Cigarette Smoking In Public: Why You're Opinion Is Wrong

HighDemonslayer · Post by **HighDemonslayer** » 02 Sep 2006 21:40

You should write forum stuff in an editor, Textpad (for example), cuz after you lose the post you thought you sent , you will never write the replacement as good.

But, I am glad we got spared whatever it was you wrote.

However, you do seem to be the gangsta critic, and his snotty, anti-smoking elitism bothers me.

Especially when he makes a naive statement like:

. However, ALL laws and regulations, including the smoking ban, are for the well being of the populace.

That one bothered me from earlier, so when he parades around like he is the owner of the smoking thread, I gotta say something.

-n

BainbridgeShred · Post by **BainbridgeShred** » 02 Sep 2006 22:47

Actually, I thought my second post was better than the orginal, and I'm hoping the third will be the best of all when I write it. With each post I'm getting less about negativism's and more about facts and opinions, so whatever.

mosher · Post by **mosher** » 03 Sep 2006 06:28

Dan, why are you fighting so hard to prove to people it's okay for you to smoke?

Your posts make you appear desperately insecure.

The shit you are fighting isn't worth fighting over, you are wasting passion man.

gangsta · Post by **gangsta** » 03 Sep 2006 08:17

HighDemonslayer wrote:However, you do seem to be the gangsta critic, and his snotty, anti-smoking elitism bothers me.

However, you do seem to be the Dan Feary critic, and his snotty, pro-smoking elitism bothers me.

HighDemonslayer wrote: Especially when he makes a naive statement like:

. However, ALL laws and regulations, including the smoking ban, are for the well being of the populace.

Especially when that Dan guy makes a statement like:

You're really dumb Switch Kicker, and I think everyone on modified knows it.

HighDemonslayer wrote: That one bothered me from earlier, so when he parades around like he is the owner of the smoking thread, I gotta say something.

Ditto.

james_dean · Post by **james_dean** » 03 Sep 2006 17:35

There's a huge difference in those two comments. It would be a dangerous world if everyone took the view that all laws are for the good of the populace. Whereas, I'd have to agree with Dan to some extent on that one.

Slowsis · Post by **Slowsis** » 03 Sep 2006 18:33

I hate smoking in bars/clubs.....not because I dislike the smell of smoke (I'm a smoker) but because it scares away attractive non-smoking females.

Wait.....me smelling like smoke scares away non-smoking females.

I gotta quit smoking.

The environmental effect aspect of smoking argument is the funniest thing I've read in weeks. Go stand by the side of the interstate and tell me that smoking is going to add to the greenhouse emissions problem in the slightest. You having a barbecue in your backyard is going to create the same amount of greenhouse gas as a smoker does in two months.
BAN BBQ'ING IN PUBLIC PLACES!!!!
BAN SECOND HAND CAR EMISSIONS!!!!
BAN LONG-WINDED AND UNINFORMED ARGUMENTS!!!!

gangsta · Post by **gangsta** » 03 Sep 2006 20:14

james_dean wrote:There's a huge difference in those two comments.

True. One is true, and the other is slanderous. Whats your point anyway? Just curious as to what your getting at.

james_dean wrote:It would be a dangerous world if everyone took the view that all laws are for the good of the populace. Whereas, I'd have to agree with Dan to some extent on that one.

It would be a dangerous world if laws are passed that are not for the well being of the populace. Clearly, the smoking ban is beneficial to the health of the populace. It's the populace that votes on such things anyway.

Slowsis wrote: The environmental effect aspect of smoking argument is the funniest thing I've read in weeks. Go stand by the side of the interstate and tell me that smoking is going to add to the greenhouse emissions problem in the slightest. You having a barbecue in your backyard is going to create the same amount of greenhouse gas as a smoker does in two months.

There's nothing funny about fucking up the environment. Sea levels have risen 1+ feet since the industrial revolution, and if we continue to release CO2 into the atmosphere at this rate, we'll be fucked in no time. Sea levels rising 20+ feet, holes in the o-zone, lack of drinking water, and highly diluted Sea water from the melted (freshwater) ice caps. Har-har-har. The only uninformed statement I see on here is the one I bolded above.

Yep, cars release greenhouse gases, as do BBQ's. Just because cig smoke does not make up a large percentage of the greenhouse gasses emitted, doesn't mean we should ignore the fact that they do. There is alot of smokers, smoking alot of cigarettes, for a long period of time. I wouldn't be suprised if a significant portion of the greenhouse gasses/toxic chemicals in the environment were released from cigz.

IMO, it would be a good idea if people drastically cut back on All greenhouse gas emissions. BBQ'ing, car driving, manufacturing, Smoking, etc. Any amount of atmosphere/environment destroying chemicals is too much!
It's obvious that the cigarette butts leach chemicals into the enviroment, and they are litter.

There's Nothing beneficial about smoking cigarettes. The manufacture of them provides some jobs, and releases even more toxins into the atmosphere, as well as wasting farmland, and other valuable resources.

james_dean · Post by **james_dean** » 03 Sep 2006 21:50

Sometimes he says dumb stuff, and that's as far as I'm going to take it because I'm not here to flame people.

It would be a dangerous world if laws are passed that are not for the well being of the populace.

It worries me that you actually believe this. Maybe you're just talking about western countries, but even then I would have to disagree. NO I am not going to give an example, I've got better things to do with my time than research this, but I can say I 100% believe there are laws passed which are not for the good of the populace in western countries.

Aside from the fact of other countries who very obviously have terrible laws. Come on! Look at the middle east etc, very oppressive laws that are designed to keep the government in power, and they don't give a rats about their people. And don't think it can't happen to America, why couldn't it? Look how Hitler took over Germany, a modern democratic country. And then proceeded to exterminate a minority of their populace. You think that was good for them?

I seriously cannot believe, that you believe that. Fact is, it is a dangerous world, and that's one of the reasons.

gangsta · Post by **gangsta** » 04 Sep 2006 05:22

Well, if you can't give an example of a law in the US that's not beneficial...

We're not here to debate that anyway. The fact is, the smoking ban is beneficial to the populace. Period.

Slowsis · Post by **Slowsis** » 04 Sep 2006 08:01

gangsta wrote:
Slowsis wrote: The environmental effect aspect of smoking argument is the funniest thing I've read in weeks. Go stand by the side of the interstate and tell me that smoking is going to add to the greenhouse emissions problem in the slightest. You having a barbecue in your backyard is going to create the same amount of greenhouse gas as a smoker does in two months.
There's nothing funny about fucking up the environment. Sea levels have risen 1+ feet since the industrial revolution, and if we continue to release CO2 into the atmosphere at this rate, we'll be fucked in no time. Sea levels rising 20+ feet, holes in the o-zone, lack of drinking water, and highly diluted Sea water from the melted (freshwater) ice caps. Har-har-har. The only uninformed statement I see on here is the one I bolded above.

Why don't you stop eating packaged or processed foods, stop driving, stop buying anything plastic or metal, stop using air conditioners during the summer, and stop being a dick AND THEN you can come and tell me that my smoking is going to effect the environment. I'm sure you're not some super-hippie, living on an organic farm in the mountains. Maybe if you were, I'd take you're critism as not being hypocritical. As it is you are a kid with a computer and a bunch of values that you don't even live up to.

So why don't you actually do something about it? Why don't you do what I did and go treeplanting? I planted 90,000 trees this summer, each of which is sucking up harmful greehouse emissions, and you've bitched about the problem on the internet. Congratulations, you've made such a huge difference in the world.

gangsta · Post by **gangsta** » 04 Sep 2006 09:43

Wow. I like your attitude Slowsis!

Just the facts, man. Just the facts. Dont kill the messenger!

Sorry if I offended you. There's no bitching in my previous post, and no hypocritical statements. I don't see where you got that, and nowhere in there does it say I eat packaged/processed foods and don't help out the environment. Talk about uninformed statements! All i've presented is facts.

That's cool that you planted 90k trees. I do my share to help the environment: ride a bike everywhere, recycle, use as little electricity as possible, I don't BBQ, and when I do have to drive, I drive a fuel effecient Mazda. Oh yea, I also don't smoke and litter the place with cigarette butts!
This stuff belongs in a different topic!

Cig smoke is the number one cause of Indoor air pollution. The ban Drastically reduces indoor pollution, obviously. If you're arguing that the bans should be repealed because cigs do not (help) create an unhealthy environment, then you're crazy. They're banned indoors because they create such an unhealthy environment.
Smoking in say, a restaurant, is akin to taking a big shit on the table. There's a place to shit and a place to smoke. Both actions produce toxic compounds, horrible smells, a less pleasant environment, and they're both illegal and Rude!

So, tell me again how the bans are Not beneficial.

Slowsis · Post by **Slowsis** » 04 Sep 2006 10:08

Sorry for going off a bit man, I do agree that Cig's smoke has a negative impact on the environment. I'm just trying to point out that the human impact(which is substantial) is what should be argued, not the environmental effect(which is minimal in comparison). I actually enjoy the fact that there is smoking bans in place, as I see the discomfort indoor smoking causes my non-smoking friends.

gangsta · Post by **gangsta** » 04 Sep 2006 13:07

Slowsis: It's cool man. I agree with your last post completely.

beenjammin · Post by **beenjammin** » 04 Sep 2006 14:48

Gangsta
You are wrong. Cigarettes are the shit and everyone should smoke the hell out of them, so go to hell fucker! Smoke! Smoke! Smoke!!!!!

james_dean · Post by **james_dean** » 04 Sep 2006 19:47

gangsta wrote:Well, if you can't give an example of a law in the US that's not beneficial...

Whether I can give an example or not is irrelevant. That statement implies that all future laws in the US, whatever they are, are for the good of the populace. That's a very bad viewpoint and would allow politicians to get away with whatever they wanted.

I'm still undecided on the issue though. Certainly in restuarants/clubs/bars there needs to be, at the very least, designated areas for smoking and non smoking. Re: other businesses... I'm more inclined to swing the non-smoking way. Not that I'm going to bother arguing it.

sniper4life · Post by **sniper4life** » 06 Sep 2006 14:07

I agree with smoking bans. I can't stand the smell of smoke it smells like shit and yes is bad for your health. The government can ban smoking. Lets see what happens with a ban of smoking in restaraunts and such... protecting people from health damaging fumes or w/e and inconveniencing smokers. Which is more important??? Our health or whether it's convenient to smokers.

This whole thing about governments and laws being all in our best interest. This is total bullcrap. That kind of thinking is how citizens get taken advantage of. Extreme example being the Nazis.
U.S. example- in bills put together by congress the congressmen can sneak in things that really dont have to do with the bill. They use this to get funding for projects in there districts and will put in payraises for themselves. Don't even tell me I'm wrong I was in washington this summer dealing with all this crap. We all would agree we've had major debated issues lately. This year congress has spent the least time in session in history.
This post was way to long. Sorry for hijacking the thread!
I'm outta here.

BainbridgeShred · Post by **BainbridgeShred** » 06 Sep 2006 15:30

Haha... Laws that aren't for the benefit of the populace. I'll include a list when I get around to rewritting.

RawSko · Post by **RawSko** » 06 Sep 2006 16:03

james_dean wrote:Certainly in restuarants/clubs/bars there needs to be, at the very least, designated areas for smoking and non smoking.

Having a smoking section in a restaurant in like having a peeing section in a pool. I think that the idea is stupid...

ps: I' don't mean to single you out, James. It's not you in particular, it's just the idea of designated smoking areas that I disagree with.

keep it real

james_dean · Post by **james_dean** » 06 Sep 2006 17:21

It's all good man

Notice I said at the very least, I watched my grandfather die slowly and very painfully from emphesema, there is no good reason to smoke. I would prefer it if no one smoked anywhere ever. (Not talking about laws here btw)

gangsta · Post by **gangsta** » 07 Sep 2006 05:46

The designated smoking area would either have to be a Balcony sort of thing, outside, or a sealed room with it's own ventilation.

The smoking ban Is beneficial to the populace.