Taking the smoking ban too far

[noodles]

Beverly Hills Considers Outdoor Smoking Ban | News | KTLA The CW | Where Los Angeles Lives

I've been very supportive of all sorts of bans on smoking indoors, but this is just stupid. Banning smoking outside?

[ohio_eric]

I'm with you. Indoors makes sense. Outdoors is just over the top. Americans seem unable to not push a good idea too far.

[eleven59]

They should have it banned in public outdoor locations (i.e. public pools, beaches, bus stops, parks) IMHO, but walking down the street is different.

There's no plus side to smoking, and I see no problem with encouraging people to quit. I don't mind passing people in the street, but when they crowd around bus stops or the entrances/exits to buildings it gets really irritating. And they have the nerve to give you dirty looks for getting in their way

[BigM555]

Originally Posted by eleven59

There's no plus side to smoking, and I see no problem with encouraging people to quit.

At least...no more than fapping. But I don't see too many people jumping on THAT band wagon.

STOP THE WEINER ABUSE!

[Drew]

Officials in Beverly Hills will vote on a smoking ban tonight for outdoor diners.

The proposal prohibits smoking at restaurant patios and poolside bars and eateries at hotels.

Thing is, I'm OK with that.

Sure, smoke dissipates a bit faster out of doors than indoors, but if you're eating at an outdoor patio and the guy next to you is smoking, you're still having cigarette smoke carried by the breeze into your face as you eat, imparing your ability to fully taste your food, leaving you smelling like a smoker yourself, and hurting your lungs. This is even worse if you're a waiter at a place like this, constantly surrounded by smoking patrons.

This isn't a "you can't smoke anywhere" outdoor smoking ban, but just one specific to bars and restaurants with outdoor seating options.

Eleven59, not to call you out specifically, but did you even read the article before replying, or just glanced at the headline?

[noodles]

I think I can understand a restaurant, Drew. A bar, though? I mean, it's a bar outside. I think this is bordering on ridiculous. Where do you go to smoke, on the other side of the rope fence? OK, I walked two feet away, I'm not bothering anyone now.

[garcia3441]

[Crocodile Dundee accent]
That's not a ban. Now this is a ban
[/Crocodile Dundee accent]

On December 17, 2004, a national ban on the sale of tobacco products went into effect. Smoking in all public places in Bhutan became illegal on February 22, 2005. It thus became the first nation in the world to outlaw this practice outright.

[Unknown Doodl3.2]

The responsibilities and restrictions for smokers get larger in number everytime a new law like this passes. I feel that if you want to be a smoker then you must learn to put up with this restrictions set to protect the non smoker's right to live in a (more and more) smoke free world and their health. If smokers can't handle this then they should either do whatever it takes to quit, or just smoke on your own private property and not in public.

[eleven59]

Originally Posted by Drew

Eleven59, not to call you out specifically, but did you even read the article before replying, or just glanced at the headline?

You caught me, actually No, I didn't read it, I was just making random statements on my opinions of smoking laws.

[noodles]

Originally Posted by garcia3441

On December 17, 2004, a national ban on the sale of tobacco products went into effect. Smoking in all public places in Bhutan became illegal on February 22, 2005. It thus became the first nation in the world to outlaw this practice outright.

^ I do not support that, because I don't think the government should dictate what people put into their body. Then again, I'm of the opinion that drugs are something that should be legal, highly regulated, and heavily taxed.

[eleven59]

(now that I've read the article) I personally agree, it should be illegal at outdoor eating/drinking establishments.

It would hurt business a lot at first, but people gotta eat/drink, so they'll come back.

[JJ Rodriguez]

Originally Posted by eleven59

(now that I've read the article) I personally agree, it should be illegal at outdoor eating/drinking establishments.

It would hurt business a lot at first, but people gotta eat/drink, so they'll come back.

Not if there's a town very near by that doesn't have it outlawed.

[Drew]

Originally Posted by noodles

I think I can understand a restaurant, Drew. A bar, though? I mean, it's a bar outside. I think this is bordering on ridiculous. Where do you go to smoke, on the other side of the rope fence? OK, I walked two feet away, I'm not bothering anyone now.

I agree with you on some level, Dave, but I think I even sort of misread it myself. They specifically ban smoking at the following places:

he proposal prohibits smoking at restaurant patios and poolside bars and eateries at hotels

So, the poolside bar is sort of the odd man out, but the others are essentially outdoor places where food is served and people will be sitting and consuming it. In short, places where you have a legitimate reason to go that does not involve smoking, and where you will be remaining for a long period of time, exposed to potential secondhand smoke from smokers. This is sort of a natural extention of restaurant smoking bans, for me.

Poolside's a little mroe arbitrary, but it's the same sort of situation where nonsmokers have a legitimate reason to be there and spend long periods of time there, exposed to your smoke. Also, the water (and filtration system) would be exposed to ash from secondhand smoke.

The way I read it, outdoor bars that are NOT eateries, or outdoor sections of bars where you can go to smoke are not included in this ban. I think it's more reasonable than it seems at a glance.

I also agree with you on issues of the federal government's ability to limit choices of its constituents, but here the one issue that I think makes it worthy of regulation is that secondhand smoke is actually more dangerous than, well, firsthand smoke, becuase it's unfiltered. As such, smoking is potentially more dangerous to people who spend a long time around smokers than it is to the smokers themselves, and thus something that I feel is wiithin the rights of the federal government to restrict.

[eleven59]

Originally Posted by JJ Rodriguez

Not if there's a town very near by that doesn't have it outlawed.

So, money is more important that peoples health? (not attacking you or saying that's your opinion, moreso attacking the businesses, etc. that make that complaint)

Besides, people are lazy, especially when looking for a place to drink

Sure, at first they'd go elsewhere, but eventually they'd get sick of the commute and they'd go somewhere local and just go to the other towns for special occasions.

[noodles]

Originally Posted by Drew

I also agree with you on issues of the federal government's ability to limit choices of its constituents, but here the one issue that I think makes it worthy of regulation is that secondhand smoke is actually more dangerous than, well, firsthand smoke, becuase it's unfiltered. As such, smoking is potentially more dangerous to people who spend a long time around smokers than it is to the smokers themselves, and thus something that I feel is wiithin the rights of the federal government to restrict.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I agree with most of what you say. Your rights end where someone else's begin, so if that someone has to breathe in your smoke, then you don't get to smoke. It just seems ridiculous that they want to ban smoking outside, where the cars driving by produce more harmful emissions than a cigarette. Are we going to ban driving by outdoor eateries now?

Now, if this is a section of town that completely bans vehicular traffic, then disregard.

[JJ Rodriguez]

Originally Posted by eleven59

So, money is more important that peoples health? (not attacking you or saying that's your opinion, moreso attacking the businesses, etc. that make that complaint)

Besides, people are lazy, especially when looking for a place to drink

Sure, at first they'd go elsewhere, but eventually they'd get sick of the commute and they'd go somewhere local and just go to the other towns for special occasions.

I don't go out to bars for 2 reasons: 1 - I'm really anti social 2 - No smoking. I would probably go out more if they hadn't banned smoking.

[Drew]

Originally Posted by noodles

Oh, don't get me wrong, I agree with most of what you say. Your rights end where someone else's begin, so if that someone has to breathe in your smoke, then you don't get to smoke. It just seems ridiculous that they want to ban smoking outside, where the cars driving by produce more harmful emissions than a cigarette. Are we going to ban driving by outdoor eateries now?

Now, if this is a section of town that completely bans vehicular traffic, then disregard.

Why not ban internal combusion engines?

[noodles]

Originally Posted by JJ Rodriguez

I don't go out to bars for 2 reasons: 1 - I'm really anti social 2 - No smoking. I would probably go out more if they hadn't banned smoking.

Having been a smoker, I can honestly say that breathing easy in club or bar I'm playing is a far more pleasurable experience than being able to smoke wherever I want. Honestly, stepping outside for a cigarette was never that big of a deal to me: it only takes five minutes, it's not like it takes that long to get out of a building, it kept me from smoking like a chimney while drinking, and was something I was used to doing in my own home (I never smoked in my own home).

Even as a smoker, I felt smoke filled bars could get annoying. It makes my eyes itchy, breathing constant smog wears you down quick, and I always came home smelling like I rolled around in an ashtray. Plus, you get the snobby subset of smokers. "Oh, I hate cigar smokers." "Is that a clove? Yuck, put that shit out." "Oh, great, grampa just lit a pipe." It's *tobacco* people, it all smells like shit.

[ohio_eric]

Originally Posted by noodles

Oh, don't get me wrong, I agree with most of what you say. Your rights end where someone else's begin, so if that someone has to breathe in your smoke, then you don't get to smoke. It just seems ridiculous that they want to ban smoking outside, where the cars driving by produce more harmful emissions than a cigarette. Are we going to ban driving by outdoor eateries now?

Now, if this is a section of town that completely bans vehicular traffic, then disregard.

When the government get serious about cleaning up polution and making our air truly cleaner and safer then a ban like this will be worthy of consideration. Until such a time it's really a joke.

[JJ Rodriguez]

Originally Posted by noodles

Having been a smoker, I can honestly say that breathing easy in club or bar I'm playing is a far more pleasurable experience than being able to smoke wherever I want. Honestly, stepping outside for a cigarette was never that big of a deal to me: it only takes five minutes, it's not like it takes that long to get out of a building, it kept me from smoking like a chimney while drinking, and was something I was used to doing in my own home (I never smoked in my own home).

Even as a smoker, I felt smoke filled bars could get annoying. It makes my eyes itchy, breathing constant smog wears you down quick, and I always came home smelling like I rolled around in an ashtray.

You ever live in Atlantic Canada? Grabbing all the clothing I need to smoke in the winter takes like 5 minutes on it's own

[Grom]

And in France, we are about to be banned from smoking in public spaces as well in July ... Nearly all my friends smoke, which means that I'll have to follow them outside when they light a cig if I don't want to be alone. We'd rather stay home instead then.

[Unknown Doodl3.2]

Originally Posted by noodles

Having been a smoker, I can honestly say that breathing easy in club or bar I'm playing is a far more pleasurable experience than being able to smoke wherever I want. Honestly, stepping outside for a cigarette was never that big of a deal to me: it only takes five minutes, it's not like it takes that long to get out of a building, it kept me from smoking like a chimney while drinking, and was something I was used to doing in my own home (I never smoked in my own home).

Even as a smoker, I felt smoke filled bars could get annoying. It makes my eyes itchy, breathing constant smog wears you down quick, and I always came home smelling like I rolled around in an ashtray. Plus, you get the snobby subset of smokers. "Oh, I hate cigar smokers." "Is that a clove? Yuck, put that shit out." "Oh, great, grampa just lit a pipe." It's *tobacco* people, it all smells like shit.

props to you noodles for being so self-aware. I wish more people I know were like that!

[noodles]

Originally Posted by Drew

Why not ban internal combusion engines?

I am certainly not adverse to the idea. I think we need to replace it with something more efficient and cleaner.

[noodles]

Originally Posted by JJ Rodriguez

You ever live in Atlantic Canada? Grabbing all the clothing I need to smoke in the winter takes like 5 minutes on it's own

Seriously, though, do you smoke inside? I was never able to, because I hate the horrible smell that it leaves in your carpet, furniture, pillows, sheets...everything, basically.

[Regor]

.... smokers IMO. It's a nasty habit. It stinks up my clothes, causes cancer in people who smoke and in 2nd hand smoke, and I'll be a dick and generalize: ALL smokers litter with their butts! I ....ing HATE it when some dickhead smoker goes and throws their cigarette butt out the window of their car on the freeway, and all the ashes come flying at my car!!

.... 'em. Make it illegal everywhere I say.