NYC Smoking Ban
NYC has chosen to ban smoking. I think it is wrong to ban smoking in a pirvate business. Many who drink smoke. Not all but there is a large %. What authority does the city gov't. have to mandate no smoking in a private business? If the customers do not like smoking they can spend their dollars at a non-smoking private place of business. If there are few non-smoking places of business then by all means the non-smokers are welcome to start a non-smoking business directed to customers who do not wish for smoke. I am sorry but the city has no business in this. We live in a free marketplace and that means customers can create all kinds of businesses to serve the needs of the diverse population. If some do not want smoke then they are free to go to smoke-free places of business. If there is a shortage of smoke-free outlets then that is sign of a void in the marketplace that a business person can solve by opening a new smoke-free business. We do not need mommy and daddy in the gov't to "take care of poor little us" We vote with our $$$ when we go out.
I am 100% against this and I do not even smoke.
Link
Your thoughts?
Fellowship
I am 100% against this and I do not even smoke.
Link
Your thoughts?
Fellowship
Comments
Originally posted by Paul
smoking should be illegal
Are you serious?
I would hope not. I will explain my position a little further. I understand some places are simply not a "place" that one would hope for smoking such as a waiting room at a doctors office etc. In such a case the owner of the business has every right to ban smoking. Let me go a little farther and even say that yes I see and clearly recognize the case that the NYC city leaders have to ban smoking as they want to "protect" people from the smoking of others. I see that and I respect that desire. However to ban smoking in places such as bars is a little too far. Many who go to a bar are well aware that bars are a kind of "place" that smoking is expected. I would also expect that truck stops and other types of businesses are also places with many smokers. In such traditional venues of smokers I say the gov't. (city, state or federal) has no business banning the practice. Sure they can impose regulations that create smoking and non-smoking sections within such a business but to ban it is beyond their rightful jurisdiction. Let the owners and the customers vote. Again I see the case of those who desire to ban smoking but the case is not a strong enough case to warrent the action of banning the practice of smoking in private places of business.
Fellowship
Living in California, it's easy to take it for granted. You don't really notice the lack of second-hand smoke, so it's really hard to appreciate it. The last time I really noticed how bad second-hand smoke is was at the Arrivals section of SFO. The air-conditioner inside was broken, so I chose to stand outside, which is a designated smoking area. My eyes got all bloodshot...the smokers were spitting everwhere and throwing butts on the ground.
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
Are you serious?
Yes. Smoking should be banned outside private residential property. I shouldn't have to lose my own health just to satisfy somebody else's addiction. Additionally, the government should tax the hell out cigarette sales.
This applies to pot too. Legalize weed under the same restrictions and tax the hell out of it. Everybody else benefits while smokers suffer.
Originally posted by Eugene
Since the city gives businesses the right to do business, they can dictate the rules to which they must adhere. This law wouldn't have passed if the majority of people disagreed with it, or if the city thought it would cause major problems.
Living in California, it's easy to take it for granted. You don't really notice the lack of second-hand smoke, so it's really hard to appreciate it. The last time I really noticed how bad second-hand smoke is was at the Arrivals section of SFO. The air-conditioner inside was broken, so I chose to stand outside, which is a designated smoking area. My eyes got all bloodshot...the smokers were spitting everwhere and throwing butts on the ground.
Life is not without complications. I understand your experience with smokers outside. When in college some students always smoked just outside the doors to each building and you had to make your way through the smoke. I understand your view. I also stand by my view that while the gov't can regulate the issue of smoking they have no right to ban it at private places of business.
Fellowship
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
Are you serious?
yes, It is an addictive drug that only serves to make MO rich for killing people... It has no legitimate positive effect...
however it does have some cultural significance... so rather then ban smoking, ban mass-produced ciggs... people should roll their own or use pipes... but coffin nails should not be around...
I understand the whole "freedom to do what i want as long as i don't hurt anyone" deal... but smoking does hurt other people, either 2nd hand or through overcrowding of medical facilities due to smoking-related illnesses taking up room for other people who need medical attention for "more legitimate illnesses"... (yes I know I will get flamed for this... but the fact of the matter is these people know smoking causes cancer... when they get it they should deal with it on their own and not cause problems for other people)
I also feel the whole tobacco is illegal, but marijuana isn't thing to be hypocritical.. if one is legal, the other should be as well... there isn't THAT much different between the two, other then well the fact that marijuana can actually have legitimate uses...
Originally posted by Eugene
Yes. Smoking should be banned outside private residential property. I shouldn't have to lose my own health just to satisfy somebody else's addiction. Additionally, the government should tax the hell out cigarette sales.
This applies to pot too. Legalize weed under the same restrictions and tax the hell out of it. Everybody else benefits while smokers suffer.
it is intresting we posted similar ideas w/o talking about it beforehand... (i was typing as you posted)
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
Life is not without complications. I understand your experience with smokers outside. When in college some students always smoked just outside the doors to each building and you had to make your way through the smoke. I understand your view. I alsy stand by my view that while the gov't can regulate the issue of smoking they have no right to ban it at private places of business.
Fellowship
If a business doesn't follow the rules, it can no longer do business in the city. The city has every right to revoke licenses for failure to comply with its laws. You can fight it all you want, but the city has the right to pass laws that some people might not agree with. If people really disagreed with it, it wouldn't have come to pass.
Originally posted by Eugene
If a business doesn't follow the rules, it can no longer do business in the city. The city has every right to revoke licenses for failure to comply with its laws. You can fight it all you want, but the city has the right to pass laws that some people might not agree with. If people really disagreed with it, it wouldn't have come to pass.
That is a poor argument and here is why..
I do not think any student in a public school should have to recite a manditory prayer to a Christian God. What if in a given community 85% of the population voted to make it the law of the land to force young students to recite a prayer to a Christian God in school? Would you still stand behind your argument? I am simply saying that while sure people disagree on things it is wrong to ban smoking in a private business. Public place just fine with me but a private business is different and what you say about the city granting the right for a business to run its business is a point but it alone while it may be the rule of law does not also mean it is the right thing to do. Again many disagree over many things.
Fellowship
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
Life is not without complications. I understand your experience with smokers outside. When in college some students always smoked just outside the doors to each building and you had to make your way through the smoke.
next year they are banning smoking in buildings and people must be 100 feet away from entrances to light up...
I understand your view. I also stand by my view that while the gov't can regulate the issue of smoking they have no right to ban it at private places of business.
Fellowship
yes it is a private place of business... but think about the non-smoking employee.... why should they be forced to work in an environment with smoking? sure they can ask their boss to do something about it, but what if the boss smokes? get a new job? that is ridiculous...
also... i HAD an internship lined up with philip morris this summer..... but now since the majority of their office is moving to VA because of this ban I lost it... Im actually happy about it... i did not know they were allowed to smoke in offices before and was surprised that the ban would have that kind of effect.... (to be fair they are also having financial troubles and they were thinking about moving some staff to their main plant in VA to save on office costs in NYC anyway...) but the ban sealed it...
As for bars... as someone who doesn't smoke it is impossible to find a smoke free bar... should i just not go to bars? that is also ridiculous... smokers should not impede on my right to have a good time without killing myself with tar...
Let each person vote. Banning things is a slippery business.
Fellowship
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
That is a poor argument and here is why..
I do not think any student in a public school should have to recite a manditory prayer to a Christian God. What if in a given community 85% of the population voted to make it the law of the land to force young students to recite a prayer to a Christian God in school? Would you still stand behind your argument? I am simply saying that while sure people disagree on things it is wrong to ban smoking in a private business. Public place just fine with me but a private business is different and what you say about the city granting the right for a business to run its business is a point but it alone while it may be the rule of law does not also mean it is the right thing to do. Again many disagree over many things.
Fellowship
different situation there.... the whole prayer in schools issue is handcuffed by the constitution... OT: i think there should be some kind of spiritual education in schools... even if it is just a history of religion or a course that debates the existence of god w/o giving any preference to any one religion... /OT
private businesses still employ citizens who deserve the right to a smoke-free workplace..
Originally posted by Paul
As for bars... as someone who doesn't smoke it is impossible to find a smoke free bar... should i just not go to bars? that is also ridiculous... smokers should not impede on my right to have a good time without killing myself with tar...
I have you right where I expected you to fall.....
Did you really think before you typed that?
You want full right to destroy your liver in a public place while you can do that at home in front of the tv.
BUT! you want smokes to smoke at home so you can go to the bars. I am not saying one is better or worse than the other but do you not see the hipocracy in that statement? You are more than free to drink at home in no smoke whatsoever.
That is the trap I expected some to fall in.
Fellowship
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
I hear the argument from those for the smoking ban. I explained why I think it is a weak argument. Yes it is a valid argument I give you that I still find it to be a weak argument from my view. Now I will state why I find my stance on the issue as having a stronger argument. Simply because the marketplace can resolve the issue without any banning. If people do not like smoke they can vote with their dollars to avoid such places that are filled with smokers.
Let each person vote. Banning things is a slippery business.
Fellowship
this wont work because one smoker can ruin a place for many many non-smokers... also businesses will lose lots of $$$ if they are in the minority by banning smoking... the only way it can be effective is through a citywide ban...
Originally posted by Paul
different situation there.... the whole prayer in schools issue is handcuffed by the constitution... OT: i think there should be some kind of spiritual education in schools... even if it is just a history of religion or a course that debates the existence of god w/o giving any preference to any one religion... /OT
private businesses still employ citizens who deserve the right to a smoke-free workplace..
Ahh another trap some fall into....
There is no right to smoke free environment.
I build homes out in the country outside of the city and I sometimes drive through smoke from people burning brush. It is a common thing for me to have to drive through smoke from people burning brush.
I am not about to try to make it illegal for them to do it.
Fellowship
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
I have you right where I expected you to fall.....
Did you really think before you typed that?
yes, i knew you would bring this up
You want full right to destroy your liver in a public place while you can do that at home in front of the tv.
but in that case i would only be affecting myself... also i don't drink much... i go to bars for the people...
BUT! you want smokes to smoke at home so you can go to the bars. I am not saying one is better or worse than the other but do you not see the hypocrisy in that statement? You are more than free to drink at home in no smoke whatsoever.
That is the trap I expected some to fall in.
Fellowship [/B]
there is no hypocrisy because i make the choice to consume -OH, with smoking that choice is made for me.... also, smokers don't have to stay home to smoke, they can just go outside...
Should we ban the sun because so many get skin cancer from the harmful UV rays?
Or how about we ban legal right to run a business unless the business owner installs 100% UV protection windows in their place of business.
After all a person in a restaurant could sit by a window and if the window is not a 100% UV blocker window that person could get skin cancer.
? ? ?
How many of you who support the smoking ban think Businesses should install UV blocking glass tomorrow or face being fined?
? ? ?
Think about it... this is very much like smoking...
Nobody is going to get lung cancer from a night or two out at a bar breathing smoke of others. If they go often they could.
Same with the Sun and UV rays.
once or twice next to the window will not harm anyone but day after day could.
So,,,, tell me should Business install UB blocking glass?
Fellowship
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
Ahh another trap some fall into....
There is no right to smoke free environment.
I build homes out in the country outside of the city and I sometimes drive through smoke from people burning brush. It is a common thing for me to have to drive through smoke from people burning brush.
I am not about to try to make it illegal for them to do it.
Fellowship
yes there is... it is called quality of the workplace... that is why there are regulations in factories and office buildings... I DO have the right to not have my health infringed upon in my workplace...
even though you may not mind driving through the smoke, you are outside and it is a bit different from an enclosed area... and depending on the situation, you could probably make a case out of it...
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
Let me ask this..
Should we ban the sun because so many get skin cancer from the harmful UV rays?
no, don't be ridiculous... smoking is something that can be regulated and is NOT EASILY SUPPRESSED IF YOU MIND BEING AROUND IT... the sun on the other hand can be blocked by those who care relatively cheaply and easily with different clothes, a shade or sunscreen...