patrickg
Veteran Member
Now don't everyone get mad at me all at once, take turns!
There is more to this smoking stuff than just personal choice. Reread some of the above posts and substitute, say, the spraying of poisonous chemicals with a water pistol at everyone within your weapon's range. Does it seem still to be just personal choice?
I too can have my evening out ruined by squalling brats that parents refuse to control (remember when walk in theaters had crying rooms?) What is the appropriate response, leave and never come back? The management could use better feedback. Make your displeasure known and indicate a willingness to consider a return if the management might consider asking parents to control their charges or remove them. (Real world, they will probably not say anything to the parents and your final recourse is to go elsewhere, good luck!)
About spitting: What if someone were spitting at folks within his spitting range, as his personal choice, would or would that not be accceptable behavior? How do the above examples (not the brat, the others) really differ from smoking and spewing noxious and poisonous gasses on the rest of us?
Smoking in and of itself is not against the law and this is not a forum to debate whether or not it should be. Shooting guns, setting off fireworks, or dancing wildly about with your hands full of rattle snakes has public safety considerations and isn't something that should be lightly entered into with non consenting folks present. Why is smoking different?
Now then, if there was a private club that was "smoker friendly", was patronized by all the top notch smokers from Rush with a cigar to Clinton with his "special" cigars, AND posted itself as such to avoid harming the unwary, then There sholdn't be a problem. Most smokers (not all but most) don't want to be in a confined space with a lot of other smokers. Most prefer to attend main stream events just like sane folks but with a lit wad of tobacco. Smoking only clubs would probably not last in the long haul in most markets.
Surely we all wonder a bit at the extreme measure taken in some places (Oregon was it?) where your smoke can't be detected in your neighbor's yard or you can be arrested or some such.
Much of the hubub about smoking revolves around a few central issues. It is an addiction, pure and simple, with all sorts of myths wrapped around its folklore as a (dare I say it, SMOKESCREEN). Addicts will go to great lengths to protect their access to their addictive substance, contorting logic and reality in bizare ways, trying to make it a personal freedom issue, or anything else but what it is. Except for the burden on society which results in my paying increased taxes because of smokers and other loss of productivity issues, I try not to care a whole lot if folks want to smoke, gamble their paychecks away, play Russian Roulette, or whatever if it doesn't involve me.
Doesn't involve me... There is one of the sticking points. Different folks define the limits of what involves them in different ways. Some claim that anything that burdens society in any way, burdens all its individuals to a degree. Motorcycle helmet laws: Why care if bikers want to bust their brains out. Seatbelts: Too stupid to wear them, let Darwinism take its course! Child safety restraints: Bah humbug, if the parents are that dumb they don't protect their young then best to put a stop to that bloodline by letting the little buggers get killed in cars.
The trend seems to be to enact laws to protect society's interest in the welfare of individuals so that society as a whole is protected. So what do we do, protest that Government is in conflict with our right to do incredibly stupid and dangerous things to ourselves (and our kids and whoever happens to be within second hand smoke range)
You can still commit suicide and not be punished by our laws. Of course if you are so stupid that you bungle it, then you can be arrested. Lets see now. Wasn't the cry of the 110% American when some minority groups (draft dodgers and anti-war hippies) didn't want to comply with the will of the majority became LOVE IT OR LEAVE IT!!! Is the will of the majority for or against smoking in public places like eating establishments, movies, etc. What has changed, shouldn't smokers comply (i.e. love it or leave it) with the will of the majority of the voting citizens? I'm sure there are a number of countries (some of the third world has pretty cheap tobacco products) that would welcome imigrant smokers yearning to live free of smoking regulations.
Personal freedom is a wonderful thing. We are all free to leave the country. There is no barbed wire covered wall keeping anyone in (or out unfortunately). OR stay and fight for your addiction of choice. You have the power of the vote. There is no IQ test required before participating in American politics. Mobilize your nicotine lung steamed compatriot veteran smokers to hit the streets and get out the vote in favor of free and open exercise of personal freedom to poison everyone around you. Of course you might want to find a better way to phrase yor message in your campaign slogans. Put in a lot of humming of the "Battle Hymn of the Republic" in the background, wave old glory, kiss babies (just don't show their little frown from their smelling your breath) Bring in the Noble Savage for their Madison Avenue value. Big tobacco has DEEP pockets and would fund your campaign in a heartbeat. You could subsidize youth market movies that portray tobacco cosumption as cool to help recruit the youth of America to toil on your behalf. Beware of any back room deals (note: I didn't say smoke filled rooms, it was tooooo easy) with agents of the folks for the "normalization of Marijuana consumption" as just because they smoke it doesn't make them your brothers.
Be a good American, work within the system to effect the changes you want. Failing that, organize an underground movement in penetration resistant cells so that the flame of tobacco culture and all its benefits will not perish from the land. Keep that flame alive until the time is right to reestablish a proper tobacco tollerant society and have your banner once again fly above a free... OOPS, got carried away a bit with the Cuban freedom fighter parallel but you get the idea.
I only have probably (if I keep it brief, condensed, and to the point) only about 20-30 more pages of material to share but I gota go right now. Maybe I can post the rest a little later.
Patrick
There is more to this smoking stuff than just personal choice. Reread some of the above posts and substitute, say, the spraying of poisonous chemicals with a water pistol at everyone within your weapon's range. Does it seem still to be just personal choice?
I too can have my evening out ruined by squalling brats that parents refuse to control (remember when walk in theaters had crying rooms?) What is the appropriate response, leave and never come back? The management could use better feedback. Make your displeasure known and indicate a willingness to consider a return if the management might consider asking parents to control their charges or remove them. (Real world, they will probably not say anything to the parents and your final recourse is to go elsewhere, good luck!)
About spitting: What if someone were spitting at folks within his spitting range, as his personal choice, would or would that not be accceptable behavior? How do the above examples (not the brat, the others) really differ from smoking and spewing noxious and poisonous gasses on the rest of us?
Smoking in and of itself is not against the law and this is not a forum to debate whether or not it should be. Shooting guns, setting off fireworks, or dancing wildly about with your hands full of rattle snakes has public safety considerations and isn't something that should be lightly entered into with non consenting folks present. Why is smoking different?
Now then, if there was a private club that was "smoker friendly", was patronized by all the top notch smokers from Rush with a cigar to Clinton with his "special" cigars, AND posted itself as such to avoid harming the unwary, then There sholdn't be a problem. Most smokers (not all but most) don't want to be in a confined space with a lot of other smokers. Most prefer to attend main stream events just like sane folks but with a lit wad of tobacco. Smoking only clubs would probably not last in the long haul in most markets.
Surely we all wonder a bit at the extreme measure taken in some places (Oregon was it?) where your smoke can't be detected in your neighbor's yard or you can be arrested or some such.
Much of the hubub about smoking revolves around a few central issues. It is an addiction, pure and simple, with all sorts of myths wrapped around its folklore as a (dare I say it, SMOKESCREEN). Addicts will go to great lengths to protect their access to their addictive substance, contorting logic and reality in bizare ways, trying to make it a personal freedom issue, or anything else but what it is. Except for the burden on society which results in my paying increased taxes because of smokers and other loss of productivity issues, I try not to care a whole lot if folks want to smoke, gamble their paychecks away, play Russian Roulette, or whatever if it doesn't involve me.
Doesn't involve me... There is one of the sticking points. Different folks define the limits of what involves them in different ways. Some claim that anything that burdens society in any way, burdens all its individuals to a degree. Motorcycle helmet laws: Why care if bikers want to bust their brains out. Seatbelts: Too stupid to wear them, let Darwinism take its course! Child safety restraints: Bah humbug, if the parents are that dumb they don't protect their young then best to put a stop to that bloodline by letting the little buggers get killed in cars.
The trend seems to be to enact laws to protect society's interest in the welfare of individuals so that society as a whole is protected. So what do we do, protest that Government is in conflict with our right to do incredibly stupid and dangerous things to ourselves (and our kids and whoever happens to be within second hand smoke range)
You can still commit suicide and not be punished by our laws. Of course if you are so stupid that you bungle it, then you can be arrested. Lets see now. Wasn't the cry of the 110% American when some minority groups (draft dodgers and anti-war hippies) didn't want to comply with the will of the majority became LOVE IT OR LEAVE IT!!! Is the will of the majority for or against smoking in public places like eating establishments, movies, etc. What has changed, shouldn't smokers comply (i.e. love it or leave it) with the will of the majority of the voting citizens? I'm sure there are a number of countries (some of the third world has pretty cheap tobacco products) that would welcome imigrant smokers yearning to live free of smoking regulations.
Personal freedom is a wonderful thing. We are all free to leave the country. There is no barbed wire covered wall keeping anyone in (or out unfortunately). OR stay and fight for your addiction of choice. You have the power of the vote. There is no IQ test required before participating in American politics. Mobilize your nicotine lung steamed compatriot veteran smokers to hit the streets and get out the vote in favor of free and open exercise of personal freedom to poison everyone around you. Of course you might want to find a better way to phrase yor message in your campaign slogans. Put in a lot of humming of the "Battle Hymn of the Republic" in the background, wave old glory, kiss babies (just don't show their little frown from their smelling your breath) Bring in the Noble Savage for their Madison Avenue value. Big tobacco has DEEP pockets and would fund your campaign in a heartbeat. You could subsidize youth market movies that portray tobacco cosumption as cool to help recruit the youth of America to toil on your behalf. Beware of any back room deals (note: I didn't say smoke filled rooms, it was tooooo easy) with agents of the folks for the "normalization of Marijuana consumption" as just because they smoke it doesn't make them your brothers.
Be a good American, work within the system to effect the changes you want. Failing that, organize an underground movement in penetration resistant cells so that the flame of tobacco culture and all its benefits will not perish from the land. Keep that flame alive until the time is right to reestablish a proper tobacco tollerant society and have your banner once again fly above a free... OOPS, got carried away a bit with the Cuban freedom fighter parallel but you get the idea.
I only have probably (if I keep it brief, condensed, and to the point) only about 20-30 more pages of material to share but I gota go right now. Maybe I can post the rest a little later.
Patrick
