Smoking Ban

[CoteauRinkRat]

It may be addictive to some people, but I'm apparently immune to it. I find caffiene to be much more addictive in my personal experiences. Like I stated previously, I think almost anything in life can be addictive. TV, the internet, biting your finger nails, sex... and the list goes on. I just don't get why non-smokers have this idea that smoking is so much more addictive than anything else in life. Have you ever smoked? Have you ever tried to quit? In my experience it was incredibly easy to quit. I would not be able to give up caffiene or the internet as easily as I gave up smoking. I wouldn't even be able to allow myself to indulge once every two or three months like I do with smoking. I need caffiene and the internet each and every day of my life.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It might have been easy for you, but it is a very very tough struggle for people who are addicted to quit. Even Big Tobacco admits nicotine is addictive, but for some reason, you don't think it is that big of a problem.

[Eskimos]

It may be addictive to some people, but I'm apparently immune to it. I find caffiene to be much more addictive in my personal experiences. Like I stated previously, I think almost anything in life can be addictive. TV, the internet, biting your finger nails, sex... and the list goes on. I just don't get why non-smokers have this idea that smoking is so much more addictive than anything else in life. Have you ever smoked? Have you ever tried to quit? In my experience it was incredibly easy to quit. I would not be able to give up caffiene or the internet as easily as I gave up smoking. I wouldn't even be able to allow myself to indulge once every two or three months like I do with smoking. I need caffiene and the internet each and every day of my life.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You watching TV, drinking Moutain Dew or surfing the internet does not have any effects on my health, smoking does.

Just because you could quit easily, is not a fair or accurate representation of the majority of people who are addicted to nicotine.

[dakotadan]

You watching TV, drinking Moutain Dew or surfing the internet does not have any effects on my health, smoking does. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

My second hand smoke only effects you if YOU choose to visit establishments that allow smoking. You have the option of frequenting bars and restaurants that are smoke free. You are the one choosing to visit these establishments.

[BringDeanBack]

[Diggler]

Smoke in your car, in a bar, or in your home, but please do not try to contaminate the air for the non-addicted people that clearly have more willpower and common sense than you do.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In others words smoke where ever you want as long as I'm not there. I don't particularily like smoke and would prefer people didn't do it, but that doesn't mean that they shouldn't be allowed to do it.

[Eskimos]

[ND Pride]

But just because you want to be able to go to a restaurant and not have people smoking, shouldn't mean that the owner of the restaurant be forced by law to not allow smoking. A majority of people don't want smoking in restaurants. If this same majority of people would act on this belief and refuse to go to restaurants that allow it, the restaurants will be forced to not allow smoking or go out of business. But people are lazy and want laws for everything they don't like without themselves having to do anything.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree that people can be lazy but maybe the smokers are just as lazy, or moreso, than the non-smokers as well as being self-centered. It only takes one smoker (especially if it is a pipe or cigar) to pollute the air in a good portion of a room/place. The negative health impact of second hand smoke is well known-by smokers and non-smokers, yet, the smoker insists on exposing others to it because he/she is too lazy to go outside. The lazy "sword" can cut both ways in this discussion. Reminds me of the two lazy smokers at a high school sports event last week. The PA announced that the grounds were smoke free and the smokers were too lazy to leave or stop smoking.

Your analysis of why we have laws (they want them for everything they don't like without themselves having to do anything) fails when looking at a variety of other public health/safety issues. For example, seat belts require more work and that is a law. Various helmet laws require effort and cost.

Edited September 12, 2005 by ND Pride

[ND Pride]

[dakotadan]

It only takes one smoker (especially if it is a pipe or cigar) to pollute the air in a good portion of a restaurant.  The negative health impact of second hand smoke is well known-by smokers and non-smokers, yet, the smoker insists on exposing others to it because he/she is too lazy to go outside. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Don't you mean that non-smokers insist on exposing themselves by attending bars that they know allow smoking. Everyone knows that they have the option of going to places such as Suite 49, Dagwoods, Italian Moon, etc that are all smoke free.

[ND Pride]