Pawlenty signs state smoking ban

[Ziggy Stardust]

We are from two diametrically opposed views.

Well, I think my hopes where too high. I might have to start looking for a new rolemodel

Smoking is not cool. It's hot. I mean, it's just smoking. Drinking beer is not cool. It's drinking beer. I love to have a cig with my beer. Or with my coffee after dinner. Coffee is far from cool.

You think smoking is cool, I do not.

We are not going to reconcile these views.

...

Allow me to prove you wrong again

Ziggy sais: "Smoking is not cool."

 

[boarder]

Only in bars people choose to go in there, but I understand they lack alternatives. That's why I am in favour of an arrangement which makes it interesting for a barowner to convert to non-smoking, but at the same time allow smoking bars.

I have no problems with that idea, maybe a issue of the staff if they where non smokers, but then again you obviously wouldnt apply for a job there if it bothered you.

They said that stopping smoking in bars here would put a lot of them out of business and its almost done the opposite in some with a new client going to them, even I as a smoker notice how much nicer it is in pubs know they are smoke free.

 

[CurtSibling]

Well, I think my hopes where too high. I might have to start looking for a new rolemodel

You should regard yourself as the only rolemodel you need!

Smoking is not cool. It's hot. I mean, it's just smoking. Drinking beer is not cool. It's drinking beer. I love to have a cig with my beer. Or with my coffee after dinner. Coffee is far from cool.

I meant 'cool' in that you are 'cool with it', as in you enjoy/like smoking.

So, because you enjoy a cigarette, and want to wreck your health.
Why should I be dragged along for the ride to intensive care?

You have no moral right to kill me too.

If you think you do, then that is insane.

Allow me to prove you wrong again

PFFT! Where was I shot down in flames????

You never even tackled the three points I made.

You have a long way to go on the road to 'proving me wrong' even once.

Ziggy sais: "Smoking is not cool."

Fine, you are aware the habit is not good - It is your choice, I am not having
a go at that, but the attitude that I should grin and bear your smoke. Nope,
I refuse to be a cancer victim just because you want to smoke in a cafe.

...

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I meant 'cool' in that you are 'cool with it', as in you enjoy/like smoking.

Ah, not 'hip' then. Yes I do enjoy/like smoking

So, because you enjoy a cigarette, and want to wreck your health.
Why should I be dragged along for the ride to intensive care?

You have no moral right to kill me too.

If you think you do, then that is insane.

Well, the only chance of that happening would be you walking into a bar which permitted smoking. And that would be your own judgement.

PFFT! Where was I shot down in flames????

You never even tackled the three points I made.

You have a long way to go on the road to 'proving me wrong' even once.

Those I won by default because you used "losers" and "people
who lack the character to cease blowing tobacco-smoke over everyone".

See, if I had said above: "If you are such a ****** that you walk into a bar and sit next to me and then whine about second hand smoke then you deserve to die of lung cancer" I would have lost as well.

These are the rules, I didn't make them up.

Oh wait, I did.

Moving on to the points, blatantly (such a nice word) disregarding my withdrawel from those points not too long ago in thread not very far far away
(You bastard)

1. Places where people congregate should have no smoking, this is a no-brainer.

I have a party at my home, people congregate all over the place, I light up a cig, that's my perogative. It shouldn't be banned in this scenario. Case closed, score 1 Ziggy.

2. Smokers are harping on about 'human rights' - Which is a load of baloney.
No I am not, so yes your statement is a load of baloney

That was easy, score 2.

3. Non-smoking people should at least have the privilege of clean air.
Depents on the situation, statement should be specified for it to have any meaning, undecided, but not looking good for point nr.3.

 

[CurtSibling]

Egad!

You didn't 'win' anything!
What age are you, when you think this a contest?

Let me put you in the picture - If you came to my house, and wanted
to smoke, I would request you stand at the back or front door in the
garden and puff away. That is how hardcore I am...(EG: not very)

But if I want to go to a concert or a tavern, then I should not have to
breathe in vile smoke till I am vomiting all over the place. The smokers
should go and stand at the door, and keep the inside area nice and clear.

This is the Law in Scotland, and it has caused no great problem, also,
the ban on public smoking is supported by the vast majority of people
in my nation too. There was no rebellion or fuss. The smokers just got
used to smoking outside and didn't complain.

So take this on board, that you are:

1. Wrong that smokers have the authority to do as they please.
2. That this is a contest where you can win. Get real, it is a debate.
3. You only would 'win' if you got me to change my view or take up smoking...

So, don't think for one minute that you are 'free' to smoke anywhere, and
that people have to shut up and breathe your fumes...In your own home
you can smoke all you wish, but in company or around people who are
annoyed by smoke, it is selfish/ignorant and stupid to smoke defiantly.

...

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Way to go not adressing anything I said, ignoring ze post and steer towards my semi-serious point scoring tally and other issues I did not touch upon.

Adress it or butt-out

Your NEW points 1, 2 and 3, I never claimed, so thanks for playing (heh).

 

[CurtSibling]

Well, the only chance of that happening would be you walking into a bar which permitted smoking. And that would be your own judgement.
Those I won by default because you used "losers" and "people
who lack the character to cease blowing tobacco-smoke over everyone".

Smoking in bars is illegal in my country, so that is not a valid case.

But if I was in a friend's house, and smoking began, I would perhaps
open a window or simply leave. That is where the smoker has the rights,
it is his house and his rules. In public, it is not so simple.

Stating the obvious (blatant, even) lose a point!

(-1 point)

See, if I had said above: "If you are such a ****** that you walk into a bar and sit next to me and then whine about second hand smoke then you deserve to die of lung cancer" I would have lost as well.

But why would I want to hang out with you in a bar?

I'd let you choke in your own smelly cloud of smoke.

And in any case, no-one can smoke in bars here in Scotland.

Moving on to the points, blatantly (such a nice word) disregarding my withdrawel from those points not too long ago in thread not very far far away
(You bastard)

Maybe so, but I will outlive you!

What style of coffin would Sir prefer?



You are not making sense, so lose a point!

(-1 point)

I have a party at my home, people congregate all over the place, I light up a cig, that's my perogative. It shouldn't be banned in this scenario. Case closed, score 1 Ziggy.

That isn't even a victory. It is like claiming you won Normandy a week after the event.

I already stated that private homes are of course not under government rule.

So ditch that point - Now!

(-1 point)

No I am not, so yes your statement is a load of baloney

Who cares about you?

Many are actually claiming not being able to smoke anywhere is unfair.
It is incredibly arrogant and dumb. What about the people being poisoned?

I say smokers should go and smoke off planet.

And by the way, deduct another point!

(-1 point)

Depents on the situation, statement should be specified for it to have any meaning, undecided, but not looking good for point nr.3.

It is situation-dependent, but the bottom line is, non-smokers should not have to put up
with smokers in a place like a workplace, train/bus station, airport, shopping centre or
community centre. Get used to the idea, because the UK ban will be in force before long.

And even the USA will be trying a limited ban in the future, I am willing to guess.

PS
Due to your blatant baloney, you now are sitting at a deficit of -4 points.

I guess you are losing now, and I suggest you sue for peace, before you
run out of lung power to continue typing.

Total = (-4 points)

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Smoking in bars is illegal in my country, so that is not a valid case.

But if I was in a friend's house, and smoking began, I would perhaps
open a window or simply leave. That is where the smoker has the rights,
it is his house and his rules. In public, it is not so simple.

Stating the obvious (blatant, even) lose a point!

(-1 point)

But bars where I live do allow smoking, and I'll be dead before I visit some backwater which has non-smoking bars. (Which means I'll be dead by 2011, when they ban smoking here). And dude, using points in an argument or debate is so 10 past 12 may the 22nd.

But why would I want to hang out with you in a bar?

I'd let you choke in your own smelly cloud of smoke.

And in any case, no-one can smoke in bars here in Scotland.

Because I am great fun in a bar, unlike on the interweb.

Maybe so, but I will outlive you!

What style of coffin would Sir prefer?

Coffin? You're not thinking mate. Do you really think I want to be burried?

You are not making sense, so lose a point!

(-1 point)

If making sense is any criteria to go by, the first one to shut up will win this game

That isn't even a victory. It is like claiming you won Normandy a week after the event.

I already stated that private homes are of course not under government rule.

So ditch that point - Now!

(-1 point)

Ah, but it is. Let me remind you of your definition of public places where you want to outlaw smoking:

Me: 1. Defintion of public places is not blatantly obvious.
You: 1. Places where people congregate should have no smoking, this is a no-brainer.

So, It's a no-brainer to laugh and point at your no-brainer definition of a public place. Good, we agree.

Who cares about you?

My mum and the barkeep

Many are actually claiming not being able to smoke anywhere is unfair.
It is incredibly arrogant and dumb. What about the people being poisoned?

I say smokers should go and smoke off planet.

I wish, I would shed no tears leaving the sorry health-freak excuse for human being likely to be wiped out at the first sign of a virus behind.

It is situation-dependent, but the bottom line is, non-smokers should not have to put up
with smokers in a place like a workplace, train/bus station, airport, shopping centre or
community centre. Get used to the idea, because the UK ban will be in force before long.

Agree to all. Even restaurants and theaters.

Do you also include Bars in that? Otherwise we're done here

And even the USA will be trying a limited ban in the future, I am willing to guess.

PS
Due to your blatant baloney, you now are sitting at a deficit of -4 points.

I guess you are losing now, and I suggest you sue for peace, before you
run out of lung power to continue typing.

Total = (-4 points)

Like I said before, I allready won by default for not being the first resorting to petty insults.

 

[CurtSibling]

Will it make you feel better if I declare you the winner?
(even though you haven't really won anything, except more spam on the post count)

I still think smokers are a minority that are destined for the ashtray of history.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Will it make you feel better if I declare you the winner?
(even though you haven't really won anything, except more spam on the post count)

No, because that would mean you beat me to it

I still think smokers are a minority that are destined for the ashtray of history.

You got that right, it's better to burn out, than to fade away.

This has been pleasant, salutations dear Sir

 

[Red Door]

See, here's the thing: cigarette smoke is poison gas.

No, it's not.

There are two issues here. First, it's not a "very minimal risk." Secondhand smoke causes cancer. Period. Second, to say that "people shouldn't even be putting themselves in that situation" is ridiculous. That's tantamount to saying that smokers can decide where nonsmokers can go.

1. Yes, it is. If I hang around a smoker, I'm not going to get a cancer. I have a minimal chance, but it's not likely.
2. What I am saying is that people shouldn't be hanging out with smokers a lot. If you are, then that's your problem, not the smoker's.

Now this is a valid point.

Exactly, this is why I am forced to side with smokers, even being very anti-smoking myself.

Yes, smoke can be deadly. Its effects are widespread and well published.

You're not going to get sick or get cancer from being around smokers once or twice a month.

The effects of second hand smoke are indeed not as well documented as that of smoking....however, it has been shown to have negative effects on ones health over time just like smoking does.

Yes, I know this. What I am saying is that you're making a personal choice to be around these smokers, just like the smokers are making a personal choice to smoke. You should take your own health risks into making your decisions, not let the government ban it for you.

 

[MobBoss]

You're not going to get sick or get cancer from being around smokers once or twice a month.

Some people very well could. Just because the large majority wont does not mean that some will.

Yes, I know this. What I am saying is that you're making a personal choice to be around these smokers, just like the smokers are making a personal choice to smoke. You should take your own health risks into making your decisions, not let the government ban it for you.

I dont disagree. My personal opinion is to let the market force settle it instead of resorting into the nanny state taking care of it for you. However, the majority opinion is against the smoker and I see smoking being virtually taxed out of existence eventually and banned in all but your own home and designated smoking areas.

 

[Gogf]

No, it's not.

If you inhale enough of it over time, it will kill you. Sounds an awful lot like poison to me.

1. Yes, it is. If I hang around a smoker, I'm not going to get a cancer. I have a minimal chance, but it's not likely.

This is wrong. I've given you a scientific study documenting the deadly effects of secondhand smoke. I'm not sure why you continue to deny it.

2. What I am saying is that people shouldn't be hanging out with smokers a lot. If you are, then that's your problem, not the smoker's.

So it's "my problem" if I want to go out to dinner, see a movie, use public transportation, or if I am taken to a hospital?

Exactly, this is why I am forced to side with smokers, even being very anti-smoking myself.

Theoretically it's a valid point, but I don't think many people would agree with you that it's not the government's job to protect its citizens, even on private property.

 

[History_Buff]

Only in bars people choose to go in there, but I understand they lack alternatives. That's why I am in favour of an arrangement which makes it interesting for a barowner to convert to non-smoking, but at the same time allow smoking bars.

And what arrangement could they possibly come up with? The only agreement that they can really propose without discriminating against random bars is "You can smoke everywhere", or "You can't smoke anywhere".

I have no problems with that idea, maybe a issue of the staff if they where non smokers, but then again you obviously wouldnt apply for a job there if it bothered you.

Not an attack against you Boarder (particularly since you appear to be one of the good ones), just a point I wanted to bring up.

Job safety is job safety for everyone. If you wanted to be a flight attendant, it would be outrageous if half the people in the plane were smoking; it's called a health risk. If you wanted to be a waitress, or bartender, or cook, or any other worker in a restaurant, it would be outrageous nowadays for you to have to put up with cigarette smoke all over the place. Why should bars be any different?

No, it's not.

Sure it is. It's an airborne cloud of dust covered in poison residues. It may not be a gas in the stricktest sense of the word, but it is most certainly poison.

What I am saying is that people shouldn't be hanging out with smokers a lot. If you are, then that's your problem, not the smoker's.

No, it's his fault. It's a two way street, and he didn't get sick from hanging out with me.

Something crazy about how the government should never restrict choices.

They do it everyday. It is the governments job to restrict free choice, because Capitalism tends to fall apart if you let it run unchecked. The government of an average western country does it everyday without you thinking twice about it.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

And what arrangement could they possibly come up with? The only agreement that they can really propose without discriminating against random bars is "You can smoke everywhere", or "You can't smoke anywhere".

Allready gave you a possibility. Tax smoking in bars. Let the owner decide if he wants to pay the tax. Or make airco-unit manditory in smoking bars. The owner will decide if he wants to invest in that.

I never gave this much thought, but I'm sure if you want you can think of a few ways yourself. It's an intrusion in the bar-owners property, but hey, not as intrusive as a complete ban.

Not an attack against you Boarder (particularly since you appear to be one of the good ones), just a point I wanted to bring up.

Job safety is job safety for everyone. If you wanted to be a flight attendant, it would be outrageous if half the people in the plane were smoking; it's called a health risk. If you wanted to be a waitress, or bartender, or cook, or any other worker in a restaurant, it would be outrageous nowadays for you to have to put up with cigarette smoke all over the place. Why should bars be any different?

A cop or soldier shouldn't be risking his/her life just the same way as a programmer should? Different jobs, different risks.

 

[ParkCungHee]

If you inhale enough of it over time, it will kill you. Sounds an awful lot like poison to me.

Whos even talking over time? If you inhale enough of it at once, you will die. Ciggerate Smoke contains the same chemicals used in the nazi T4 euthenasia program. Sounds like poison gas to me.

 

[CurtSibling]

No, because that would mean you beat me to it

We can call it a draw...(but not of a cigarette)

You got that right, it's better to burn out, than to fade away.

You win a point for the Highlander reference!

This has been pleasant, salutations dear Sir

Indeed - I wish all the debates on CFC were this fun!

 

[CurtSibling]

Whos even talking over time? If you inhale enough of it at once, you will die. Ciggerate Smoke contains the same chemicals used in the nazi T4 euthenasia program. Sounds like poison gas to me.

A valid point!

Funny how the stuff used in many horrific parts of history are rebranded
and sold to an unsuspecting market...Although smokers are sucked in by
the (media-given) romantic notion that smoking is a 'cool' habit, or that
now they are heroic rebels, smoking to defy 'the big brother'.

All the while being told to just buy more cigarettes!

....

 

[ParkCungHee]

You win a point for the Highlander reference!

Bah, thats a Neil Young Lyrics reference, which is two points!

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I say we give me three points to get this sorted

Moderator Action: You all might get a point each for spamming if you continue...
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889