Smoking ban in Philadelphia approved

[rjs246]

My issue is with regulating the behavior of consenting adults in any way. People have a choice to go to a smokey bar or not. Life will go on if IGY chooses to never set foot in a bar again because he doesn't like the smell of cigarette smoke or is concerned with the health risks involved with second hand smoke. I get sunburned easily and even though I enjoy doing shtein outside I avoid the sun in the summer when I can because I'm at high risk for skin cancer. I could choose to slather myself in suntan lotion and have fun at the beach and brave the elements anyway, but I don't. That's my choice. Why is it any different for a farging bar? Of all places on Earth a bar should be allowed to cater to any legal thing that a consenting adult wants to do. The government isn't here to save us from our choices. It's here to ensure that we have the right to make that choice.

If you don't like smoke, stop going to bars that allow smoking. The world will not end if you never go to a bar again.

[ice grillin you]

My issue is with regulating the behavior of consenting adults in any way. People have a choice to go to a smokey bar or not. Life will go on if IGY chooses to never set foot in a bar again because he doesn't like the smell of cigarette smoke or is concerned with the health risks involved with second hand smoke. I get sunburned easily and even though I enjoy doing shtein outside I avoid the sun in the summer when I can because I'm at high risk for skin cancer. I could choose to slather myself in suntan lotion and have fun at the beach and brave the elements anyway, but I don't. That's my choice. Why is it any different for a farging bar? Of all places on Earth a bar should be allowed to cater to any legal thing that a consenting adult wants to do. The government isn't here to save us from our choices. It's here to ensure that we have the right to make that choice.

If you don't like smoke, stop going to bars that allow smoking. The world will not end if you never go to a bar again.

its not about igy...its about the people who work in restaurants and the general population at large

you care more where someone can smoke a cancer stick than where someone can comfortable choose to make a living?...for real?


if it were about me id be railing on about how bars should be able to serve alcohol whenever the hell they want...but as much as i like to go out and drink i dont think thats the best for society

[Sgt PSN]

Smokers need to look at the big health picture, put the civil liberties baton down and stop being narrow-minded. The gov't is not trying to take over the world. Its a figment of your paranoid imagination

Look at the big picture?  Ok, let's look at the big picture.

Today the government tells all privately owned business owners that they cannot allow smoking in their privately owned establishment.  

Tomorrow the government tells home owners that they can't smoke in the privacy of their own home.

Next week the government tells me what to wear to work.  

The week after that the government tells me what color to paint my house.

Next month the government makes OnStar^TM mandaotry on all vehicles that they always know where I am.

3 months from now the government is regulating the amount of bacon I can eat in a day/week/month.

Next year the government tells me I can't own a gun because now that smoking in public is illegal and cancer isn't a problem, gun shots wounds are the leading cause of death.  

2 years from now everyone's phone calls, emails and spending habits are tracked and studied to determine who is a threat to society.

5 years from now US mail must be sent in see-through, plastic packaging.  No more discrete shipping methods for Chuggie's new "jack hammer."  

15 years from now my first grandchild is born and immediate has a computer chip shoved up it's ass that tell the gov't where he/she is at all times, what his/her vital signs are, body temperature, thoughts, dreams, etc, etc.  

Once you start allowing the government to start violating civil liberties and rights, you are opening up Pandora's Box and 10 years from now when it snowballs out of control you'll be standing around one day thinking "What the farg?"

[SunMo]

i think you use the employees as an easier argument for a personal agenda...you would rather there be no smokers at a bar when you are there.

as far as the employees go, they don't have to work there...you know the inherit risk/reward ratio or any job you take before you take it.  some jobs have a higher risk than others...bartending and waitressing in a bar has a low risk compared to other real jobs, yet people still work them.  if you really care about employees under terrible working conditions there are much bigger battles to fight.

[rjs246]

you care more where someone can smoke a cancer stick than where someone can comfortable choose to make a living?...for real?

Those people have a choice to work at a restaurant or a bar that doesn't allow smoking. They have a choice to find a different profession or live in their parents' basements. They have the choice to work as painters at an auto-body shop and inhale fumes all day, or become police officers and get shot at, or become firefighters and run into flaming buildings, or be cowboys, or computer programmers or any farging thing on earth, much of which is way more dangerous than serving drinks at a bar.

So yes, I'm more concerned with a consenting adult's right to take part in a legal activity than I am about the plight of an overly health conscious bus boy.

[ice grillin you]

as far as the employees go, they don't have to work there

again you believe that its more important to be able to choose to smoke in a bar than it is to choose where you would like to work....i think being able to work where you want is more important than being able to smoke where you want

i think you use the employees as an easier argument for a personal agenda...you would rather there be no smokers at a bar when you are there.

if it were a personal agenda like i said id be pushing for no public drinking laws...but even tho they would make my life better i dont believe in them...just as i believe their should be certain public smoking laws

[ice grillin you]

Those people have a choice to work at a restaurant or a bar that doesn't allow smoking.

what if they prefer a place of work that suits them better...its near public transportation and they dont have a car...its close to home or near their kids babysitter...what if their bar offers a 401k and another doesnt...what if they just plain love their place of employment?...all that versus having to walk ten feet to smoke a cigarette and you choose the 10 foot walk as being more important than a persons job?

So yes, I'm more concerned with a consenting adult's right to take part in a legal activity whenever and wherever i want regardless of the harm it causes to others.

fixed

because remember this law STILL ALLOWS YOU TO SMOKE CIGARETTES

[SunMo]

again you believe that its more important to be able to choose to smoke in a bar than it is to choose where you would like to work....

no, i think both choices are equally important... 

[rjs246]

Those people have a choice to work at a restaurant or a bar that doesn't allow smoking.

what if they prefer a place of work that suits them better...its near public transportation and they dont have a car...its close to home or near their kids babysitter...what if their bar offers a 401k and another doesnt...what if they just plain love their place of employment?...all that versus having to walk ten feet to smoke a cigarette and you choose the 10 foot walk as being more important than a persons job?

I've traded location and convenience for better pay and benefits before. Life is all about choices. If avoiding smoke is more important to you than how much money you make or where you work, fantastic! You have a choice to make. The government doesn't need to gold-plate every intersection.

Whatever. I'm never going to convince you and you're never going to convince me.

[Wingspan]

Smokers need to look at the big health picture, put the civil liberties baton down and stop being narrow-minded. The gov't is not trying to take over the world. Its a figment of your paranoid imagination

i'm not a smoker and i'm against this because i hate the government telling us what to do.  seat belts even...i think you're dumb not to wear one...but i think it's farging retarded to have a law forcing you to wear one...personal choice, it's a beautiful thing

but you go ahead and be a good little sheep.

I agree with the seat belt being retarded...and the fact Im fined for it is even more. Your not affecting anyone else's life but your own.

Not true at all actually. The seat-belt laws are not in place to protect the idiot who doesn't wear one. They are in place to protect the other driver from the idiot who will still refuse to wear one.

Scenario:

You get into an accident, everyone sober. The other guy was not wearing a seat belt, you were. The other guy dies, and it is determined that wearing a seat-belt would have saved his life.

With no seat-belt law: You can be charged with vehicular manslaughter at worst (if the accident is your fault), or at least be hit with wrongful death charges/suits for years.

With a seat-belt law: The guy who did not wear the belt is at fault for his own death, regardless of the accident cause (all partys being sober) due to his neglect to obey the seat-belt law.

[rjs246]

That's stupid. If a driver is at fault and someone dies they should be charged. If that driver is not at fault they shouldn't have anything to worry about. Seatbelt plays no part in it one way or another.

[phattymatty]

Seatbelt plays no part in it one way or another.

??

[rjs246]

Wingspan is saying that it's less likely that someone will die if they are wearing a seatbelt (der) and if they aren't wearing a seatbelt and they die than the at-fault driver faces a lighter charge.

I was saying that if the at-fault driver kills someone then they should be charged whether that person was wearing a seatbelt or not. I'm also saying that if you're a woman and can't drive and cause an accident you should have to deal with the consquences whether that person was wearing a seatbelt or not. If they weren't and they died. Sucks for you and it sucks for them, but it's your fault not theirs and you should have to deal with it accordingly.

[Cerevant]

Today the government tells all privately owned business owners that they cannot allow smoking in their privately owned establishment.

Public space

Tomorrow the government tells home owners that they can't smoke in the privacy of their own home.

Private space

Next week the government tells me what to wear to work.

Work space

The week after that the government tells me what color to paint my house.

Private space, although home owner associations are infringing...

Next month the government makes OnStar^TM mandaotry on all vehicles that they always know where I am.

Private space

3 months from now the government is regulating the amount of bacon I can eat in a day/week/month.

Private space

Next year the government tells me I can't own a gun because now that smoking in public is illegal and cancer isn't a problem, gun shots wounds are the leading cause of death.

Public and private, Gun ownership is already regulated.

2 years from now everyone's phone calls, emails and spending habits are tracked and studied to determine who is a threat to society.

Private space

5 years from now US mail must be sent in see-through, plastic packaging.  No more discrete shipping methods for Chuggie's new "jack hammer."  

This is a gray area, because of the safety of the carriers.  I would argue that the shippers have the right to inspect the contents of a package, but may not record or report the contents unless they violate the law.  I would be very surprised if something like this is not already the case.

15 years from now my first grandchild is born and immediate has a computer chip shoved up it's ass that tell the gov't where he/she is at all times, what his/her vital signs are, body temperature, thoughts, dreams, etc, etc.  

Way private

Once you start allowing the government to start violating civil liberties and rights, you are opening up Pandora's Box and 10 years from now when it snowballs out of control you'll be standing around one day thinking "What the farg?"

In a free society, you have the right to do as you please until it infringes on someone else's right to do the same.  Every case I've listed as public or work it is reasonable to have some restrictions to protect the rights of the others who have every right to be in that place.  The government has no place interfering in our private lives.  There are gray areas that are messy to interpret, but I do think in most cases the distinction is cut and dry.

I argued against drug testing in that thread, because I don't believe it is anyone's right to monitor your private activities.  Want me to blow a breathalyzer before I start my shift?  Sure, but don't tell me I can't drink when I get home.

I would never support a ban on smoking in private homes.  I would support negligence/endangerment charges if children become sick due to a parent's smoking.  I would also support denial of health care coverage (private or public) for smokers who contract smoking-related diseases.

I would never support a ban on drinking, and frankly I think trying to control drugs is equally stupid.  However, I have no problem with someone who has been convicted of DUI being thrown in jail.

I would support denial of health care, life insurance, and/or liability claims to those who are injured or die due to their own negligence: no seat belt, no helmet, disabling the safety features of cars, power tools, lawn equipment, etc.  But a person has the absolute right to do those things.

If you want to kill yourself, have a ball.  I'll laugh and submit your ass for a Darwin Award.  I agree that the law shouldn't be used to protect people from themselves.  The law is there to protect people and their property from the actions of others.

[ice grillin you]

This is one of those things where I personally don't care if the gov't has my palm prints, finger prints or ass prints.  At the same time, I think it's wrong to force it upon the nation.  I wouldn't mind sacrificing that liberty but certainly understand why not everyone feels the same way.