Smoking bans in bars...

[Funwithcorpses]

What has this country come to?

Granted smoking is a serious health hazard but why does the government have to get involved in this at any level? Some may argue that the people that work in these places shouldn't have to put up with the second hand smoke, but I argue that these same people should've made something out of their lives in the first place...then maybe they wouldn't have to deal with it.

Cigarettes are to alcohol, what peanut butter is to jelly...they go great together.

Thank god, where I live, these communists haven't struck yet.

[Doctor Z]

<img src="http://homepage.mac.com/phornedowl/.Pictures/icecream.jpg" border="0" />

<span class=post_edited>This message was edited by Doctor_Z on 1-2-07 @ 12:01 AM</span>

[Tenbatsuzen]

<strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br />Thank god, where I live, these communists haven't struck yet.<p>&nbsp;</p><p>I'm sure being in the county seat of the largest area of tobacco production in America has nothing to do with it.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Smoking is a bad habit that kills people.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>

[TheGameHHH]

I completly understand how smoking is hazardous to people's health. I'm not a smoker and I never once cared if somebody was smoking next to me in a bar. In all honesty it doesn't matter to me one bit, the best part about it is my clothes don't reek of smoke at the end of a night out of drinking (though it might reek of weed).

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br />Thank god, where I live, these communists haven't struck yet.<p>ÿ</p><p>I'm sure being in the county seat of the largest area of tobacco production in America has nothing to do with it.</p><p>ÿ</p><p>Smoking is a bad habit that kills people.ÿÿÿ</p><p></p>I don't profit from it...besides I'm moving in a couple of weeks anyway.

Eating fatty foods is a bad habit, are we ready to have the government decide what we can and cannot eat as well?

It looks like we're headed in that direction anyway, but the point is that the government is over-stepping it's bounds.

People enjoy all kinds of things that aren't good for them...so is the next step to ban all those things too?

[kellermcgee21]

Starting today I can no longer smoke at work.&nbsp; I am an hour in with 8 more to go and I am getting increasingly more pissed off.&nbsp; I hate everyone.

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>kellermcgee21</strong> wrote:<br>Starting today I can no longer smoke at work.ÿ I am an hour in with 8 more to go and I am getting increasingly more pissed off.ÿ I hate everyone. <p></p>I hear you. I'm moving in a couple of weeks and the place I'm working at doesn't allow smoking inside. But the difference is that it's THEIR business, they make the rules. The government shouldn't be involved at all.

[Tenbatsuzen]

<strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br />Thank god, where I live, these communists haven't struck yet.<p>&nbsp;</p><p>I'm sure being in the county seat of the largest area of tobacco production in America has nothing to do with it.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Smoking is a bad habit that kills people. </p><p>&nbsp;</p>I don't profit from it...besides I'm moving in a couple of weeks anyway. Eating fatty foods is a bad habit, are we ready to have the government decide what we can and cannot eat as well? It looks like we're headed in that direction anyway, but the point is that the government is over-stepping it's bounds. People enjoy all kinds of things that aren't good for them...so is the next step to ban all those things too?<p>&nbsp;</p><p>No, douche.&nbsp; Because when you eat fatty foods, it just affects YOU.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>When you smoke, you can affect the people around you.&nbsp; Just like drinking is not illegal, but DUI is.</p><p>&nbsp;</p>

[DonInNC]

<strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br />&nbsp;Thank god, where I live, these communists haven't struck yet. <p>give us time.</p>

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br />Thank god, where I live, these communists haven't struck yet.<p>ÿ</p><p>I'm sure being in the county seat of the largest area of tobacco production in America has nothing to do with it.</p><p>ÿ</p><p>Smoking is a bad habit that kills people. </p><p>ÿ</p>I don't profit from it...besides I'm moving in a couple of weeks anyway. Eating fatty foods is a bad habit, are we ready to have the government decide what we can and cannot eat as well? It looks like we're headed in that direction anyway, but the point is that the government is over-stepping it's bounds. People enjoy all kinds of things that aren't good for them...so is the next step to ban all those things too?<p>ÿ</p><p>No, douche.ÿ Because when you eat fatty foods, it just affects YOU.</p><p>ÿ</p><p>When you smoke, you can affect the people around you.ÿ Just like drinking is not illegal, but DUI is.</p><p>ÿ</p><p></p>Frankly I couldn't care less whether you douche or not.

As for the rest of your post...If you think smoking is going to kill you, then stay home and stop fucking up everybodys evening. And that's not even the point. The point is the government shouldn't be involved.

Nobody is twisting these peoples arms to go to a bar that allows smoking. Why don't these people that want these laws, open up their own bars (and nix smoking) and compete head to head with the other bars
that do allow it.

Oh wait, that would be a capitalistic scenerio...fucking commie bastards.

[Tenbatsuzen]

<strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:Eating fatty foods is a bad habit, are we ready to have the government decide what we can and cannot eat as well? <p>&nbsp;</p><p>NYC banned transfats.&nbsp; You were saying?</p><p>&nbsp;</p>

[mikeyboy]

<p>Unless your Grandma died of nicotine withdrawal because she couldn't get a cigarette in a bar, or you're being harassed by an vicious smoking motorcycle gang that holds you down and forces you to inhale second-hand smoke, I see no reason a simple debate on this issue should get personal.&nbsp; Discuss the topic without personal attacks.</p>

[TheGameHHH]

Tenbats, doesnt that contradict your point too? Trans fats only harm YOU when you eat them, its your decision to eat them or not, yet the government has to step in and tell you what to eat. Like I said before I dont really care about this whole smoking thing, but I get what this dude is saying about the government possibly overstepping their boundries.

[epo]

<strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br />Thank god, where I live, these communists haven't struck yet. <p>&nbsp;</p><p>I'm sure being in the county seat of the largest area of tobacco production in America has nothing to do with it.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Smoking is a bad habit that kills people. </p><p>&nbsp;</p>I don't profit from it...besides I'm moving in a couple of weeks anyway. Eating fatty foods is a bad habit, are we ready to have the government decide what we can and cannot eat as well? It looks like we're headed in that direction anyway, but the point is that the government is over-stepping it's bounds. People enjoy all kinds of things that aren't good for them...so is the next step to ban all those things too? <p>&nbsp;</p><p>No, douche.&nbsp; Because when you eat fatty foods, it just affects YOU.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>When you smoke, you can affect the people around you.&nbsp; Just like drinking is not illegal, but DUI is.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p>Frankly I couldn't care less whether you douche or not. As for the rest of your post...<font style="background-color: #ffff00">If you think smoking is going to kill you</font>, then stay home and stop fucking up everybodys evening. And that's not even the point. The point is<font style="background-color: #ffff00"> the government shouldn't be involved</font>. Nobody is twisting these peoples arms to go to a bar that allows smoking. Why don't these people that want these laws, open up their own bars (and nix smoking) and compete head to head with the other bars that do allow it. Oh wait, that would be a capitalistic scenerio...fucking commie bastards. <p>It is essentially a public safety issue, which then <strong>demands</strong> the government become involved.&nbsp; Smoking is scientifically proven to have a causal effect on developing cancer.&nbsp; If you don't like it, go outside and keep the effects to yourself.</p><p>If you thought we live in a pure capitalistic society you must be from.......oooooohhhhhhhh.</p>

[Tenbatsuzen]

Personally, I'd ban cigarettes all together.&nbsp; It's a fucking disgusting habit that kills people.&nbsp;

[burrben]

<p><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:</p><p><br />&nbsp;Thank god, where I live, these communists haven't struck yet. </p><p>mikeyboy will be there soon</p>

[Tenbatsuzen]

<strong>TheGameHHH</strong> wrote:<br />Tenbats, doesnt that contradict your point too? Trans fats only harm YOU when you eat them, its your decision to eat them or not, yet the government has to step in and tell you what to eat. Like I said before I dont really care about this whole smoking thing, but I get what this dude is saying about the government possibly overstepping their boundries. <p>&nbsp;</p><p>It was a public health issue, as noted below.&nbsp; Nobody walks into a restaurant specifically wanting transfats.&nbsp; They didn't ban the food, just the product that was making it worse.</p><p>&nbsp;</p>

[DJEvelEd]

<p>Nothing worse than sitting at a table trying to play cards and the somebody's nasty ass smoke in going in my face. The pit bosses &amp; dealers deal with that all the time.&nbsp;They should definitely have a smoking section for the gamblers or the smokers will&nbsp;just go elsewhere, especially&nbsp;the high rollers, which is bad business.&nbsp;There's alot of money involved.&nbsp;</p><p>I started bringing cigars to combat the cigarette smokers when I went gambling. If I got stuck next to a smoker, I would light a fat cigar. I wish I could blizzout. Cigarettes are just nasty. Mostly chemicals. They stink like shit. My uncle rolled his own but he used pipe tobacco so it smelled sweet. If cigarette smokers rolled pipe tobacco, I could tolerate it. Unburnt pipe tobacco smells fuckin great!</p>

[kellermcgee21]

why don't we just ban drinking while we're at it

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>epo</strong> wrote:<br><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br />Thank god, where I live, these communists haven't struck yet. <p>ÿ</p><p>I'm sure being in the county seat of the largest area of tobacco production in America has nothing to do with it.</p><p>ÿ</p><p>Smoking is a bad habit that kills people. </p><p>ÿ</p>I don't profit from it...besides I'm moving in a couple of weeks anyway. Eating fatty foods is a bad habit, are we ready to have the government decide what we can and cannot eat as well? It looks like we're headed in that direction anyway, but the point is that the government is over-stepping it's bounds. People enjoy all kinds of things that aren't good for them...so is the next step to ban all those things too? <p>ÿ</p><p>No, douche.ÿ Because when you eat fatty foods, it just affects YOU.</p><p>ÿ</p><p>When you smoke, you can affect the people around you.ÿ Just like drinking is not illegal, but DUI is.</p><p>ÿ</p><p>ÿ</p>Frankly I couldn't care less whether you douche or not. As for the rest of your post...<font style="background-color: #ffff00">If you think smoking is going to kill you</font>, then stay home and stop fucking up everybodys evening. And that's not even the point. The point is<font style="background-color: #ffff00"> the government shouldn't be involved</font>. Nobody is twisting these peoples arms to go to a bar that allows smoking. Why don't these people that want these laws, open up their own bars (and nix smoking) and compete head to head with the other bars that do allow it. Oh wait, that would be a capitalistic scenerio...fucking commie bastards. <p>It is essentially a public safety issue, which then <strong>demands</strong> the government become involved.ÿ Smoking is scientifically proven to have a causal effect on developing cancer.ÿ If you don't like it, go outside and keep the effects to yourself.</p><p>If you thought we live in a pure capitalistic society you must be from.......oooooohhhhhhhh.</p><p></p>How about all you commie bastards staying the fuck out of bars? Nobody wants you in there. The next person I see at a bar without a cigarette in their hand, I'm cracking them over the head with a pool stick.

[Tenbatsuzen]

<strong>kellermcgee21</strong> wrote:<br />why don't we just ban drinking while we're at it<p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Because if someone is doing shots of tequila, I don't have to smell it in my clothes and hair the next morning and have my fiance wheezing because of an asthma attack.</p><p>&nbsp;</p>

[mikeyboy]

<strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>epo</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br />Thank god, where I live, these communists haven't struck yet. <p>&nbsp;</p><p>I'm sure being in the county seat of the largest area of tobacco production in America has nothing to do with it.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Smoking is a bad habit that kills people. </p><p>&nbsp;</p>I don't profit from it...besides I'm moving in a couple of weeks anyway. Eating fatty foods is a bad habit, are we ready to have the government decide what we can and cannot eat as well? It looks like we're headed in that direction anyway, but the point is that the government is over-stepping it's bounds. People enjoy all kinds of things that aren't good for them...so is the next step to ban all those things too? <p>&nbsp;</p><p>No, douche.&nbsp; Because when you eat fatty foods, it just affects YOU.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>When you smoke, you can affect the people around you.&nbsp; Just like drinking is not illegal, but DUI is.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p>Frankly I couldn't care less whether you douche or not. As for the rest of your post...<font style="background-color: #ffff00">If you think smoking is going to kill you</font>, then stay home and stop fucking up everybodys evening. And that's not even the point. The point is<font style="background-color: #ffff00"> the government shouldn't be involved</font>. Nobody is twisting these peoples arms to go to a bar that allows smoking. Why don't these people that want these laws, open up their own bars (and nix smoking) and compete head to head with the other bars that do allow it. Oh wait, that would be a capitalistic scenerio...fucking commie bastards. <p>It is essentially a public safety issue, which then <strong>demands</strong> the government become involved.&nbsp; Smoking is scientifically proven to have a causal effect on developing cancer.&nbsp; If you don't like it, go outside and keep the effects to yourself.</p><p>If you thought we live in a pure capitalistic society you must be from.......oooooohhhhhhhh.</p><p>&nbsp;</p>How about all you commie bastards staying the fuck out of bars? Nobody wants you in there. The next person I see at a bar without a cigarette in their hand, I'm cracking them over the head with a pool stick. <p>ooh.&nbsp; shock poster.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Please.</p>

[HBox]

<strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>epo</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br />Thank god, where I live, these communists haven't struck yet. <p>&nbsp;</p><p>I'm sure being in the county seat of the largest area of tobacco production in America has nothing to do with it.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Smoking is a bad habit that kills people. </p><p>&nbsp;</p>I don't profit from it...besides I'm moving in a couple of weeks anyway. Eating fatty foods is a bad habit, are we ready to have the government decide what we can and cannot eat as well? It looks like we're headed in that direction anyway, but the point is that the government is over-stepping it's bounds. People enjoy all kinds of things that aren't good for them...so is the next step to ban all those things too? <p>&nbsp;</p><p>No, douche. Because when you eat fatty foods, it just affects YOU.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>When you smoke, you can affect the people around you. Just like drinking is not illegal, but DUI is.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p>Frankly I couldn't care less whether you douche or not. As for the rest of your post...<font style="background-color: #ffff00">If you think smoking is going to kill you</font>, then stay home and stop fucking up everybodys evening. And that's not even the point. The point is<font style="background-color: #ffff00"> the government shouldn't be involved</font>. Nobody is twisting these peoples arms to go to a bar that allows smoking. Why don't these people that want these laws, open up their own bars (and nix smoking) and compete head to head with the other bars that do allow it. Oh wait, that would be a capitalistic scenerio...fucking commie bastards. <p>It is essentially a public safety issue, which then <strong>demands</strong> the government become involved. Smoking is scientifically proven to have a causal effect on developing cancer. If you don't like it, go outside and keep the effects to yourself.</p><p>If you thought we live in a pure capitalistic society you must be from.......oooooohhhhhhhh.</p><p>&nbsp;</p>How about all you commie bastards staying the fuck out of bars? Nobody wants you in there. The next person I see at a bar without a cigarette in their hand, I'm cracking them over the head with a pool stick.<p>That's a pretty vulgar thing to do for someone with such a gifted mind as yourself.</p>

[Tenbatsuzen]

<strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:How about all you commie bastards staying the fuck out of bars? Nobody wants you in there. The next person I see at a bar without a cigarette in their hand, I'm cracking them over the head with a pool stick.<p>&nbsp;</p><p>Actually, ass, smokers are a vocal minority.&nbsp; They literally and figureatively stink up the place.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p>But don't worry, serving a year or two for assault - they still allow smoking in jail. &nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p>

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br>Personally, I'd ban cigarettes all together.ÿ It's a fucking disgusting habit that kills people.ÿ <p></p>Sorry, but if I didn't smoke and I worried about the effects, I wouldn't go to a bar that allowed it. But most bars do. Why? Because drinkers are predominantly smokers.

Besides, not everybody that smokes, dies because of it.

[Tenbatsuzen]

<strong>mikeyboy</strong> wrote:<p>ooh. shock poster.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Please.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>You're just realizing this NOW?</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p>

[HBox]

<strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br />Personally, I'd ban cigarettes all together. It's a fucking disgusting habit that kills people. <p>&nbsp;</p>Sorry, but if I didn't smoke and I worried about the effects, I wouldn't go to a bar that allowed it. But most bars do. Why? Because drinkers are predominantly smokers. Besides, not everybody that smokes, dies because of it. <p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRHvZazd4IM" target="_blank">You don't always die from tobacco.</a> </p>

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:How about all you commie bastards staying the fuck out of bars? Nobody wants you in there. The next person I see at a bar without a cigarette in their hand, I'm cracking them over the head with a pool stick.<p>ÿ</p><p>Actually, ass, smokers are a vocal minority.ÿ They literally and figureatively stink up the place.ÿÿ</p><p>But don't worry, serving a year or two for assault - they still allow smoking in jail. ÿ</p><p>ÿ</p><p>ÿ</p><p></p>Not in some places.

Smokers are the majority among drinkers. Most of the people I know that drink, smoke...not all, but most. Who knows why, but it is what it is. I've been to alot of places (I served in the military), and this is the case everywhere.

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>epo</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br />Thank god, where I live, these communists haven't struck yet. <p>ÿ</p><p>I'm sure being in the county seat of the largest area of tobacco production in America has nothing to do with it.</p><p>ÿ</p><p>Smoking is a bad habit that kills people. </p><p>ÿ</p>I don't profit from it...besides I'm moving in a couple of weeks anyway. Eating fatty foods is a bad habit, are we ready to have the government decide what we can and cannot eat as well? It looks like we're headed in that direction anyway, but the point is that the government is over-stepping it's bounds. People enjoy all kinds of things that aren't good for them...so is the next step to ban all those things too? <p>ÿ</p><p>No, douche. Because when you eat fatty foods, it just affects YOU.</p><p>ÿ</p><p>When you smoke, you can affect the people around you. Just like drinking is not illegal, but DUI is.</p><p>ÿ</p><p>ÿ</p>Frankly I couldn't care less whether you douche or not. As for the rest of your post...<font style="background-color: #ffff00">If you think smoking is going to kill you</font>, then stay home and stop fucking up everybodys evening. And that's not even the point. The point is<font style="background-color: #ffff00"> the government shouldn't be involved</font>. Nobody is twisting these peoples arms to go to a bar that allows smoking. Why don't these people that want these laws, open up their own bars (and nix smoking) and compete head to head with the other bars that do allow it. Oh wait, that would be a capitalistic scenerio...fucking commie bastards. <p>It is essentially a public safety issue, which then <strong>demands</strong> the government become involved. Smoking is scientifically proven to have a causal effect on developing cancer. If you don't like it, go outside and keep the effects to yourself.</p><p>If you thought we live in a pure capitalistic society you must be from.......oooooohhhhhhhh.</p><p>ÿ</p>How about all you commie bastards staying the fuck out of bars? Nobody wants you in there. The next person I see at a bar without a cigarette in their hand, I'm cracking them over the head with a pool stick.<p>That's a pretty vulgar thing to do for someone with such a gifted mind as yourself.</p><p></p>I'm using a stick, in the event I don't have access to an ice pick...but either way...it's going down.

[epo]

<p>&nbsp;</p>Frankly I couldn't care less whether you douche or not. As for the rest of your post...<font style="background-color: #ffff00">If you think smoking is going to kill you</font>, then stay home and stop fucking up everybodys evening. And that's not even the point. The point is<font style="background-color: #ffff00"> the government shouldn't be involved</font>. Nobody is twisting these peoples arms to go to a bar that allows smoking. Why don't these people that want these laws, open up their own bars (and nix smoking) and compete head to head with the other bars that do allow it. Oh wait, that would be a capitalistic scenerio...fucking commie bastards. <p>It is essentially a public safety issue, which then <strong>demands</strong> the government become involved.&nbsp; Smoking is scientifically proven to have a causal effect on developing cancer.&nbsp; If you don't like it, go outside and keep the effects to yourself.</p><p>If you thought we live in a pure capitalistic society you must be from.......oooooohhhhhhhh.</p><p>How about all you commie bastards staying the fuck out of bars? Nobody wants you in there. The next person I see at a bar without a cigarette in their hand, I'm cracking them over the head with a pool stick. </p><ul><li><div>A.&nbsp; I don't smoke.</div></li><li><div>B.&nbsp; I grew up in Wisconsin.&nbsp; I'm used to smoke in the taverns, I've been dealing with it since age 10 when my dad would take me to the pub and give me a roll of quarters to play video games.&nbsp; One thing I can tell you is that the more smoky a bar is, the worse my goddamned hangover is.</div></li><li><div>C.&nbsp; I can tell you that having worked in the alcohol industry (bartending &amp; for an alcohol company) in the past they all know that smoke-free is the future.&nbsp; All smart tavern owners/liquor companies&nbsp;know this and should be prepared.</div></li><li><div>D.&nbsp; Public safety has never been a &quot;commie issue&quot;.&nbsp; That's why we wear seat belts, there is no asbestos in the walls, DUI is illegal, etc.&nbsp; </div></li></ul>

[PapaBear]

<strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br />&nbsp;&nbsp;<p>But don't worry, serving a year or two for assault - they still allow smoking in jail. &nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Not in the last three jails I was in.</p>

[kellermcgee21]

<strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>kellermcgee21</strong> wrote:<br />why don't we just ban drinking while we're at it <p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Because if someone is doing shots of tequila, I don't have to smell it in my clothes and hair the next morning and have my fiance wheezing because of an asthma attack.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Well if you have asthma attacks because your going to places where people are smoking don't go there anymore.&nbsp; I'm all in favor of having smoking bars and non-smoking bars but I'm not in favor of forcing these places to do something thats going to hurt their businesses.&nbsp; You really think smokers are going to go to bars instead of staying at home?&nbsp; And you said you find smoking a disgusting habit but I see more people ruining their lives from drinking and I think laying on the bathroom floor puking your guts out more disgusting than lighting up.</p>

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br />Personally, I'd ban cigarettes all together. It's a fucking disgusting habit that kills people. <p>ÿ</p>Sorry, but if I didn't smoke and I worried about the effects, I wouldn't go to a bar that allowed it. But most bars do. Why? Because drinkers are predominantly smokers. Besides, not everybody that smokes, dies because of it. <p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRHvZazd4IM" target="_blank">You don't always die from tobacco.</a> </p><p></p>They did an expose on this guy...he chewed tobacco...big difference.

[Tenbatsuzen]

<strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:How about all you commie bastards staying the fuck out of bars? Nobody wants you in there. The next person I see at a bar without a cigarette in their hand, I'm cracking them over the head with a pool stick.<p>&nbsp;</p><p>Actually, ass, smokers are a vocal minority. They literally and figureatively stink up the place. </p><p>But don't worry, serving a year or two for assault - they still allow smoking in jail. </p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p>Not in some places. <strong>Smokers are the majority among drinkers</strong>. Most of the people I know that drink, smoke...not all, but most. Who knows why, but it is what it is. I've been to alot of places (I served in the military), and this is the case everywhere.<p>&nbsp;</p><p>You have stats to back this up?</p><p>There are &quot;social smokers&quot; who only &quot;smoke when they drink&quot;, and they aren't affected by the ban.</p><p>&nbsp;</p>

[Funwithcorpses]

Here's the deal people. Why not let capitalism take its course here? If you drink, and you don't like smoking...open a bar, it's a FREE (somewhat getting restricted day by day) country. The government has no business in this.

If this keeps up, I'm joining a militia.

[HBox]

<strong>kellermcgee21</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>kellermcgee21</strong> wrote:<br />why don't we just ban drinking while we're at it <p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Because if someone is doing shots of tequila, I don't have to smell it in my clothes and hair the next morning and have my fiance wheezing because of an asthma attack.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Well if you have asthma attacks because your going to places where people are smoking don't go there anymore. I'm all in favor of having smoking bars and non-smoking bars but I'm not in favor of forcing these places to do something thats going to hurt their businesses. You really think smokers are going to go to bars instead of staying at home? And you said you find smoking a disgusting habit but I see more people ruining their lives from drinking and I think laying on the bathroom floor puking your guts out more disgusting than lighting up.</p><p>Or maybe smokers could value the health of people working in bars and those non-smokers in the bar over a 10 foot walk outside. </p>

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:How about all you commie bastards staying the fuck out of bars? Nobody wants you in there. The next person I see at a bar without a cigarette in their hand, I'm cracking them over the head with a pool stick.<p>ÿ</p><p>Actually, ass, smokers are a vocal minority. They literally and figureatively stink up the place. </p><p>But don't worry, serving a year or two for assault - they still allow smoking in jail. </p><p>ÿ</p><p>ÿ</p><p>ÿ</p>Not in some places. <strong>Smokers are the majority among drinkers</strong>. Most of the people I know that drink, smoke...not all, but most. Who knows why, but it is what it is. I've been to alot of places (I served in the military), and this is the case everywhere.<p>ÿ</p><p>You have stats to back this up?</p><p>There are "social smokers" who only "smoke when they drink", and they aren't affected by the ban.</p><p>ÿ</p><p></p>No...just personal experience. I know it's not as 'legitimate' as your studies from Harvard...but it's all I got.

[mikeyboy]

<strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>mikeyboy</strong> wrote: <p>ooh. shock poster.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Please.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>You're just realizing this NOW?</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>I took some time off for the holidays.</p>

[HBox]

<strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br />Personally, I'd ban cigarettes all together. It's a fucking disgusting habit that kills people. <p>&nbsp;</p>Sorry, but if I didn't smoke and I worried about the effects, I wouldn't go to a bar that allowed it. But most bars do. Why? Because drinkers are predominantly smokers. Besides, not everybody that smokes, dies because of it. <p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRHvZazd4IM" target="_blank">You don't always die from tobacco.</a> </p><p>&nbsp;</p>They did an expose on this guy...he <strong>chewed</strong> tobacco...big difference.<p>[color=navy][size=2]yeah, that's a huge difference.[color=navy][size=2]&nbsp; <img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/rolleyes.gif" border="0" /></p>

[Funwithcorpses]

There are "social smokers" who only "smoke when they drink", and they aren't affected by the ban.
What? They would be the most affected. If they ban smoking in bars, these "social smokers" who only "smoke when they drink" won't be able to at all.

[Tenbatsuzen]

<strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br />Here's the deal people. Why not let capitalism take its course here? If you drink, and you don't like smoking...open a bar, it's a FREE (somewhat getting restricted day by day) country. The government has no business in this. If this keeps up, I'm joining a militia.<p>&nbsp;</p><p>Playing both sides of the fence, are we?&nbsp; First saying the government should have no hand in it, then threatening to assault anyone who is not smoking. &nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p>

[narc]

<p>I have mixed feelings about this issue myself. I've never smoked. I also have respiratory problems but it's nothing that would kill me being in a smoky bar. I generally think people should be able to inhale fiberglass into their lungs slowly killing themselves if they so choose. The NY trans fatty acid ban strikes me as absolutely fascist (and I actually have and&nbsp;would go out specifically to consume a food with lots of trans fatty acids). </p><p>That having been said, when NY outlawed cigarettes in bars,&nbsp;it's been nothing but&nbsp;nice to come home not reeking of cigarette smoke. Before it happened, I'd always wash my hair when I came home because otherwise, I'd go to sleep and have to deal with tar-pillow until I washed it again. I'm also impatient for them to ban it in DC. They never will in Virginia, but the fact that DC itself hasn't banned it shows that it's not as progressive a city as it claims to be.</p>

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br />Personally, I'd ban cigarettes all together. It's a fucking disgusting habit that kills people. <p>ÿ</p>Sorry, but if I didn't smoke and I worried about the effects, I wouldn't go to a bar that allowed it. But most bars do. Why? Because drinkers are predominantly smokers. Besides, not everybody that smokes, dies because of it. <p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRHvZazd4IM" target="_blank">You don't always die from tobacco.</a> </p><p>ÿ</p>They did an expose on this guy...he <strong>chewed</strong> tobacco...big difference.<p>[color=navy][size=2]yeah, that's a huge difference.[color=navy][size=2]ÿ <img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/rolleyes.gif" border="0" /></p><p></p>Tobacco juice is more concentrated than any cigarette. Chewers swallow quite a bit. Not to mention they ingest tobacco juice. Maybe he should quit bitching and thank god he didn't get stomach cancer to boot.

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br />Here's the deal people. Why not let capitalism take its course here? If you drink, and you don't like smoking...open a bar, it's a FREE (somewhat getting restricted day by day) country. The government has no business in this. If this keeps up, I'm joining a militia.<p>ÿ</p><p>Playing both sides of the fence, are we?ÿ First saying the government should have no hand in it, then threatening to assault anyone who is not smoking. ÿ</p><p>ÿ</p><p></p>The difference being, that I'm joking and the government isn't.

[HBox]

<p><span class="postbody">The NY trans fatty acid ban strikes me as absolutely fascist (and I actually have and&nbsp;would go out specifically to consume a food with lots of trans fatty acids).</span></p><p>Wow. Talk about a useless, meaningless protest. At least its only your internal organs that will pay the price.</p>

[kellermcgee21]

<strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><p><font color="#000080"><font size="2">Or maybe smokers could value the health of people working in bars and those non-smokers in the bar over a 10 foot walk outside.</font></font> </p><p>so why don't we have non-smoking bars and smoking bars so the employee can choose wherever they want to work...and smoking bans go beyond just bars here you can't smoke within 50 feet of any public place or business unless your on your property....so that whole 10 foot walk doesn't work unless they just ban smoking in bars and let you smoke outside</p>

[mikeyboy]

<p>I'm not a smoker, so I can't say I haven't benefited from the ban..</p><p>- my eyes don't burn in bars anymore.</p><p>- I can take my kids to the&nbsp;pub down the block for dinner if I'm in the mood for fish &amp; chips.</p><p>- my clothes no longer smell like smoke when I come home from a bar. (ironically, I had the smell of smoke on my clothes for the first time in NYC in quite a long time from hanging out with the smokers outside at the Christmas party)</p><p>That said, I am in favor in&nbsp;somewhat less stringent anti-smoking laws.&nbsp; Whether it be strictly controlled smoking areas in bars (with proper ventilation) or a limited number of smoking licenses available for businesses, I find the current system a bit draconian.</p>

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>narc</strong> wrote:<br><p>I have mixed feelings about this issue myself. I've never smoked. I also have respiratory problems but it's nothing that would kill me being in a smoky bar. I generally think people should be able to inhale fiberglass into their lungs slowly killing themselves if they so choose. The NY trans fatty acid ban strikes me as absolutely fascist (and I actually have andÿwould go out specifically to consume a food with lots of trans fatty acids). </p><p>That having been said, when NY outlawed cigarettes in bars,ÿit's been nothing butÿnice to come home not reeking of cigarette smoke. Before it happened, I'd always wash my hair when I came home because otherwise, I'd go to sleep and have to deal with tar-pillow until I washed it again. I'm also impatient for them to ban it in DC. They never will in Virginia, but the fact that DC itself hasn't banned it shows that it's not as progressive a city as it claims to be.</p><p></p><a target='blank' href=http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070101/ap_on_re_us/dc_smoking_ban>Thank god now, commie bastard.</a>

[narc]

<strong>kellermcgee21</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><p><font color="#000080"><font size="2">Or maybe smokers could value the health of people working in bars and those non-smokers in the bar over a 10 foot walk outside.</font></font> </p><p>so why don't we have non-smoking bars and smoking bars so the employee can choose wherever they want to work...and smoking bans go beyond just bars here you can't smoke within 50 feet of any public place or business unless your on your property....so that whole 10 foot walk doesn't work unless they just ban smoking in bars and let you smoke outside</p><p><img src="http://www.stephendaitergallery.com/dynamic/images/display/Elliott_Erwitt_Segregated_Water_Fountains_North_Ca rolina_1255_67.jpg" border="0" width="370" height="241" /></p>

[Snacks]

<strong>Doctor_Z</strong> wrote:<br /><img src="http://homepage.mac.com/phornedowl/.Pictures/icecream.jpg" border="0" width="432" height="288" /> <span class="post_edited">This message was edited by Doctor_Z on 1-2-07 @ 12:01 AM</span> <p>I think this person is wearing an ozygen thing because he/she is a fat slob not b/c of smoking</p>

[narc]

<strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><span class="postbody">The NY trans fatty acid ban strikes me as absolutely fascist (and I actually have and&nbsp;would go out specifically to consume a food with lots of trans fatty acids). </span><p><font color="#000080"><font size="2">Wow. Talk about a useless, meaningless protest. At least its only your internal organs that will pay the price.</font></font></p><p>I wasn't talking about doing it as a form of protest. Sometimes, I happen to crave a food that I know is terrible for me and that I know happens to contain a lot of trans-fatty acids. </p><p>Sorry I can't be as perfect as you, who apparently has never craved a pizza or fast food. </p>

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br><p><span class="postbody">The NY trans fatty acid ban strikes me as absolutely fascist (and I actually have andÿwould go out specifically to consume a food with lots of trans fatty acids).</span></p><p>Wow. Talk about a useless, meaningless protest. At least its only your internal organs that will pay the price.</p><p></p>Here's the thing...maybe one day the government will put an end to bathroom solicitations in male bath rooms, then you'll get all up in arms, wondering where your rights are going.

But until then, I guess you won't ever understand.

[epo]

<strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br />Here's the deal people. Why not let capitalism take its course here? If you drink, and you don't like smoking...open a bar, it's a FREE (somewhat getting restricted day by day) country. The government has no business in this. If this keeps up, I'm joining a militia. <p>&nbsp;</p><p>Playing both sides of the fence, are we?&nbsp; First saying the government should have no hand in it, then threatening to assault anyone who is not smoking. &nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p>The difference being, that I'm joking and the government isn't. <p>Once again you aren't considering the entire story here.&nbsp; In order to open a bar you have to obtain a liquor license from your local municipality.&nbsp; You must follow the rules that are imposed by that municipality.&nbsp; So in some places you can't sell beer after 2pm, you can't sell alcohol to a minor &amp; in certain places when the elected officials/referendum of the area has dictated it, you can't smoke.&nbsp; </p><p>America is not a pure capitalistic model.&nbsp; The will of the people &amp; public safety are factors.&nbsp; If you wanna stop this tide, get involved, donate to PACs and help out your side.&nbsp; </p>

[Snacks]

<strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br />Thank god, where I live, these communists haven't struck yet. <p>&nbsp;</p><p>I'm sure being in the county seat of the largest area of tobacco production in America has nothing to do with it.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Smoking is a bad habit that kills people. </p><p>&nbsp;</p>I don't profit from it...besides I'm moving in a couple of weeks anyway. Eating fatty foods is a bad habit, are we ready to have the government decide what we can and cannot eat as well? It looks like we're headed in that direction anyway, but the point is that the government is over-stepping it's bounds. People enjoy all kinds of things that aren't good for them...so is the next step to ban all those things too? <p>&nbsp;</p><p>No, douche.&nbsp; Because when you eat fatty foods, it just affects YOU.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>When you smoke, you can affect the people around you.&nbsp; Just like drinking is not illegal, but DUI is.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>true but what about seatbelts? Not wearing one only&nbsp;hurts you no one else. I hate being forced to wear a seat belt.</p><p>By the way thatnks for the redo on my sig !!!</p>

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>kellermcgee21</strong> wrote:<br><strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><p><font color="#000080"><font size="2">Or maybe smokers could value the health of people working in bars and those non-smokers in the bar over a 10 foot walk outside.</font></font> </p><p>so why don't we have non-smoking bars and smoking bars so the employee can choose wherever they want to work</p><p></p>Because that wouldn't be the commie way. Any bar that didn't allow smoking that HAD to compete against a bar that did allow smoking right next door, would fail miserably.

[mikeyboy]

<strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><span class="postbody">The NY trans fatty acid ban strikes me as absolutely fascist (and I actually have and&nbsp;would go out specifically to consume a food with lots of trans fatty acids). </span><p><font color="#000080"><font size="2">Wow. Talk about a useless, meaningless protest. At least its only your internal organs that will pay the price.</font></font></p><p>&nbsp;</p>Here's the thing...maybe one day the government will put an end to bathroom solicitations in male bath rooms, then you'll get all up in arms, wondering where your rights are going. But until then, I guess you won't ever understand. <p>Quit being a douche and argue your point.</p>

[HBox]

<strong>kellermcgee21</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><p><font color="#000080"><font size="2">Or maybe smokers could value the health of people working in bars and those non-smokers in the bar over a 10 foot walk outside.</font></font> </p><p>so why don't we have non-smoking bars and smoking bars so the employee can choose wherever they want to work...and smoking bans go beyond just bars here you can't smoke within 50 feet of any public place or business unless your on your property....so that whole 10 foot walk doesn't work unless they just ban smoking in bars and let you smoke outside</p><p>Because they just about always fail, that's why.</p><p>And is that 50 foot thing actually enforced? I was under the impression people just went outside on the sidewalk. I know in NJ people are smoking close to the door whenever I've seen them.</p>

[narc]

<strong>Snacks</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br />Thank god, where I live, these communists haven't struck yet. <p>&nbsp;</p><p>I'm sure being in the county seat of the largest area of tobacco production in America has nothing to do with it.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Smoking is a bad habit that kills people. </p><p>&nbsp;</p>I don't profit from it...besides I'm moving in a couple of weeks anyway. Eating fatty foods is a bad habit, are we ready to have the government decide what we can and cannot eat as well? It looks like we're headed in that direction anyway, but the point is that the government is over-stepping it's bounds. People enjoy all kinds of things that aren't good for them...so is the next step to ban all those things too? <p>&nbsp;</p><p>No, douche.&nbsp; Because when you eat fatty foods, it just affects YOU.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>When you smoke, you can affect the people around you.&nbsp; Just like drinking is not illegal, but DUI is.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>true but what about seatbelts? Not wearing one only&nbsp;hurts you no one else. I hate being forced to wear a seat belt.</p><p>By the way thatnks for the redo on my sig !!!</p><p>Not true. You can fly around the compartment and hurt other people in your car. Or fly out of your car and hurt other people who happen to be around. Be imaginative with your pessimism. </p>

[epo]

<strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><span class="postbody">The NY trans fatty acid ban strikes me as absolutely fascist (and I actually have and&nbsp;would go out specifically to consume a food with lots of trans fatty acids). </span><p><font color="#000080"><font size="2">Wow. Talk about a useless, meaningless protest. At least its only your internal organs that will pay the price.</font></font></p><p>&nbsp;</p>Here's the thing...maybe one day the government will put an end to bathroom solicitations in male bath rooms, then you'll get all up in arms, wondering where your rights are going. But until then, I guess you won't ever understand. <p>So you're a southern &quot;shock jock&quot;.&nbsp; That's quite a gimmick you have going.</p>

[kellermcgee21]

<strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>kellermcgee21</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><p><font color="#000080"><font size="2">Or maybe smokers could value the health of people working in bars and those non-smokers in the bar over a 10 foot walk outside.</font></font> </p><p>so why don't we have non-smoking bars and smoking bars so the employee can choose wherever they want to work...and smoking bans go beyond just bars here you can't smoke within 50 feet of any public place or business unless your on your property....so that whole 10 foot walk doesn't work unless they just ban smoking in bars and let you smoke outside</p><font color="#000080"><font size="2">Because they just about always fail, that's why.</font></font><font color="#000080"><font size="2"> <p>And is that 50 foot thing actually enforced? I was under the impression people just went outside on the sidewalk. I know in NJ people are smoking close to the door whenever I've seen them.</p></font></font><p>I don't know how well they are enforcing it yet because it went into effect today.&nbsp; But knowing the cops around here they are going to love having a new reason to fine people.</p>

[HBox]

<strong>narc</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><span class="postbody">The NY trans fatty acid ban strikes me as absolutely fascist (and I actually have and would go out specifically to consume a food with lots of trans fatty acids). </span><p><font color="#000080"><font size="2">Wow. Talk about a useless, meaningless protest. At least its only your internal organs that will pay the price.</font></font></p><p>I wasn't talking about doing it as a form of protest. Sometimes, I happen to crave a food that I know is terrible for me and that I know happens to contain a lot of trans-fatty acids. </p><p>Sorry I can't be as perfect as you, who apparently has never craved a pizza or fast food. </p><p>Well that's not what you said. You said you went out for specifically for something with alot of trans fat. Which is incredibly stupid. It's not as if trans fat is essential to the taste of anything. It could be replaced and you wouldn't notice.</p><p>If I go out for fast food or pizza it's because I'm craving the taste of the food, not trans fat </p>

[mikeyboy]

<strong>Snacks</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br />Thank god, where I live, these communists haven't struck yet. <p>&nbsp;</p><p>I'm sure being in the county seat of the largest area of tobacco production in America has nothing to do with it.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Smoking is a bad habit that kills people. </p><p>&nbsp;</p>I don't profit from it...besides I'm moving in a couple of weeks anyway. Eating fatty foods is a bad habit, are we ready to have the government decide what we can and cannot eat as well? It looks like we're headed in that direction anyway, but the point is that the government is over-stepping it's bounds. People enjoy all kinds of things that aren't good for them...so is the next step to ban all those things too? <p>&nbsp;</p><p>No, douche.&nbsp; Because when you eat fatty foods, it just affects YOU.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>When you smoke, you can affect the people around you.&nbsp; Just like drinking is not illegal, but DUI is.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>true but what about seatbelts? Not wearing one only&nbsp;hurts you no one else. I hate being forced to wear a seat belt.</p><p>By the way thatnks for the redo on my sig !!!</p><p>It effects the insurance industry.&nbsp; If you aren't wearing a seat belt as a choice and some guy takes an illegal left turn and hits you and kills you (whereas you might have lived if you were wearing a belt), assuming that there is no reduction in coverage because of your own stupidity, the driver's insurance pays out.&nbsp; By being a rebel and not wearing a seatbelt, the insurance company pays out more, which means in the long run, multiplies by all of the accident victims not wearing seatbelts,&nbsp;everyone pays&nbsp;higher premiums.</p>

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>epo</strong> wrote:<br><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br />Here's the deal people. Why not let capitalism take its course here? If you drink, and you don't like smoking...open a bar, it's a FREE (somewhat getting restricted day by day) country. The government has no business in this. If this keeps up, I'm joining a militia. <p>ÿ</p><p>Playing both sides of the fence, are we?ÿ First saying the government should have no hand in it, then threatening to assault anyone who is not smoking. ÿ</p><p>ÿ</p><p>ÿ</p>The difference being, that I'm joking and the government isn't. <p>Once again you aren't considering the entire story here.ÿ In order to open a bar you have to obtain a liquor license from your local municipality.ÿ You must follow the rules that are imposed by that municipality.ÿ So in some places you can't sell beer after 2pm, you can't sell alcohol to a minor & in certain places when the elected officials/referendum of the area has dictated it, you can't smoke.ÿ </p><p>America is not a pure capitalistic model.ÿ The will of the people & public safety are factors.ÿ If you wanna stop this tide, get involved, donate to PACs and help out your side.ÿ </p><p></p>You're quoting those other laws like I agree with them. The point is that the government comes in and takes a little, and it's no big deal...then they take a little bit more, and a little bit more...etc. At what point does this stop? Our rights are being eroded little by little, and because it seems like a small thing at the time, nobody cares. One time it might be something I care about, another time it be something you care about. In the end, apathy wins.

I don't think our forefathers would ever have allowed such government intrusion.

[narc]

Maybe smokers could form their own country. Smokelandia. The streets could be paved with cigarette butts and there'd be a convenience store on every corner!

[Tenbatsuzen]

<strong>narc</strong> wrote:<p>true but what about seatbelts? Not wearing one only hurts you no one else. I hate being forced to wear a seat belt.</p><p>By the way thatnks for the redo on my sig !!!</p><p>Not true. You can fly around the compartment and hurt other people in your car. Or fly out of your car and hurt other people who happen to be around. Be imaginative with your pessimism. </p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Or <a href="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/viewmessages.cfm/forum/81/topic/47939">die from not wearing your seatbelt</a> and emotionally hurt loved ones.</p><p>&nbsp;</p>

[Snacks]

<p>I am a former smoker. I will say this the smoking ban has made bars and restaurants look like shit holes now. Wehnever you drive bythese places you see 10-20 or more people outside smoking. It make every place look trashy. If your going into a bar you feel like you have to walk to people just to get in the door. They should have smoking rooms that are seperate from the rest of the place with doors that close and with professional smoke eater / air purifiers. Then you have a choice smoke or not smoke. I will be the smoking rooms will be busy and the bartenders will make more tips from smokers. Before you non smokers bitch and say thats not true. I have been in the nightclub business for 12 years and all my bartenders always said smokers tpped more. There was even a study in nightclub and bar magazine that said smokers tip more b/c they are more relaxed.</p><p>Either way I'm very happy that I stopped smoking.</p>

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>mikeyboy</strong> wrote:<br><strong>Snacks</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br />Thank god, where I live, these communists haven't struck yet. <p>ÿ</p><p>I'm sure being in the county seat of the largest area of tobacco production in America has nothing to do with it.</p><p>ÿ</p><p>Smoking is a bad habit that kills people. </p><p>ÿ</p>I don't profit from it...besides I'm moving in a couple of weeks anyway. Eating fatty foods is a bad habit, are we ready to have the government decide what we can and cannot eat as well? It looks like we're headed in that direction anyway, but the point is that the government is over-stepping it's bounds. People enjoy all kinds of things that aren't good for them...so is the next step to ban all those things too? <p>ÿ</p><p>No, douche.ÿ Because when you eat fatty foods, it just affects YOU.</p><p>ÿ</p><p>When you smoke, you can affect the people around you.ÿ Just like drinking is not illegal, but DUI is.</p><p>ÿ</p><p>true but what about seatbelts? Not wearing one onlyÿhurts you no one else. I hate being forced to wear a seat belt.</p><p>By the way thatnks for the redo on my sig !!!</p><p>It effects the insurance industry.ÿ If you aren't wearing a seat belt as a choice and some guy takes an illegal left turn and hits you and kills you (whereas you might have lived if you were wearing a belt), assuming that there is no reduction in coverage because of your own stupidity, the driver's insurance pays out.ÿ By being a rebel and not wearing a seatbelt, the insurance company pays out more, which means in the long run, multiplies by all of the accident victims not wearing seatbelts,ÿeveryone paysÿhigher premiums.</p><p></p>So first it's a national health issue, and then it's a corporate insurance issue??

George Washington would lead another revolution were he here today.

[epo]

<strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>kellermcgee21</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><p><font color="#000080"><font size="2">Or maybe smokers could value the health of people working in bars and those non-smokers in the bar over a 10 foot walk outside.</font></font> </p><p>so why don't we have non-smoking bars and smoking bars so the employee can choose wherever they want to work</p><p>&nbsp;</p>Because that wouldn't be the commie way. Any bar that didn't allow smoking that HAD to compete against a bar that did allow smoking right next door, would fail miserably. <p>The irony is, the really good tavern owners that I've seen and talked to about this issue understand that it's for the public's &amp; their own good.</p><ul><li><div>They save on cleaning/labor from cleaning up after smokers.</div></li><li><div>They create a more dynamic entertainment venue for customers.&nbsp; The government is forcing them away from the drink, gamble, smoke model of yesteryear.&nbsp; This forces them to &quot;entertain&quot; their customers in new ways.</div></li><li><div>They are now able to tap into new non-smoking high-end customers that would have never gone out before.&nbsp; </div></li><li><div>And smoking's proven link to cancer is a turn-off for better bartenders.&nbsp; They can now find higher quality employees.&nbsp; And if you've ever gone into an on-premise establishment in your life a bartender (quality, honesty, customer service) can make or break a bar's til.</div></li></ul><p>Please stop with the &quot;commie&quot; garbage.&nbsp; It's only hurting your credibility.&nbsp; </p>

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>mikeyboy</strong> wrote:<br><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><span class="postbody">The NY trans fatty acid ban strikes me as absolutely fascist (and I actually have andÿwould go out specifically to consume a food with lots of trans fatty acids). </span><p><font color="#000080"><font size="2">Wow. Talk about a useless, meaningless protest. At least its only your internal organs that will pay the price.</font></font></p><p>ÿ</p>Here's the thing...maybe one day the government will put an end to bathroom solicitations in male bath rooms, then you'll get all up in arms, wondering where your rights are going. But until then, I guess you won't ever understand. <p>Quit being a douche and argue your point.</p><p></p>That is my point.

Why are you so mean to me?

[Tenbatsuzen]

<strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:You're quoting those other laws like I agree with them. The point is that the government comes in and takes a little, and it's no big deal...then they take a little bit more, and a little bit more...etc. At what point does this stop? Our rights are being eroded little by little, and because it seems like a small thing at the time, nobody cares. One time it might be something I care about, another time it be something you care about. In the end, apathy wins. I don't think our forefathers would ever have allowed such government intrusion.<p>&nbsp;</p><p>Our forefathers bought and sold and breeded other human beings, and that went on for nearly 100 years before Lincoln put a stop to it.&nbsp; Government intrusion!</p><p>The only rights being taken away are rights of people who have decided that they want to slowly kill themselves, and also infringe on the comfort and enjoyment of people around them.&nbsp; Such insensitivity isn't a rights issue.</p><p>Again, smokers a vocal minority.&nbsp; They are infringing on my rights as a majority.&nbsp; You can still smoke.&nbsp; Just take it outside.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p>

[narc]

<strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>narc</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><span class="postbody">The NY trans fatty acid ban strikes me as absolutely fascist (and I actually have and would go out specifically to consume a food with lots of trans fatty acids). </span><p><font color="#000080"><font size="2">Wow. Talk about a useless, meaningless protest. At least its only your internal organs that will pay the price.</font></font></p><p>I wasn't talking about doing it as a form of protest. Sometimes, I happen to crave a food that I know is terrible for me and that I know happens to contain a lot of trans-fatty acids. </p><p>Sorry I can't be as perfect as you, who apparently has never craved a pizza or fast food. </p><font color="#000080"><font size="2">Well that's not what you said. You said you went out for specifically for something with alot of trans fat. Which is incredibly stupid. It's not as if trans fat is essential to the taste of anything. It could be replaced and you wouldn't notice.</font></font><font color="#000080"><font size="2"> <p>If I go out for fast food or pizza it's because I'm craving the taste of the food, not trans fat </p></font></font><p>That actually isn't really what I meant...Haven't you ever gone out for something that you know is going to&nbsp;be terrible for you in that it has the trans fatty acids? So you go out and eat it anyway because you want to eat the thing that's really bad for you. I guess I'm saying I don't separate the food itself from the uber dangerous but delicious fat lurking inside. </p>

[HBox]

<strong>narc</strong> wrote:<br />Maybe smokers could form their own country. Smokelandia. The streets could be paved with cigarette butts and there'd be a convenience store on every corner!<p>And the whole place would smell like shit, there'd be no sports to speak of, the teeth whitening industry would be the biggest in the nation, walls would need to be repainted weekly, health care costs would be crippling and no one would live past 55. </p>

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>epo</strong> wrote:<br><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>kellermcgee21</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><p><font color="#000080"><font size="2">Or maybe smokers could value the health of people working in bars and those non-smokers in the bar over a 10 foot walk outside.</font></font> </p><p>so why don't we have non-smoking bars and smoking bars so the employee can choose wherever they want to work</p><p>ÿ</p>Because that wouldn't be the commie way. Any bar that didn't allow smoking that HAD to compete against a bar that did allow smoking right next door, would fail miserably. <p>The irony is, the really good tavern owners that I've seen and talked to about this issue understand that it's for the public's & their own good.</p><ul><li><div>They save on cleaning/labor from cleaning up after smokers.</div></li><li><div>They create a more dynamic entertainment venue for customers.ÿ The government is forcing them away from the drink, gamble, smoke model of yesteryear.ÿ This forces them to "entertain" their customers in new ways.</div></li><li><div>They are now able to tap into new non-smoking high-end customers that would have never gone out before.ÿ </div></li><li><div>And smoking's proven link to cancer is a turn-off for better bartenders.ÿ They can now find higher quality employees.ÿ And if you've ever gone into an on-premise establishment in your life a bartender (quality, honesty, customer service) can make or break a bar's til.</div></li></ul><p>Please stop with the "commie" garbage.ÿ It's only hurting your credibility.ÿ </p><p></p>I'm sorry but isn't a communist society only concerned with the well being of the society and not the individual?

You're not even aware of what you are, which doesn't surprise me. Not speaking to your intelligence, but the overall apathy and misplaced trust in government.

[Snacks]

<strong>kellermcgee21</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>kellermcgee21</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><p><font color="#000080"><font size="2">Or maybe smokers could value the health of people working in bars and those non-smokers in the bar over a 10 foot walk outside.</font></font> </p><p>so why don't we have non-smoking bars and smoking bars so the employee can choose wherever they want to work...and smoking bans go beyond just bars here you can't smoke within 50 feet of any public place or business unless your on your property....so that whole 10 foot walk doesn't work unless they just ban smoking in bars and let you smoke outside</p><font color="#000080"><font size="2">Because they just about always fail, that's why.</font></font><font color="#000080"><font size="2"> <p>And is that 50 foot thing actually enforced? I was under the impression people just went outside on the sidewalk. I know in NJ people are smoking close to the door whenever I've seen them.</p></font></font><p>I don't know how well they are enforcing it yet because it went into effect today.&nbsp; But knowing the cops around here they are going to love having a new reason to fine people.</p><p>I think cops shouldnt smokw while working/driving their cop cars. They are publice servants and are outting all of us at risk by driving with one hand and smoking with the other, lol It bad enough these asshole cops cant wait at a red light. I hate when a cop turns on his lights just to get through a red light and as soon as he thru he turns the lights and sirens off. Assholes</p>

[DonInNC]

<strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>narc</strong> wrote:<br />Maybe smokers could form their own country. Smokelandia. The streets could be paved with cigarette butts and there'd be a convenience store on every corner! <p><font color="#000080"><font size="2">And the whole place would smell like shit, there'd be no sports to speak of, the teeth whitening industry would be the biggest in the nation, walls would need to be repainted weekly, health care costs would be crippling and no one would live past 55.</font></font> </p><p>And the interiors of all the cars would be covered in cigarette burns.</p>

[HBox]

<strong>narc</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>narc</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><span class="postbody">The NY trans fatty acid ban strikes me as absolutely fascist (and I actually have and would go out specifically to consume a food with lots of trans fatty acids). </span><p><font color="#000080"><font size="2">Wow. Talk about a useless, meaningless protest. At least its only your internal organs that will pay the price.</font></font></p><p>I wasn't talking about doing it as a form of protest. Sometimes, I happen to crave a food that I know is terrible for me and that I know happens to contain a lot of trans-fatty acids. </p><p>Sorry I can't be as perfect as you, who apparently has never craved a pizza or fast food. </p><font color="#000080"><font size="2">Well that's not what you said. You said you went out for specifically for something with alot of trans fat. Which is incredibly stupid. It's not as if trans fat is essential to the taste of anything. It could be replaced and you wouldn't notice.</font></font><font color="#000080"><font size="2"> <p>If I go out for fast food or pizza it's because I'm craving the taste of the food, not trans fat </p></font></font><p>That actually isn't really what I meant...Haven't you ever gone out for something that you know is going to be terrible for you in that it has the trans fatty acids? So you go out and eat it anyway because you want to eat the thing that's really bad for you. I guess I'm saying I don't separate the food itself from the uber dangerous but delicious fat lurking inside. </p><p>Then I misread your intention. I actually thought you sought out something specifically because of trans fat. Your point is still kind of moot though because if trans fat were outlawed everywhere everything would taste the same trans fat would just be replaced by something noticably less unhealthy. The only difference would be stuff might cost more. </p>

[Snacks]

<strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>mikeyboy</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Snacks</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br />Thank god, where I live, these communists haven't struck yet. <p>&nbsp;</p><p>I'm sure being in the county seat of the largest area of tobacco production in America has nothing to do with it.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Smoking is a bad habit that kills people. </p><p>&nbsp;</p>I don't profit from it...besides I'm moving in a couple of weeks anyway. Eating fatty foods is a bad habit, are we ready to have the government decide what we can and cannot eat as well? It looks like we're headed in that direction anyway, but the point is that the government is over-stepping it's bounds. People enjoy all kinds of things that aren't good for them...so is the next step to ban all those things too? <p>&nbsp;</p><p>No, douche.&nbsp; Because when you eat fatty foods, it just affects YOU.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>When you smoke, you can affect the people around you.&nbsp; Just like drinking is not illegal, but DUI is.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>true but what about seatbelts? Not wearing one only&nbsp;hurts you no one else. I hate being forced to wear a seat belt.</p><p>By the way thatnks for the redo on my sig !!!</p><p>It effects the insurance industry.&nbsp; If you aren't wearing a seat belt as a choice and some guy takes an illegal left turn and hits you and kills you (whereas you might have lived if you were wearing a belt), assuming that there is no reduction in coverage because of your own stupidity, the driver's insurance pays out.&nbsp; By being a rebel and not wearing a seatbelt, the insurance company pays out more, which means in the long run, multiplies by all of the accident victims not wearing seatbelts,&nbsp;everyone pays&nbsp;higher premiums.</p><p>&nbsp;</p>So first it's a national health issue, and then it's a corporate insurance issue?? George Washington would lead another revolution were he here today. <p>I live in NJ and already pay hight insurance, the highest in the country. They havent gone down since the seat belt law. They have actually gone up. In NJ we also must decide if we will take insurance that we can sue or not sue if in an accident. If you take the plan were you are allowede to sue your premium is like 50% higher. I dont want to wear a seat belt. It effects me. Fuck the insurance companies</p>

[mikeyboy]

<strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>mikeyboy</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><span class="postbody">The NY trans fatty acid ban strikes me as absolutely fascist (and I actually have and&nbsp;would go out specifically to consume a food with lots of trans fatty acids). </span><p><font color="#000080"><font size="2">Wow. Talk about a useless, meaningless protest. At least its only your internal organs that will pay the price.</font></font></p><p>&nbsp;</p>Here's the thing...maybe one day the government will put an end to bathroom solicitations in male bath rooms, then you'll get all up in arms, wondering where your rights are going. But until then, I guess you won't ever understand. <p>Quit being a douche and argue your point.</p><p>&nbsp;</p>That is my point. Why are you so mean to me? <p>Because you seem incapable of arguing your point without making personal attacks.&nbsp; I told everyone to knock it off, but you're still taking shots..&nbsp; Be civil, make your point.&nbsp; That in and of itself is good enough for people to take you more seriously.&nbsp; If you can't do that, just stay out of the thread you started.</p>

[narc]

<strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>narc</strong> wrote:<br />Maybe smokers could form their own country. Smokelandia. The streets could be paved with cigarette butts and there'd be a convenience store on every corner! <p><font color="#000080"><font size="2">And the whole place would smell like shit, there'd be no sports to speak of, the teeth whitening industry would be the biggest in the nation, walls would need to be repainted weekly, health care costs would be crippling and no one would live past 55.</font></font> </p><p>I bet Ricky Williams would sign on to live there. So you can't say there'd be NO sports. </p>

[HBox]

I'm sorry but isn't a communist society only concerned with the well being of the society and not the individual? <p> You're not even aware of what you are, which doesn't surprise me. Not speaking to your intelligence, but the overall apathy and misplaced trust in government.</p><p>Somebody should read more about Communism.</p>

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>Tenbatsuzen</strong> wrote:<br><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:You're quoting those other laws like I agree with them. The point is that the government comes in and takes a little, and it's no big deal...then they take a little bit more, and a little bit more...etc. At what point does this stop? Our rights are being eroded little by little, and because it seems like a small thing at the time, nobody cares. One time it might be something I care about, another time it be something you care about. In the end, apathy wins. I don't think our forefathers would ever have allowed such government intrusion.<p>ÿ</p><p>Our forefathers bought and sold and breeded other human beings, and that went on for nearly 100 years before Lincoln put a stop to it.ÿ Government intrusion!</p><p>The only rights being taken away are rights of people who have decided that they want to slowly kill themselves, and also infringe on the comfort and enjoyment of people around them.ÿ Such insensitivity isn't a rights issue.</p><p>Again, smokers a vocal minority.ÿ They are infringing on my rights as a majority.ÿ You can still smoke.ÿ Just take it outside.</p><p>ÿ</p><p>ÿ</p><p></p>Let's not compare slavery to smoking please...don't be an idiot.

Smokers are the majority in a bar, otherwise it wouldn't be an issue. I doubt one guy can can kill millions with his secondhand smoke.

How about this, I smoke inside, and when you want to breathe you go outside?

Or how about opening up your own fucking bar that doesn't allow smoking? So then you and your 2 friends can enjoy your wine while the smokers are next door having a good time.

Bars are a meeting place for people, nothing more, nothing less. What is the big deal in someone opening up a non-smoking bar and see how it does competing against the ones that allow smoking? That way, you can enjoy yourself, and I can enjoy myself.

[HBox]

<strong>narc</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>narc</strong> wrote:<br />Maybe smokers could form their own country. Smokelandia. The streets could be paved with cigarette butts and there'd be a convenience store on every corner! <p><font color="#000080"><font size="2">And the whole place would smell like shit, there'd be no sports to speak of, the teeth whitening industry would be the biggest in the nation, walls would need to be repainted weekly, health care costs would be crippling and no one would live past 55.</font></font> </p><p>I bet Ricky Williams would sign on to live there. So you can't say there'd be NO sports. </p><p>I said no sports TO SPEAK OF. Nobody's spoken of Ricky Williams in a long time.<br /> </p>

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>mikeyboy</strong> wrote:<br><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>mikeyboy</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><span class="postbody">The NY trans fatty acid ban strikes me as absolutely fascist (and I actually have andÿwould go out specifically to consume a food with lots of trans fatty acids). </span><p><font color="#000080"><font size="2">Wow. Talk about a useless, meaningless protest. At least its only your internal organs that will pay the price.</font></font></p><p>ÿ</p>Here's the thing...maybe one day the government will put an end to bathroom solicitations in male bath rooms, then you'll get all up in arms, wondering where your rights are going. But until then, I guess you won't ever understand. <p>Quit being a douche and argue your point.</p><p>ÿ</p>That is my point. Why are you so mean to me? <p>Because you seem incapable of arguing your point without making personal attacks.ÿ I told everyone to knock it off, but you're still taking shots..ÿ Be civil, make your point.ÿ That in and of itself is good enough for people to take you more seriously.ÿ If you can't do that, just stay out of the thread you started.</p><p></p>Ahahaha...if you were reading the thread, you'd have noticed that I was personally attacked first, which I don't really give a crap about, because I'm a big boy...it's all in fun, lighten up bro.

[HBox]

<p><span class="postbody"> How about this, I smoke inside, and when you want to breathe you go outside?</span></p><p>No, YOU take it outside!</p>

[kellermcgee21]

<strong>narc</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>narc</strong> wrote:<br />Maybe smokers could form their own country. Smokelandia. The streets could be paved with cigarette butts and there'd be a convenience store on every corner! <p><font color="#000080"><font size="2">And the whole place would smell like shit, there'd be no sports to speak of, the teeth whitening industry would be the biggest in the nation, walls would need to be repainted weekly, health care costs would be crippling and no one would live past 55.</font></font> </p><p>I bet Ricky Williams would sign on to live there. So you can't say there'd be NO sports. </p><p>If your going to legalize what ricky williams smokes I will bet there is a lot of frisbee golf getting played.&nbsp; Not exactly a sport but it involves a lot of walking.</p>

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br>I'm sorry but isn't a communist society only concerned with the well being of the society and not the individual? <p> You're not even aware of what you are, which doesn't surprise me. Not speaking to your intelligence, but the overall apathy and misplaced trust in government.</p><p>Somebody should read more about Communism.</p><p></p>LOL...okay then explain please.

This should be good. In fact, make a whole different thread, because I'd LOVE to pick you apart.

[narc]

This also reminds me: at my college after sophomore year they banned smoking in dorms. That year there were these two gals from NYC who lived down the hall and just smoked constantly. I went into their room after they had moved out - it was one of the grossest and most extraordinary things I've seen. Their walls which for everyone else was white were just streaked this yellowish brown. I really pity whoever had to live there&nbsp;the next year because I&nbsp;think it still would've smelled. &nbsp;

[HBox]

<strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br />I'm sorry but isn't a communist society only concerned with the well being of the society and not the individual? <p> You're not even aware of what you are, which doesn't surprise me. Not speaking to your intelligence, but the overall apathy and misplaced trust in government.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><font color="Navy"><font size="2">Somebody should read more about Communism.</font></font></p><p>&nbsp;</p>LOL...okay then explain please. This should be good. In fact, make a whole different thread, because I'd LOVE to pick you apart.<p>[quote]<strong>Communism</strong> is an ideology that seeks to establish a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classlessness" title="Classlessness">classless</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State" title="State">stateless</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_organisation" title="Social organisation">social organization</a>, based upon <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_ownership" title="Common ownership">common ownership</a> of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Means_of_production" title="Means of production">means of production</a>. It can be classified as a branch of the broader <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism" title="Socialism">socialist movement</a>. Early forms of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human" title="Human">human</a> social organization have been described as '<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primitive_communism" title="Primitive communism">primitive communism</a>' by Marxists. However, communism as a political goal is generally a conjectured form of future social organization. There is a considerable variety of views among self-identified communists, including <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maoism" title="Maoism">Maoism</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trotskyism" title="Trotskyism">Trotskyism</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_communism" title="Council communism">council communism</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxemburgism" title="Luxemburgism">Luxemburgism</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_communism" title="Anarchist communism">anarchist communism</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_communism" title="Christian communism">Christian communism</a>, and various currents of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left_communism" title="Left communism">left communism</a>, which are generally the more widespread varieties. However, various offshoots of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Union" title="Soviet Union">Soviet</a> (what critics call the '<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalinism" title="Stalinism">Stalinist</a>') and Maoist interpretations of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxism-Leninism" title="Marxism-Leninism">Marxism-Leninism</a> comprise a particular branch of communism that has the distinction of having been the primary driving force for communism in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_relations" title="International relations">world politics</a> during most of the 20th century. The competing branch of Trotskyism has not had such a distinction.</p> <p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx" title="Karl Marx">Karl Marx</a> held that society could not be transformed from the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism" title="Capitalism">capitalist</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mode_of_production" title="Mode of production">mode of production</a> to the advanced communist mode of production all at once, but required a transitional period which Marx described as the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_revolution" title="Communist revolution">revolutionary</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictatorship_of_the_proletariat" title="Dictatorship of the proletariat">dictatorship of the proletariat</a>, the first stag

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br />[quote]I'm sorry but isn't a communist society only concerned with the well being of the society and not the individual? <p> You're not even aware of what you are, which doesn't surprise me. Not speaking to your intelligence, but the overall apathy and misplaced trust in government.</p><p>ÿ</p><p><font color="Navy"><font size="2">Somebody should read more about Communism.</font></font></p><p>ÿ</p>LOL...okay then explain please. This should be good. In fact, make a whole different thread, because I'd LOVE to pick you apart.<p>[quote]<strong>Communism</strong> is an ideology that seeks to establish a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classlessness" title="Classlessness">classless</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State" title="State">stateless</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_organisation" title="Social organisation">social organization</a>, based upon <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_ownership" title="Common ownership">common ownership</a> of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Means_of_production" title="Means of production">means of production</a>. It can be classified as a branch of the broader <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism" title="Socialism">socialist movement</a>. Early forms of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human" title="Human">human</a> social organization have been described as '<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primitive_communism" title="Primitive communism">primitive communism</a>' by Marxists. However, communism as a political goal is generally a conjectured form of future social organization. There is a considerable variety of views among self-identified communists, including <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maoism" title="Maoism">Maoism</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trotskyism" title="Trotskyism">Trotskyism</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_communism" title="Council communism">council communism</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxemburgism" title="Luxemburgism">Luxemburgism</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_communism" title="Anarchist communism">anarchist communism</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_communism" title="Christian communism">Christian communism</a>, and various currents of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left_communism" title="Left communism">left communism</a>, which are generally the more widespread varieties. However, various offshoots of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Union" title="Soviet Union">Soviet</a> (what critics call the '<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalinism" title="Stalinism">Stalinist</a>') and Maoist interpretations of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxism-Leninism" title="Marxism-Leninism">Marxism-Leninism</a> comprise a particular branch of communism that has the distinction of having been the primary driving force for communism in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_relations" title="International relations">world politics</a> during most of the 20th century. The competing branch of Trotskyism has not had such a distinction.</p> <p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx" title="Karl Marx">Karl Marx</a> held that society could not be transformed from the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism" title="Capitalism">capitalist</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mode_of_production" title="Mode of production">mode of production</a> to the advanced communist mode of production all at once, but required a transitional period which Marx described as the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_revolution" title="Communist revolution">revolutionary</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictatorship_of_the_proletariat" title="Dictatorship of the proletariat">dictatorship of the proletariat</a>, the first stage of co

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>narc</strong> wrote:<br>This also reminds me: at my college after sophomore year they banned smoking in dorms. That year there were these two gals from NYC who lived down the hall and just smoked constantly. I went into their room after they had moved out - it was one of the grossest and most extraordinary things I've seen. Their walls which for everyone else was white were just streaked this yellowish brown. I really pity whoever had to live thereÿthe next year because Iÿthink it still would've smelled. ÿ<p></p>You were grossed out?

Then I guess a law banning such a thing is in order after all...I stand corrected.

[HBox]

<strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br />[quote]<strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br />[quote]I'm sorry but isn't a communist society only concerned with the well being of the society and not the individual? <p> You're not even aware of what you are, which doesn't surprise me. Not speaking to your intelligence, but the overall apathy and misplaced trust in government.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><font color="Navy"><font size="2">Somebody should read more about Communism.</font></font></p><p>&nbsp;</p>LOL...okay then explain please. This should be good. In fact, make a whole different thread, because I'd LOVE to pick you apart.<p>&nbsp;</p>[quote]<strong>Communism</strong> is an ideology that seeks to establish a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classlessness" title="Classlessness">classless</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State" title="State">stateless</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_organisation" title="Social organisation">social organization</a>, based upon <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_ownership" title="Common ownership">common ownership</a> of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Means_of_production" title="Means of production">means of production</a>. It can be classified as a branch of the broader <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism" title="Socialism">socialist movement</a>. Early forms of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human" title="Human">human</a> social organization have been described as '<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primitive_communism" title="Primitive communism">primitive communism</a>' by Marxists. However, communism as a political goal is generally a conjectured form of future social organization. There is a considerable variety of views among self-identified communists, including <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maoism" title="Maoism">Maoism</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trotskyism" title="Trotskyism">Trotskyism</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_communism" title="Council communism">council communism</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxemburgism" title="Luxemburgism">Luxemburgism</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_communism" title="Anarchist communism">anarchist communism</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_communism" title="Christian communism">Christian communism</a>, and various currents of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left_communism" title="Left communism">left communism</a>, which are generally the more widespread varieties. However, various offshoots of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Union" title="Soviet Union">Soviet</a> (what critics call the '<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalinism" title="Stalinism">Stalinist</a>') and Maoist interpretations of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marxism-Leninism" title="Marxism-Leninism">Marxism-Leninism</a> comprise a particular branch of communism that has the distinction of having been the primary driving force for communism in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_relations" title="International relations">world politics</a> during most of the 20th century. The competing branch of Trotskyism has not had such a distinction.<p>&nbsp;</p> <p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Marx" title="Karl Marx">Karl Marx</a> held that society could not be transformed from the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism" title="Capitalism">capitalist</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mode_of_production" title="Mode of production">mode of production</a> to the advanced communist mode of production all at once, but required a transitional period which Marx described as the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communist_revolution" title="Communist revolution">revolutionary</a> <a href="http://en

[Funwithcorpses]

Was that in a movie? LOL! I'm awesome.

[HBox]

<strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br />Was that in a movie? LOL! I'm awesome.<p>Are you posting from 1995? LOL? LOL? I bet all your teenage girlfriends think that's totally ROXOR!!!!!!</p>

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br />Was that in a movie? LOL! I'm awesome.<p>Are you posting from 1995? LOL? LOL? I bet all your teenage girlfriends think that's totally ROXOR!!!!!!</p><p></p>If I had teenage girlfriends I wouldn't even be on here shit dick. Grab ahold of yourself.

[PapaBear]

<p>This thread is...</p><p><img src="http://www.mini-lathe.org.uk/images/lathe_boring_1.jpg" border="0" width="473" height="341" /></p>

[epo]

<strong>PapaBear</strong> wrote:<br /><p>This thread is...</p><p><img src="http://www.mini-lathe.org.uk/images/lathe_boring_1.jpg" border="0" width="473" height="341" /></p><p>Thank you.&nbsp; Have fun kids, I'm going to bed and let you argue this brand of circular logic.&nbsp; </p>

[CofyCrakCocaine]

All personal attacks are gay. No offense Fezzy.

[DonInNC]

Communism is&nbsp;more concerned with&nbsp;an equitable distribution of wealth&nbsp;than it is with public health. I don't think there was ever an anti-smoking campaign in the USSR. If there was, it apparently wasn't very successful. China also. Those Communists are some cigarette smoking bastards.

<span class=post_edited>This message was edited by DonInNC on 1-2-07 @ 2:05 AM</span>

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>PapaBear</strong> wrote:<br><p>This thread is...</p><p>...not something I can wrap my feeble mind around.<p></p>

Give it a shot, Einstein...never mind what your daddy told you.

[kellermcgee21]

<p>I'm going back to watching Trailer Park Boys and illegally smoking.&nbsp; </p>

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>DonInNC</strong> wrote:<br>Communism isÿmore concerned withÿan equitable distribution of wealthÿthan it is with public health. I don't think there was ever an anti-smoking campaign in the USSR. If there was, it apparently wasn't very successful. China also. Those Communists are some cigarette smoking basterds.<p></p>True, but to be fair, the USSR ended their communist regime a long time before the push for communism here really started coming on strong.

As for the Chinese, they make some damn good food...they deserve a cig break, IMO.

[CofyCrakCocaine]

<p>I for one hate smoking. Glad there's a ban on it going on in public places. If I'm gonna get cancer, I don't want to get it because some asshole wanted to indulge himself in some poisonous habit right next to me.</p><p>I don't mind bumming a cigarette from a friend or a random girl as a way to get a conversation going, but I hated the indoor smoking cuz it stuck around the place and got in your hair and clothes and left you generally smelling like smokey shit the next day. </p><p>Ever notice Asians and Europeans smoke like fucking chimneys?&nbsp; </p>

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>CofyCrakCocaine</strong> wrote:<br><p>I for one hate smoking. Glad there's a ban on it going on in public places. If I'm gonna get cancer, I don't want to get it because some asshole wanted to indulge himself in some poisonous habit right next to me.</p><p>I don't mind bumming a cigarette from a friend or a random girl as a way to get a conversation going, but I hated the indoor smoking cuz it stuck around the place and got in your hair and clothes and left you generally smelling like smokey shit the next day. </p><p>Ever notice Asians and Europeans smoke like fucking chimneys?ÿ </p><p></p>I'm coming to Jersey in 2 weeks, give me your address...I'm kicking your ass personally.

[HBox]

<strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>CofyCrakCocaine</strong> wrote:<br /><p>I for one hate smoking. Glad there's a ban on it going on in public places. If I'm gonna get cancer, I don't want to get it because some asshole wanted to indulge himself in some poisonous habit right next to me.</p><p>I don't mind bumming a cigarette from a friend or a random girl as a way to get a conversation going, but I hated the indoor smoking cuz it stuck around the place and got in your hair and clothes and left you generally smelling like smokey shit the next day. </p><p>Ever notice Asians and Europeans smoke like fucking chimneys? </p><p>&nbsp;</p>I'm coming to Jersey in 2 weeks, give me your address...I'm kicking your ass personally.<p><font size="3"><em>SHOCK POSTER!</em></font></p>

[Funwithcorpses]

<strong>HBox</strong> wrote:<br><strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>CofyCrakCocaine</strong> wrote:<br /><p>I for one hate smoking. Glad there's a ban on it going on in public places. If I'm gonna get cancer, I don't want to get it because some asshole wanted to indulge himself in some poisonous habit right next to me.</p><p>I don't mind bumming a cigarette from a friend or a random girl as a way to get a conversation going, but I hated the indoor smoking cuz it stuck around the place and got in your hair and clothes and left you generally smelling like smokey shit the next day. </p><p>Ever notice Asians and Europeans smoke like fucking chimneys? </p><p>ÿ</p>I'm coming to Jersey in 2 weeks, give me your address...I'm kicking your ass personally.<p><font size="3"><em>SHOCK POSTER!</em></font></p><p></p>For fucks sake can't a guy have fun?!?!

[DonInNC]

<strong>CofyCrakCocaine</strong> wrote:<br /><p>Ever notice Asians and Europeans smoke like fucking chimneys?&nbsp; </p><p>The prostitutes are the worst.</p>

[CofyCrakCocaine]

<strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br /><strong>CofyCrakCocaine</strong> wrote:<br /><p>I for one hate smoking. Glad there's a ban on it going on in public places. If I'm gonna get cancer, I don't want to get it because some asshole wanted to indulge himself in some poisonous habit right next to me.</p><p>I don't mind bumming a cigarette from a friend or a random girl as a way to get a conversation going, but I hated the indoor smoking cuz it stuck around the place and got in your hair and clothes and left you generally smelling like smokey shit the next day. </p><p>Ever notice Asians and Europeans smoke like fucking chimneys? </p><p>&nbsp;</p>I'm coming to Jersey in 2 weeks, give me your address...I'm kicking your ass personally.<p>&nbsp;Oh no...I'll bring the barbed wire, you bring the pick. </p>

[Don Stugots]

i hate cigerette smoking period.&nbsp; i do like going out to a bard and not stink of smoke.&nbsp; the one thing i hate about the ban is that there is a town in CA, bakersfield, i think, that nolonger allows you to smoke in your home or on the streets.&nbsp; that is too far.&nbsp; tobacco companies, while ruthless, provide jobs for millions of people.&nbsp; it also generates a ton of tax dollars.&nbsp; if you wipe out smoking where would that tax money be replaced from?

[A.J.]

<strong>Funwithcorpses</strong> wrote:<br />Besides, not everybody that smokes, dies because of it. <p>He'll bury us all.</p><p><img src="http://i3.cn.cz/3/1125390401_richards-keith-1.jpg" border="0" width="360" height="301" /></p>

[TheMojoPin]

<p>i do like going out to a bard and not stink of smoke.</p><p>FORSOOTH!&nbsp; Ye shall smelt as ye smelt and liketh it!</p><p><img src="http://www.readprint.com/images/authors/william-shakespeare.gif" border="0" width="140" height="180" /></p>

[A.J.]

<strong>TheMojoPin</strong> wrote:<br />i do like going out to a <strong>bard</strong> and not stink of smoke. <p>FORSOOTH!&nbsp; Ye shall smelt as ye smelt and liketh it!</p><p><img src="http://www.readprint.com/images/authors/william-shakespeare.gif" border="0" width="140" height="180" /></p><p>And get thee to a winery!</p>

[angelinad128]

<p>I love that you can go out and when you come back home, your clothes and worse, your hair doesn't smell like smoke.</p><p>Plus like Mickeyboy mentioned, I can take my kid for shepards pie without her becoming ashmatic.</p>

[badmonkey]

<p>All these arguments about how people love coming home from bars without smelling like smoke sound like proof that non-smoking bars can compete.&nbsp; In DC a non-smoking bar opened and was doing well because it was promoting itself as a place for non-smokers.&nbsp; Why can't we have both?&nbsp; My dad is a doctor and he quit smoking when I was born.&nbsp; I don't know anybody on the planet more strongly against smoking than he is and even he says that the second hand smoke thing is mostly horseshit dreamed up by non-smokers with no real basis in medical or scientific fact.</p><p>In Maryland, restaurants were required at one point to provide completely separate ventilation systems for the smoking and non-smoking sections.&nbsp; Now they are being told that they can't allow smoking at all.&nbsp; Why is a section for people to smoke in so wrong?&nbsp; Nobody is forced to work in the smoking section.&nbsp; There is no law stopping anybody from opening a bar that does not allow smoking.&nbsp;</p><p>I think most people agree that it's not right for the govt to tell you that you can't smoke at home on your own private property.&nbsp; The bars and restaurants are privately owned businesses not public property and the government has no business telling them that they can't allow smoking.&nbsp; If you don't wanna smell like smoke then petition your local bar to try a month smoke free or something and advertise it as a smoke free establishment.&nbsp; If they do well that month, maybe they'll keep it smoke free for you. If the govt wants to get involved then they should drop a pair and make tobacco illegal and until that day comes they should let the market handle it.&nbsp; </p><p>There's no reason that there shouldn't be places for smokers to go enjoy themselves too without being oppressively forced into the rain/snow/etc to enjoy a cigarette. There's no reason that there shouldn't also be bars for non-smokers to go hang out without having to deal with somebody else's smoke.&nbsp; Everybody can then be happy and nobody's evening is ruined by anybody else's behavior or intolerance. </p><p>Badmonkey&nbsp;</p>

[Zorro]

<font size="2">We need the ban so more bar ashtrays become available for Fez to give as gifts</font>

[ralphbxny]

<strong>Don Stugots</strong> wrote:<br />i hate cigerette smoking period.&nbsp; i do like going out to a bard and not stink of smoke.&nbsp; the one thing i hate about the ban is that there is a town in CA, bakersfield, i think, that nolonger allows you to smoke in your home or on the streets.&nbsp; that is too far.&nbsp; tobacco companies, while ruthless, provide jobs for millions of people.&nbsp; it also generates a ton of tax dollars.&nbsp; if you wipe out smoking where would that tax money be replaced from? <p>Agreed!!!!!!!!</p>

[CofyCrakCocaine]

<strong>badmonkey</strong> wrote:<br /><p>All these arguments about how people love coming home from bars without smelling like smoke sound like proof that non-smoking bars can compete. In DC a non-smoking bar opened and was doing well because it was promoting itself as a place for non-smokers. Why can't we have both? My dad is a doctor and he quit smoking when I was born. I don't know anybody on the planet more strongly against smoking than he is and even he says that the second hand smoke thing is mostly horseshit dreamed up by non-smokers with no real basis in medical or scientific fact.</p><p>In Maryland, restaurants were required at one point to provide completely separate ventilation systems for the smoking and non-smoking sections. Now they are being told that they can't allow smoking at all. Why is a section for people to smoke in so wrong? Nobody is forced to work in the smoking section. There is no law stopping anybody from opening a bar that does not allow smoking. </p><p>I think most people agree that it's not right for the govt to tell you that you can't smoke at home on your own private property. The bars and restaurants are privately owned businesses not public property and the government has no business telling them that they can't allow smoking. If you don't wanna smell like smoke then petition your local bar to try a month smoke free or something and advertise it as a smoke free establishment. If they do well that month, maybe they'll keep it smoke free for you. If the govt wants to get involved then they should drop a pair and make tobacco illegal and until that day comes they should let the market handle it. </p><p>There's no reason that there shouldn't be places for smokers to go enjoy themselves too without being oppressively forced into the rain/snow/etc to enjoy a cigarette. There's no reason that there shouldn't also be bars for non-smokers to go hang out without having to deal with somebody else's smoke. Everybody can then be happy and nobody's evening is ruined by anybody else's behavior or intolerance. </p><p>Badmonkey </p><p>&nbsp;Yeah, but then all the cool people would be in the smoking bars and us losers would be in the non-smoking bar sitting there with urine soaked undies wondering where the fun went. </p>

[Jughead]

Andy Griffith Smoked so its OK!&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Damn It!!!

[epo]

<strong>badmonkey</strong> wrote:<br /><p>All these arguments about how people love coming home from bars without smelling like smoke sound like proof that non-smoking bars can compete.&nbsp; In DC a non-smoking bar opened and was doing well because it was promoting itself as a place for non-smokers.&nbsp; Why can't we have both?&nbsp; My dad is a doctor and he quit smoking when I was born.&nbsp; I don't know anybody on the planet more strongly against smoking than he is and even he says that the <font style="background-color: #ffff00">second hand smoke thing is mostly horseshit dreamed up by non-smokers with no real basis in medical or scientific fact</font>.</p><p>In Maryland, restaurants were required at one point to provide completely separate ventilation systems for the smoking and non-smoking sections.&nbsp; Now they are being told that they can't allow smoking at all.&nbsp; Why is a section for people to smoke in so wrong?&nbsp; Nobody is forced to work in the smoking section.&nbsp; There is no law stopping anybody from opening a bar that does not allow smoking.&nbsp;</p><p>I think most people agree that it's not right for the govt to tell you that you can't smoke at home on your own private property.&nbsp; The bars and restaurants are privately owned businesses not public property and the government has no business telling them that they can't allow smoking.&nbsp; If you don't wanna smell like smoke then petition your local bar to try a month smoke free or something and advertise it as a smoke free establishment.&nbsp; If they do well that month, maybe they'll keep it smoke free for you. If the govt wants to get involved then they should drop a pair and make tobacco illegal and until that day comes they should let the market handle it.&nbsp; </p><p>There's no reason that there shouldn't be places for smokers to go enjoy themselves too without being oppressively forced into the rain/snow/etc to enjoy a cigarette. There's no reason that there shouldn't also be bars for non-smokers to go hang out without having to deal with somebody else's smoke.&nbsp; Everybody can then be happy and nobody's evening is ruined by anybody else's behavior or intolerance. </p><p>Badmonkey&nbsp;</p><p>So you are saying that science is making this shit up?&nbsp; Like global warming or evolution?&nbsp; How about gravity?</p>

[badmonkey]

<strong>epo</strong> wrote:So you are saying that science is making this shit up? Like global warming or evolution? How about gravity?<p>Actually, I passed on information from my father who is a radiologist with over 40 years experience in his field, a former chief of radiology in the US Air Force and advisor to the Surgeon General. He is also an ex-smoker who is so against smoking that every visit involves a lecture about it. He says that the numbers they use are bogus and second hand smoke is not more deadly than first hand smoke for one. They way they calculate deaths from second hand smoke is totally skewed towards their desired outcome. Here is an example of how they prove it at &quot;<a href="http://www.no-smoke.org/getthefacts.php?id=13" target="_blank">no-smoke.org</a>&quot;: </p><p><em>&quot;We now know that 53,800 people die every year from secondhand smoke exposure. This number is based on the midpoint numbers for heart disease deaths (48,500), lung cancer deaths (3,000), and SIDS deaths (2,300) as calculated in the 1997 California EPA Report on Secondhand Smoke.&quot;</em></p><p><strong>Heart disease</strong> deaths are counted and make up the vast majority (48,500) of &quot;smoke related&quot; deaths. Then they count lung cancer deaths at only 3,000. They also count SIDs (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) death, which NOBODY has any idea what causes it. Every year the suspected causes are different and there's no documentation or facts that say that all of these kids died in homes where one or more parent smokes. So based on these scientific/medical facts we learn that most people that die from &quot;second hand smoke&quot; die of heart disease. So what are the main causes of heart disease?</p><p> According to the <a href="http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/007115.htm" target="_blank">NIH</a>:</p><p><span class="minusOne"><ul><li>Family history of coronary heart disease (especially before age 50)</li><li>Male gender</li><li>Age (65 and greater)</li><li>Tobacco smoking</li><li>High blood pressure</li><li>Diabetes</li><li>High cholesterol levels (specifically, high LDL cholesterol and low HDL cholesterol)</li><li>Lack of physical activity or exercise</li><li>Obesity</li><li>Higher-than-normal markers of inflammation</li><li>High blood homocysteine levels</li><li>Menopause</li></ul></span> Smoking is listed, but that's active smoking, not passive smoking. Sure, if you spend all your time in a smokefilled room like the smoking rooms at the airports it's going to cause you problems, but lungs heal themselves quickly and for active smokers according to the <a href="http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/002032.htm" target="_blank">NIH</a> again:</p><p><span class="minusOne"><ul><li> <strong>Within 20 minutes of quitting</strong> - your blood pressure and pulse rate drop to normal and the temperature of your hands and feet increases to normal.</li><li> <strong>Within 8 hours of quitting -</strong> your carbon monoxide levels drop and your oxygen levels increase, both to normal levels.</li><li> <strong>Within 24 hours of quitting -</strong> your risk of a sudden heart attack decreases.</li><li> <strong>Within 48 hours of quitting -</strong> nerve endings begin to regenerate and your senses of smell and taste begin to return to normal.</li><li> <strong>Within 2 weeks to 3 months of quitting</strong> - your circulation improves and walking becomes easier; even your lung function increases up to 30%.</li><li> <strong>Within 1 to 9 months of quitting</strong> - your overall energy typically increases and symptoms like coughing, nasal congestion, fatigue, and shortness of breath diminish; also, the small hairlike projections lining your lower airways begin to function normally. This increases your lungs' ability to handle mucus, clean the airways, and reduce infections.</li><li> <strong>Within 1 year of quitting -</strong> your risk of coronary heart disease is half that of someone still using tobacco.</li><li> <str

[A.J.]

Well, yesterday was the first day of the smoking ban in Virginia. It was weird not being able to burn one at my favorite bar. But it wasn't as miserable as I thought it would be having to go outside for a smoke. That will be when it's freezing and/or snowing/raining.