where is the line???

Some time ago I had a quite lengthy debate on here about the discriminatory actions these non smoking campaigns have on humanity.

To see little old ladies, war vets, and even handi-capped (or handi-capable if you prefer) individuals being exiled from buildings, having to walk around buildings or off propery lines in order to have a cigarette. Despite weather conditions, despite icy sidewalks, despite the fact these are fellow human beings. To fill an addiction they now have, one that the government knowing aloud to infest our country without doing a thing to stop it.

But that's only part of my current issue with this immoral judgement on humanity.

Now, I can be over looked for employment or potentially even lose my job if I so choose, or once made a choice to become addicted to a completely legal, once commonly socially accepted smoking habit.

The government turned a blind eye when cigarettes were handed out in care packs for military soldiers, the government payed no attention and did nothing when study after study proved of their addiction and health consequences. But now, now that it's had it's effect and people are both chemically dependent and habitually addicted to these things, the government steps in and bans me from allowing my paying customers to smoke in my bar, that I own and pay taxes on. (theoretical situation, don't own a bar).

There are laws against not hiring for skin color, gender, even obesity. Yet they do nothing to protect the nicotine addicted individuals that some of which had no idea the consequences of their decision at the time they were made!!!

Where is the line people?

I believe cigarette smoking has become a scapegoat for all manner of cancers and diseases that we can't seem to pin down any cause for.

Smoking kills! ...nevermind that nuclear reactor over in Japan pumping out toxic waste into the environment, that won't hurt you... Just stop smoking. You'll be the epitome of health... Sure their is fluoride in your drinking water, yeah it's poisonous, but it's good for your teeth! It's those cigarettes that are bad for your health....

ugh...

reply to post by sparda4355


I agree with your post except this part:

There are laws against not hiring for skin color, gender, even obesity. Yet they do nothing to protect the nicotine addicted individuals that some of which had no idea the consequences of their decision at the time they were made!!!

A by-law mandating non-smoking establishments in no way stops you from hiring a smoker, that comparison does not jive.

but I do agree that the government helped this problem and is now restricting the rights of a group of people based on the demands of another group of people.

Oh wait, that's the purpose government....

If smoking is so bad, and being banned from everywhere, why in the heck can't I get free quit smoking aids from the government? They give everything else for free!

I can tell you that there are several bars in our area that have now started a donation jar to smoke in their bar, even though it is illegal. They save the money, to pay the $500.00 fine. I'm trying to find out if the rumors are true that there is only 1 person in this entire state that enforces this law.

I don't understand how the government can tell a private business owner that nobody can smoke in their bar, but they still have the right to refuse service to anyone because it is a private business.

reply to post by phishyblankwaters


No, I'm saying companies are choosing not to hire you based on whether or not you are a smoker...

www.nytimes.com...

And the government is not putting a stop to this

They try and stop us from smoking in bars here in Ohio and we just don't care(mostly),almost every bar here has ashtrays out but if the police come in you just push it over the side of the bar and just like magic no one is smoking again.Many companies here on their jobs apps. ask if you smoke and you nave to submit to random drug testing for whatever reason. What i do on my free time is my business and has nothing to do with a job period.

reply to post by sparda4355


I guess this movement stems from the fact that somehow smokers are allotted more breaks than normal workers, thus creating an rivalry between smokers and non-smokers in the work place, and also a gap in productivity between the two parties which only exacerbates things.
What they should do, in regards to restaurants & pubs, is create smoking sections (as they used to have), and allow smoking employees to work these areas, and vice versa. Allow the smokers to smoke on the job without smoke breaks, in a duly ventilated area. This would create a balance and everyone's happy.
They could also create smoking theatres and the like.

reply to post by sparda4355


I agree with you, except that you seem to be saying that smokers had no idea what the consequences of their actions would be when they started smoking. If that is indeed what you are saying then I couldn't disagree more. As a former smoker for about 15 years I knew that they were bad for me, deadly even, when I started smoking as a teenager. It's just that 55 or 60 years old seemed so far away at the time that I didn't give much thought to it. Time flies and before you know it you have been smoking for 15 years.

A couple cities in San Diego county don't allow you to smoke outside on the street.... That's even worse... I know I should quit, but it makes me look cool... So what do we do about this? I agree smokers have become the scapegoat... However.... Lets be honest smokers.... If you are the "designated" smoker in your group, think about all the times you used the "smoke break" line to scapegoat something else :-p

I know I do it... for example

"Hey smoke break" then I go and call someone.
"gotta smoke" then surprise a lady with something; BAM perfect cover...

SO yes, the laws are unfair... but think about ALL the time you save by smoking outside! I've gotten SO good at it... I've literally left the bar I was at walked to 7-11, got food, ate it and no one was the wiser (don't judge 7-11 grub is awesome)

reply to post by OptimusSubprime


I'm not saying people didn't know the dangers 15 years ago... I'm saying People didn't know the dangers 50 years ago when the government aloud them to be handed out in the care packs like food.

During World War II (1939-1945), cigarette sales are at an all time high. Cigarettes were included in a soldier's C-Rations (like food!). Tobacco companies sent millions of cigarettes to the soldiers for free, and when these soldiers came home, the companies had a steady stream of loyal customers.

Health risks were not widely known till 1950 and the tobacco companies still denied such things.

During the 1950's, more and more evidence was surfacing that smoking was linked to lung cancer. Although the tobacco industry denied such health hazards, they promoted new products which were "safer", such as those with lower tar and filtered cigarettes.

Source

academic.udayton.edu...

Most cancers are genetic not from anything a person has been exposed to or did.

I get a chest x-ray every two years and every two years I have to listen to a doctor tell me how clean my lungs are and this is what he always sees in non-smokers.

It really bums them out when I tell them I have been a pack a day smoker for 35 years.

The government still subsidizes tobacco farmers.

Strange is it not.

One part of the government gives people money and another tells you smoking it may cause you cancer.

The western world is the only place where they have restrictions on purchasing and smoking tobacco products.

You know what I think?

Were all CRAZY!