Italy to ban plastic bags

[BabylonHoruv]

That only works if both smoking and non-smoking clubs are equivalent.

Smoker can go to Club Air or Club Cancer.  They have a choice.  If they go to Club Air, they can go outside to smoke.

Asthmatic can only go to Club Air.  They do not have the choice not to breathe in Club Cancer.

Therefore, if something cool is going on in Club Cancer, asthmatics cannot attend.

Think about that when you start talking about fairness.

Make smokers stand outside 50 feet away from the entrance in the winter freezing.

Think about that when you start talking about fairness.

Oh, so smoking is no longer a choice?

It's one of the most addictive drugs known to mankind.  Yeah, it's a choice, just like abstaining from sex is a choice for people who are wired for homosexuality.

Wait, what? I'm not getting your analogy...

That yes it's a choice, but it's not an easy choice like paper or plastic.  It's a difficult choice with your brain wiring heavily leaning toward you making the choice in one direction, and not the other.

Homosexuals naturally abstain from sex?

No more so than anyone else.

They get more socially unpleasant consequences for not abstaining than heterosexuals do though.

And now that Phox points it out I realize I do kinda sound like Blue, so I'm gonna shut up now.

I don't think smoking bans are a green issue though so much as a health one.

[Cramulus]

Interesting thread! I just got caught up...

My mind is still not made up about this business, but let me share a few of my thoughts...


Some people are treating the group "smoker" as if it's some kind of inborn property, like being black. I think this leads to the notion that smokers are a protected group who have the right to smoke anywhere. But if we look at this problem through the lens of other legal albeit dangerous substances, it starts to fall apart. Like drinking, for example. It seems logical that there are laws preventing you from drinking anywhere you'd like (notably in public places) - unless the place has a permit for it. So how is tobacco different from alcohol?

Second hand smoking is dangerous. I know that idea is controversial, but the bulk of independent scientific data research backs it up. Some people are cool with breathing second hand smoke, others are not. Which is more unfair:
  -people being forced to refrain from smoking?
  -people being forced to breathe smoke?

keep in mind we're not just talking about people who choose to hang out in bars, we're also talking about employees who might be pregnant or have lung conditions. So who should make the sacrifice - smokers or nonsmokers? If you're the one creating the potential harm, I think you should be the one who has to make the sacrifice.

I am always hesitant to advocate government regulation of recreational activities. But if the activity is actually harming others, the government does need to build in some protection for people who will be exposed to harm but did not choose to participate.

If I had to vote on a resolution, I guess I'd vote for the option where smoking is banned but establishments can apply for a smoking permit. Most jobs have risks associated with them,(working in an editorial department puts me slightly at risk for carpal's tunnel syndrome) this is one of those things you'd have to be cool with before you started working there, just like how wielders and insulation installers are at a high risk for lung cancer. But I think that jobs that have those sorts of risks should give their employees benefits like health insurance and pregnancy leave.



my two cents

[Adios]

And you people thought plastic bags was going to be a boring thread.........

(yes, YOU PEOPLE)

[Cramulus]

 

WHO ARE YOU CALLING "YOU PEOPLE"??
                          /

[Fujikoma]

I'm cool with permits... I think the banners would be a nice touch, too.

[hooplala]

It seems logical that there are laws preventing you from drinking anywhere you'd like

It does?

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Without some kind of smoking ban, it would be highly unlikely I would ever be in a bar.  Along with every other asthmatic who has severe allergic reactions to cigarette smoke (breathing becoming difficult, wheezing etc).

I also note no-one is touching this with a barge pole.

I read it. I kinda hinted at it with why can't there be both smoking and non-smoking places? It is well known smoking affects people with asthma badly.

Yeah, kind of my take on the matter too... I don't really want to get into it, my cousin is asthmatic... I often go places that don't allow smoking, I'm just saying, making it a matter of law takes the policy out of the hands of the business owner, who likely knows what kinds of customers frequent their place of business. Maybe they could hang a big, nasty lung banner outside their place of business if they allow smoking inside?

When you're talking about an activity that infringes on another person's body, I think that making a law against it is reasonable. I also think that there should be a provision for smoking establishments. Perhaps in order to get a permit that allows smoking inside, they should have to be also a tobacco seller; there is such a provision in Oregon, but no one seems to be jumping on that bandwagon.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

That only works if both smoking and non-smoking clubs are equivalent.

Smoker can go to Club Air or Club Cancer.  They have a choice.  If they go to Club Air, they can go outside to smoke.

Asthmatic can only go to Club Air.  They do not have the choice not to breathe in Club Cancer.

Therefore, if something cool is going on in Club Cancer, asthmatics cannot attend.

Think about that when you start talking about fairness.

Make smokers stand outside 50 feet away from the entrance in the winter freezing.

Think about that when you start talking about fairness.

It's not like anyone who smokes always h as to stand 50 feet from the door outside. They only have to do that when they decide they want to have a smoke.

I mean, what's next? You'll complain that you're not allowed to masturbate in public? Or pee anywhere you want?

Nobody is being forced to go outside BECAUSE they smoke. Only WHILE they smoke.

[Jasper]

It seems logical that there are laws preventing you from drinking anywhere you'd like

It does?

Yeah.  Some examples of what I'd consider to be good no booze zones would be schools and day cares.  But I support drinking in public places, personally.  I don't see how it's a bad thing, and it just gives cops one more thing to bother homeless people about.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

It basically comes down to this:

Both a smoker and a non-smoker can go out and have a good time without in any way interferring with each other's ability to have a good time.  However, as soon as a smoker lights up, it becomes necessary for me to leave.  If they don't have a smoke, it is not going to kill them, though if they haven't smoked in a while, it will become deeply unpleasant after a while.  On the other hand, people can die from asthma attacks (I probably wouldn't, in fact I am almost entirely recovered from asthma, but cigarette smoke is one of my allergens, which provokes the attack).  A smoker, in doing that, is asserting their right to smoke overrules my right to go out.

If we were out having drinks I would respect your condition and go away from you to smoke. Maybe I am just weird.

Maybe he should wear a banner and have a bell-ringing boy make announcements at the bar so that everyone has the chance to be so considerate.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

That only works if both smoking and non-smoking clubs are equivalent.

Smoker can go to Club Air or Club Cancer.  They have a choice.  If they go to Club Air, they can go outside to smoke.

Asthmatic can only go to Club Air.  They do not have the choice not to breathe in Club Cancer.

Therefore, if something cool is going on in Club Cancer, asthmatics cannot attend.

Think about that when you start talking about fairness.

Make smokers stand outside 50 feet away from the entrance in the winter freezing.

Think about that when you start talking about fairness.

Oh, so smoking is no longer a choice?

It's one of the most addictive drugs known to mankind.  Yeah, it's a choice, just like abstaining from sex is a choice for people who are wired for homosexuality.

Oh, bullshit. Sex is a human need. Tobacco is not.

[Phox]

It seems logical that there are laws preventing you from drinking anywhere you'd like

It does?

Yeah.  Some examples of what I'd consider to be good no booze zones would be schools and day cares.  But I support drinking in public places, personally.  I don't see how it's a bad thing, and it just gives cops one more thing to bother homeless people about.

Well, here's the thing. There are plenty of people that get even more stupid than they normally are when drinking. Shocking, I know, but bear with me. Would you want these people out and about making big scenes at say, a park where kids are playing? Considering how the majority of people I know act when they go out for drinks, I certainly wouldn't.

[Jasper]

It seems logical that there are laws preventing you from drinking anywhere you'd like

It does?

Yeah.  Some examples of what I'd consider to be good no booze zones would be schools and day cares.  But I support drinking in public places, personally.  I don't see how it's a bad thing, and it just gives cops one more thing to bother homeless people about.

Well, here's the thing. There are plenty of people that get even more stupid than they normally are when drinking. Shocking, I know, but bear with me. Would you want these people out and about making big scenes at say, a park where kids are playing? Considering how the majority of people I know act when they go out for drinks, I certainly wouldn't.

Then there's the school of thought that people should handle their shit or face the consequences.  If I want a beer at a park picnic, I see no reason why I can't because some people drink for the sole purpose of getting hammered and acting a fool.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Here's the thing, dipshits:

You can just not smoke.

Yes, you CAN. It's not a natural process or a way of life, it's just an activity. Grow a fucking pair and quit whining like a bunch of sissies having their binky taken away. You can smoke and suck your wee little thumb at home if you want it that bad.

[LMNO]

It seems logical that there are laws preventing you from drinking anywhere you'd like

It does?

Yeah.  Some examples of what I'd consider to be good no booze zones would be schools and day cares.  But I support drinking in public places, personally.  I don't see how it's a bad thing, and it just gives cops one more thing to bother homeless people about.

Well, here's the thing. There are plenty of people that get even more stupid than they normally are when drinking. Shocking, I know, but bear with me. Would you want these people out and about making big scenes at say, a park where kids are playing? Considering how the majority of people I know act when they go out for drinks, I certainly wouldn't.

Now, hold on.  There are already laws about public intoxication and disorderly conduct.  Are you saying that drinking in public should be banned for everyone because of the actions of a few?  


LMNO
-What Sig said.