generalizations like the one you made (and I have been guilty of doing the same in the past) are wrong and that was what I pointed out. At that point you somehow began to think I was a smoker, that was hilarious. I never defended the smoker once. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

eg8r

woody_968
12-10-2003, 02:26 PM
Ted, one thing I want to make clear is that on many of your points, and those of other non-smokers, I agree with. I just dont agree with a law that totally bans it from any business owner that wants to allow smoking in his business.
I appreciate your concern for my health, and I do consider what it does to not only me but my family. I have stopped smoking inside my house, and when I decide I have had enough I will stop smoking period. I have stopped for over a year before, but by my own choice decided to smoke again.
As I said, I am not against non-smoking pool rooms (I have played in some) or any other establishment. I just think there would be better ways to implement some type of action to clear the air than a total ban.

ted harris
12-10-2003, 03:49 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Iowashark:</font><hr> Pretty soon they will be all out of money and will have to close down. But at least then nobody will be smoking and bothering you. Hooray, death to pool. You win.

~~Dave&lt;&lt; not sure if there is an intelligent side to any of this thread. <hr /></blockquote>
It is exactly this kind of thinking that has brought these extreme laws into effect. People hide from what scares them. I do not think for one second that pool will die as a result of nonsmoking. I think there will be a transitional period. How long, who knows? It's called adaptation. But there are many people that would never even consider getting into pool because of the smoke filled stereotype associated with pool. I mean, if you dig deep, ask yourself how many good parents would really let their child go down to the poolroom everyday and be in that environment. Not many! I for one, will be glad for pool to take it's next course. Well, it's called evolution, and I believe in it.

PQQLK9
12-10-2003, 05:49 PM
<hr /></blockquote>
Ever notice that tobacco products do not have an ingredients list. Ever wonder why? <hr /></blockquote>
"Because consumers choose brands based on flavor, taste and aroma, and tend to remain loyal to those brands, small fortunes are spent creating flavor formulas for tobacco products. The information needed to copy these formulas is, in turn, worth many millions of dollars. It is no secret that tobacco companies, like other manufacturers of brand name products, employ elaborate procedures to safeguard their ingredient information."
http://www.pmusa.com/product_facts/ingredients/ingredients_in_cigarettes.asp

ted harris
12-10-2003, 09:17 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote PQQLK9:</font><hr> <hr /></blockquote>
Ever notice that tobacco products do not have an ingredients list. Ever wonder why? <hr /></blockquote>
"Because consumers choose brands based on flavor, taste and aroma, and tend to remain loyal to those brands, small fortunes are spent creating flavor formulas for tobacco products. The information needed to copy these formulas is, in turn, worth many millions of dollars. It is no secret that tobacco companies, like other manufacturers of brand name products, employ elaborate procedures to safeguard their ingredient information."
http://www.pmusa.com/product_facts/ingredients/ingredients_in_cigarettes.asp <hr /></blockquote>
HA! What a joke!
...or maybe it is because there are many more than 599 added ingredients (http://quitsmoking.about.com/cs/nicotineinhaler/a/cigingredients.htm) , causing over 4000 chemical compounds when burned with 42 of them being carcinogens!...and they really don't want you to know?
Perhaps you should scroll down the Phillip-Morris page a little further and continue to read and click on this link;
Furthermore, some believe that there are adverse effects associated with some of our ingredients. Read " Tobacco Additives - Cigarette Engineering and Nicotine Addiction (http://www.ash.org.uk/html/regulation/html/additives.html).
Phillipp-Morris and all the rest of these tobacco companies are like one-pocket specialists; they move like a ghost! They fully expect you to read the info they print, and not take it to the next level. Try reading everything on their sites, and take into consideration the source of the info provided. Check into who funds who, and who's in charge. Most all of the info you will find against cigarettes is non-profit organizations. Where do yo think the pro-cigarette info comes from?

ted harris
12-10-2003, 09:28 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> <hr /></blockquote> This statement is as foolish as everything else you have said. I am not a smoker and do not encourage smoking. If you are this asinine in your business ventures I am really suprised you come this far in life.

eg8r &lt;~~~Standing up for business not smokers, one day Ted will understand <hr /></blockquote>
Sorry for thinking you smoked. I thought you and woody_968 were the same poster. I really do not pay much attention to who is posting, just the content.
If you are going to defend anyone or anything that allows cig smoking, then it is you that are deeply mislead. The tobacco companies love people like you, because you fight their war for them. Believing that this is an issue about business owners and their rights, is pretty shallow. You need to go a few levels deeper. In the meantime, you can continue being their puppet, and I will continue being an asinine anti-smoking advocate. Thanks for the compliment. Have a nice day, sir.

pooltchr
12-11-2003, 07:14 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote woody_968 if you have the right to have someplace to play without smoke why dont we have the right to play in a place that allows smoking if we so choose? [/quote:</font><hr>

That says it all. One group's rights lost in exchange for another group's rights.

Let the government keep out of it, and let free enteprise take over. If there is enough demand for non-smoking bars/pool rooms, I'm sure there are some "Greedy Business Owners" out there that would take advantage of it without government intervention.

eg8r
12-11-2003, 07:23 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Let the government keep out of it, and let free enteprise take over. If there is enough demand for non-smoking bars/pool rooms, I'm sure there are some "Greedy Business Owners" out there that would take advantage of it without government intervention. <hr /></blockquote> Exactly.

eg8r

eg8r
12-11-2003, 07:30 AM
[ QUOTE ]
If you are going to defend anyone or anything that allows cig smoking, then it is you that are deeply mislead. <hr /></blockquote> LOL. And you haven't been. Yeah, our oxygen supply is just running abundantly over every time a tree is cut down so you greedy business owners can make cue sticks. Park your car (I am guessing this is probably a truck or SUV but that is just a guess), and ride a bike for now on. If you are going to be ridiculous, you might as well go all the way. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

eg8r &lt;~~~Sure the tree thing is a bit overstated but proves the same ridiculous point ted is trying to make

eg8r
12-11-2003, 07:34 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I mean, if you dig deep, ask yourself how many good parents would really let their child go down to the poolroom everyday and be in that environment. Not many! <hr /></blockquote> While you are digging in you know what, ask those parents if it is becasue of the smoke they are not allowing their children to go...or is it because of the gambling, violence, drinking etc that pool is stereotyped. LOL, Smoking is the last thing I ever heard bad about pool rooms.

eg8r

ted harris
12-11-2003, 10:11 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> Park your car (I am guessing this is probably a truck or SUV but that is just a guess), and ride a bike for now on. If you are going to be ridiculous, you might as well go all the way. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

eg8r &lt;~~~Sure the tree thing is a bit overstated but proves the same ridiculous point ted is trying to make <hr /></blockquote>
This is typical smoker mentality; change the subject and dodge the real issues. The issue here is tobacco use in poolrooms. Personally, I do not want drug addicts and their dealers making my decisions for me. If you do, then go down to the poolroom for a while and hit some balls.
Cars provide transportation to billions of people. Without transportation millions of people would freeze to death, starve, die from lack of medicine, etc. There are billions of people affected positively every day because of transportation. Can you name one good thing that comes about from direct use of tobacco?
...I'm waitng............................................ .
.................................................. .................................................. .....................I thought so...

Troy
12-11-2003, 10:16 AM
This thread should be moved to the Non Pool Related category.

ted harris
12-11-2003, 10:18 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> ask those parents if it is becasue of the smoke they are not allowing their children to go...or is it because of the gambling, violence, drinking etc that pool is stereotyped. LOL, Smoking is the last thing I ever heard bad about pool rooms.

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>
What is the first thing you see when you walk into a pool room?

eg8r
12-11-2003, 10:19 AM
[ QUOTE ]
This is typical smoker mentality; change the subject and dodge the real issues. <hr /></blockquote> LOL, what are you going to blame you did not see the name again, or will it be age this time. Too many excuses. I guess you really meant that my quote was a true liberal mentality, but a little searching will show you I am no liberal either. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif What else are you gonna use?

Once again, I do not smoke, is there anything else you might want to make an excuse for? You try to say the issue is tobacco use in poolrooms, since you are the one that likes to dive a little deeper to the REAL issue, is it not HEALTH. Don't stop where it suits you, keep on going.

eg8r

eg8r
12-11-2003, 10:22 AM
Why?

eg8r

eg8r
12-11-2003, 10:25 AM
What is the first thing you see? That still has nothing to do with what we were just talking about. The smoking issue is the last thing I have ever heard bad about a pool hall.

eg8r

ted harris
12-11-2003, 10:27 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Troy:</font><hr> This thread should be moved to the Non Pool Related category. <hr /></blockquote>
This thread is about as pool related as any subject on this board, or any other. Smoking in poolrooms is part of the reason why pool is not growing.
If you think that this subject is not appropriate for a pool discussion forum, then you haven't ever opened your eyes at the poolroom.

ted harris
12-11-2003, 10:33 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> <hr /></blockquote> LOL, what are you going to blame you did not see the name again, or will it be age this time. Too many excuses. I guess you really meant that my quote was a true liberal mentality, but a little searching will show you I am no liberal either. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif What else are you gonna use?

Once again, I do not smoke, is there anything else you might want to make an excuse for? You try to say the issue is tobacco use in poolrooms, since you are the one that likes to dive a little deeper to the REAL issue, is it not HEALTH. Don't stop where it suits you, keep on going.

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>
Uhmmm... I hate to keep correcting you, but it wouldn't be liberal mentality, it would be conservative.
I did not say you were a smoker, I said it was smoker mentality.

eg8r
12-11-2003, 10:41 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Uhmmm... I hate to keep correcting you, but it wouldn't be liberal mentality, it would be conservative.
<hr /></blockquote> When in the past have you ever corrected me on anything? A conservative would never ask someone to quit driving their SUV and choose a bike instead in an effort to conserve energy or reduce emissions, that is a liberal issue. Jeesh, I thought you knew.

eg8r &lt;~~~thinks Ted should go back to making cues

ted harris
12-11-2003, 10:51 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
Uhmmm... I hate to keep correcting you, but it wouldn't be liberal mentality, it would be conservative.
<hr /></blockquote> When in the past have you ever corrected me on anything? A conservative would never ask someone to quit driving their SUV and choose a bike instead in an effort to conserve energy or reduce emissions, that is a liberal issue. Jeesh, I thought you knew.

eg8r &lt;~~~thinks Ted should go back to making cues <hr /></blockquote>
Hey guy,
This whole thread has been an excercise in correction, IMHO. We are talking about smoking in poolrooms here, not SUV's. Liberals are against smoking, and conservatives could care less who smokes and who dies, to them it is all about the money for the poolroom, or the cig manufacturer. Same as you.
Would you please stick to the subject?

eg8r
12-11-2003, 10:56 AM
[ QUOTE ]
We are talking about smoking in poolrooms here, not SUV's. Liberals are against smoking, and conservatives could care less who smokes and who dies, to them it is all about the money for the poolroom, or the cig manufacturer. Same as you.
Would you please stick to the subject? <hr /></blockquote> LOL. You hated correcting me with bad information so now you want to go back to the subject. I never really branched until you decided you would chime in and "correct" me with bad info.

Back to the subject - A smoking ban is absolutely wrong as far as the government is concerned. It is not the government's duty to make sure Ted Harris breathes clean air. Also, if the business owner is offering a place to play pool, and he obeys the law of the land (permits smoking) then he is in no way being greedy. This was the whole reason I chimed in on your little rant earlier.

eg8r

strawman
12-11-2003, 11:04 AM
Ted,

Sound arguments, but a whole lot of vitriolic tone for a touchy subject ... Go easy, bro. I happen to be a smoker who has learned the ingredients of my tobacco over the years, made conscious choices to smoke for enjoyment as opposed to compulsion, and try not to pester others with it.

For those struggling to quit, I recently converted to a roll our own procedure. It changes the whole psychology of the habit; do you really want that cigarette, or could you just as easily be chewing on something? American Spirit, who was unfortunately purchased by a large conglomerate, happens to make additive free tobacco, which means no burn accelerating chemicals (it will burn dead if untoked) or reprocessed sheet tobacco (no scraps repressed into second and third sheets). I've learned to opt for toothpicks, straws and gum a lot more, but Ted, keep this in mind ...

Nonsmokers die every day. (I stole that from a comedian ... name him, and you win a cigarette.) The world is absolutely rampant with random, accidental, or malicious loss of life. So go a touch soft on those who either enjoy smoking, or are stuck in a habit. And definitely, big thanks to the efforts Champion Billiards put forth. It's a tough pill to swallow, and businesses will feel it because of the chaos of bureaucratic endeavors. Kato mentioned FL; they're already on a quota for food sales that's changed the economy of operation for some poolrooms there. You can't smoke in Denny's down there, and that's where a road dog likes to eat. Ask Parica; it's his favorite.

Keep making quality cues Ted, but don't give all this secondhand smoke nonsense enough weight to get that ornery about.

Most of the anti-smoking lobby is non partisan, easily scared hypochondriacs that make up our anaesthatized (I can't spell that) nation. The tobacco companies are doing well because they have diversified, and down here in the South, no one would dream of boycotting Nabisco or Kraft food, or even Miller beers, which are all owned by tobacco companies. So Ted, don't tell me you know your mac and cheese won't hook you like DC crack rock.

No, really, I don't buy that, but for a guy who loves pool so much, you have to have to accomodate its growth structure, and a lot of pool enthusiasts meet their first table in a college bar. If it's in CA and NY, you can bet it will get everywhere else, so try to be gracious in victory, all ye of the smokeless tribes. And take your vitamins; flu season is upon us.

Cheers,
Paul (I gave Ryan a ride out of Queens this summer ... you remember me, and I remember "You can't spell pool." I'm going to steal that story someday, or at least lay it on TW and see how he likes it ...)

ted harris
12-11-2003, 11:08 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
We are talking about smoking in poolrooms here, not SUV's. Liberals are against smoking, and conservatives could care less who smokes and who dies, to them it is all about the money for the poolroom, or the cig manufacturer. Same as you.
Would you please stick to the subject? <hr /></blockquote> LOL. You hated correcting me with bad information so now you want to go back to the subject. I never really branched until you decided you would chime in and "correct" me with bad info.

Back to the subject - A smoking ban is absolutely wrong as far as the government is concerned. It is not the government's duty to make sure Ted Harris breathes clean air. Also, if the business owner is offering a place to play pool, and he obeys the law of the land (permits smoking) then he is in no way being greedy. This was the whole reason I chimed in on your little rant earlier.

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>
The info was quite good. It is obvious by your reaction that it was accurate. Why don't you take a break to collect yourself. I really do not care to get into a pissing contest with you.
February 1, 2003. No smoking in Rockville!

eg8r
12-11-2003, 11:35 AM
[ QUOTE ]
The info was quite good. It is obvious by your reaction that it was accurate. Why don't you take a break to collect yourself. I really do not care to get into a pissing contest with you.
February 1, 2003. No smoking in Rockville! <hr /></blockquote> What info was good, I was responding to the wrong info on the lib/conservative issue. You were dead wrong, but we can leave that alone if you would like.

As far as the no pissing contest that is fine, no likes to get any on them anyways.

As far as no smoking in Rockville, enjoy it, who knows what the government will take next.

eg8r &lt;~~~Would like to play in a non-smoking pool hall, till I find one, I will continue to play at the least smokey pool hall I can handle

Iowashark
12-11-2003, 11:53 AM
This could go on forever. This is America, land of the free, democracy, majority rules, etc....

Answer me this, Ted. If you took a petition into your local smoker-friendly pool hall to try to ban smoking in pool halls (and take it to the pool hall Ted, not the church down the street or the local Greenpeace rally)
How many people do you really think would sign it? Would it be over 50%? Hell would it even be over 15%? This is what should matter, if a majority of the people who frequent these pool halls don't mind the smoking, then it should not be outlawed.

~~Dave

Rod
12-11-2003, 12:07 PM
Sometimes I think these threads are started just to instigate a feud. I guess why does not matter really but it always manages to get some people into a pissing contest and nothing ever gets accomplished. It dies after the people involved has said their peace. It's a boring topic as usual.

Rod, non smoker as of 5 months ago, but I ain't preaching

ted harris
12-11-2003, 01:11 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Rod:</font><hr>Rod, non smoker as of 5 months ago, but I ain't preaching <hr /></blockquote>
Congratulations!

Vicki
12-11-2003, 01:16 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote ted harris:</font><hr> As an aside, I would like to thank the Champion Billiards chain in Maryland for their efforts to segregate smokers from non-smokers. The Champion Billiards in Rockville had the best segregation system I have ever seen. It no longer needs it now as the whole room is non-smoking. I know they will survive, and I wish them luck! <hr /></blockquote>

Actually Ted,

I am a weekly regular at Champions in Rockville and I can tell you that they have NOT enforced the smoking ban. I have called the enforcement officer (and so have countless other non-smoking Champions regulars) and Champions has been fined and ticketed for allowing their patrons to smoke but still they allow it.

They are owed no thanks. They don't even enforce non-smoking in their former non-smoking section.

They are a very profitable chain with rooms in other counties where there is no smoking ban. In fact, the Rockville room is the only one of their chain affected.

In the nbc4 article Gary Allen is quoted as saying that their business was down 50% since the ban went into effect. It seems very hard to believe that business is down because of a smoking ban that, so far, they have not enforced.

I am very disappointed in the Champion's ownership and in particular with Gary Allen who, as you know, has been my friend for many, many years.

Vicki

ted harris
12-11-2003, 01:33 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Vicki:</font><hr>
Actually Ted,

I am a weekly regular at Champions in Rockville and I can tell you that they have NOT enforced the smoking ban. I have called the enforcement officer (and so have countless other non-smoking Champions regulars) and Champions has been fined and ticketed for allowing their patrons to smoke but still they allow it.

They are owed no thanks. They don't even enforce non-smoking in their former non-smoking section.

They are a very profitable chain with rooms in other counties where there is no smoking ban. In fact, the Rockville room is the only one of their chain affected.

In the nbc4 article Gary Allen is quoted as saying that their business was down 50% since the ban went into effect. It seems very hard to believe that business is down because of a smoking ban that, so far, they have not enforced.

I am very disappointed in the Champion's ownership and in particular with Gary Allen who, as you know, has been my friend for many, many years.

Vicki <hr /></blockquote>
Vicki,
Thanks for the info. I was going to make it a point to spend my money there when in town visiting you and yours, but the info you provided will certainly change my position.
In fact, the last two times I was there was with you, and that was the last time I was in a pool room for recreational purposes. Wow, that's a long time ago!
50% does seem quite unbelievable! For them, it would probably be well over $1,000,000 (one million) a year! Double Wow!

Vicki
12-11-2003, 01:37 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
I mean, if you dig deep, ask yourself how many good parents would really let their child go down to the poolroom everyday and be in that environment. Not many! <hr /></blockquote> While you are digging in you know what, ask those parents if it is becasue of the smoke they are not allowing their children to go...or is it because of the gambling, violence, drinking etc that pool is stereotyped. LOL, Smoking is the last thing I ever heard bad about pool rooms.

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>

I'm a parent and I don't allow my daughter to go to pool rooms. I don't allow it because of the SMOKING.

My daughter is a proficient gambler and has a healthy respect for it. She is a pretty good card player, and she can snap anyone off playing Connect Four. She will be 12 this month and I guarantee she will never be hustled in her life.

It is a shame that she wants to play pool and I will not allow it because I don't want her exposed to cigarette smoke.

I don't worry about violence because we live in an area with a very low crime rate. I've never seen a fight in my pool room. People do drink, but rarely have I seen anyone get drunk. (In fairness, I generally go to the pool room in the early evenings and usually during the week, not Friday or Saturday night.)

Vicki

Vicki
12-11-2003, 01:57 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Iowashark:</font><hr> This could go on forever. This is America, land of the free, democracy, majority rules, etc....

Answer me this, Ted. If you took a petition into your local smoker-friendly pool hall to try to ban smoking in pool halls (and take it to the pool hall Ted, not the church down the street or the local Greenpeace rally)
How many people do you really think would sign it? Would it be over 50%? Hell would it even be over 15%? This is what should matter, if a majority of the people who frequent these pool halls don't mind the smoking, then it should not be outlawed.

~~Dave <hr /></blockquote>

Iowa,

I am a weekly regular at the same Champion Billiards of Rockville Maryland that has been mentioned in this post numerous times. I took an un-official count of the league players to determine what percentage of them smoke. More than 65% are NON-smokers. In the bar area where people gather to watch Monday night football there is a larger percentage of smokers (I don't personally know any of them so I can't really say with any degree of certainty which are smokers.) Overall in Montgomery County there is a very small percentage of the population that smokes... like less than 20%.

In answer to your question... on an average night in Champions of Rockville, there is likely to be a vast majority who would be willing to sign Ted's petition.

Montgomery County is the wealthiest county in Maryland and something like the third wealthiest county in the country. There are no trailer parks, no liquor stores with ads in the window, no billboards... there are very large, expensive houses, very upscale restaurants, shopping, and so on... we don't want smoking and by we I mean the majority of our county residents. It's not the government deciding reallly... it's the residents who elected the politicians who are making the decisions who are deciding.

Vicki

PQQLK9
12-11-2003, 02:07 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Vicki:</font><hr> Montgomery County is the wealthiest county in Maryland and something like the third wealthiest county in the country. There are no trailer parks, no liquor stores with ads in the window, no billboards... there are very large, expensive houses, very upscale restaurants, shopping, and so on... we don't want smoking and by we I mean the majority of our county residents. It's not the government deciding reallly... it's the residents who elected the politicians who are making the decisions who are deciding.

Vicki <hr /></blockquote>
As a former resident of Montgomery County I agree with you 100%.I wish the people here in Charlotte,NC were as socially conscious of smoking as people in some of the more progressive parts of the country.

Troy
12-11-2003, 02:07 PM
Why? Read Rod's post. This has degenerated into a pissing contest and is now far away from "pool related".
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> Why?

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>

eg8r
12-11-2003, 02:24 PM
I don't still don't think that matters. There are other branches to the thread. The non-pool related is not the place. If it should not be on the forum anymore, then it should be deleted. Moving it does nothing, especially since it is pool related.

eg8r

eg8r
12-11-2003, 02:28 PM
[ QUOTE ]
It's not the government deciding reallly... it's the residents who elected the politicians who are making the decisions who are deciding.
<hr /></blockquote> If the citizens were to get enough signatures to add this ban to a ballot, then it would be the citizens speaking, and they would have a chance to vote it in. I have not seen this yet. I don't believe in Florida it was voted on by the citizens, I believe government put it into effect.

I personally would love to have a smoke free room, but like before, it is not the governments job to step in.

eg8r &lt;~~~the wealthiest people I have ever met are all big-time smokers

eg8r
12-11-2003, 02:39 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I'm a parent and I don't allow my daughter to go to pool rooms. I don't allow it because of the SMOKING. <font color="blue"> Great! </font color>

My daughter is a proficient gambler <font color="blue">Well, now isn't that something to be proud of. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif Don't smoke honey but you can gamble all you want. Which is worse? </font color> and has a healthy respect for it. She is a pretty good card player, and she can snap anyone off playing Connect Four. She will be 12 this month and I guarantee she will never be hustled in her life. <font color="blue"> Gaurantees are never any good. </font color>

It is a shame that she wants to play pool and I will not allow it because I don't want her exposed to cigarette smoke. <font color="blue"> Do as I say, not as I do. </font color>

I don't worry about violence because we live in an area with a very low crime rate. I've never seen a fight in my pool room. People do drink, but rarely have I seen anyone get drunk. (In fairness, I generally go to the pool room in the early evenings and usually during the week, not Friday or Saturday night.) <font color="blue"> The majority of pool rooms are not in your situation. </font color>
<hr /></blockquote> I am pretty much giving you a hard time because there is always that first person to stand up. You do not want your child breathing smoke, I would not want mine either (if I had one). The fact is, 9 times out of 10 someone will refer to other negatives of the pool room before they mention smoke (referring to non-poolplayers).

eg8r

ted harris
12-11-2003, 02:51 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Vicki:</font><hr>I don't worry about violence because we live in an area with a very low crime rate. I've never seen a fight in my pool room. People do drink, but rarely have I seen anyone get drunk.
Vicki <hr /></blockquote>
From 1987 through Thanksgiving 1991 I managed a poolroom X 60 hours a week, not including the hours during my time off. When I quit and went on the road it was 7 years X 90 hours a week in pool rooms all over this counry in all but one state. After I quit the road, my shop was in a poolroom and I was there for 28 months X 100 hours a week. Thats over 55,000 hours in the pool room in less than 15 years, minimum. Drove about 500,000 miles in that time to get to the next poolroom. I have participated in and/or witnessed millions of dollars worth of gambling. Been in Overtown Miami, South Central Los Angeles, and Beverly Hills, and I can count on one hand the violence that I have seen in poolrooms. Pool is my life and my life is pool. Too bad I can't participate anymore for the smoke.

Vicki
12-11-2003, 03:12 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
I'm a parent and I don't allow my daughter to go to pool rooms. I don't allow it because of the SMOKING. <font color="blue"> Great! </font color>

My daughter is a proficient gambler <font color="blue">Well, now isn't that something to be proud of. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif Don't smoke honey but you can gamble all you want. Which is worse? </font color> and has a healthy respect for it. She is a pretty good card player, and she can snap anyone off playing Connect Four. She will be 12 this month and I guarantee she will never be hustled in her life. <font color="blue"> Gaurantees are never any good. </font color>

It is a shame that she wants to play pool and I will not allow it because I don't want her exposed to cigarette smoke. <font color="blue"> Do as I say, not as I do. </font color>

I don't worry about violence because we live in an area with a very low crime rate. I've never seen a fight in my pool room. People do drink, but rarely have I seen anyone get drunk. (In fairness, I generally go to the pool room in the early evenings and usually during the week, not Friday or Saturday night.) <font color="blue"> The majority of pool rooms are not in your situation. </font color>
<hr /></blockquote> I am pretty much giving you a hard time because there is always that first person to stand up. You do not want your child breathing smoke, I would not want mine either (if I had one). The fact is, 9 times out of 10 someone will refer to other negatives of the pool room before they mention smoke (referring to non-poolplayers).

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>

I don't deserve a hard time.

It is an opinion that you have expressed to say that "9 times out of 10 someone will refer to other negatives of the pool room before they mention smoke (referring to non-poolplayers)". There is no way for us to know this at this time, but you have stated it as fact.

You also tell me you have no children yet you judge my parenting skills without knowing me or my daughter one iota. So I will not justify you with a response.

You're reaching to be able to give me, "a hard time because there is always that first person to stand up."

I'm glad we agree on one thing... children should not be exposed to cigarette smoke.

Vicki

Vicki
12-11-2003, 03:15 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> eg8r &lt;~~~the wealthiest people I have ever met are all big-time smokers <hr /></blockquote>

It's funny that I've noticed that wealthy people don't smoke.

Vicki
12-11-2003, 03:24 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr>
I personally would love to have a smoke free room, but like before, it is not the governments job to step in.

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>

I am supposed to have a smoke-free pool room TODAY.

...and it's because the people I elected to represent me have listened to what I have said about the issue. I am glad they are listening to me and other voters like me who don't want smoking in our restaurants and bars anymore or I would not vote for them at the next election. I am proud to live in this area where smoking is not permitted in any restaurant or bar or other establishment that is open to the public.

Vicki

pooltchr
12-11-2003, 03:44 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> As far as no smoking in Rockville, enjoy it, who knows what the government will take next. <hr /></blockquote>

That is the issue that should have us all concerned!!!
TAP TAP TAP!!!!

Nostroke
12-11-2003, 04:23 PM
The government didn't take anything-It gave the majority of people the opportunity to breathe clean air in public. You can still smoke all you want in your home, club and a zillion other places.

ted harris
12-11-2003, 04:36 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> As far as no smoking in Rockville, enjoy it, who knows what the government will take next. <hr /></blockquote>

That is the issue that should have us all concerned!!!
TAP TAP TAP!!!! <hr /></blockquote>
...and we should just all sit blindly by and watch Phillip-Morris, Brown &amp; Williamson, etc take our billions of dollars and our lives at the same time. Maybe you put more value on the right to smoke than an innocent life. Glad to see you have your priorities in order.

Qtec
12-11-2003, 11:14 PM
[ QUOTE ]
What is the first thing you see when you walk into a pool room?

<hr /></blockquote>

Pool tables?

Q

wolfdancer
12-11-2003, 11:28 PM
Ted, good point!!!..I'll be moving soon to a state that doesn't have smoking ban laws. I've been to the bars and rooms there, and couldn't tolerate the smoke..I'm allergic....so, It'll be the end of my playing days.
I'm not against the smokers RIGHT to smoke...it just doesn't agree with my right to breathe.

Qtec
12-12-2003, 12:34 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Personally, I do not want drug addicts and their dealers making my decisions for me. <hr /></blockquote>
If the addicts are the smokers then the dealers are the Tobac Comps and the Govt. They make the most out of cigs.
For your information, just because you are a smoker doesnt mean to say that you are a second class citizens.

[ QUOTE ]
Without transportation millions of people would freeze to death, starve, die from lack of medicine, etc. <hr /></blockquote>

I dont want to be coy but dont this happen today,even with cars.

A PH owner can declare his buisness non-smoking anytime. He doesnt need this ban to do that.If there was a demand for non smoking PHs, there would already be plenty to choose from.Let the market decide.Isnt that capitalism at its best. If ,as you contend,more people want smoke free PHs, you will be spoilt for choice.
Why do you deny the guy who likes to have a cig while playing pool his enjoyment.
This isnt about health, its about choice.The choice for the customer to play his pool the way he wants and the right to run your own buisness the way you want to.

Is there no comprimise?

Q

Country Music should be banned from all PHs. Scientific studies show that sustained exposure to CM can lead to brain damage, significant lowering of the IQ and is reportedly linked to Parkinsons[ note; R Reagan!]
One of the most hideous side affects is a tendency to line dance!!!!!!! /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

eg8r
12-12-2003, 08:13 AM
Funny or contrasting?

eg8r

eg8r
12-12-2003, 08:17 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Maybe you put more value on the right to smoke than an innocent life. Glad to see you have your priorities in order. <hr /></blockquote> Pure ignorance. This is nothing about priorities. I guess you are perfectly happy taking all your problems to the government and dropping it on their front steps. Do you think the government should be responsible for your individual actions? Give me a break! Each person is responsible for what they choose. It is a choice everyone makes.

If the person chooses to smoke, then they deal with those consequences, however because they chose to smoke does not mean people like you can strip away their rights.

eg8r

eg8r
12-12-2003, 08:19 AM
It is a concern. Government is way to big and has too much power.

eg8r

eg8r
12-12-2003, 08:23 AM
[ QUOTE ]
The government didn't take anything-It gave the majority of people the opportunity to breathe clean air in public. You can still smoke all you want in your home, club and a zillion other places. <hr /></blockquote> Go back and read what you just posted and you will see exactly what was taken...People can still smoke in a zillion OTHER places. Meaning no longer can they smoke in the place they were allowed to before. This would be mean that place to smoke has been TAKEN away. If you accept this, then sit back and wait until your rights are infringed upon. It will happen sooner or later and I will see you on here crying victim.

eg8r

eg8r
12-12-2003, 08:35 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I don't deserve a hard time. <font color="blue"> OK. </font color>

It is an opinion that you have expressed to say that "9 times out of 10 someone will refer to other negatives of the pool room before they mention smoke (referring to non-poolplayers)". There is no way for us to know this at this time, but you have stated it as fact. <font color="blue"> You are correct. As far as my life and experiences, it is the most true statement. </font color>

You also tell me you have no children yet you judge my parenting skills without knowing me or my daughter one iota. So I will not justify you with a response. <font color="blue"> You did respond, let me spell it out for you...You somehow feel that having a child makes it easier for you to understand how to raise them (Was I close?). Whatever, I helped raise my nieces and nephews for 5 years while they lived in my house (both their parents only allowed visitation every other week, a truly horrible mess). Just because I don't have kids makes no difference whether I have experience raising them. It does not matter whether I know you or your kid. I only know what you have posted, and that is that your kid is a proficient gambler. Doesn't sound to promising to me. I could definitely be wrong, but I don't think the majority of parents out there would be too keen on their children gambling with cards and connect four. Maybe that is just another inexperienced assessment on my part, who knows better than you! </font color>

You're reaching to be able to give me, "a hard time because there is always that first person to stand up." <font color="blue"> Reaching for what? </font color>

I'm glad we agree on one thing... children should not be exposed to cigarette smoke. <font color="blue"> I am here to please. </font color>
<hr /></blockquote>

What happens when your daughter grows up and decides she wants to go to the pool hall and light up while playing some fun ring games with her friends?

eg8r

pooltchr
12-12-2003, 09:09 AM
O-k, I'll jump on your bandwagon for a minute...
Let's ban smoking because it offends non-smokers.
Let's ban alcohol because people do stupid stuff when they get drunk.
Let's ban gambling because some people can't control themselves and bet the rent money.
Let's ban juke boxes because it's too loud for some people.
Let's ban pool rooms because they open doors to all kinds of nasty habits.

The point here is NOT about smoking. It's about civil rights, and the government has a way of getting their big foot in the door and pushing way beyond the limits. Remember whey you used to be able to carry your pool cues on an airplane? Now you can't even carry nail clippers. This scares me how a good idea (airport security) ends up getting totally out of hand when the govt. gets involved. My gripe is not with non smokers or smokers, but with people who are willing to give everything up to the government. If the demand for non smoking rooms exists, they will be there without a mandate from our "uncle".

eg8r
12-12-2003, 09:27 AM
I have made a few posts to this thread in reference to "what will the government take next". This morning while reading an email I get from the WSJ Opinion Journal. Here is the quote...
[ QUOTE ]
How insane is New York's Mayor Michael Bloomberg? Not satisfied with banning smoking in nearly every bar, restaurant and club in the city, his Health Department is giving out citations for possession of ashtrays, the New York Times reports:

Graydon Carter, the editor of Vanity Fair, received a summons because of ashtrays in his Times Square office. Inspectors, who had gone there on a complaint about smoking, found no one puffing away. But they did spot the ashtrays. That was enough.

"I keep them around to remind me of my youth," Mr. Carter said in an e-mail message yesterday after being asked about the incident. "They had not been used and did not have cigarette butts in them when we were fined."

Inspectors also issued a summons to the Players Club for three ashtrays that were on a shelf behind a desk. "They were there just to get them out of the way," John Martello, the club's executive director, tells the Times.

Martello adds: "I think what I was most appalled about was the constitutionality of them being able to come in and search my office. Unlike the police, they don't need a search warrant. They just walked in on an anonymous tip."
<hr /></blockquote> Pretty scary. Did anyone living in NYC hear about this?

eg8r

ted harris
12-12-2003, 09:27 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
Maybe you put more value on the right to smoke than an innocent life. Glad to see you have your priorities in order. <hr /></blockquote> This is nothing about priorities. Do you think the government should be responsible for your individual actions? Give me a break! Each person is responsible for what they choose. It is a choice everyone makes.
eg8r <hr /></blockquote>
Since the smokers have not governed themselves, and twist smoking indoors into a governmental meddling issue, and the reality of smoking indoors is that "a smoker's right to smoke stops at my nose," yes I believe that the government should create laws to protect non smokers from smokers. It is not an individuals right to smoke and assault unwilling participants in the process. It is not a smokers right to invade my personal space. If I walk up and shove my fist down a smokers throat, I will be guilty of assault and prosecuted to the full extent of the law. There is no difference. Non-smokers are victims every day. It's no secret that this legal system is not geared to protect the victims. Well, for generations, non smokers have been assaulted every time they walked into a public indoor place. Now the non smoking majority is voting and therefor taking a proactive role in it's own lawmaking by voting for anti-smoking laws and electing officials that vote for the same beliefs. Isn't that the American way!?

eg8r
12-12-2003, 09:38 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Since the smokers have not governed themselves, and twist smoking indoors into a governmental meddling issue, and the reality of smoking indoors is that "a smoker's right to smoke stops at my nose," <hr /></blockquote> How far does this go? What if you were to speak vulgarly and I despised it. Would you be violating my "space" when I hear it? What about driving your car down the road? Is my "space" violated if I breathe in the same air in which your car's exhaust is expelled. No one can answer where does it end, but as long as you are not bothered, then everybody else must suffer.

[ QUOTE ]
...lawmaking by voting for anti-smoking laws and electing officials that vote for the same beliefs. Isn't that the American way!? <hr /></blockquote> Who ever has the most votes wins. However clear this description was of the voting system, I am absolutely sure you are still clouded on "the American way" idea.

eg8r

ted harris
12-12-2003, 09:38 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> O-k, I'll jump on your bandwagon for a minute...
Let's ban smoking because it offends non-smokers.
Let's ban alcohol because people do stupid stuff when they get drunk.
Let's ban gambling because some people can't control themselves and bet the rent money.
Let's ban juke boxes because it's too loud for some people.
Let's ban pool rooms because they open doors to all kinds of nasty habits.

The point here is NOT about smoking. It's about civil rights, and the government has a way of getting their big foot in the door and pushing way beyond the limits. Remember whey you used to be able to carry your pool cues on an airplane? Now you can't even carry nail clippers. This scares me how a good idea (airport security) ends up getting totally out of hand when the govt. gets involved. My gripe is not with non smokers or smokers, but with people who are willing to give everything up to the government. If the demand for non smoking rooms exists, they will be there without a mandate from our "uncle". <hr /></blockquote>
Banning smoking because it offends smokers is ridiculous. It is being banned because of the health threat is poses.
When drinkers drink, they do not make me drunk...and when they do stupid stuff such as drunk driving, disorderly conduct, vehicular homicide, spousal abuse, etc there are laws to deal with them.
Where are the laws to protect non-smokers? I'll tell you where they are; they're coming. And the majority is voting for it. It's about time. You and I do agree on one thing, it is about civil rights!

ted harris
12-12-2003, 09:42 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> <hr /></blockquote> How far does this go? What if you were to speak vulgarly and I despised it. Would you be violating my "space" when I hear it? What about driving your car down the road? Is my "space" violated if I breathe in the same air in which your car's exhaust is expelled. No one can answer where does it end, but as long as you are not bothered, then everybody else must suffer.

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>
I certainly can answer it. It ends when you back your car up to the poolroom door, and hook up a hose to your muffler and pipe it into the room. Smokers want to kill themselves, go ahead, just do it in your garage, and don't take me, the wife or the kids with you. Do you have a brain?
This question does not require an answer.

Wally_in_Cincy
12-12-2003, 09:45 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Vicki:</font><hr>
<font color="red"> My daughter is a proficient gambler </font color> and has a healthy respect for it. She is a pretty good card player, and she can snap anyone off playing Connect Four. <font color="red">She will be 12 this month </font color>and I guarantee she will never be hustled in her life.

...I will not allow it because <font color="blue">I don't want her exposed to cigarette smoke.</font color>

<hr /></blockquote>

You're a shoo-in for Mother of the Year

ted harris
12-12-2003, 10:05 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Wally_in_Cincy:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Vicki:</font><hr>
<font color="red"> My daughter is a proficient gambler </font color> and has a healthy respect for it. She is a pretty good card player, and she can snap anyone off playing Connect Four. <font color="red">She will be 12 this month </font color>and I guarantee she will never be hustled in her life.

...I will not allow it because <font color="blue">I don't want her exposed to cigarette smoke.</font color>

<hr /></blockquote>

You're a shoo-in for Mother of the Year <hr /></blockquote>
What's wrong with teaching your kid to be proficient at cards, and teach them the ways of the world? The difference is, playing cards is not physically harmful like heroin, smoke, cocaine, crack, etc. Maybe if more children had parents like Vicki, we wouldn't have so many drug abusing, gambling fools. With a healthy respect for cards &amp; gambling, her daughter will be all the wiser, and a non-smoker. Just what this world needs; smart non-smokers.
BTW, I wonder if Tiger Woods or any other child prodigies were gamblers too? What do you think?

Wally_in_Cincy
12-12-2003, 10:38 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote ted harris:</font><hr>What's wrong with teaching your kid to be proficient at cards,

<font color="blue">I don't think 12-year-olds should gamble. That is an adult activity. </font color>

and teach them the ways of the world? The difference is, playing cards is not physically harmful like heroin, smoke, cocaine, crack, etc. Maybe if more children had parents like Vicki, we wouldn't have so many drug abusing, <font color="red">gambling fools </font color> .

<font color="blue">It seems she not only allows her to gamble, but actually encourages it. Will her daughter grow up to be a "gambling fool" or a "smart" gambler, as if there is such a thing. </font color>

With a healthy respect for cards &amp; gambling, her daughter will be all the wiser, and a non-smoker.

<font color="blue">Consorting with gamblers, it seems to me, would increase the likelihood of her becoming a smoker. </font color>

Just what this world needs; smart non-smokers.
BTW, I wonder if Tiger Woods or any other child prodigies were gamblers too? What do you think?

<font color="blue">Maybe he did. Does that make it right? </font color>

<hr /></blockquote>

eg8r
12-12-2003, 10:42 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Do you have a brain?
<hr /></blockquote> Are you somehow implying that if someone does not agree with you, then they don't have a brain? If my thought process was as screwed up as yours I might wish I didn't have one.

Given your logic, all civil rights are abolished when you, the almighty Ted, walks into a private establishment (duly noted it is owned by someone other than yourself) to play pool.

eg8r &lt;~~~Wishes ted was using his brain

eg8r

eg8r
12-12-2003, 10:51 AM
Is Vicki's child a prodigy at cards? I don't understand the "BTW" portion of Ted's post unless she is a prodigy. Hard to compare a girl that is "good" at cards to a phenom at golf. Either way, no, I don't think it is right. It is Vicki's daughter, so she can raise her daughter how she see fit, but to come on the board and blast one vice while praising another is quite hypocritical. This is my opinion though.

eg8r

pooltchr
12-12-2003, 10:57 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote ted harris:</font><hr> And the majority is voting for it. <hr /></blockquote>

Did the voters vote on this issue, or did a small group of elected officials decide this is what is best for everyone? There is a big difference!

ted harris
12-12-2003, 11:10 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr>It is Vicki's daughter, so she can raise her daughter how she see fit, but to come on the board and blast one vice while praising another is quite hypocritical. This is my opinion though.

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>
How silly of me to assume that playing cards and gambling is not a vice! I know lots of people that play cards, play cards and gamble, and it is not a vice to them. Maybe cause they were smart. I also didn't know that playing cards and cigarette smoking could be mentioned in the same sentence. How many kids do you know that had cancer caused by playing cards?
Good-bye.

ted harris
12-12-2003, 11:13 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote ted harris:</font><hr> And the majority is voting for it. <hr /></blockquote>

Did the voters vote on this issue, or did a small group of elected officials decide this is what is best for everyone? There is a big difference! <hr /></blockquote>
Are you and eq8r the same person? LOL.
Some places the people vote on it. Some places the elected officials vote on it. What does that mean to you?

eg8r
12-12-2003, 11:18 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Are you and eq8r the same person? LOL. <hr /></blockquote> If someone does not agree with you, they have no brain. If two or more people disagree with you, then they must be the same person.

eg8r &lt;~~~thinks ted is hallucinating

eg8r
12-12-2003, 11:20 AM
[ QUOTE ]
How silly of me to assume that playing cards and gambling is not a vice! <hr /></blockquote> How silly of you to think I was talking about you. I mean gosh, did I not even name the person I was referring to. It was Vicki, not TED. Get off your ego, you are not always the topic in this thread. As tough a blow that is to your ego, I hope you take it well.

[ QUOTE ]
How many kids do you know that had cancer caused by playing cards?
Good-bye.
<hr /></blockquote> None, I also don't know any people that have died from cancer by playing pool. This is the whole reason of the thread. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif You just don't get it. Did you say good-bye because you were headed back to your non-smoking hole never to return until the next smoking thread surfaced?

eg8r &lt;~~~edited my post to remove the name calling /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Qtec
12-12-2003, 11:24 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Are you and eq8r the same person? LOL <hr /></blockquote>

take it from me Ted, there is only one eg8r! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

They are just making the same point which apparently you cant see.

No smoker denies your right to breathe smoke free air.In non smoking PHs we are prepared to stand outside so as not to offend your nose.
All that is being said is; do smokers not have the right to smoke in a PH that wishes to allow smoking.

Its about choice.

Q

ted harris
12-12-2003, 11:52 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
Are you and eq8r the same person? LOL <hr /></blockquote>

take it from me Ted, there is only one eg8r! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

They are just making the same point which apparently you cant see.

No smoker denies your right to breathe smoke free air.In non smoking PHs we are prepared to stand outside so as not to offend your nose.
All that is being said is; do smokers not have the right to smoke in a PH that wishes to allow smoking.

Its about choice.

Q <hr /></blockquote>
I can see their point entirely. I have been breathing it since childhood.
Does that mean that if a pool hall wishes to allow pot smoking, that that should be okay too?
Man, when are you gonna get it. The issue is not about smoking being offensive. I am not trying to take away from it being offensive; it is a disgusting habit. It is about health. Smokers have no right to kill me or anyone else. This is a very basic concept. So by all means, go kill yourself.
God gave us two ears and one mouth, to be used in that ratio.
This seems to be an excercise in futility, just like it has been for the last 30 years. You people have done this to yourselves, so don't blame the non-smoker. I think I will just vote at the polls with my fellow non-smokers, and the hell with you pro-smoking fools. Once the ban is in effect, hopefully someone in your area will open a smoking establishment, where you and eg8r and pooltchr, and all you wacko conspiracy theory/big brother believers can assemble, play pool and die.
I can hardly wait.

eg8r
12-12-2003, 12:07 PM
LOL, in one hand he offers health to all the people that will listen to him, in his other hand he offers death. I guess somewhere in the non-smoking induced hallucination, Ted sees himself as everyone's saviour. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif Keep on going Ted, your hole is getting bigger.

I like teds little math problem, wow he was even able to show us an example of a 2:1 ratio. Good job teddy. Just tell me something, when did you live by your own words and do a little listening instead of running of your mouth?

eg8r &lt;~~~believes ted does not live by his little 2:1 ratio

JimS
12-12-2003, 12:24 PM
When anyone abuses his/her right to do whatever they want and continues to do things that hurt others even though they know full-well that their actions are injurious to others, then their behavior must be legislated and policed by civilized society. It's a shame that smokers won't police their own behavior but that's the way it is so we'll have to police it for them.

ted harris
12-12-2003, 12:28 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> LOL, in one hand he offers health to all the people that will listen to him, in his other hand he offers death. I guess somewhere in the non-smoking induced hallucination, Ted sees himself as everyone's saviour. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif Keep on going Ted, your hole is getting bigger.

I like teds little math problem, wow he was even able to show us an example of a 2:1 ratio. Good job teddy. Just tell me something, when did you live by your own words and do a little listening instead of running of your mouth?

eg8r &lt;~~~believes ted does not live by his little 2:1 ratio <hr /></blockquote>
If we ever enter into a discussion again, I really wish you would stop using my name in the third person, like I am not in the conversation. It is very disrespectful, and maliciously trying to make me look bad in this discussion. Your posts are in response to my posts, and mine to yours. You could at least show me that little respect. And leave my business out of this conversation too.
You, the cig companies, and smokers offer death in place of common sense, and clean air to people that wish to stay out of indoor public places. And to accuse me of that, what a hippocrite you are. I am simply offering you the same thing you are offering me. And all you can offer is to enable one to kill another if they choose to go inside. Can you not see the insanity in your argument?
I really do not care to discuss this with you any more, as you have not addressed one of my questions thus far.
I look forward to one day meeting you.
If any one else would like to proceed, please do.

pooltchr
12-12-2003, 12:41 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote ted harris:</font><hr> Some places the people vote on it. Some places the elected officials vote on it. What does that mean to you? <hr /></blockquote>
It means to me that in some places people are making choices for themselves, and in some places politicians are taking choices away from people. Which goes right back to my main point of contention on this whole post!

Steve---willing to bet there aren't a lot of places where this actually found it's way onto a ballot!

eg8r
12-12-2003, 12:44 PM
[ QUOTE ]
If we ever enter into a discussion again, I really wish you would stop using my name in the third person, like I am not in the conversation. It is very disrespectful, and maliciously trying to make me look bad in this discussion. Your posts are in response to my posts, and mine to yours. You could at least show me that little respect. <hr /></blockquote> My posts are not meant to be read by just you, so you are just a subject of my posts. Not meant to be disrespectful, and equally not meant to be some conversation either. In defense of myself here is a quote of mine that was directed towards you, one that you quoted but forgot to read... [ QUOTE ]
Keep on going Ted, your hole is getting bigger.
<hr /></blockquote> oh wait, here is another... [ QUOTE ]
Good job teddy. <hr /></blockquote> Just to be fair, I was playing around a bit with your name, I hope you accept my apology, but it was a direct statement to you. I was not using third-person in that sentence. So, there you go, sometimes, I am talking to you, and sometimes you are no more than a subject. It is quite easy and should help you read my future posts.

[ QUOTE ]
You, the cig companies, and smokers offer death in place of common sense, and clean air to people that wish to stay out of indoor public places. And to accuse me of that, what a hippocrite you are. <hr /></blockquote> Could you explain how I was being hypocritical. It makes deciphering your drivel a little easier for me. Please just an example would be fine. Could you do that Ted (see another effort to talk directly to you Ted so that you are not disrespected).

[ QUOTE ]
I really do not care to discuss this with you any more, as you have not addressed one of my questions thus far.
<hr /></blockquote> Ted (oops, I did it again), can you give me an example of "question" of yours that I have failed to reply. Sounds like you are leaving. Ha, it was starting to get good. Now would be the point in which you specifically ask a question and I would reply in response to that question. WHERE ARE YOU GOING TED???

eg8r &lt;~~~Since Ted has no more to say, he feels I am attacking him, instead of his backwards anti-civil rights logic

eg8r
12-12-2003, 12:51 PM
[ QUOTE ]
When anyone abuses his/her right to do whatever they want and continues to do things that hurt others even though they know full-well that their actions are injurious to others, then their behavior must be legislated and policed by civilized society. It's a shame that smokers won't police their own behavior but that's the way it is so we'll have to police it for them. <hr /></blockquote> What exactly are you talking about? People who are in a Pool Hall and having a smoke while playing pool, are not injurious to others. The actual "act" of smoking does not hurt anyone. It is the inhalation of smoke that is injurious. You are doing it to yourself. How hard is that to understand?

Just because someone does something that you feel is wrong, does not deputize you.

Like Ted has offered, your only option is to vote in a politician with the same viewpoints as you, and hope he pulls his weight come voting time. This could be all the more reason for the participation at the voting polls to increase.

eg8r

ted harris
12-12-2003, 12:52 PM
Could someone else please explain it?
I would be more than happy to engage in an intelligent discussion about smoking indoors /poolrooms if someone would like to.

P.S. Would you (eg8r) like to participate in one of my little "vices" when we meet. Care to gamble a little playing some pool?

eg8r
12-12-2003, 01:08 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Could someone else please explain it?
I would be more than happy to engage in an intelligent discussion about smoking indoors /poolrooms if someone would like to. <hr /></blockquote> Because I do not agree with you, I do not have a brain and the discussion has not been intelligent? Is that what you believe. Tell me Ted, if I was to agree with you, would you think we had an intelligent discussion. This was not about intelligence, it was about your inability to prove anything positive about removing someone's rights. Your only argument is that it "could" be unhealthy. When has anyone ever died because of lung cancer while playing pool?

On one of your posts you spoke about a 2:1 ratio in relation to ears and mouth. Could you please show me where in this entire thread you lived by your own words? Can you?

Tell me if this quote of yours sounds intelligent... [ QUOTE ]
Tough luck, hey! If they need to smoke so bad, they can go outside in subzero weather, catch pneumonia and die....weaklings! <hr /></blockquote> Yeah, that sounded intelligent.

Is this really about intelligence Ted? I don't think so. You have not budged one inch, so it has been more like grid lock. I think what you are really looking for is a thread in which everyone will just agree with everything you have to say. If anyone brings up a different point of view, you will immediately deem the conversation non-intelligent, you will question the person if he has a brain, and then you will end your involvment. Sorry, this forum is not your ball, but you are welcome to go home.

eg8r

Iowashark
12-12-2003, 01:16 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote ted harris:</font><hr> Does that mean that if a pool hall wishes to allow pot smoking, that that should be okay too?
<hr /></blockquote>

That would be illegal, brotha. So the point you're making is that in Happy Tedland or whatever your fantasy world is called, smoking is illegal too.

Smoking cigarettes is not illegal, therefore giving smokers the right to smoke cigarettes in public where it is allowed.

~~Dave

UWPoolGod
12-12-2003, 01:18 PM
There is no winning this arguement. It has been hashed over and over in 100+ post threads before with no sense made of any of it. Just each side thinking "I told him, why can't he get it?"

I am a non-smoker. Never have smoked anything. I got super turned off of it by coming home after playing sports in the dead heat of summer and having the house half filled with cigarette smoke from both my parents which was drifting out the screen door. I would turn around go to practice shooting hoops some more so I didn't have to choke indoors.
I put up with the poolhall/bar smoke because they are they only places to play the game I love. I usually stand as far away from direct cigarette smoke wafting into the air right from the cig and into my face. or I'll blow it back at the owner...or slide his ash tray over. Did that to my good friend the other day at a tourney..he said "we're in a bar for christ sakes". I said "yeah and i don't care to get smoke right in my face either."

Being pretty close to the only non-smoker of my generation (seems like everyone does these days), it is just the way it is. I hate coming home smelling like an ash tray but what can I do. Stop going I guess (fack that)...buy my own table? (no room)...put up with it. Guess so. But at least when i get diagnosed with emphysema (sp?) I can sue the cigarette companies and get a million.

Would I like to see nonskoking in public places? Sure would. Am I going to bitch about it while it is still there? Of course. The thing I just hate is smokers who have to light up constantly becuase they forget their cigarette somwhere or just let it keep burning while they are away from it. God...take a drag...put it out and light it back up when you get stressed out again...and repeat. Bet it would cut down on 3/4 the smoke in bars if this was a common practice.

I feel bad for my overweight friend who plays me pool. He gets so stressed he lights up one after another the whole time we match up. Everytime he heads back to the chair he puffs away. Makes me not want to play him because of it. becaus ehe wants to quit but gets to stressed when he plays me. he went through 2 packs in one session once. Unbelieveable.
I just don't get the whole idea of smoking..after you are an addict. I get the initial buzzes...but not the rest. But..hey...I don't have to understand it.

Enough rambling for one post.

ted harris
12-12-2003, 01:20 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr>Your only argument is that it "could" be uunhealthy.
eg8r <hr /></blockquote>
I am a student of learning and tobacco use. I have spent hundreds if not thousands of hours researching the effects of smoking and ETS.
Could be unhealthy? Just when I thought I'd heard it all!
Once again, I see you have done your homework and spoken from an educated standpoint.
JFTR, denial is not just a river in Egypt.

eg8r
12-12-2003, 01:24 PM
Great post. I feel the same.

eg8r

DoomCue
12-12-2003, 01:29 PM
Ted,

I'm going to chime in here, more or less just to keep this entertaining thread from dying out.

First, you say, "Does that mean that if a pool hall wishes to allow pot smoking, that that should be okay too?" There's an important distinction which must be made here: smoking cigarettes is legal, smoking pot is not. No further legislation needs to be done against smoking pot, it's already been done. On the other hand, smoking cigarettes is perfectly legal. If a business wishes to cater to smokers, it should be able to do so because smoking cigarettes is NOT illegal. Certain state and local governments have taken that choice out of the hands of business owners, and by extension, affected the rights of smokers.

Furthermore, you seem to think your right NOT to smoke is more important than somebody else's right TO smoke. Remember, both smoking and not smoking are legal, so why do you feel your right is more important than someone else's? For instance, I don't like being around drunk people. I'll exercise my right not to be around drunk people in a very simple manner: I won't be around drunk people. I know drinking is legal, therefore I'm not going to whine when somebody is drunk, I'll simply leave or walk away. I'm not going to try to have my Congressman introduce legislation banning alcohol. My right not to be around drunk people is no more and no less important than their right to drink, so I exercise my right by avoiding them. By the same token, if I don't want to be around smokers, I'm not going to try to have the legal right to smoke arbitrarily banned from certain establishments, I'll just choose not to frequent those establishments.

Seems to me that your belief is, "Dammit, my opinion is right, and screw all you smokers because I'm right!" Eg8r said it best, "Just because someone does something that you feel is wrong, does not deputize you." Ted, your kind of thinking is scary to me because it's the same mindset (albeit on a smaller scale) of people like Hitler, Hussein, bin Laden, Helen Kushnick (bonus points if you know who that is!), Castro, etc. In their own minds, these people all believe(d) they were right, and their actions will be remembered as disastrous. Who are you to decide what's good and right for everybody?

-djb

eg8r
12-12-2003, 01:30 PM
I don't believe I stated either way, healthy or not. I was making a statement about your swiss cheese arguments. A little reading comprehension will go a long way. I am willing to bet, if you had spent more time on your comprehension, it would have not taken "hundreds if not thousands of hours researching the effects of smoking and ETS."

Whatever, you have offered nothing. If what you have provided to this thread is a direct result of your research and knowledge, keep on making cues.

eg8r

ted harris
12-12-2003, 01:30 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Iowashark:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote ted harris:</font><hr> Does that mean that if a pool hall wishes to allow pot smoking, that that should be okay too?
<hr /></blockquote>
That would be illegal, brotha. So the point you're making is that in Happy Tedland or whatever your fantasy world is called, smoking is illegal too.

Smoking cigarettes is not illegal, therefore giving smokers the right to smoke cigarettes in public where it is allowed.

~~Dave <hr /></blockquote>
Did we vote on whether pot smoking should be legal or not? Or did the elected officials change the laws to make it illegal oh so many years ago? The original title of this thread was "Smokers have till Feb.1 to light up!" in Rockville, MD. Doesn't that make it illegal as of Feb. 1 in Rockville, MD?
So, by your standards, what's the argument?

Iowashark
12-12-2003, 01:31 PM
Okay class, what have we learned during this lesson? Allow me to reiterate.

1. smoking is bad not only to yourself, but to others.
2. some people like the idea of non-smoking pool halls, most business owners don't
3. some businesses apparently lose up to 50% of their profits when they ban smoking.
4. several non-smokers die from lung-cancer or emphyzema (okay so Ted or Vicki didn't bring this up which surprised me but I added it to take some of the bias out of my post)
5. In Happy Tedland smoking is illegal
6. In Moneyland County, U.S.A. where Vicki lives nobody smokes, but the children gamble.
7. It does seem a little unfair that when it comes to smoking in public places it is the smoker that has the rights to do it, and the non-smoker doesn't have the right to make them stop doing it.

End of lesson
New thread please

~~Dave

eg8r
12-12-2003, 01:36 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Doesn't that make it illegal as of Feb. 1 in Rockville, MD?
So, by your standards, what's the argument?
<hr /></blockquote> Are you on purpose acting foolish. What if he was to say his standards were based on laws in effect right now? Today it is not illegal so why would you purposely try and compare something illegal with some legal? C'mon, you are a sinking ship with nothing to stop the leak.

eg8r

ted harris
12-12-2003, 01:36 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr>Tell me if this quote of yours sounds intelligent...
Tough luck, hey! If they need to smoke so bad, they can go outside in subzero weather, catch pneumonia and die....weaklings! <hr /></blockquote> Yeah, that sounded intelligent.

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>
Sounds about as intelligent as a pro smoking advocate telling me that if I don't like the smoke in the poolroom, I can leave.
Please, try to be little more challenging. You are pathetic!

eg8r
12-12-2003, 01:37 PM
That was funny. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Thank you.

eg8r

UWPoolGod
12-12-2003, 01:39 PM
I only got one thing to say...

..8 year olds Dude.

ted harris
12-12-2003, 01:42 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Iowashark:</font><hr> Okay class, what have we learned during this lesson? Allow me to reiterate.

1. smoking is bad not only to yourself, but to others.
2. some people like the idea of non-smoking pool halls, most business owners don't
3. some businesses apparently lose up to 50% of their profits when they ban smoking.
4. several non-smokers die from lung-cancer or emphyzema (okay so Ted or Vicki didn't bring this up which surprised me but I added it to take some of the bias out of my post)
5. In Happy Tedland smoking is illegal
6. In Moneyland County, U.S.A. where Vicki lives nobody smokes, but the children gamble.
7. It does seem a little unfair that when it comes to smoking in public places it is the smoker that has the rights to do it, and the non-smoker doesn't have the right to make them stop doing it.

End of lesson
New thread please

~~Dave <hr /></blockquote>
Too funny!

eg8r
12-12-2003, 01:43 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Sounds about as intelligent as a pro smoking advocate telling me that if I don't like the smoke in the poolroom, I can leave.
Please, try to be little more challenging. You are pathetic! <hr /></blockquote> If that is pathetic, could you please go through the thread and show me where I said that. Who is pathetic. You did not even acknowledge the post in which you quoted. C'mon, did you not want to make this an intelligence issue? You tried, but you keep failing. I never said that, but you seem to brand me with it. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. I quoted you, in a very non-intelligent post. You then decide to put words in my mouth. Sounds pathetic to me, I just wonder if you are living by your 2:1 ratio and are hearing any of this.

Furthermore, you are calling me a pro-smoking idiot. Did you not already forget that I stated I was not a smoker, and that my intention on this thread was defend the business man. Ted, I try not to resort to name calling. I wonder if your thick head can refer back a few posts of yours in which you were asking for a little respect. After this post, do you think you deserve any respect? I don't.

eg8r

ted harris
12-12-2003, 01:46 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
Doesn't that make it illegal as of Feb. 1 in Rockville, MD?
So, by your standards, what's the argument?
<hr /></blockquote> Are you on purpose acting foolish. What if he was to say his standards were based on laws in effect right now? Today it is not illegal so why would you purposely try and compare something illegal with some legal? C'mon, you are a sinking ship with nothing to stop the leak.

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>
We'll see who's battleship sinks...I would like to play eg8r and sink that battleshop too! Ouch!

eg8r
12-12-2003, 01:49 PM
Were you going to answer the question or play games?

eg8r

ted harris
12-12-2003, 01:52 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr>I am willing to bet, if you had spent more time on your comprehension, it would have not taken "hundreds if not thousands of hours researching the effects of smoking and ETS."

Whatever, you have offered nothing. If what you have provided to this thread is a direct result of your research and knowledge, keep on making cues.

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>
Thus far, my discussion has only been implemented with opinion &amp; common sense. Would you like to proceed to the next level? You might want to put on your seatbelt and wear a helmet, cause the TRUTH can hurt. If you would like, we can begin the dialogue presenting scientific research.

eg8r
12-12-2003, 02:01 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Thus far, my discussion has only been implemented with opinion &amp; common sense. <hr /></blockquote> There is a reason why you should be judged by your peers. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[ QUOTE ]
If you would like, we can begin the dialogue presenting scientific research. <hr /></blockquote> Great, show me some scientific research that explains the validity of the government to step in and infringe on the rights of private business in reference to the very legal activity of smoking.

eg8r &lt;~~~Knows ted does not want to talk about the real issue of this thread. he only wants to talk second hand smoke

Iowashark
12-12-2003, 02:03 PM
I don't think scientific research would be necessary. The main question here is "should smoking be allowed in pool halls". And I believe the answer is, if the business owner wants a non-smoking pool hall he should have a non-smoking pool hall. If a business owner wants to have smoking allowed, so be it. The government shouldn't have to step in and make that decision for the business owner.

~~Dave

P.S. it would be the same as the government telling you not to use birdseye maple, or cocobolo, because they are endangered or poisonous, and from now on you had to make your cues with balsa wood. That's along the same lines, Big Brother telling businesses how they are allowed to operate.

ted harris
12-12-2003, 02:13 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote DoomCue:</font><hr> Ted,

Furthermore, you seem to think your right NOT to smoke is more important than somebody else's right TO smoke. Remember, both smoking and not smoking are legal, so why do you feel your right is more important than someone else's? Seems to me that your belief is, "Dammit, my opinion is right, and screw all you smokers because I'm right!" Eg8r said it best, "Just because someone does something that you feel is wrong, does not deputize you." Ted, your kind of thinking is scary to me because it's the same mindset (albeit on a smaller scale) of people like Hitler, Hussein, bin Laden, Helen Kushnick (bonus points if you know who that is!), Castro, etc. In their own minds, these people all believe(d) they were right, and their actions will be remembered as disastrous. Who are you to decide what's good and right for everybody?

-djb
<hr /></blockquote>
You know, this is getting boring. How can you be so myopic? I know, it's easy to have selective memory when it suits your needs. Don't you remember hearing that the right to smoke is more important as the a non-smokers right to breathe clean air, and if I don't like it I can go somewhere else. How typical. Pro smokers are so predictable.
Your remarks about Bin Laden, Hitler, etc. don't even deserve a response. You should be ashamed of yourself. How you can equate the downing of the World Trade Center, and the killing of 6 million Jews, and millions of Iraqi's to the new smoking indoor rules is beyond me. However, tobacco usage most certainly will be remembered as the scourge of humanity, being far worse than all of those butcher's combined.
Are you saying that making smoking illegal indoors is going to be remembered historically in the same context? Maybe for some wacko like you it might.

ted harris
12-12-2003, 02:24 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> <hr /></blockquote> can you give me an example of "question" of yours that I have failed to reply. Sounds like you are leaving. Ha, it was starting to get good. Now would be the point in which you specifically ask a question and I would reply in response to that question. WHERE ARE YOU GOING TED???

eg8r &lt;~~~Since Ted has no more to say, he feels I am attacking him, instead of his backwards anti-civil rights logic <hr /></blockquote>
Okay, let's start with the last question first.
Does eg8r want to gamble with Ted Harris playing some pool?

Wally_in_Cincy
12-12-2003, 02:27 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Iowashark:</font><hr>P.S. it would be the same as the government telling you not to use birdseye maple, or cocobolo, because they are endangered or poisonous, and from now on you had to make your cues with balsa wood. That's along the same lines, Big Brother telling businesses how they are allowed to operate. <hr /></blockquote>

Don't give Big Brother any ideas /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

That's a really good point Iowashark. May Ted can relate to that.

Iowashark
12-12-2003, 02:29 PM
I shouldn't have made such a good point cause I think that's why Ted's ignoring my question.
Oh well, his silence is answer enough for me.

~~Dave

Wally_in_Cincy
12-12-2003, 02:30 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote ted harris:</font><hr>
Okay, let's start with the last question first.
Does eg8r want to gamble with Ted Harris playing some pool? <hr /></blockquote>

What's that got to do with anything? Whoever is the better pool player wins the argument?

eg8r
12-12-2003, 02:31 PM
Oh, poor teddy does not have any more juice. He is now going to try and lure me into a bet on the pool table. Will that help clean your wounds little teddy? Huh, would it make you feel better if you beat me on the pool table.

Don't bother, Ted, I am not a good pool player. Aw shucks does that ruin the fun. Maybe you could bet me who could make the better cue stick? I guess you win there also.

I have a suggestion, keep to the topic. You said I did not answer a question of yours...Well big boy, where is it. When did I purposely not answer a perfectly legitimate question of yours?

eg8r

ted harris
12-12-2003, 02:34 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Iowashark:</font><hr>
P.S. it would be the same as the government telling you not to use birdseye maple, or cocobolo, because they are endangered or poisonous, and from now on you had to make your cues with balsa wood. That's along the same lines, Big Brother telling businesses how they are allowed to operate. <hr /></blockquote>
No it wouldn't. It would be like them telling me not to use those woods after I conspired for 30 years to make the population of the world addicted to buying my cues, adding 599 chemicals to them, creating 42 carcinogens when they were played with, spending 14 million dollars a day on advertising to hook our youth to replace the 5,000 owners of a Ted Harris Custom Cue that quit or die, and through the usage of them be directly involved in the death of over 400,000 people per year in the US alone. And not just killing the ones that are using my cues, but everyone in the poolroom where they are being used!
Talk about the death of pool man, you people are too funny!
Now smoke a cigarette and go back to sleep!

eg8r
12-12-2003, 02:34 PM
He is not going to answer it because he would agree to that law. The only problem he has is with smoking? Seems to be a pet peeve, strikes a nerve everytime it is mentioned.

eg8r &lt;~~~Mourns the loss of a grandfather to smoking, he would not even quit when he was in the hospital. Always sneaking away to have a smoke.

eg8r
12-12-2003, 02:36 PM
Oops, I was wrong. Teddy did not even get the point. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif What a joke.

eg8r

ted harris
12-12-2003, 02:36 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Iowashark:</font><hr> I shouldn't have made such a good point cause I think that's why Ted's ignoring my question.
Oh well, his silence is answer enough for me.

~~Dave <hr /></blockquote>
Easy Hoss, I can only type so fast!

pooltchr
12-12-2003, 02:47 PM
He's not going to answer because his mind is made up over the smoking issue, and he is more than happy to let the government whisk away someone elses rights because it doesn't bother him. When they make cutting exotic woods illegal due to the air contamination it causes, maybe a light will go off.


Then again, maybe not!

Iowashark
12-12-2003, 02:51 PM
I'm sorry, Ted, but that was a huge swing and a miss.
The pool hall owner does not make the cigarettes and get his customers addicted. He/she is merely trying to run a business without having the government telling them what they can and can't do, such as allowing smoking.
You are a business owner, you don't get your customers addicted to pool, you just offer a service to allow them to play pool with your product, very much along the same lines as a pool hall owner. You wouldn't want the government telling you what woods you could use cause you might not make as much money making cues out of balsa wood and particle board. Just like the pool hall owner wouldn't make as much money if his smoking clientel had to go somewhere else to play pool. That was the point you missed.

~~Dave

eg8r
12-12-2003, 02:52 PM
Someone needs to walk ted through the analogy so that he can understand it. Baby steps I tell you. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif In blue will be the comparison trying to be made.

<blockquote><font class="small">Quote iowashark:</font><hr> P.S. it would be the same as the government telling you <font color="blue"> ted cue business would be the example in replacement of a pool hall </font color> not to use birdseye maple, or cocobolo, because they are endangered or poisonous, <font color="blue"> the examples here are used in replacement of cigarettes or any other smoke producing product. iowashark is stating they are engandered or poisonous as an example to act as reference to the already staggering proof that cigs are harmful. </font color> and from now on you had to make your cues with balsa wood. <font color="blue"> This statement says that because the woods you were using were poisonous you must use this replacement. This is in reference to the government coming in and saying cigs are harmful, you must continue operating business as a non-smoking establishment </font color> That's along the same lines, Big Brother telling businesses how they are allowed to operate. <hr /></blockquote>

Does that help you understand the analogy any better. Sure, there is no proof whatsoever that cocobolo is endangered or poisonous, but it was used as an example of a way the government could step in and tell you how to run your business. I am sure there are some tree loving fanatics out there that would love to shut your company down, except there are other bigger fish in the pond cutting down trees.

eg8r

eg8r
12-12-2003, 02:54 PM
You are assuming there is a light in the first place. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

There is no doubt he makes a fine looking/playing cue.

eg8r

Iowashark
12-12-2003, 02:59 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> Does that help you understand the analogy any better. Sure, there is no proof whatsoever that cocobolo is endangered or poisonous, but it was used as an example of a way the government could step in and tell you how to run your business.
eg8r <hr /></blockquote>



Actually eg8r....

Quote Fred Agnir:
Cocobolo dust has been reported to cause allergic reactions in the respitory system as well as poison ivy-like dermatitis by those who happened to be allergic.






Okay, so maybe not poisonous, but perhaps harmful. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

ted harris
12-12-2003, 03:11 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> Thus far, my discussion has only been implemented with opinion &amp; common sense. <hr /></blockquote> There is a reason why you should be judged by your peers. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif

If you would like, we can begin the dialogue presenting scientific research. <hr /></blockquote> Great, show me some scientific research that explains the validity of the government to step in and infringe on the rights of private business in reference to the very legal activity of smoking.

eg8r &lt;~~~Knows ted does not want to talk about the real issue of this thread. he only wants to talk second hand smoke <hr /></blockquote>
TedHarris knows that eg8r does not want to talk about ETS because if ETS is harmful to the health, then certainly smoking is harmful as well. And you think that ETS is not related to smoking in indoor public places?

How many reasons do you need to figure out that smoker's should not have the right to smoke anywhere indoors where there are people that do not smoke are present?
Well, heres over eleven million of them! Now, we all realise that all 11,000,000 of these documents individually are not going to provide that proof you seek, but the total package certainly does.

I would like to scratch the surface just a little for you. The rest is up to you.
http://tobaccodocuments.org/
there is something like 11,000,000 documents (that's eleven million)

http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/1999/06/F.RU.990629125134.html
showing that half the worlds children are endangered by tobacco smoke

http://www.who.int/tobacco/en/
world health organization

http://www.who.int/tobacco/health_impact/secondhand_smoke/en/
current status of ETS and the WHO

Take note of this quote from within this WHO page;
While the tobacco industry continues to claim that the evidence that passive smoking causes disease particularly lung cancer is controversial, every independent authoritative scientific body that has examined the evidence has concluded that passive smoking causes
many diseases ( Table 1 ). Moreover, the evidence that passive smoking causes disease is not new. The first studies linking passive smoking with breathing problems in children and lung cancer in adults 20 years or more ago and the studies linking passive smoking and heart disease are over 10 years old. The tobacco industry attacks the evidence that passive smoking is dangerous because it knows that smokers are reluctant to poison others. Smoke free workplaces, public places, and homes help smokers cut down or stop, which reduces tobacco company sales and profits.

Now, when you decide that you are not going to do any research because you have all the answers allready, I can provide you with sites that provide statistical research.

UWPoolGod
12-12-2003, 03:14 PM
This post is exactly the reason we need a chat room. Maybe all of us should head over to yahoo and get in a private room instead of posting over the top of each other.

Iowashark
12-12-2003, 03:20 PM
Funny, I didn't read one thing in those links that said it should be the right of the government to make a business change it's smoking policies.
If the non-smokers at my local pool hall knew there would be a good chance of the pool hall going out of business if it were changed to non smoking, they would never even push the issue. They go there anyway, even the owner/manager is a non-smoker.

Another thing, I don't believe my opinions are bias, as I am a non-smoker. I'm speaking for the business owners, if I was a business owner I wouldn't change a smoking policy willingly if it meant I would lose close to half my business.

~~Dave

DoomCue
12-12-2003, 03:22 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote ted harris:</font><hr> You know, this is getting boring. How can you be so myopic? I know, it's easy to have selective memory when it suits your needs. Don't you remember hearing that the right to smoke is more important as the a non-smokers right to breathe clean air, and if I don't like it I can go somewhere else. How typical. Pro smokers are so predictable.
Your remarks about Bin Laden, Hitler, etc. don't even deserve a response. You should be ashamed of yourself. How you can equate the downing of the World Trade Center, and the killing of 6 million Jews, and millions of Iraqi's to the new smoking indoor rules is beyond me. However, tobacco usage most certainly will be remembered as the scourge of humanity, being far worse than all of those butcher's combined.
Are you saying that making smoking illegal indoors is going to be remembered historically in the same context? Maybe for some wacko like you it might. <hr /></blockquote>

Heh, myopic, that's funny. If you can't see that limiting one right can lead to the slippery slope of limiting more and more freedoms, then who's myopic? Let's say smoking gets banned, what are the "you gotta do what I say is right" people gonna pick on next? Alcohol? Then what, pre-marital sex? After that, are you going to tell me what kind of pets I can have? Will I be allowed to drive a red car, even though red is supposedly a color of aggression? You don't see the bigger picture because you think your opinion is right, and to hell with everyone else. I'm not pro-smoking, I'm simply against anything which takes away the rights of anyone, especially if there's nothing illegal about exercising that right in the first place. Take away one right, and another is sure to follow.

My point was that neither your right not to smoke, nor a smoker's right to smoke, is more important than the other. I never said anything resembling your statement about a smoker's rights being more important than a non-smoker's, so why bring that up? I don't believe that, and neither do you. However, the difference between us is I believe both rights need to be taken into account, you believe the rights of the non-smoker are more important.

If a smoker wants to smoke, he'll go somewhere where he's allowed to smoke, which is probably somewhere you shouldn't be since you're so anti-smoking. If you don't want to be around that smoke, don't go where he goes. It's that simple. You seem to be all for limiting where a smoker can exercise his right, but how about if legislation were issued stating that smoking is legal in all public places? Wouldn't you see that as an infringement of your rights? Why would it be wrong in that case, but not in the reverse example?

Since many businesses have made a choice to cater to both smokers and non-smokers, you (and certain state and local governments) see the only solution as legislation which takes away that choice. Why don't you exercise your right and power as a consumer, along with other non-smokers, and choose not to patron those establishments which allow smoking? Why is legislation necessary? Of course, why am I even asking this, in today's litigious society where we have to have a warning about hot coffee on a coffee cup, people sue McDonald's because they're fat, and non-smokers believe smoking is the "scourge of humanity," it's no surprise that many people feel legislation is necessary (but that's another topic).

BTW, I posted my previous response, as well as this one, in a non-inflammatory manner, presented a logical argument, and you resort to name-calling. That's typical of people whose words are governed by emotion. Emotional reaction needs to be tempered with rational thought, so THINK about that the next time you feel you want to call someone "myopic" or "wacko." You wouldn't want me to call you "moron" or "knee jerk dumbass," would you?

-djb

ted harris
12-12-2003, 03:24 PM
The tobacco and/or drug addicts are playing you like dominoes. I do not care who makes the rules, government, smokers, tobacco users, pool halls, police. Police yourselves, stop blowing your smoke in OUR air. Take it outside, open a club, see ya'.
You can all just be glad that non-smokers haven't treated your life with the same disregard as you have treated ours.
You'd probably be better off if we did, then you wouldn't have to live out the long miserable existence of knowing that you killed yourself.
Pitiful really.

pooltchr
12-12-2003, 03:32 PM
Ted,
Very few are going to argue the dangers of smoking. But it is still legal in this country. Why have there been no laws passed making smoking illegal? It's not because of the tobacco companies. The government actually makes more money on the tax on a pack of cigarettes than the tobacco companies make. Who stands to lose the most if smoking is illegal? The GOVERNMENT! The same government that tells tobacco companies they can't advertise their product. The same government that wants to tell bar and pool room owners how to run their business. If you want to fight a battle, try getting the government to outlaw one of their biggest cash cows, rather than hammering the poor business owner trying to make a living. Government exists to grow. More legislation = more growth. More growth = more tax. More tax = more opportunity for government growth, etc etc.
GET IT???????? It's not about smoking in pool rooms. It's about letting government take over more and more of you life.

ted harris
12-12-2003, 03:34 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Iowashark:</font><hr> Funny, I didn't read one thing in those links that said it should be the right of the government to make a business change it's smoking policies.
If the non-smokers at my local pool hall knew there would be a good chance of the pool hall going out of business if it were changed to non smoking, they would never even push the issue. They go there anyway, even the owner/manager is a non-smoker.

Another thing, I don't believe my opinions are bias, as I am a non-smoker. I'm speaking for the business owners, if I was a business owner I wouldn't change a smoking policy willingly if it meant I would lose close to half my business.

~~Dave <hr /></blockquote>
Glad to see you spent all of 5 minutes on those links. You are a real treasure, someone the tobacco companies can be proud of.
Sad to hear that you would participate in the deaths of people who choose to live. In hindsight, makes you kinda like Hitler and Stalin huh? No, not really, you choice would be to do it for money. I'd say that makes you the same as the perpetrators; tobacco companies.
God Bless America! Land of the free!

ted harris
12-12-2003, 03:41 PM
I just looked up at your name on the left side, and saw that you are listed as an ADDICT! Too funny! Thanks fo the laugh.

Iowashark
12-12-2003, 03:42 PM
I'm not sure how to make this more clear to you.
I don't smoke
I'm not a smoker
I'm not supporting smokers by saying a business owner has a right to run his business the way he sees fit, if it will do his business some good.
I'm saying let them run their business the way they want.
You can keep running your business the way you want. If someone doesn't want to breath smokey air, they won't go to said pool hall where smoking is permitted.
If someone doesn't want a Ted Harris cue, they won't go to said cue shop to get a Ted Harris cue made by Ted Harris.
How does this not make sense to you?
Okay I understand that Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion are spelled out for you in the Constitution, but Freedom of running your own business is not. It still shouldn't be that hard to figure out. Slip in the word Business every time one of the other ones say Speech or Religion, it's kind of like a fill in the blank game, it should almost be fun.
I'm running out of logic, and I don't want to resort to your one-sided "I'm right so I'm going to start calling you names" tactic. Read back through my posts and honestly tell me that my views on how businesses should be run ungoverned by any higher bodies is wrong or flawed. (other than them not saying 'smoking is the devil and everyone who does it be thinking on their death bed...gosh Ted Harris was right, why didn't I listen to him'.

~~Dave&lt;&lt;&lt;not sure if I've been this frustrated since debating religion with my catholic mother-in-law.

ted harris
12-12-2003, 03:45 PM
~~~never sweat the petty things, just pet the sweaty things.

Iowashark
12-12-2003, 03:46 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote ted harris:</font><hr> ~~~never sweat the petty things, just pet the sweaty things. <hr /></blockquote>


It is pretty clever, no?

~~Dave

ted harris
12-12-2003, 03:53 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Iowashark:</font><hr> I'm not sure how to make this more clear to you.
I don't smoke
I'm not a smoker
I'm not supporting smokers by saying a business owner has a right to run his business the way he sees fit, if it will do his business some good.
~~Dave&lt;&lt;&lt;not sure if I've been this frustrated since debating religion with my catholic mother-in-law. <hr /></blockquote>
I don't care if you smoke or not, the tobacco comapanies and smokers are relying on people like you to fight their insane war. If you think that a businees owner should be allowed to make more money at the cost of someones health, then shame on you. Every place I have ever been to that you can get hurt at makes you sign a waiver. I don't remember anyone ever asking me if I agreed to breathe smoke. Do you?
In this case you are advocating smoking in pool rooms, as this is what this entire thread is about.

Iowashark
12-12-2003, 04:00 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote ted harris:</font><hr> In this case you are advocating smoking in pool rooms, as this is what this entire thread is about. <hr /></blockquote>

In a way, perhaps.
I'm also advocating my local pool hall staying in business so my friends and I have a place to play pool.
75% of my friends do not smoke, yet I've never heard them complain about the smoke in the pool hall. My brother absolutely detests cigarette smoke, yet he spends more time at the hall than I do. Perhaps not all non-smokers have this obsession to stop the tobacco companies like you do. I'm sure you're not alone in your quest, but I'm also sure you're not in the majority.

~~Dave

BeanDiesel
12-12-2003, 04:00 PM
I recommend you to watch South Park episode #713 - Butt Out. /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Iowashark
12-12-2003, 04:04 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote BeanDiesel:</font><hr> I recommend you to watch South Park episode #713 - Butt Out. /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif <hr /></blockquote>

I've seen it, very funny stuff. Especially where the lame boy band makes the South Park kids want to start smoking.
In a way I'm almost in the same boat. The JEL and Truth commercials sometimes make me wish I smoked.
I saw an HBO skit once where there was a group of JEL kids on the street protesting and some snipers on a nearby rooftop, they didn't show them firing the guns but the end said Just Eliminate JEL. Get it? Cause JEL stands for Just Eliminate Lies...thought I'd spell that out for Ted.

~~Dave

woody_968
12-12-2003, 04:07 PM
Ted, if I am reading you right your point is people shouldnt be allowed to smoke in a place that the owner wants to allow them to smoke because it will harm players that dont smoke. Correct?

Then I agree with you, the government should step in and tell the company its not there right to decide how to run their business.

Next I want to ban bars from selling alcohal, people drive drunk and kill others all the time, so a law should be made that people can only drink in their house or where ever they are going to sleep.

Next is fast food chains, people are distracted by the drive though food and cause accidents that kill people that were not eating.

Next is the radio stations. They should not be allowed to broadcast music into cars, people mess with the radio and cause accidents that kill people that may not have even had a radio on.

While were at it I think all food service places should shut down, they sell to much food that makes people fat. I know its really the publics own fault because they dont know when to quit eating, but hey, lets have the government step in anyway. Sure there eating doesnt make you fat, but your tax dollars have to go to help pay for the medical bills that they will run up but cant pay for. Thats money you could have used to buy products or services that would improve your health, so I guess if we look hard enough we can find a way to link anything to someone elses well being.

THE ISSUE IS NOT SMOKING OR NOT SMOKING, ITS THE GOVERNMENT HAVING THE RIGHT TO TELL SOMEONE HOW TO OPERATE THERE BUSINESS. UNDER THIS LAW, EVEN IF THE POOL ROOM OWNER WANTED TO MAKE A SEPERATE ROOM FOR PEOPLE TO SMOKE IN HE CHOULDNT!

Iowashark
12-12-2003, 04:11 PM
Thanks Woody, very well put. I guess there was more logic that I was missing.

ted harris
12-12-2003, 04:39 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote woody_968:</font><hr> THE ISSUE IS NOT SMOKING OR NOT SMOKING, ITS THE GOVERNMENT HAVING THE RIGHT TO TELL SOMEONE HOW TO OPERATE THERE BUSINESS. UNDER THIS LAW, EVEN IF THE POOL ROOM OWNER WANTED TO MAKE A SEPERATE ROOM FOR PEOPLE TO SMOKE IN HE CHOULDNT! <hr /></blockquote>
Yeah that's right. The owner never gave two shits about me before the laws were passed. Why should I care about him after they are passed? Maybe he should have thought about the consequences of his indifference prior to the no smoking laws. Well, I guess he was just to busy washing his Mercedes and counting his money to bothered with a little thing like protecting his non-smoking customers, huh? He didn't really have enough insight to figure this out? Come on, he knew, and he schlepped it? It's called evolution.
Now he can sell his Mercedes, buy a Yugo and use that money for the chemotherapy treatments he'll be needing. Hopefully, he will have plenty of time to think about his his lack of insight!

woody_968
12-12-2003, 04:57 PM
Do you really think someone opening a pool room today wouldn't even consider making it non-smoking? I am currently trying to put together a package in my home town to open a room, and yes the smoking or non smoking is a big thought!
The decision would come down to one thing, would the non-smokers complain more about the smoke, or would smokers complain more about not being able to smoke? It is not my job to try to make everyone healthy, other wise I would put the whole country on a diet. I know to you this would sound crass and like I don't consider the health issues, but I do. But the bottom line is this, if allowing smoking in a pool room is something I feel would make it more profitable then that is something I should be able to decide. If it were true that the vast majority wants a non-smoking room don't you think there would be more of them?

By the way, profit is not a dirty word, if owners didn't make a decent profit then there would be a great many people out of work!
If you think making money is a bad thing, I would like to buy one of your cues for $100. I think it would make me want to play more, thus giving me more exercise and better health. Which I know is your major concern.

JimS
12-12-2003, 06:06 PM
None of this has anything to do with business. It has to do with health and rights.

I have the right to do dammed near anything I want to do. That's freedom. When I do something because I want to and that action hurts someone else I'm supposed to stop it. If I don't stop it someone will have to step up and stop me. That's what civilized society is about. That's what all the smoking laws and other drug laws are about.

It is NOT "freedom" to indulge in actions that hurt others. That's abuse. Abuse will not be tolerated. If folks don't stop hurting others then laws will be passed to stop those folks from hurting others.

It's that simple. All the rest is just BS intended as a smokescreen (heh..heh) to obscure the real issue. /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

ted harris
12-12-2003, 06:08 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote woody_968:</font><hr> By the way, profit is not a dirty word, <hr /></blockquote>
Hey, I am all for profit, just not at the will of the tobacco companies, nor at the cost of human tragedy.

ted harris
12-12-2003, 06:12 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote JimS:</font><hr> None of this has anything to do with business. It has to do with health and rights.

I have the right to do dammed near anything I want to do. That's freedom. When I do something because I want to and that action hurts someone else I'm supposed to stop it. If I don't stop it someone will have to step up and stop me. That's what civilized society is about. That's what all the smoking laws and other drug laws are about.

It is NOT "freedom" to indulge in actions that hurt others. That's abuse. Abuse will not be tolerated. If folks don't stop hurting others then laws will be passed to stop those folks from hurting others.

It's that simple. All the rest is just BS intended to blur the simple facts. /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif <hr /></blockquote>
The prosecution rests.

pooltchr
12-12-2003, 07:31 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote ted harris:</font><hr> I just looked up at your name on the left side, and saw that you are listed as an ADDICT! Too funny! Thanks fo the laugh. <hr /></blockquote>

This is the best response you can come up with in answer to my post regarding government, growth, and how the government loves tobacco for all the revenue???? /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Good Answer!

ted harris
12-12-2003, 08:12 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> Ted,
Very few are going to argue the dangers of smoking. But it is still legal in this country. Why have there been no laws passed making smoking illegal? It's not because of the tobacco companies. The government actually makes more money on the tax on a pack of cigarettes than the tobacco companies make. Who stands to lose the most if smoking is illegal? The GOVERNMENT! The same government that tells tobacco companies they can't advertise their product. The same government that wants to tell bar and pool room owners how to run their business. If you want to fight a battle, try getting the government to outlaw one of their biggest cash cows, rather than hammering the poor business owner trying to make a living. Government exists to grow. More legislation = more growth. More growth = more tax. More tax = more opportunity for government growth, etc etc.
GET IT???????? It's not about smoking in pool rooms. It's about letting government take over more and more of you life. <hr /></blockquote>
I was being sincere in my post, not trying to be a wise guy.
It was funny!

Seriously though, it won't make any difference to you what argument I present, how many statistical facts are thrown your way, what evidence I present, but here goes.

So your solution for me is to get the government to completely ban smoking instead of regulating it's usage more. And you say you are against government control. Gimme a break!
Let me ask you one question.
If there were no tobacco companies, would there be a need for tobacco use to be illegal. So how can anyone believe anything other than that the cigarette companies are responsible for smoking being legal. The tobacco lobby is the largest, richest lobby in the world. Wonder why that is? Hmmmmm.....One day, in the not so far off future, after you and I are dead and gone, tobacco use will be nonexistent, unless of course the tobacco plutocracy survives, and still has an underpaid slave work force that of course smokes, drinks and doe slots of drugs. It is a shame that it has lasted this long. Pro-smoking fanatics argue that Big Brother is coming, and government laws to protect non-smokers is proof positive. Listen very close, Big Brother is here, and its hides behind the tobacco industry. But hey, live and learn.
Personally, I will do whatever I can to make sure that my children will not have to be a slave to cigarettes like my mother, myself, and hundreds of millions, if not billions of others have been.
Personal freedoms like tobacco use we can do without. Just like we can do without any other sort of drug abuse.
Can anyone here name anything positive that comes from the use of tobacco? Of course it also has to be weighed against the bad it causes too. Just like everything in life, there are postives and negatives about everything. Never before have I ever seen so many negatives. Just generating cash flow is not a good enough reason. I have faith in mankind that there is more to life than money. And I gotta believe that the majority of people out there believe that too.

Qtec
12-12-2003, 11:18 PM
Your air is my air.The wind doesnt recognize international borders.
The US produces 25% of the worlds air polution and refuses to do anything about it.
If you live in the city,

[ QUOTE ]
Particular industries with significant health impacts include: chemical, paper and pulp, cement, glass and ceramics, iron and steel, non-ferrous metals, leather, refining and processing petroleum, and particularly from coal and oil burning plants producing electric power.
Motor vehicles account for about 30% of emissions of nitrogen oxides, 50% of hydrocarbons, 60% of lead and 60% of carbon monoxide in cities of developed countries. In city centres the values rise to 95% for carbon monoxide and up to 70% for nitrogen oxides <hr /></blockquote>

Ted,if there was 20 PHs in your town,would you allow 1 to permit smoking?

Q

eg8r
12-13-2003, 12:58 AM
I am beginning to see that teddy boy is just a jealous wanna be. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif Sure that is name calling I guess, but what else would you call him. Ted does not care about anyone else but himself, it is obvious in his disregard for our Bill of Rights. Funny, I don't see too many pool room owners driving mercedes. Maybe teddy's neck of the woods, but not the rest of the US.

eg8r

eg8r
12-13-2003, 01:02 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Hey, I am all for profit, just not at the will of the tobacco companies, nor at the cost of human tragedy. <hr /></blockquote> Sorry teddy boy, you are an enabler for the tobacco industry. They use greedy business owners like you, to make cues. Smokers buy the cues and go to bars and smoke in non-smokers air. Your product draws people into these smoky pool rooms. You are to blame for part of their smoking experience at the pool hall.

eg8r

eg8r
12-13-2003, 01:14 AM
[ QUOTE ]
TedHarris knows that eg8r does not want to talk about ETS because if ETS is harmful to the health, then certainly smoking is harmful as well. And you think that ETS is not related to smoking in indoor public places?
<hr /></blockquote> Hey teddy, whatcha doin there in the first sentence. I guess you command so much respect, that you will now be referring to yourself in third person? Ted don't know squat.

You keep harping about staying on the subject, yet now, you want to deviate. WHEN HAS ANYONE DISPUTED THE EFFECTS OF CIGARETTE SMOKE??? You are fighting an argument that just is not there. Your boy Fred would call this a strawman. The scientific research does not say squat, about private business operating legally under the U.S. law. Ted, what happened the brain post, or the intelligence post. Are you throwing that all to the wind and just shooting with whatever you have left.

eg8r

eg8r
12-13-2003, 01:16 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I just looked up at your name on the left side, and saw that you are listed as an ADDICT! Too funny! Thanks fo the laugh. <hr /></blockquote> I believe FL made this same asinine post once before. Ted, when did you choose enthusiast? You didn't. The ignorance continues...

eg8r &lt;~~~wonders what teddy boy will do when his post count gets high enough to become an addict

RailbirdJAM
12-13-2003, 06:30 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote ted harris:</font><hr>The prosecution rests.<hr /></blockquote>

Ted, I've been following this smoking thread because it started with an article about smoking in Montgomery County, Maryland, which is the area where I reside.

I smoke and I don't like having to go outside, now in the cold, to light up. On the flip side, I had quit smoking for 3-1/2 years. When I was an ex-smoker, I abhored cigarette smoke. I couldn't stand the smell or what it did to my virgin-tissue sinuses after I quit. I do understand the reasoning for creating a smoking ban.

I am sure if anybody asked a current smoker how they REALLY FEEL about smoking, many, like myself, would say they wish they did not have the habit. I am looking forward to the day when I have the will power to give it up, but currently I'm not there yet.

I believe that it is not fair to subject a non-smoking public to the dangers of cigarette smoke. Secondhand smoke is harmful.

If the authorities could issue "smoking permits" to facilities, this may prevent business owners from losing money. The business, however, would have to invest the dough to create an area in their establishment that would curtail the smoke from harming non-smoking patrons. It would be a win-win situation. The smokers would be happy, the non-smokers could breathe clean air, and the business owners will get their customers to keep coming back.

RailbirdJAM (Promises never to smoke a cigarette in front of Ted again!)

woody_968
12-13-2003, 08:36 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote JimS:</font><hr> None of this has anything to do with business. It has to do with health and rights.

<font color="blue"> I agree with you. I mention business because Ted keeps acting like every pool hall owner drives a Mercedes because they let people smoke. Although I do feel they should be able to decide if people smoke in their building or not. </font color>

I have the right to do dammed near anything I want to do. That's freedom. When I do something because I want to and that action hurts someone else I'm supposed to stop it. If I don't stop it someone will have to step up and stop me.

<font color="blue"> Again here I agree with you for the most part, thing is where do we draw the line. A great many things people do hurt other people in one way or another and go unmentioned.</font color>
That's what civilized society is about. That's what all the smoking laws and other drug laws are about.

It is NOT "freedom" to indulge in actions that hurt others. That's abuse. Abuse will not be tolerated. If folks don't stop hurting others then laws will be passed to stop those folks from hurting others.

It's that simple. All the rest is just BS intended as a smokescreen (heh..heh) to obscure the real issue. /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

<font color="blue"> Please understand that I do think smoking indoors is a problem, and one that we have to address. I just think there should be some option other than an all out ban. As you said earlier, its about rights. I should have the right to decide if people could smoke in my pool hall. They should have the right to decide to come in or not. If enough people told me they werent comming in because of the smoke then I should have the right to change the sign on the door to non-smoking. </font color> <hr /></blockquote>

woody_968
12-13-2003, 08:53 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote ted harris:</font><hr> Hey, I am all for profit, just not at the will of the tobacco companies, nor at the cost of human tragedy. <hr /></blockquote>

Much of the problem I have had with your argument has been with your "smokers and people who disagree with me are second class citezens" standpoint, or at least this is how you and a few others have come accross. I am not trying to defend tabaco companies, I just dont agree with the ban its that simple. I know you think by saying I should be able to smoke that is defending the tobaco company, but to me its not. If I where to say they have done nothing wrong and shouldnt change the amount of chemicals in cigarets then that would be defending them, and I havent.

Yes smoking is harmfull, yes everyone needs to quit. Yes I think the government should set guidlines, but I do not and will not agree with an all out ban.

These are just my opinions, right or wrong. I dont look down on you or anyone else just because you dont agree with them.

Fred Agnir
12-13-2003, 09:04 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote ted harris:</font><hr> Every place I have ever been to that you can get hurt at makes you sign a waiver. I don't remember anyone ever asking me if I agreed to breathe smoke. <hr /></blockquote>

This is an interesting point. If this (that patrons would have to sign a waiver ) were the law introduced instead, would that appease both sides of this argument?

How about a posted placard next to the "Microwaves in Use" sign? Would that do it?

Fred &lt;~~~ wouldn't mind seeing at least one non-smoking pool room

ted harris
12-13-2003, 09:43 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> I just looked up at your name on the left side, and saw that you are listed as an ADDICT! Too funny! Thanks fo the laugh. <hr /></blockquote> I believe FL made this same asinine post once before. Ted, when did you choose enthusiast? You didn't. The ignorance continues...

eg8r &lt;~~~wonders what teddy boy will do when his post count gets high enough to become an addict <hr /></blockquote>
Can you really be this ridiculous? Him not choosing the Addict category is what was so funny.
This is generally what happens when a pro smoker runs out of things to say. The blanket personal attacks begin.
Hey, it's Saturday. Why don't you retreat, take a day off and regroup? Maybe then you will have something productive to say? Live today, fight tomorrow....maybe you are a glutton for punishment? ...and you are right, the ignorance definitely continues. I have given you the benefit of the doubt for most of this thread. I was gonna tell you to duck, but after reading this post, don't worry, you can stand tall brother!

ted harris
12-13-2003, 09:49 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote RailbirdJAM:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote ted harris:</font><hr>The prosecution rests.<hr /></blockquote>

Ted, I've been following this smoking thread because it started with an article about smoking in Montgomery County, Maryland, which is the area where I reside.

I smoke and I don't like having to go outside, now in the cold, to light up. On the flip side, I had quit smoking for 3-1/2 years. When I was an ex-smoker, I abhored cigarette smoke. I couldn't stand the smell or what it did to my virgin-tissue sinuses after I quit. I do understand the reasoning for creating a smoking ban.

I am sure if anybody asked a current smoker how they REALLY FEEL about smoking, many, like myself, would say they wish they did not have the habit. I am looking forward to the day when I have the will power to give it up, but currently I'm not there yet.

I believe that it is not fair to subject a non-smoking public to the dangers of cigarette smoke. Secondhand smoke is harmful.

If the authorities could issue "smoking permits" to facilities, this may prevent business owners from losing money. The business, however, would have to invest the dough to create an area in their establishment that would curtail the smoke from harming non-smoking patrons. It would be a win-win situation. The smokers would be happy, the non-smokers could breathe clean air, and the business owners will get their customers to keep coming back.

RailbirdJAM (Promises never to smoke a cigarette in front of Ted again!) <hr /></blockquote>
Good luck to you on your next effort! I can certainly sympathize with you on the quitting thing, as I wanted to quit many times before I was able to quit. If there is anything I can do, let me know. There is lots of help out there for you...and thank you for your well thought out post!

ted harris
12-13-2003, 10:47 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote woody_968:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote ted harris:</font><hr> Hey, I am all for profit, just not at the will of the tobacco companies, nor at the cost of human tragedy. <hr /></blockquote>

Much of the problem I have had with your argument has been with your "smokers and people who disagree with me are second class citezens" standpoint, or at least this is how you and a few others have come accross. I am not trying to defend tabaco companies, I just dont agree with the ban its that simple. I know you think by saying I should be able to smoke that is defending the tobaco company, but to me its not. If I where to say they have done nothing wrong and shouldnt change the amount of chemicals in cigarets then that would be defending them, and I havent.

Yes smoking is harmfull, yes everyone needs to quit. Yes I think the government should set guidlines, but I do not and will not agree with an all out ban.

These are just my opinions, right or wrong. I dont look down on you or anyone else just because you dont agree with them. <hr /></blockquote>
Isn't communication is a great thing. I don't believe that cig smokers are second class citizens, I believe they are victims. I do not come to this conclusion inexperienced, as I smoked for about 20 years and can completely sympathize with your feelings. One of the toughest things to overcome in this discussion is breaking through the barrier of having to try to reach the addict.
Making cigarette smoking illegal in indoor public places is not an all out ban. The government is basically saying that smokers can smoke anywhere they want as long as it does not violate the space of others who have no choice but to breathe ETS in their presence in indoor public places because of the health risks. But there are many other barriers to overcome during this process. The population has to be educated about the dangers of smoking, and believe it. The believing is the hardest part. On one hand you have part of the population that believes it is simply a choice, and doesn't give two shits who smokes and who dies, which is ridiculous. There is also a part of the population that understands it is an addiction, and through education, treatment, and compassion that given time then maybe smoking can be over come. This is the group I fall into; only thing is, in the meantime take the smoke outside. The most affected group is the addict. They wanna believe they are making the choice to smoke, and that is one tough wall to knock down. Another group is the restaurant and alcohol establishments. We won't hold them as responsible as the final group, as they were just for the most part living within the law, and trying to earn a living. They were guilty of indifference towards the end of indoor smoking, and some businesses will not survive because of their indifference. It's not like they didn't see it coming. Then the final group are the killers that participate in the manufacture and blinding of the populace with doublespeak and lies.
Now the tobacco companies are trying to portray themselves as our friends, like they just discovered that smoking was harmful. Trust me, they have done a lot of things as of late to make it look that way, but it was all under court order.
Sorry that it seems like I am playing hardball, but there is no other way to break down the barriers we face in dealing with this issue. I am just gonna tell it like it is when dealing with smokers, because I have been there, done that, and remember when my self defense mechanism went into overdrive. It was all just an excuse to smoke. So when I hear it today, I understand, but at the same time, if someone wants to self medicate, and BS me with this excuse and that excuse, I simply am going to tell them like it is. That is the best thing you can do for an addict; keep it real.
Just thought I would try to give you a better understanding of where I stand on this issue.
Thank you for your input.

woody_968
12-13-2003, 12:01 PM
Thanks for the post Ted, a little more understanding now. Do you really think there are that many people that dont know the dangers of smoking? I think it would be hard to believe that in this day and age someone would not no that smoking will kill them.
I know that sounds stupid from someone that smokes, but I have quit before and I decided I wanted to smoke again. Dumb decision I know, and do plan on quiting soon.

ted harris
12-13-2003, 12:21 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote woody_968:</font><hr> Thanks for the post Ted, a little more understanding now. Do you really think there are that many people that dont know the dangers of smoking? I think it would be hard to believe that in this day and age someone would not no that smoking will kill them.
I know that sounds stupid from someone that smokes, but I have quit before and I decided I wanted to smoke again. Dumb decision I know, and do plan on quiting soon. <hr /></blockquote>
I think everyone pretty much knows it is a deadly habit. Most people just wanna believe that it ain't gonna happen to them (same scenario with HIV). You know; "I'll quit when I'm ready," thinking that they will quit before the iron lung arrives.
I started when I was kid, as most addicts did. The cig companies actually put larger contents of additives in cigarettes that appeal to kids; chocolate, sugar, etc all the while claiming they don't try to attract children to their product. There are documents at Tobacco Documents Online (http://www.tobaccodocuments.org) that prove that the additives that are put in cigarettes are done so for their addictive purposes. As if nicotine isn't enough. Some children are just doing it because their parents said not to and some for peer pressure. The cig companies thrive on it! Doesn't really matter much how they smoked the first one, does it? After that, there is no choice. 3000 children start smoking everyday to replace the smokers that die or quit in the US.

TomBrooklyn
12-13-2003, 05:57 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> One group's rights lost in exchange for another group's rights.

Let the government keep out of it and free enterprise take over. If there is enough demand for non-smoking bars/pool rooms, I'm sure some "Greedy Business Owners" will take advantage of it. <hr /></blockquote>Pooltchr,

I heartily support your plea for Big Brother to stop interfering with the private lives and practices of civilian people and private businesses; even if it purports to be "for their own good." The logic of your preface, however, was faulty: a right was lost, but none was gained.

There is no such thing as a natural right to have a non-smoke filled atmosphere in any private business. A private business is any business owned and operated by a private citizen, including businesses that open it's doors to the public. No one has a "right" to dictate to a business owner what kind of atmosphere he provides, as long as he is not bothering anyone outside the walls of his establishment. The right that every individual does own is the right to chose to enter and patronize, or not enter and not patronize, any particular business.

What the government granted to non-smokers in this case was not a right, it was a freedom robbing condensation to the agenda of a minority group that was given preference over the natural God-given, inalienable right of freedom and free choice for all people, whether they like smoking or not.

While this sodomy of freedom may be popular with some people because it suits their personal preference; lets neither camouflage nor dignify it by alluding to it as a human right.

TomBk

ted harris
12-13-2003, 07:08 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote TomBrooklyn:</font><hr>
There is no such thing as a natural right to have a non-smoke filled atmosphere in any private business. A private business is any business owned and operated by a private citizen, including businesses that open it's doors to the public. No one has a "right" to dictate to a business owner what kind of atmosphere he provides, as long as he is not bothering anyone outside the walls of his establishment. The right that every individual does own is the right to chose to enter and patronize, or not enter and not patronize, any particular business.

What the government granted to non-smokers in this case was not a right, it was a freedom robbing condensation to the agenda of a minority group that was given preference over the natural God-given, inalienable right of freedom and free choice for all people, whether they like smoking or not.

While this sodomy of freedom may be popular with some people because it suits their personal preference; lets neither camouflage nor dignify it by pretending it is such an honorable thing as a human right.

TomBk
<hr /></blockquote>
So inside the private business, any atmosphere the owner wants to provide is okay, so long as it doesn't hurt anyone outside said businesses walls...
What if the owner wanted to provide a heroin den...
a crack house...
a paint sniffing club for our children...
or a date rape club?
You are saying that anarchy should be allowed inside the walls of a private business, no?
Smokers are the minority, in case you haven't noticed.
Do you smoke? /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Troy
12-13-2003, 09:07 PM
Extremely well said Tom, even though it's not pool related.
Too bad Mr. Harris chooses to site illegal activities in his response, thus nullifying his arguement.
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote ted harris:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote TomBrooklyn:</font><hr>
There is no such thing as a natural right to have a non-smoke filled atmosphere in any private business. A private business is any business owned and operated by a private citizen, including businesses that open it's doors to the public. No one has a "right" to dictate to a business owner what kind of atmosphere he provides, as long as he is not bothering anyone outside the walls of his establishment. The right that every individual does own is the right to chose to enter and patronize, or not enter and not patronize, any particular business.

What the government granted to non-smokers in this case was not a right, it was a freedom robbing condensation to the agenda of a minority group that was given preference over the natural God-given, inalienable right of freedom and free choice for all people, whether they like smoking or not.

While this sodomy of freedom may be popular with some people because it suits their personal preference; lets neither camouflage nor dignify it by pretending it is such an honorable thing as a human right.

TomBk
<hr /></blockquote>
So inside the private business, any atmosphere the owner wants to provide is okay, so long as it doesn't hurt anyone outside said businesses walls...
What if the owner wanted to provide a heroin den...
a crack house...
a paint sniffing club for our children...
or a date rape club?
You are saying that anarchy should be allowed inside the walls of a private business, no?
Smokers are the minority, in case you haven't noticed.
Do you smoke? /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif <hr /></blockquote>

nhp
12-13-2003, 10:59 PM
The poolroom I go to used to allow people to smoke inside before California banned it. There are a few things I have noticed ever since- The place stays cleaner, the equipment stays in better condition (no cigarrete burns or ashes on the tables), I see more fathers coming in with their sons to teach them how to play, and the people who go there who do smoke (myself included) don't really mind stepping outside for a smoke. Then again, this is southern California weather we experience, I'm sure it's nothing compared to going outside in -30 degree weather.

ted harris
12-13-2003, 11:30 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Troy:</font><hr> Extremely well said Tom, even though it's not pool related.
Too bad Mr. Harris chooses to site illegal activities in his response, thus nullifying his arguement.<hr /></blockquote>
Troy,
I would like to quote Tom from his post;
"No one has a "right" to dictate to a business owner what kind of atmosphere he provides, as long as he is not bothering anyone outside the walls of his establishment."

This thread is titled "Smokers Have until Feb 1 to light up." That is within the town of Rockville, MD in Montgomery county, MD. It is illegal to smoke at the poolroom in Montgomery County, and will be illegal in the town of Rockville as of Feb 1, 2004.

In Montgomery county today, all of these things are illegal. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Why don't you offer up a valid discussion, or is this all you can contribute? /ccboard/images/graemlins/blush.gif

cueball1950
12-14-2003, 12:41 AM
I was sure i was not going to reply to this post but now i have to. The only pool room here in albany has lost over 40% of his business. He can get a waiver if he allows the Gov't to look at his books to prove it. hey, all they have to do is come there any night we have a handicapped tournament. the amount of players has dropped from 28-30 players to barely 16. hell, on any friday night you can walk in and pick any table you want. Used to be that they had a waiting list. I do think that public places that allow smoking should advertise that it is a smoking place and then let the non-smokers make their own decision to come play or drink. I am not going to force anyone to inhale my second hand smoke. If i am in an establishment that allows smoking and a non-smoker comes in, should i have to put it out. No, it was their choice to come in there in the first place. Anyway. all you new yorkers, get ready for the new one. they are going to try to ban smoking in you own cars. canot wait until they try to pass that one. HEY TED, not trying to rile you up, but can you show me anywhere where it says smoking causes cancer. Definative scientific proof is what i am asking for. i realize that it causes other health problems. But from what i understand no one has ever shown Definate SCIENTIFIC PROOF that smoking causes cancer. if you have proof then i would like to see it. P M me if you have found it and where it is. that would be convincing enough for me to quit. And i make this Promise here and now. If you can show me the Definative Scientific proof that cigarette smoking causes cancer then i will quit within 30 days. Guaranteed................mike

tateuts
12-14-2003, 01:07 AM
It's just a matter of time before smoking is banned indoors in all public and work areas nationally, just like it is in California. People will get used to it as we have.

I won't play pool in places that (illegally here) allow smoking. The one I know of only has smokers playing, because it's so full of smoke it actually makes your eyes burn like smog. I wish that building owners would install nice outdoor areas (with overhangs and heaters if necessary) with benches and ashtrays to accommodate smokers. I think it's terrible for smokers to have to feel like they're on public display huddled on the curb outside buildings.

I quit smoking five years ago after heavy smoking for 30 years. My dad begged me to stop when he was in the hospital, dying of lung cancer. He quit before me but it was too late, unfortunately.

Quitting smoking was the hardest thing I've ever done and I consider it a great accomplishment. Without my dad, I couldn't have done it. My wife was very supportive also.

When I smoked, I realized that I could rationalize anything because I needed the drug. All smokers are good at rationalizing because it is so psychologically painful and physically uncomfortable to quit. But even I never once tried rationalizing the fact that smoking causes lung cancer. It was simply a gamble I was willing to take.

I heard a comedian say: "I still drink and smoke. I don't want to die of nothing!"


Chris

JimS
12-14-2003, 06:34 AM
Great post Chris!! Congratulations!!!

I stopped (I haven't quit.....I stopped..one day at a time...and it's been about 225 days now) on May 1, so it's been almost 8 months. It's gotten easy now that I have 225 days to look back on and realize that what I did those days will work today.

The smoker that lives in the back of my head still lives (he lives with the drunken little bastard in the back of my head that hasn't gotten the drink he wants for 22 years and 15 days!) and wants to smoke and still talks to me on occasion but he has little power to change my mind these days. I want to be a non-smoker today and in days to come.

PQQLK9
12-14-2003, 07:01 AM
Congragulations Jim on your abstinance...just take it a day at a time. I smoked for 22 years but have been smoke free for 24 (will be as of Feb.10th 2004 11:55 pm /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif) Heck I can remember smoking on Airplanes.
I just want to play One-Pocket with a clear head and not stink up my clothes.

tateuts
12-14-2003, 10:55 AM
Congrats to you too, JimS and Nick. Thank god that adventure is over.

Chris

Ps. Breaking News - Santa the Gopher emerges after playing one-hole in Tikrit, just in time for the Bush Chistmas video. Yeeehaaaww!

JimS
12-14-2003, 11:04 AM
The General being interviewed said "caught like a rat". The media is going to love that line. Even The Twit may use it.

I hate war. I hate killing people. I hate fighting. Hell I even hate loud minor disagreements....BUT...I sure am glad they got that sub-human piece'O CRAP.

ted harris
12-14-2003, 11:06 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote cueball1950:</font><hr>HEY TED, not trying to rile you up, but can you show me anywhere where it says smoking causes cancer. Definative scientific proof is what i am asking for. i realize that it causes other health problems. But from what i understand no one has ever shown Definate SCIENTIFIC PROOF that smoking causes cancer. if you have proof then i would like to see it. P M me if you have found it and where it is. that would be convincing enough for me to quit. And i make this Promise here and now. If you can show me the Definative Scientific proof that cigarette smoking causes cancer then i will quit within 30 days. Guaranteed................mike <hr /></blockquote>
This is typical of a smoker. I have provided links in this thread, and the one titled A more sensible approach to smoking vs. non-smoking (http://www.billiardsdigest.com/ccboard/showflat.php?Cat=&amp;Board=ccb&amp;Number=114018&amp;page=0&amp;v iew=collapsed&amp;sb=5&amp;o=&amp;fpart=1). All you have to do is click on those links. Your post makes the assertion that the scientific community has not provided sufficient proof of the diseases that are caused by tobacco use and the effects of environmental tobacco smoke. Have you read this entire thread? Why didn't you check out this info before you posted? I'll tell you why, because in most cases it doesn't matter what proof is provided, the mind is already made up.
Denial is not just a river in Egypt.
This kind of thinking is exactly what brought us to the point of a ban on smoking in indoor public places. All smokers really want to do is throw up a smokescreen (pardon the pun) and pretend like tobacco use does not cause cancer and a myriad of other diseases. As such, the rest of the world will take care of the problem for you. I am an optimist, and my hope is that those of you that are still addicted will be able to quit. The rest is up to you! I wish you luck, and if there is anything I can do to help, please let me know.

JimS
12-14-2003, 11:23 AM
Denial is a strong and strange phenonenom. The brain actually lies to the addict convincing them that their addiction is not hurting them or anyone else.

Denial prevails in all addictions: tobacco, alcohol, cocaine, gambling and on and on.

The last thing the addict wants to believe is that there is something terribly wrong with doing what they are doing. If they believed that then they'd have to do something and the LAST thing they want to do is even think about giving up whatever it is they are addicted to. They love that addiction more than they love their wife, kids, money, job, and life itself. The addict would rather die than even think about giving up their addiction. Like the guy above that says that their has never been any scientific proof that smoking causes cancer. Good grief...what does it take? He probably read somewhere that the scientific tests that have been done are all skewed and not conclusive and that's EXACTLY what he wanted to hear and believe....because...HE'S AN ADDICT, IN DENAIL, AND CANNOT FACE GIVING UP ON WHAT HE LOVES DOING. The promise to quit if provided proof that smoking causes cancer is BS. He's been telling his friends/girlfriend/wife/mother/kids that crap for years.

Still...there is hope. Denial can be broken. But it takes help.

Vicki
12-14-2003, 01:47 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Wally_in_Cincy:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote ted harris:</font><hr>What's wrong with teaching your kid to be proficient at cards,

<font color="blue">I don't think 12-year-olds should gamble. That is an adult activity. </font color>

and teach them the ways of the world? The difference is, playing cards is not physically harmful like heroin, smoke, cocaine, crack, etc. Maybe if more children had parents like Vicki, we wouldn't have so many drug abusing, <font color="red">gambling fools </font color> .

<font color="blue">It seems she not only allows her to gamble, but actually encourages it. Will her daughter grow up to be a "gambling fool" or a "smart" gambler, as if there is such a thing. </font color>

With a healthy respect for cards &amp; gambling, her daughter will be all the wiser, and a non-smoker.

<font color="blue">Consorting with gamblers, it seems to me, would increase the likelihood of her becoming a smoker. </font color>

Just what this world needs; smart non-smokers.
BTW, I wonder if Tiger Woods or any other child prodigies were gamblers too? What do you think?

<font color="blue">Maybe he did. Does that make it right? </font color>

<hr /></blockquote> <hr /></blockquote>

Let's get a few things straight...

I don't "encourage" my daughter to gamble. My daughter DOES know how to gamble AND she has just enough experience to know that she will likely lose. She understands that there is always someone else who's better and who will rob her blind if she wants to play him some. She wanted to learn and so I taughter her. She knows HOW but she is discouraged from it.

We play cards on a regular basis. Uno, Gin, Rummy, Poker... and she occasionally wants a reminder that gambling will cost her. We've allowed her to experiment with chips and I've played her for REAL money when she got too confident... allowance and savings. And when she lost I took her money and DID NOT give it back to her. She didn't like it one bit.

My daughter's father's family are all BIG gamblers. They have their book maker over for Christmas dinner. No vacation is ever taken in a place where there is no casino. With so much exposure to gambling she is bound to learn about it eventually so when she expressed an interest, I figured the best thing would be for ME to teach her. (just so you know... my dauther sees her relatives about once a month and for certain holidays, and it's because of these values that I limit her time with them so much)

When I said she would likely never be hustled I meant it's because she knows better than to expect she'll win. She has no illusions about gambling. It has not been glamourized or encouraged by me, but her father's relatives make it seem like a beautiful way of life. She has seen the problems is creates first hand by losing herself and seeing others lose (her father's relatives).

Naturally I am dealing with THE most judgemental group of people on the planet here on the CCB. Who better to criticize my parenting than a bunch of pool players... You've never met me and have NO idea how we live, who we know, or what we are about.

The only gamblers my daughter is consorting with are her aunts, uncles, grandparents, cousins... and there's not a darned thing I can do to discourage them but I can give some perspective to my kid.

As for my daughter ever smoking... I could be in for a huge shock if it ever happens, especially after we watched her father die from lung cancer. I would be very disappointed in her. I would never allow it and I would do everything I could to make her stop.

I don't give a good god darned if Tiger Woods gambled when he was a kid. I have done my best to educate my kid about it and hopefully it will be enough.

Vicki

Vicki
12-14-2003, 02:11 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote JimS:</font><hr> Denial is a strong and strange phenonenom. The brain actually lies to the addict convincing them that their addiction is not hurting them or anyone else.

Denial prevails in all addictions: tobacco, alcohol, cocaine, gambling and on and on.

The last thing the addict wants to believe is that there is something terribly wrong with doing what they are doing. If they believed that then they'd have to do something and the LAST thing they want to do is even think about giving up whatever it is they are addicted to. They love that addiction more than they love their wife, kids, money, job, and life itself. The addict would rather die than even think about giving up their addiction. Like the guy above that says that their has never been any scientific proof that smoking causes cancer. Good grief...what does it take? He probably read somewhere that the scientific tests that have been done are all skewed and not conclusive and that's EXACTLY what he wanted to hear and believe....because...HE'S AN ADDICT, IN DENAIL, AND CANNOT FACE GIVING UP ON WHAT HE LOVES DOING. The promise to quit if provided proof that smoking causes cancer is BS. He's been telling his friends/girlfriend/wife/mother/kids that crap for years.

Still...there is hope. Denial can be broken. But it takes help. <hr /></blockquote>

Very nice. Very well said. Very true. Well done.

eg8r
12-15-2003, 10:17 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Making cigarette smoking illegal in indoor public places is not an all out ban. The government is basically saying that smokers can smoke anywhere they want as long as it does not violate the space of others who have no choice but to breathe ETS in their presence in indoor public places because of the health risks. <hr /></blockquote> Great quote Ted. Let me see if I can get this straight...You do not like it when a smoker says, "If you don't like the smoke don't come to the pool room." However, quite hypocritically you agree with your quote, "The government is basically saying that smokers can smoke anywhere they want as long as it does not violate the space of others who have no choice but to breathe ETS in their presence in indoor public places". Ted does not want to be told where he can go, but he is the first to tell a smoker where they can go. Hypocrite.

eg8r

eg8r
12-15-2003, 10:33 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Can you really be this ridiculous? Him not choosing the Addict category is what was so funny.
This is generally what happens when a pro smoker runs out of things to say. The blanket personal attacks begin.
Hey, it's Saturday. Why don't you retreat, take a day off and regroup? Maybe then you will have something productive to say? Live today, fight tomorrow....maybe you are a glutton for punishment? ...and you are right, the ignorance definitely continues. I have given you the benefit of the doubt for most of this thread. I was gonna tell you to duck, but after reading this post, don't worry, you can stand tall brother! <hr /></blockquote> Are you acting this stupid on purpose. If you would go back and read my post, it does explain what "Addict" was. Let me make it clearer for the slow at hand...The word addict, is a adjective given to the poster with a certain post count. Here is a quote from the CCB Admin... [ QUOTE ]
Everyone has a title within the forum. You will notice them below the Username in each post. Some titles are automatically assigned based on the number of posts a user has made, and some titles are assigned by the forum owner to denote official representatives of the company or other VIPs in the forums.

Here is the list of the standard titles and # of posts to achieve them:


0 stranger
25 newbie
50 journeyman
100 member
200 enthusiast
400 addict
700 old hand
1200 veteran
1600 Pooh-Bah
2500 Carpal Tunnel


<hr /></blockquote> Watch out moron, if this thread goes any longer and you continue to participate, your title will also be an addict. You act like you know it all yet even simple little things like assigned titles by the CCB seem to flush you. Surely you are not an idiot like this in real life.

Even in your quote... [ QUOTE ]
Can you really be this ridiculous? Him not choosing the Addict category is what was so funny.
<hr /></blockquote> The only time in my post did the word funny come up was when I was quoting you. You are truly acting like an out of control anti-smoking zealot. I am not even a smoker and you continue to make that error.

You have been too stupid to understand that my entire participation in this thread really has NOTHING TO DO WITH SMOKING!!!!! The whole reason I continue is maybe one time, it will get through your thick head that I am posting about Government and Private Business. Someone even gave a good analogy that coincided great with your current business and you were too stupid to understand. If you were to remove smoking from thread and inserted gambling, I would have acted the same. It is about Government intervention with legally operating private business. Smoking just seems the new topic that follows along a long line of government intervention.

eg8r &lt;~~~hopes one day, Ted will shut up and read before he chimes in with something un-intelligent to say

ted harris
12-15-2003, 11:39 AM
If your input has nothing to do with smoking, why don't you go start a thread entitled "Nothing to do with smoking!"
Dude, you have demonstrated time and time again that your reading comprehension is virtually nonexistent. Why don't you ask someone else to 'splain it to you? Maybe you should ask some of your friends (if you have any) to read my posts, and see if they understand them the same way you do?
My posts are clear and concise. Since you are incapable of comprehending my posts, and incapable of anything other than ill warranted person attacks, we have nothing further to discuss.

eg8r
12-15-2003, 12:47 PM
[ QUOTE ]
If your input has nothing to do with smoking, why don't you go start a thread entitled "Nothing to do with smoking!" <font color="blue"> Oh, now you would like to tell me what to do. LOL Nah, you are more entertaining. </font color>
Dude, you have demonstrated time and time again that your reading comprehension is virtually nonexistent. <font color="blue"> Do you have any examples, I usually try to provide them when making this type of statement. You are just blowing hot air. </font color> Why don't you ask someone else to 'splain it to you? <font color="blue"> What part did I need an explanation. </font color> Maybe you should ask some of your friends (if you have any <font color="blue"> Awww, teddy, is this your school yard talk coming out? </font color> ) to read my posts, and see if they understand them the same way you do?
My posts are clear and concise. Since you are incapable of comprehending my posts, and incapable of anything other than ill warranted person attacks <font color="blue"> I was wondering if you think you are squeaky clean here? </font color> , we have nothing further to discuss. <hr /></blockquote> You completely ignored the "addict" part of the post, so I am guessing that is your way of showing your tail tucked nicely between your legs as you scamper away.

Your ill warranted attacks on legitimate business owners was the primary reason I joined in. It wasn't until I posted the reason for staying that I noticed you had no idea what the discussion was about. Then came your well placed, "I bet I could beat you on a pool table." Did that post make you feel better. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif It sounded like a childish ploy to divert from the fact that you were flailing in deep water. Then you started questioning my brain. All of this while you were trying to argue the ill effects of smoking. No one even questioned the evils of smoking, but you decided you had already made a fool of yourself, so you stood strong. Sorry Teddy, it never was about that. One day, you might want to come back to thread and see where you went astray. You got too emotional in the beginning and that was when you fell off the wagon. You did not want to believe anything I was saying because you were ignoring me as just another smoker. You even made some stupid comment about it (several times) even after I told you I don't smoke. You never offered anything as far as the negativity of the government and private business however you did spew a ton of hate towards those who smoke.

eg8r

Nostroke
12-15-2003, 02:12 PM
It is clear that this thread will never end because both of you have to have the last word. Will the one with the most common sense please stop posting?

Big_Jon
12-15-2003, 03:53 PM
Ok, here is my opinion... like anyone cares...
The pool room I go to used to have a non smoking section... well the front tables were smoking and the back tables were not, well after awhile of watching a waiting list build up on the smoking side and the non smoking side half empty... that had to go... and on another note, all you beer/wine/liquor drinkers proclaiming "yay to the government for cracking down on smoking!!!"... just wait... after the gov gets through with tobacco, who do you think will be next... and do you really think the gov wants to go though prohibition again... I say let 'em, let the gov ban smoking like they did the drink in the '30s and once again the gov will create another al capone, and then will you all be happy??? Here is how it goes, if you don't want to smell smoke, start your own pool room or get your own table, the same can go for smokers too, but it won't happen... the anti smokers will not win this... it's impossible, did you know that a prominent member of congress was heavily against tobacco until someone pulled him aside and showed him how much he and the rest of the government were making off of the taxes... he is now pro-smoking... like I said... it wont happen, and if it does... you'll be sorry, after tobacco... it'll be alcohol... don't say you weren't warned...

Thanks

Jon

eg8r
12-15-2003, 06:30 PM
LOL, nice of you to keep it going.

eg8r

Qtec
12-15-2003, 08:42 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Smokers are the minority, in case you haven't noticed <hr /></blockquote>

On the whole, yes.Are they a minority in bars and PHs?
I dont think the evidence supports the conclusion that they are,considering the fact that if the ban was optional, the non smoking bars and PHs would be the first to go out of buisness.
If it made good buisness sense to ban smoking in bars or PHs owners would have already done it!

My biggest objection to this ban is that it turns ordinary law abiding citizens into criminals simply for being addicted to cigs.
30 days in jail for being caught in posession of an ash-tray?????

Q

Vicki
12-16-2003, 10:17 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote eg8r:</font><hr> LOL, nice of you to keep it going.

eg8r <hr /></blockquote>

Here's a little more fuel...

Last night at Champion's Billiards in Rockville, Maryland there was no smoking allowed!

It was GLORIOUS!!!!

Seems the county, after several citations and fines, told the management that if they were caught allowing smoking again that they would be forced to close for three days!

Halleluiah!!!!

Vicki

Cueless Joey
12-16-2003, 10:28 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> &lt;/font&gt;&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;font class="small"&gt;Quote:&lt;/font&gt;&lt;hr /&gt;
Smokers are the minority, in case you haven't noticed <hr /></blockquote>

On the whole, yes.Are they a minority in bars and PHs?
I dont think the evidence supports the conclusion that they are,considering the fact that if the ban was optional, the non smoking bars and PHs would be the first to go out of buisness.
If it made good buisness sense to ban smoking in bars or PHs owners would have already done it!

My biggest objection to this ban is that it turns ordinary law abiding citizens into criminals simply for being addicted to cigs.
30 days in jail for being caught in posession of an ash-tray?????

Q <hr /></blockquote>
Pool hall owners don't ban smoking b/c non-smokers put up with it. Of course, we'd rather not.
I smoke a cigar too. I don't smoke inside or next to a person who is offended by it.

UWPoolGod
12-16-2003, 10:32 AM
Are they a minority in bars and PHs?
I dont think the evidence supports the conclusion that they are &lt;--Q

I definitely think that I am a minority in any poolhall/bar I have been in..being a non-smoker. I survey the place feel like a loner not having a cig in my hand. maybe I should start....yeah thats it....somebody pass me a cig. people get too stressed, like driving in traffic, while playing pool if they are smokers, always need a drag when they sit back down. I don't know how many wrecks I have almost seen while someone is lighting up during rush hour...but thats a whole different thread.

Todd &lt;--- screw it...I'll keep it going LOL!!!

Vicki
12-16-2003, 10:32 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Big_Jon:</font><hr> Ok, here is my opinion... like anyone cares...
the anti smokers will not win this... it's impossible... like I said... it wont happen, and if it does... you'll be sorry, after tobacco... it'll be alcohol... don't say you weren't warned...

Thanks

Jon
<hr /></blockquote>

Jon,

I'm so sure you're right. The governemnt is BOUND to allow smoking in public places again. I'm SO SURE they're going to allow smoking in offices. It's an ABSOLUTE that smoking will once again be allowed in doctor offices. Once we see the negative effects caused by dis-allowing something so purely innocent and righteous as smoking cigarettes I'm sure ashtrays will be returned to all public places. Even in nursing homes where emphysema patients are carrying around oxygen tanks there will be smoking once again. Doctors will just have to put their stogie in the ashtray to burn out as they deliver babies.

Give me a break!

We're talking about banning smoking in restaurants and bars - NOT PROHABITION. Smokers can still smoke - they just have to go outside. They can smoke in their homes and cars... just not where I have to breathe the air.

P-L-E-A-S-E!

Vicki