PDA

View Full Version : Welcome to California. No, you may not smoke.



Cueless Joey
03-19-2006, 11:06 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060319/ap_on_re_us/smoking_ban /ccboard/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
My kind of towm except when I want to smoke a stogey. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

pooltchr
03-19-2006, 03:27 PM
Just another example of government taking away personal freedom. Let me know how you feel when they decide to ban pool rooms.
Steve

moblsv
03-19-2006, 05:28 PM
Smoking next to me and ruining my meal is no more a personal freedom worth respecting than me spitting on the people next to me who are trying to enjoy thier meals. So, as soon as a rude, ignorant pool hall ruins my meal I'll let you know.

JPB
03-19-2006, 06:36 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote moblsv:</font><hr> Smoking next to me and ruining my meal is no more a personal freedom worth respecting than me spitting on the people next to me who are trying to enjoy thier meals. So, as soon as a rude, ignorant pool hall ruins my meal I'll let you know. <hr /></blockquote>


The right to hold private property is a personal freedom worth protecting, and every time a rude, ignorant politician ruins more than a meal by stealing property for their political aims, some of us will let you know.

Smoking in restaurants is not a public concern; it is a private one. The market will take care of the problem. I really don't understand when private property which invited the public became synonymous with public property. The government can regulate pollution with chemicals or mercury, etc... but the harm of secon hand smoke in private buildings can be avioded by walking away. I dislike smoking in public. It bothers me. But the government does not thereby have the right to dictate the terms of ownership of property to business people when nobody is hurt other than people who consent to the harm.

Big_Jon
03-20-2006, 05:41 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote JPB:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote moblsv:</font><hr> Smoking next to me and ruining my meal is no more a personal freedom worth respecting than me spitting on the people next to me who are trying to enjoy thier meals. So, as soon as a rude, ignorant pool hall ruins my meal I'll let you know. <hr /></blockquote>


The right to hold private property is a personal freedom worth protecting, and every time a rude, ignorant politician ruins more than a meal by stealing property for their political aims, some of us will let you know.

Smoking in restaurants is not a public concern; it is a private one. The market will take care of the problem. I really don't understand when private property which invited the public became synonymous with public property. The government can regulate pollution with chemicals or mercury, etc... but the harm of secon hand smoke in private buildings can be avioded by walking away. I dislike smoking in public. It bothers me. But the government does not thereby have the right to dictate the terms of ownership of property to business people when nobody is hurt other than people who consent to the harm. <hr /></blockquote>

Tap Tap Tap, JPB!

Cueless Joey
03-20-2006, 06:04 PM
As long as smokers keep the smoke in their section, I'm ok.
As a compromise, smokers are allowed to smoke outside of the restaurants.
The poor waitresses, watiers, bartenders and bouncers inside smoke-allowed bars are getting killed. Did they consent to being exposed to harmful smoke? Yes, b/c they need to work.
You wouldn't let factory workers get exposed to harmful chemicals unnecessarily.
Same should be done to restaurant workers and flight attendants.
Smoking is no longer allowed indoors in California. I'm ok with that. Children shouldn't go to a smoke-filled McDonald' b/c of the law protecting them.

Barbara
03-20-2006, 07:50 PM
Hey CJ!!

Okay, I don't agree with the total outside thing. If there was a ban so many feet from building entrances, that would be acceptable. But to ban smoking in the great outdoors?? WTF? Who owns the great outdoors???

This is just my knee-jerk reaction. I haven't read the posts and I'm fading fast from last weekend.

You should come out to the EC for VF SBE baby!!

Barbara

Cueless Joey
03-20-2006, 10:05 PM
They can smoke outside the building all they want.
I don't really care.
An all-out ban by a city is nazicistic I think.
I smoke a stogey once in a while. I do it outside of course as it offends a lot of people.
I'd love to go but these days, my free time is spent turning wood.
Like right now. The shaft machine is on a 10-minute cycle.

Big_Jon
03-21-2006, 12:44 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cueless Joey:</font><hr> Like right now. The shaft machine is on a 10-minute cycle.
<hr /></blockquote>
Uh oh...
I think i just heard a belt break...

heater451
03-21-2006, 05:18 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote (from link):</font><hr>. . ."We just don't want anyone blowing smoke in someone's face. Unfortunately, what smokers do is harmful to everybody else. People should have the right to breathe clean air," said Mayor Pro Tem Dennis Washburn. . . ."<hr /></blockquote>Does a smoking human put out more toxins per minute, than your average, modern, catalytic-converter equipped automobile, sitting in gridlock?

Calabasas sits on/around the 101, not long before it merges with the 405, and that area is clogged with cars for hours a day. Would it be okay to smoke during rush hours?



=================================

moblsv
03-22-2006, 08:49 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote heater451:</font><hr>Would it be okay to smoke during rush hours?<hr /></blockquote>

Sure, just keep it in your car and don't throw your butts out the window.

heater451
03-23-2006, 04:52 PM
Yeah--I hate when people toss cigarette butts out of car windows. Even though they get mangled into psuedo-bio-degradation, they still hang around long enought to look nasty. Not to mention, there **is** usually a littering law that's being broken.

Otherwise, does a car with an open window constitute a private or public area? Even if someone smokes with the windows closed, it gets out (minus some trapped in the upholstery and seating), and it's right back in the air.

This seems to point to a problem with smokers in groups, as opposed to one person, who wouldn't make much of an impact, assuming a "reasonable" cubic-ft area for dispersion. . . .

Hey, what about smokers who are protesting outdoors, while smoking? If they are arrested and broken up, doesn't this infringe on the Right to Assemble?

I mean, I'm all for non-smoking, but I think legislation can get carried a bit far, no matter how much one can 'prove' health impact.

When smoking is outlawed, only outlaws will smoke. It'll be tough to enforce--look how good they do with curtailing speeding, drugs, and invading foreign nations under false pretenses. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif



=================================