It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
NJ woman chides NYC smoker, gets stabbed with pen (smoking verses non smoking)
page: 4share:
reply to post by HabaneroPepper
In the UK it costs the government around 3.2billion to treat tobacco related illnesses.
The tax they take from the sale of Tobacco products? around 22 billion.
None Smokers need to realize that smoking subsidizes government infrastructure, without which your taxes would probably be much higher.
In the UK it costs the government around 3.2billion to treat tobacco related illnesses.
The tax they take from the sale of Tobacco products? around 22 billion.
None Smokers need to realize that smoking subsidizes government infrastructure, without which your taxes would probably be much higher.
Originally posted by Jefferton
reply to post by HabaneroPepper
People walk by me a thousand times a day blowing smoke at me, is there a special out doors just for lame people like me who like breathing?
Yeah I'd like breathing “fresh air” too but Thousands of cars passing by me every day and night. Do I have a choice..?
What is most poisonous to human health? Cars or cigarettes..??
OP ....
" Then, one day, someone decided after years of it being ok, it wasn't. Just like that, and over night"
No it was never OK to smoke around other people. You were just too self centered to ever think about it before. And you hung out with a group of like minded individuals.
The fact is, if smokers had any manners. No laws would ever have had to be passed in the first place to FORCE them to acknowledge other peoples rights. It would have been a non-issue.
" Then, one day, someone decided after years of it being ok, it wasn't. Just like that, and over night"
No it was never OK to smoke around other people. You were just too self centered to ever think about it before. And you hung out with a group of like minded individuals.
The fact is, if smokers had any manners. No laws would ever have had to be passed in the first place to FORCE them to acknowledge other peoples rights. It would have been a non-issue.
You tell a crazy homeless person how to act in public, and you get what you asked for. Which makes me wonder, who was nuttier? If ever in such
a situation, leave it up to security or the police. Common sense could have avoided this entire situation.
I am a pipe smoker, and the occasional cigar afficionado. I don't really like the smell/taste of cigarettes. I think they are gross. I think all
cigarettes should be banned, and those that smoke them marked as social pariah for ever even wishing to consume the vile things. As for me, and my
virginia burleys, periques, and latakias we should be left alone because it smells good, and it's MY thing so that makes it OK. In fact I wish for
draconian laws affecting everyone that doesn't think exactly the way I do. I should keep my right to smoke stuff that smells nice, but you can
infringe on those nasty cigarette suckers all day.
Non-smokers should simply unite in their righteous, morally superior cause. Myself being exempt of course on a technicality. Double standard is just the way of world right? I fully support all suppressive measures against anything "I" see as inordinate, or disturbing, but don't you dare come after MY rights. I demand my rights, I yell for them, I scream for them. I stab people in the face with a pen, or walk 50 yards out of my way to verbally accost people who even look like they might offend my utopian view.
Sarcasm off-
The issue is not smokers Vs. non-smokers. The issue is self centeredness Vs. tolerance. There are times in life you just have to grow up, grow a pair, and suck it up. Smokers should strive to be polite, and pay attention when/where they light up. I do. Non-smokers should avoid active smoking when/where possible if they are put off by it. When a conflict invariably arises both parties would benefit from employing manners, and decorum. Non-smokers who go out of their way to chide smokers are nastier than cigarettes, and take a larger health risk too. Smokers who selfishly light up anywhere without considerations are just exactly as rude, and nasty as their annoying non-smoker counter parts. Smoke doesn't bother me at all, toxic attitudes do.
Non-smokers should simply unite in their righteous, morally superior cause. Myself being exempt of course on a technicality. Double standard is just the way of world right? I fully support all suppressive measures against anything "I" see as inordinate, or disturbing, but don't you dare come after MY rights. I demand my rights, I yell for them, I scream for them. I stab people in the face with a pen, or walk 50 yards out of my way to verbally accost people who even look like they might offend my utopian view.
Sarcasm off-
The issue is not smokers Vs. non-smokers. The issue is self centeredness Vs. tolerance. There are times in life you just have to grow up, grow a pair, and suck it up. Smokers should strive to be polite, and pay attention when/where they light up. I do. Non-smokers should avoid active smoking when/where possible if they are put off by it. When a conflict invariably arises both parties would benefit from employing manners, and decorum. Non-smokers who go out of their way to chide smokers are nastier than cigarettes, and take a larger health risk too. Smokers who selfishly light up anywhere without considerations are just exactly as rude, and nasty as their annoying non-smoker counter parts. Smoke doesn't bother me at all, toxic attitudes do.
The funny thing is, you think the armed forces are old fashioned. But in the 80s I was in the Navy. And if you lit up around a non-smoker. You could
expect a punch in the head.
As a smoker, I make it a point to try and stay away from people, especially kids. I don't want to be bitched at either though. I had someone approach
me and say "Second hand smoke kills", so I said "Well then, you should probably take up smoking then. Then it won't be second hand." There's a
town called belmont here in the bay area that was trying to ban smoking altogether anywhere, even in your own home or car. I'm not sure if it passed,
but that's waaaay too extreme. San Francisco recently raised the cigarette tax to cover the charge of cleaning up the cigarette butts. They made it
seem like the city had to pay millions a year just cleaning butts up. I thought the street sweepers pick up all garbage. Now, whenever I go to SF, I
throw my butts out the window, because I paid for it to be cleaned up before I even opened the pack.
reply to post by thedeadtruth
well said, star from me
this is the first post in this thread that is normal.
after reading pages of mindless posts arguing about is it ok to smoke or not ( which sound to me like kids arguing who's dad is stronger. mine! mine! ), you sound refreshing.
If smokers had decent manners, no laws would be brought. But no, they had to puff the smoke in restaurants, they had to puff it in everyone's face, they had to go "clothes shopping with cigarette" ....
Now face it. Non-smokers had lot's of arguments and they won.
Now you can't smoke anywhere. And so what?
Now on topic - idiot lights up the cigarette in subway and gets surprised that somebody says something??
And then he slashes people??
That is not connected with smoking ban. He's just plain idiot. He knew that he can't smoke in subway, he knew that somebody will complaint. Either he has some mental problems or he is from some rural country that no one ever heard of.
I smoke for 17 years, come from ex-communist state where we were so cool when we smoked at 12-13 years old, I have smoking family, smoke 2 packs of Marlboro a day.
BUT
I have manners and sane mind. And I would never ever even consider lighting up a cigarette in subway, even as a eastern european tourist.
My mother would slap me now with my 31 years if she saw me smoking where it is banned.
And I would do the same to others.
But i'm confused with this incident - why other passengers didn't kick the sh*t out of him when he started slashing that person. So that the bully can learn a lesson - when you have no manners and you are aggressive , you get slapped. Here he would get such beating, he could not smoke for some days after.
well said, star from me
this is the first post in this thread that is normal.
after reading pages of mindless posts arguing about is it ok to smoke or not ( which sound to me like kids arguing who's dad is stronger. mine! mine! ), you sound refreshing.
If smokers had decent manners, no laws would be brought. But no, they had to puff the smoke in restaurants, they had to puff it in everyone's face, they had to go "clothes shopping with cigarette" ....
Now face it. Non-smokers had lot's of arguments and they won.
Now you can't smoke anywhere. And so what?
Now on topic - idiot lights up the cigarette in subway and gets surprised that somebody says something??
And then he slashes people??
That is not connected with smoking ban. He's just plain idiot. He knew that he can't smoke in subway, he knew that somebody will complaint. Either he has some mental problems or he is from some rural country that no one ever heard of.
I smoke for 17 years, come from ex-communist state where we were so cool when we smoked at 12-13 years old, I have smoking family, smoke 2 packs of Marlboro a day.
BUT
I have manners and sane mind. And I would never ever even consider lighting up a cigarette in subway, even as a eastern european tourist.
My mother would slap me now with my 31 years if she saw me smoking where it is banned.
And I would do the same to others.
But i'm confused with this incident - why other passengers didn't kick the sh*t out of him when he started slashing that person. So that the bully can learn a lesson - when you have no manners and you are aggressive , you get slapped. Here he would get such beating, he could not smoke for some days after.
reply to post by atlasastro
The same can be said for self righteous attitudes...
As a smoker (I am now 48 and been smoking since I was 8 years old) I can see both sides to this argument. The offender was completely in the wrong, he was in a confined place, with strict no smoking rules. Those rules apply for the benefit of everyone, and in confined spaces passive smoking has been proven to be harmful. There is no debate, he should not of lit up his smoke, whether it be weed or a normal cigarette.
Having said that, the arguments here about smoking in open area's by non smokers just don't wash with me. In a public open area, there is no evidence to support any permanent harm can be done from slip stream smoke (from the end of the cigarette) or from second hand smoke. There is though plenty of evidence to say it is harmful within an enclosed area, and so I feel the current legislation is right.
Then comes the other issue, do people have the right to challenge others just because they are doing something they don't like. I know (from personal experience) if someone complains about me smoking in an open public place, my first reaction is to ignore them, if they continue to voice their opinion my reply tends to be a two word sentence staring and finishing with the letter F. That may seem like I am intolerant, which I am not I just hate anyone trying to impinge on my personal freedoms.
I don't drive and my personal belief is everyone should use public transport, it would be better for the environment. The smoke, carcinogens and other obnoxious fumes released by cars and motorcycles is provably damaging to the environment and towards peoples overall health, yet I don't berate every driver I see, in fact I don't berate any driver I see, even the housewives who take their gas guzzling 4x4 a 1000 yards to drop their kids at school just because they are to fat and lazy to walk.
So the be all and end all of it is, if I am smoking in an area that is designated no smoking, you have reason to complain, if it is in an open area with no restriction in place, don't bother to complain to me, the reply will be terse to say the least. No one has teh right to try an impinge my freedom just because they don't like what I do
Smoking is dumb and ugly.
The same can be said for self righteous attitudes...
As a smoker (I am now 48 and been smoking since I was 8 years old) I can see both sides to this argument. The offender was completely in the wrong, he was in a confined place, with strict no smoking rules. Those rules apply for the benefit of everyone, and in confined spaces passive smoking has been proven to be harmful. There is no debate, he should not of lit up his smoke, whether it be weed or a normal cigarette.
Having said that, the arguments here about smoking in open area's by non smokers just don't wash with me. In a public open area, there is no evidence to support any permanent harm can be done from slip stream smoke (from the end of the cigarette) or from second hand smoke. There is though plenty of evidence to say it is harmful within an enclosed area, and so I feel the current legislation is right.
Then comes the other issue, do people have the right to challenge others just because they are doing something they don't like. I know (from personal experience) if someone complains about me smoking in an open public place, my first reaction is to ignore them, if they continue to voice their opinion my reply tends to be a two word sentence staring and finishing with the letter F. That may seem like I am intolerant, which I am not I just hate anyone trying to impinge on my personal freedoms.
I don't drive and my personal belief is everyone should use public transport, it would be better for the environment. The smoke, carcinogens and other obnoxious fumes released by cars and motorcycles is provably damaging to the environment and towards peoples overall health, yet I don't berate every driver I see, in fact I don't berate any driver I see, even the housewives who take their gas guzzling 4x4 a 1000 yards to drop their kids at school just because they are to fat and lazy to walk.
So the be all and end all of it is, if I am smoking in an area that is designated no smoking, you have reason to complain, if it is in an open area with no restriction in place, don't bother to complain to me, the reply will be terse to say the least. No one has teh right to try an impinge my freedom just because they don't like what I do
Originally posted by onehuman
Ok, first I will post what brought me to making this thread and yes, once again I used the original title of article out of respect, but I really have more to say on the subject.
The witnesses say two riders were trying to restrain the man when he pulled out a pen and slashed Seeger's face. Seeger, of Nutley, N.J., was treated at a hospital and released. Police charged the man with felony assault and criminal possession of a weapon.
Shocking! The pen is now considered a weapon and if you have one they can get you for criminal possession of a weapon! That's just way too much. I need to go to Office Max tomorrow. I wonder how many forms I have to fill out and how many days I have to wait before they will issue me my Bics and Sharpies.
~~~~~~~~~~~
I have a solution for you. Switch to Electronic Cigarettes. You can smoke them almost anywhere because you don't actually smoke them at all - you vape them - inhale water vapor with a little flavored nicotine in it. They taste and feel very much like smoking tobacco. You can tell people, your not smoking ( because it's true) your using your personal inhaler and what they see is only water vapor. There will be none of the 4000 chemicals in tobacco smoke or the 69 that are known to cause cancer going into the air. It is much better for you and others around you.
So try one and when people give you funny looks and tell you not to smoke, take that opportunity to educate them. You just might help someone strop smoking and save their life.
reply to post by HabaneroPepper
why should you have to walk in a different direction though because of that? If you are walking in one direction its probably because thats where you need to go, for people who are allergic to cigerette smoke it is more than a small problem. I think smokers have had it too good for too long and assume that they can smoke wherever they please. I dont want myself and my clothes to smell of smoke because someone lights up in front of me, Its nice when a smoker tries their best to keep the smoke away from you, but this is rare. They almost always are oblivious to other people.
And saying if you dont like it you can walk somewhere else is missing the point, you shouldnt have to.
why should you have to walk in a different direction though because of that? If you are walking in one direction its probably because thats where you need to go, for people who are allergic to cigerette smoke it is more than a small problem. I think smokers have had it too good for too long and assume that they can smoke wherever they please. I dont want myself and my clothes to smell of smoke because someone lights up in front of me, Its nice when a smoker tries their best to keep the smoke away from you, but this is rare. They almost always are oblivious to other people.
And saying if you dont like it you can walk somewhere else is missing the point, you shouldnt have to.
reply to post by PrinceDreamer
No evidence.... How about intelligence ?
First point........
(1) The first day you ever went to school, the first thing they ever teach you is if there ever is a fire, " get on the floor and crawl out because the smoke will kill you " It is part of a global curriculum for children.
Are you suggesting you never went to any school in any county ? ( If so it might account for your absence of intellect ).
(2) Smoke is an irritant, even outside. The first logical thing you would do is make sure you are downwind of everyone else before lighting up.
Manners + Intelligence = non-issue.
No manners + lack of intelligence = this conversation.
Important point...... So you ignore the above and site " no research " blah blah blah....What would you do if research was released showing it does kill people. Offer to set yourself on fire in public out of shame for hurting innocent people your whole life.
I think not. I think you just don't care for anyone but yourself.
No evidence.... How about intelligence ?
First point........
(1) The first day you ever went to school, the first thing they ever teach you is if there ever is a fire, " get on the floor and crawl out because the smoke will kill you " It is part of a global curriculum for children.
Are you suggesting you never went to any school in any county ? ( If so it might account for your absence of intellect ).
(2) Smoke is an irritant, even outside. The first logical thing you would do is make sure you are downwind of everyone else before lighting up.
Manners + Intelligence = non-issue.
No manners + lack of intelligence = this conversation.
Important point...... So you ignore the above and site " no research " blah blah blah....What would you do if research was released showing it does kill people. Offer to set yourself on fire in public out of shame for hurting innocent people your whole life.
I think not. I think you just don't care for anyone but yourself.
edit on 11/19/09 by thedeadtruth because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by thedeadtruth
reply to post by PrinceDreamer
No evidence.... How about intelligence ?
First point........
(1) The first day you ever went to school, the first thing they ever teach you is if there ever is a fire, " get on the floor and crawl out because the smoke will kill you " It is part of a global curriculum for children.
Are you suggesting you never went to any school in any county ? ( If so it might account for your absence of intellect ).
(2) Smoke is an irritant, even outside. The first logical thing you would do is make sure you are downwind of everyone else before lighting up.
Manners + Intelligence = non-issue.
No manners + lack of intelligence = this conversation.
Important point...... So you ignore the above and site " no research " blah blah blah....What would you do if research was released showing it does kill people. Offer to set yourself on fire in public out of shame for hurting innocent people your whole life.
I think not. I think you just don't care for anyone but yourself.
edit on 11/19/09 by thedeadtruth because: (no reason given)
My first reaction to your really pathetic post would break the T&C and so I will restrain myself. Your arguments are just emotive and pathetic.
Equating a house or building fire and being trapped inside to passing someone who is having a cigarette is pathetic, that is like saying striking a sulphur match is as dangerous as standing in a volcano as it explodes. It is these kind of emotive arguments that have absolutely no validation and no logical point.
All you want to do is force your moral standpoint on to others, forcing everyone to live their life the way you see fit, you have no evidence to back up your argument, just false and emotive reasoning.
Some people are allergic to petrol fumes (Ban all cars)
Some people are allergic to perfume (Ban all deodorants and perfumes)
Some people are allergic to Pollen (Ban all flowers and trees within a city)
Some people are allergic to Fish (ban all restaurants and takeaways that supply seafood)
Some people are allergic to nuts (ban the sale and eating of all nuts in public areas)
There are always going to be things people don't like, or have a reaction to, doesn't mean they have to be banned for the rest of us.
And thanks for saying I have no consideration for others, where I had already stated quite clearly it was wrong to smoke in a confined space or in a designated no smoking area, which by the way I have always done even before legislation made it that way. And so I should go and burn myself alive? Actually if I was going to waste the petrol, I could think of better people to pour it on...
Anyway thanks for your pathetic and emotive rant, really it was so erm, wait cant think of the word, erm oh yes, pointless.
As I said earlier, I have a to word sentence for you, starting and ending in F.
edit on 21-4-2011 by PrinceDreamer because: (no reason
given)
reply to post by onehuman
I am in the UK, and I was talking to a publican a couple of months ago about this subject, the smoking ban has put him and other publicans out of business. There are loads of pubs in the UK which are empty and boarded up since this ban.
He told me he was still waiting for the hoardes of non-smokers who said they would visit pubs more often if smoking was banned.
I am in the UK, and I was talking to a publican a couple of months ago about this subject, the smoking ban has put him and other publicans out of business. There are loads of pubs in the UK which are empty and boarded up since this ban.
He told me he was still waiting for the hoardes of non-smokers who said they would visit pubs more often if smoking was banned.
Wow the righteous people are out in force eheheh, im a long time smoker, and i do comform tyo what the law says, i canot smoke in any indoor public
area, i canot smoke at the beachthe park, so i dont, i get out of my way to not offend anybody with my criminal act eheheh, but heck you guys seem tio
have your panties spun so tight that you cant just let others be, you have no more rights than a smoker, and you gives a rats ar how you feel inside
seriously, if people where more considered there woudlent be fights for silly things.
I canot for the best of me understand why people get out of there way to try to make me a smoker feel abd about smoking, its my choice, you got nothing that will change my mind., its not an uneducated decision i made, i just like to smoke.
So plz use your righteous fury on something thats really important in life, seriously some of you psters are just too much, sounds like a bunch of kids that momy and dady never said no to
I canot for the best of me understand why people get out of there way to try to make me a smoker feel abd about smoking, its my choice, you got nothing that will change my mind., its not an uneducated decision i made, i just like to smoke.
So plz use your righteous fury on something thats really important in life, seriously some of you psters are just too much, sounds like a bunch of kids that momy and dady never said no to
reply to post by PrinceDreamer
Emotive huh ? I thought I was being logical.
I tell you this as a mortician. Forget the stories of people smoking and living full healthy lives. That is 1 in a million. If you smoke you will die younger, and it will not be a nice death. You are going to suffer. Not opinion, fact
Logical and unemotional enough for you ?
Emotive huh ? I thought I was being logical.
I tell you this as a mortician. Forget the stories of people smoking and living full healthy lives. That is 1 in a million. If you smoke you will die younger, and it will not be a nice death. You are going to suffer. Not opinion, fact
Logical and unemotional enough for you ?
reply to post by dukeofjive
I do not think you get the point. I don't think most non--smokers mind people being stupid and making stupid choices. It is your right to be dumb if you so wish.
We just want to f-off and be stupid and smelly far away from us.
I do not think you get the point. I don't think most non--smokers mind people being stupid and making stupid choices. It is your right to be dumb if you so wish.
We just want to f-off and be stupid and smelly far away from us.
The smoker in this story is nuts. And the fact that the story bleeds anti-cigarette propaganda is nuts too. The guy sounds to be unstable, and your
rights take the wrap.
reply to post by amkia
That's a poor excuse often used to justify cigarette smoking.
While the air we breathe may not be perfect, everyone has a right to breathe it instead of the smoke from the bottom feeder next to them (who can be a bottom feeder for any reason, not just smoking).
That's a poor excuse often used to justify cigarette smoking.
While the air we breathe may not be perfect, everyone has a right to breathe it instead of the smoke from the bottom feeder next to them (who can be a bottom feeder for any reason, not just smoking).
Originally posted by PrinceDreamer
The same can be said for self righteous attitudes...
Smoking is dumb and ugly.
It is that simple.
Science supports that.
There is though plenty of evidence to say it is harmful within an enclosed area, and so I feel the current legislation is right.
Smoke is harmful, period. Indoors our outdoors does not negate that. The difference is that outdoors increases diffussion of the smoke.
The smoke still stinks, it still has all the cancer causing chemicals in it.
Then comes the other issue, do people have the right to challenge others just because they are doing something they don't like.
Yes, when it is harmful, damn straight I have the right to challenge people.
Your rights end where mine begin.
I know (from personal experience) if someone complains about me smoking in an open public place, my first reaction is to ignore them, if they continue to voice their opinion my reply tends to be a two word sentence staring and finishing with the letter F. That may seem like I am intolerant, which I am not I just hate anyone trying to impinge on my personal freedoms.
I guess the right to have clean air inpinges on your freedom hey!
You are right, self-rightuous attitudes are dumb and ugly.
The funny thing about your comment is that you are some how excersizing your freedom when you have a smoke.
You are not free, you are an addict satisfying a need.
You are a slave to a habit.
You are a dupe of the tabacoo giants that have specifically designed a product to ensnare you.
So lets cut the crap about being free hey!
I don't drive and my personal belief is everyone should use public transport, it would be better for the environment. The smoke, carcinogens and other obnoxious fumes released by cars and motorcycles is provably damaging to the environment and towards peoples overall health, yet I don't berate every driver I see, in fact I don't berate any driver I see, even the housewives who take their gas guzzling 4x4 a 1000 yards to drop their kids at school just because they are to fat and lazy to walk.
Your analogy is B.S. and you know it.
The automotive industry has endeavoured to clean enigine emissions, not to mention countries have instituted compulsory filters and targets for more efficient vehicles and cleaner fuels.
Not to mention that many countries have introduced a carbon tax on fossil fuels to battle the very issues you raise here:
.
smoke, carcinogens and other obnoxious fumes released by cars and motorcycles is provably damaging to the environment and towards peoples overall health,
In my city you can report vehicles with bad emissions and the EPA will test the car.
www.environment.nsw.gov.au...
The fact is that this is just as an important issue to cities, as smoking in public is.
So the be all and end all of it is, if I am smoking in an area that is designated no smoking, you have reason to complain, if it is in an open area with no restriction in place, don't bother to complain to me, the reply will be terse to say the least. No one has teh right to try an impinge my freedom just because they don't like what I do
If your activity, that is an addiction, effects my freedom, I'll let you know. When smokers get that into their heads, you might not seem so dumb and ugly.
Don't bother replying. You will just be blowing more smoke.
Smoking is Dumb and Ugly.