Should smoking in bars/pubs be forbidden?

New Member
Joined
May 30, 2003
Messages
842
Best answers
0
The answer is no, this is a matter of health, not opinion, smoking causes cancer of the lunges, blood pressure increase, etc. I dont want *******s blowing smoke in my face so my lungs can get charred too. End of story. And its not my fault I can still smell the smoke in the NON smoking section, smoking kills you, why the smokers cant see that is anyone's guess, you'll have huge somewhat intelligent debates on how America is an Imperialistic country or not, but yet many of you smoke. Why? What exact good has it ever done for you?
Dont give me that crap that your 'addicted' just stop. Its not that hard to STOP, just dont buy them anymore. Period.
Now if this bar is actually private property or a 'club' then they have a RIGHT to decide who can smoke on their property and who cant. I only sound so harsh because of the fact that I get a strong allergic reaction to smoke. But if the owner dosn't want smoking in HIS place, then it shouldn't be allowed.
And there is a MAJOR difference between shutting down factories, polution emitting sources, or cars, point is, we NEED these things, as ENERGY sources, we would not be able to live without them, if there was a better source we would be using it right now, but there isnt. People dont NEED to smoke, they can live without it, and probably not live with it.
And to the marijuana smokers that think it does nothing to you: pull your goddamn head out of your ass, HELLO. SMOKE + LUNGS = BARBEQUE. Cancer, charred lungs, whatever, I'm gonna laugh at all of you when they find out the long term effects of this drug. They already know one as being memory loss, which isnt suprising seeing as the drug distorts your brain.
 
Super Moderator
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 1, 2001
Messages
3,125
Best answers
0
I never said I want to help people quit. In fact I want no part in helping people quit, they started on their own, they can quit on their own.

Well, basically, I don't need to be in this conversation anymore because it is already banned in public places in Canada so what's the point.

And I still strongly agree, that if you are going to do something that endangers the lives of others, they should be able to say where you can and can't do it.
 
Active Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 4, 2002
Messages
1,061
Best answers
0
Actually second hand alcoholism exists. Its called drunken fathers beating there wifes and children. I realize that suicide is illegal in the us but thats only outright. Even bringing up second hand smoking and the thought of inguring innocents is ignoring what I said. Each place should have to declare whether or not it is smoking or non smoking and none of this half and half crap. Everything now a days causes cancer. The dye in potato chips and soda are proven to. Car exhaust is often said to kill ozone which it does but do you have any idea how bad planes are? Technically your not endangering people's lifes your just giving them a boost towards death.
 
New Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2003
Messages
125
Best answers
0
"Technically your not endangering people's lifes your just giving them a boost towards death."

That's like saying, "I didn't punch him... his head came into contact with my fist." Besides, we've all established that death is a fact of life. So wouldn't "giving someone a boost towards it" be considered bad?
 

owa

New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Aug 26, 2002
Messages
1,043
Best answers
0
Alrighty I'm gonna post my opinion on this whole topic so far.

--------

Ok, my opinion is obvious I agree with the smoking laws that are in place and ones that will follow soon. The government is looking out for us, sure they screw up alot of the time, but they want Healthy people, and less Cancer/Lung Disease/Hear Proplems/ect... Most of which are cause by smoking.

I admit it can take years for smoking to take heavy negative effects on a person, BUT it does happen eventually, so you can't say the effects are mild or some is un-true, and ect.

You also argued that I should go ask someone to take it out-side or put it out right. Why should I have too go tell someone to stop poisoning me? You also noted that its not really Poisoning me, well it is, very slowly but it still is and you can't argue that fact.

The government sees it this way in my opinion:- you can harm yourself with cigerates but do it at home, not around people who don't want it around them willingly.

Young people who are underage can access cigerates easier if people smoke openly, all they have too do is if they know someone just ask.***

***NOTE*** Your most likely thinking that "well the people shouldn't give them cigs then" Well alot don't, which is good, but some DO, and starting smoking early in your life can have negative effects later on, and people get VERY addicted. Not too mention coming to class with cigerate smoke on you isn't good for Morale.

I know I can't change anyones mind, but I feel some of you are over looking why they want this done or trying too lighten up the fact they kill [eventually]. Its proven, don't blame me blame science.

If your gonna smoke, don't smoke cigs smoke pot. Atleast you get high on pot.
 
New Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2003
Messages
27
Best answers
0
i too im gonna post my idea

YES it should be in pubs and bars because theve been there since the begining of cigs. i really cant see a pub of a bar without smoke in it i dont smoke or like it but this is the only place where these people can go its banned everywhere else so i say let them have it i dont mind pubs and bars were invented by people that smoke anyway so leave it to them.
 
New Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2003
Messages
125
Best answers
0
-[ZeniSlev]- said:
If your gonna smoke, don't smoke cigs smoke pot. Atleast you get high on pot.
Nice one there, Sherlock... deductive reasoning clearly leads one to choose smoking pot over a cigarette if you're concerned about health issues. That's as freaking obvious as 1+1= -562...
 
Active Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 4, 2002
Messages
1,061
Best answers
0
fryd4good, that line was said as a joke. Don't respond to individuals to critisize as it doesn't help the thread and its no more than a spam/flame. I know I'm not a mod but your continual 2 sentence posts to put down people is starting to irritate me.
 
brainfeeder
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
May 29, 2002
Messages
5,179
Best answers
0
-[ZeniSlev]- said:
If your gonna smoke, don't smoke cigs smoke pot. Atleast you get high on pot.
hahaha thats a good point owa, i have to agree with you on that one
 
New Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2002
Messages
417
Best answers
0
In Japan, where people smoke up to 8 packs of cigs a day, they have less cancer. In France, where they not only smoke 8 packs but they add cigars to that too, they have even less cancer. In America, people blame cancer on cigarettes and cigars.

It could be the way we make the cigarettes, or it could be food companies placing the blame elsewhere so that we don't give up their "poison" instead. After all, people were healthier 100 years ago, and they smoked like crazy. But that was before food coloring and bleached bread.

So I say leave the cigarettes, but especially in bars and pubs, where only people who smoke and drink go anyway.
 
The Duke of Juke
Retired Forum Staff
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
2,852
Best answers
0
I agree with Smokurai, who said that it should be up to the owner of the bar/pub.

I mean, some owners are going to choose smokeless, and some are going to choose smoking.

This would cause problems for those who don't want to smoke and live near a smoking bar or vice versa, but then it is on the owner for his decision.
 
New Member
★ Black Lounger ★
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Apr 15, 2003
Messages
4,628
Best answers
0
"I know I can't change anyones mind, but I feel some of you are over looking why they want this done or trying too lighten up the fact they kill [eventually]. Its proven, don't blame me blame science."
Yes, people on here have come into this discussion with a closed mind, they have seen the topic title and decided opinion. I am guilty of this too, but i used to be against smoking completely, but after knowing more and more smokers, and understanding their siutuation, i gave in, and admitted to myself that i was wrong. I think that people are free to do as they please and it isnt for anybody else to decide whats good for them.

Just to make a point, there has never been a case of sum1 dying directly from second hand smoke. Ever.
 
New Member
Retired Forum Staff
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Apr 7, 2003
Messages
1,478
Best answers
0
Vegeta's Briefs said:
In Japan, where people smoke up to 8 packs of cigs a day, they have less cancer. In France, where they not only smoke 8 packs but they add cigars to that too, they have even less cancer. In America, people blame cancer on cigarettes and cigars.

It could be the way we make the cigarettes, or it could be food companies placing the blame elsewhere so that we don't give up their "poison" instead. After all, people were healthier 100 years ago, and they smoked like crazy. But that was before food coloring and bleached bread.

So I say leave the cigarettes, but especially in bars and pubs, where only people who smoke and drink go anyway.
When you say "they have less cancer," you are refering to the country itself, correct? I can guarantee you that those people smoking 8 packs of cigarettes a day have an infinitely higher chance to get cancer then someone in America who doesn't smoke at all. More Americans smoke (percentage wise) then the Japanese population, and there are less morbidly obese people, did you take that into consideration rather then spouting off "Cigarettes don't cause cancer!"

Anyway, sugar and chocolate may be addictive, but those are things people have known about for centuries, along with the fact that you gain weight from eating too much. You remind me of those maternal zealots who try to go on campaigns blaming McDonalds for their children's obesity. Afterall, Ronald McDonald crammed the crap down their throats with his own money, didn't he?

The Tobacco companies should be glorified as heros, sticking it out bravely, continuing to sell products that actually do less harm then a hamburger.

What a revelation, V.B.!

And by the way, people were not "healthier" 100 years ago. I suggest you look at the projected life expectency in 1903, compared with 2003. We've wiped out many diseases and ailments with modern medicine.

References:
Period Life Expectancies 1, Calendar Years 1940-2001 Historical Period
http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TR/TR02/lr5A3-h.html
 
New Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2003
Messages
47
Best answers
0
if you ask me you shoud be able to do anything you want as long as it doesnt infringe on the rights of others... and smoking in public infringes on a persons right to breathe smoke free air. so if you ask me the ban is a good thing, but seperating building into smoking and nonsmokeing areas could work with proper filtration.
 
New Member
★ Black Lounger ★
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Apr 15, 2003
Messages
4,628
Best answers
0
seperate area's solves the problem really, cuz the non smokers that dont mind smoking will go in either the smoking area or the part of the non smoking area near the smoking area, where as the non smokers that dont like smoking can go to the other side. Usually it ends up with separation part in the middle and it keeps non smokers and smoker happy.... to me, some people who dont want it full stop are selfish and inconsiderate, and unwilling to find other solutions that both parties can agree on, which is totally unreasonable.
 
New Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2003
Messages
125
Best answers
0
Scorcher2k said:
fryd4good, that line was said as a joke. Don't respond to individuals to critisize as it doesn't help the thread and its no more than a spam/flame. I know I'm not a mod but your continual 2 sentence posts to put down people is starting to irritate me.
If you're gonna be sarcastic, at least do a good job. And to let you know how much I care for your input, this post will include a total of TWO sentences.
 

owa

New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Aug 26, 2002
Messages
1,043
Best answers
0
davidskiwan said:
"I know I can't change anyones mind, but I feel some of you are over looking why they want this done or trying too lighten up the fact they kill [eventually]. Its proven, don't blame me blame science."
Yes, people on here have come into this discussion with a closed mind, they have seen the topic title and decided opinion. I am guilty of this too,

Just to make a point, there has never been a case of sum1 dying directly from second hand smoke. Ever.
Nah your not guilty of it, infact you, SailorAlea, Mirouku and a few other people actually know what there talking about, just the rest which are a select few say stupid things that don't make sense. Were all just giving opinions and I don't hold anyones opinions against them, unless its so obviously stupid that there opinion is moronic and abunch of lies :p

This whole 8 pack a day thing is insane, you'd be dead in no time

8 X 365 = 2920/ Year I think it works out too, and lets say you miss a month of smoking your still in an amazing amount of packs a day, you'd be so broke and horribly un-healithy you'd be worse then Hunter S. Thompson on a bad day.

And I was only joking, its a big thing me and my friends say about Drugs and cigerates at school.
 
New Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2002
Messages
417
Best answers
0
SailorAlea said:
When you say "they have less cancer," you are refering to the country itself, correct? I can guarantee you that those people smoking 8 packs of cigarettes a day have an infinitely higher chance to get cancer then someone in America who doesn't smoke at all. More Americans smoke (percentage wise) then the Japanese population, and there are less morbidly obese people, did you take that into consideration rather then spouting off "Cigarettes don't cause cancer!"

Anyway, sugar and chocolate may be addictive, but those are things people have known about for centuries, along with the fact that you gain weight from eating too much. You remind me of those maternal zealots who try to go on campaigns blaming McDonalds for their children's obesity. Afterall, Ronald McDonald crammed the crap down their throats with his own money, didn't he?

The Tobacco companies should be glorified as heros, sticking it out bravely, continuing to sell products that actually do less harm then a hamburger.

What a revelation, V.B.!

And by the way, people were not "healthier" 100 years ago. I suggest you look at the projected life expectency in 1903, compared with 2003. We've wiped out many diseases and ailments with modern medicine.

References:
Period Life Expectancies 1, Calendar Years 1940-2001 Historical Period
http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TR/TR02/lr5A3-h.html
I'm going to address all of that in this paragraph:

If you actually knew that bleached, artificial, and cloned foods were unhealthy, you wouldn't blame tobacco for the increase in deaths by cancer. And that life expentency wasn't just for cancer. See, a lot of people died lifting heavy machinary and stuff, and they just rounded them all together. When you got past the age 20, and you didn't do any dangerous work, you lived to be over 100 in those days. And Japan smokes more than America, yet they are healthier and skinnier. But you want to know what they do different other than smoke more than America? Easy. No bleached, cloned, or artificial foods. Tada! Not only that, but they use less wheat and more fish in their foods than Americans do. They also use natural herbs for medicines, not chemicals.

So what causes cancer when you compare America to Japan? As far as I can tell, it's the chemicals we actually consume rather than smoke, or else Japan would have lots more cancer deaths than they do.

Also, since you like percentages, %97 of all Japanese over the age 16 smoke 8 packs a day. %3 of all Japanese people die of lung cancer in a year.

%64 of all Americans over the age 18 smoke 2 packs a day. %17 of all American people die of lung cancer in a year.

If you do not believe it, go to Japan. They also sell cigarettes a lot cheaper than Americans. They aren't out to milk money.

Also, I thought this was a thread where you could place what you thought about it, not where you had to argue because somebody didn't believe what you said :p
 
New Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2002
Messages
32
Best answers
0
In Ireland, smoking in pubs and bars is illegal, if you throw a anything you can smoke on the ground in Dublin your fined and all packets of ciggaretes are legally required to have pictures of people's lungs and mouths damage through smoking on them.
 
New Member
Retired Forum Staff
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Apr 7, 2003
Messages
1,478
Best answers
0
Vegeta's Briefs said:
I'm going to address all of that in this paragraph:

If you actually knew that bleached, artificial, and cloned foods were unhealthy, you wouldn't blame tobacco for the increase in deaths by cancer. And that life expentency wasn't just for cancer. See, a lot of people died lifting heavy machinary and stuff, and they just rounded them all together. When you got past the age 20, and you didn't do any dangerous work, you lived to be over 100 in those days. And Japan smokes more than America, yet they are healthier and skinnier. But you want to know what they do different other than smoke more than America? Easy. No bleached, cloned, or artificial foods. Tada! Not only that, but they use less wheat and more fish in their foods than Americans do. They also use natural herbs for medicines, not chemicals.

So what causes cancer when you compare America to Japan? As far as I can tell, it's the chemicals we actually consume rather than smoke, or else Japan would have lots more cancer deaths than they do.

Also, since you like percentages, %97 of all Japanese over the age 16 smoke 8 packs a day. %3 of all Japanese people die of lung cancer in a year.

%64 of all Americans over the age 18 smoke 2 packs a day. %17 of all American people die of lung cancer in a year.

If you do not believe it, go to Japan. They also sell cigarettes a lot cheaper than Americans. They aren't out to milk money.

Also, I thought this was a thread where you could place what you thought about it, not where you had to argue because somebody didn't believe what you said :p
You are absolutely insane. I don't know WHERE you got your information on the percentages of Japanese smokers, bu I happen to be half-Japanese, and I've lived there for a number of years.

You think 64% of Americans smoke? I don't know which America you live in, or what magical source of information you seem to have, but it's just convieniently incorrect.

"Among the states showing an increase in the number of occasional smokers, Arizona went from 16.2 percent in 1996 to 28 percent in 2001; Delaware, 13.5 percent to 24 percent; Nevada, 10.8 percent to 22.8 percent; and Ohio, 9.6 percent to 20.8 percent. The District of Columbia had the highest percentage of smokers who said they only smoked occasionally, at 41.2 percent."

References:
http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/898799.asp?cp1=1
A report by MSNBC, on findings from the CDC, Center for Disease Control.

In Japan, smoking % for females in 1994 was 14.8%, and in males, 59%.

http://www.kidon.com/smoke/percentages2.htm

I find your way of thinking, that people just happened to die 100 years ago from lifting heavy machinery, and the such, rather then just having a shorter life expectency due to malnutrition, ignorance of diversity in 'food groups,' and modern medicine, to be highly amusing.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top