The growing trend of smoking bans

Justin Gray89 · 2004-03-28T19:48:41+00:00

We’ve already gone back and forth on the whole smoking debate quite a bit, but I felt compelled to reopen the discussion after stumbling upon an article in The…

bluewolf4 Newcomer

4 messages
joined Mar 2004

#81 · Apr 4, 2004

dustycanyon6 says:

Are you kidding me? What you’re describing sounds more like heresy—believing in something a theist wouldn't touch. Atheists simply don't believe (mostly because nobody can give them a straight answer to "What is God?", so they can't even decide if they believe or not). Antitheists actually believe God doesn't exist (they apparently have a grasp on what theists actually mean by "God").

I didn't mean to say Atheist, but whatever, now you feel the need to debate it for four hours.
The word Atheist comes from the Greek *atheos*, where *a* means "without" and *theos* means "God." So, an Atheist is someone without a god. But hey, you had to show off, right? Now you're busy defining terms that have nothing to do with this topic. That was my mistake, I already admitted it. If you actually have something to say about the smoking ban, say it. Stop wasting time correcting my grammar and splitting hairs over definitions.

bluewolf4 Newcomer

4 messages
joined Mar 2004

#82 · Apr 4, 2004

Justin Gray89 said:Hey! I asked about America, not New York City.
Regarding advertising, cigarette ads are banned by law here in the States. But TDR finds ways to market them indirectly. Honestly, I think those loopholes should be shut down by law too.

Look, I'm not from around here. I missed that last word in your question. My bad.

dustyharbor7 Member

21 messages
joined Mar 2004

#83 · Apr 4, 2004

All things considered, I’m actually in favor of banning smoking everywhere except within the private homes of the smokers themselves.

Sh

bluewolf4 Newcomer

4 messages
joined Mar 2004

#84 · Apr 4, 2004

dustyharbor7 said:Bottom line, I’m all for banning smoking everywhere except inside the smokers' own homes.

Sh...

Sure, but if they actually pull this off, nothing will stop them from eventually banning smoking in people's own houses too. I mentioned this before when they did that documentary—how some old lady complains about her neighbor smoking in his own apartment in the same building. She's terrified her cat is going to get cancer from smoke drifting through the vents at an Atomic size via the AC units.🙏

Douglas Phillips4 Active Member

70 messages
joined Apr 2003

#85 · Apr 4, 2004

All you ever do is spout nonsense, which is pretty much world-class stuff... and just typical for someone like you. When you run out of actual arguments, you just start grasping at straws. 🙄

bluewolf4 Newcomer

4 messages
joined Mar 2004

#86 · Apr 5, 2004

That’s how things work here in the States, and judging by this forum, the rest of the Western world is heading down that same path—slowly but surely. Give it thirty years. You'll look back on the good old days when you could just light up a grill in your own backyard without anyone breathing down your neck. Maybe it seems trivial to you now, but everything eventually catches up to itself.

Anyway, why don't you lay out some actual facts to back up your arguments? Let's see how "your kind" of people actually operates.🙂

Douglas Phillips4 Active Member

70 messages
joined Apr 2003

#87 · Apr 5, 2004

Do me a favor and actually read some other posts; we’ve covered a massive amount of ground here. For someone who refuses to look past their own bubble and only sees what suits them, this whole debate is pretty much pointless. I honestly don't have the energy left to go back and forth with you. There is plenty of intelligent discourse already written right here. 🙂

So, what's next? The future, federal laws, or maybe just a backyard BBQ? The topic at hand remains: the smoking ban.

dustyharbor7 Member

21 messages
joined Mar 2004

#88 · Apr 5, 2004

bluewolf4 said:Yeah, but if they actually pull this off, I feel like there won't be anything left to stop them from banning smoking even inside a smoker's own home. I was mentioning this before—how they made that documentary where an old lady was complaining about her neighbor smoking in his apartment in the same building. She’s worried her cat might get cancer from the smoke drifting through the AC vents at an Atomic size.🙏

Honestly, if you ask me, they could probably just ban that too, 😈 because it happens to me all the time during the summer; I'll have my window open and a neighbor will light up right on their windowsill, and then I'm stuck smelling it...

Sh

placidjackal97 Active Member

135 messages
joined May 2003

#89 · Apr 5, 2004

That’s all I’m saying—I am totally here for this trend from the main thread. Honestly, if we could just get more "trends" like this one, life would be a whole lot better.👍

Melissa Gonzalez9 Newcomer

1 message
joined Mar 2004

#90 · Apr 5, 2004

Justin Gray89 said:Seriously, can someone point me to a single bar in America where smoking isn't allowed?
Are bars, pubs, cafes, and clubs just reserved exclusively for smokers now? Who exactly is being discriminated against here?

It’s not really about discrimination. It's just that non-smokers aren't profitable enough for the business model. If you look at most American coffee shops or bars, the non-smoking sections are always smaller and usually empty...

Anyone trying to open a spot strictly for non-smokers would be taking a massive gamble. Honestly, it wouldn't even be a gamble—it would be a disaster. Even God couldn't save a business like that, since the heavy hitters in the bar scene are almost always smokers...

That’s why this kind of Law feels premature. There are just too many smokers around right now. It would be better to put that money into intensive education and prevention programs first. Once we actually see some results there, then maybe such a Law could be considered. Until then, from a purely economic standpoint, it just won't work...

Douglas Phillips4 Active Member

70 messages
joined Apr 2003

#91 · Apr 5, 2004

Melissa Gonzalez9 - That’s the bottom line right there. Totally, 100%.

The issue isn't about making a profit; it's about an individual's fundamental right to freedom of choice.
Is that really such a hard concept to grasp? If I decide I don't want to smoke cigarettes, I shouldn't be forced into passive smoking just because I'm in a certain space. FORCED—does that word carry enough weight for you? It's forced because someone else, who enjoys that same freedom of choice, decides they want to smoke, and suddenly everyone nearby is being compelled to inhale their smoke. In doing so, the non-smoker's basic rights are being violated. 🙄

By the way, a new Law went into effect in Sweden, and the Netherlands will follow suit on January 5th. 👍

Melissa Gonzalez9 Newcomer

1 message
joined Mar 2004

#92 · Apr 5, 2004

Hey, T.—not that I missed the point—but when people debate a new Law, you have to look at the pros and cons from pretty much every angle. One of those big ones is basically whether the thing actually makes sense economically. If it isn't cost-effective, you have to question if it's even worth doing in the first place...

Betty Hill82 Member

49 messages
joined Nov 2004

#93 · Apr 5, 2004

It’s all about the bottom line here!!!!

Look, this Law isn't being passed because of you Non-smokers; it's driven by something much more sinister.

By the time you actually realize what's happening, this trend will have shifted, and some other regulation will hit you personally, and then you'll be back here whining about that instead..

I'm out of this thread before someone manages to trigger my cancer cells.

I have zero interest in dealing with primitives....

👋

Steven Ruiz Active Member

156 messages
joined Sep 2004

#94 · Apr 5, 2004

You know, Melissa Gonzalez9, it seems like more and more restaurants and bars over in London are switching to completely smoke-free environments...
Basically, after they ran some test periods—maybe just a few months or so—to see how things would shake out, they realized their profits actually went up once they banned smoking entirely. So, that theory of yours about smokers spending more money just doesn't really hold water...
Maybe the reason those designated non-smoking sections in our local spots seem so empty is simply because people don't want someone at the next table ruining their meal with a cloud of cigarette smoke right in their face...😉

bluewolf4 Newcomer

4 messages
joined Mar 2004

#95 · Apr 5, 2004

dustyharbor7 said:Look, if you ask me, they might as well just ban the whole thing. 😈 I deal with it too—during the summer, I’ll have my window open and the neighbor starts smoking right on their windowsill, and suddenly my whole place stinks.

Sh

Yeah, you're spot on. Next time, I won't even light up in my own house. Instead, I'll just wait until the neighbor starts their car in the morning and blow smoke directly into the exhaust pipe so the gasoline fumes can kill the smell of tobacco.

Honestly, the best move would be to buy a plot of land way out in the middle of nowhere, and every time I feel like having a cigarette, I'll just drive out there.
That's exactly what I'm going to do.
There. At least when it comes to my smoking habit, you all should be happy now.
Or am I wrong again?

Melissa Gonzalez9 Newcomer

1 message
joined Mar 2004

#96 · Apr 5, 2004

Betty Wright64 said:To be fair, Melissa Gonzalez9, more and more restaurants and bars in London are moving toward total smoking bans.
Basically, after testing the waters for a few months, they found that profits actually went up once the ban kicked in. That theory you have about smokers spending more just doesn't hold water.
Maybe the reason non-smoker sections in our local spots are empty isn't because people aren't there, but because nobody wants their dinner smelling like someone else's cigarette at the next table. 😉

It might be like that in London, but things are a bit different here in America. We deal with much fewer luxuries and a lower standard of living compared to the UK. People are usually focused on just getting through the day rather than worrying about long-term health—we don't really have that luxury yet...

Besides, until just a few years ago, we weren't being bombarded with anti-smoking warnings like they are in the West, so the smoking population remains much higher here...

Around here, the priority is putting food on the table, not indulging in a cigarette... over there, people can probably afford other things. If you look closely enough at London, you'll likely notice that most of the smokers are actually those further down the social ladder...

Melissa Gonzalez9 Newcomer

1 message
joined Mar 2004

#97 · Apr 5, 2004

Betty Hill82 said:It’s all about the bottom line.

Look, this law isn't being passed because of you Non-smokers. It’s happening for a completely different, much messier reason.

By the time you realize what’s actually going on, this whole trend will have passed, and some other regulation will hit you right where it hurts. Then we'll be back here arguing about that instead..

I’m stepping out of this thread before someone accidentally stresses me out enough to give me cancer.

I really don't have the energy for these primitive arguments....

👋

The truth is, this law exists just to scoop up votes at the lowest possible cost. At the same time, it keeps us distracted from much bigger, more critical issues that aren't getting addressed—issues that should actually be the priority...

mistyscout6 Newcomer

6 messages
joined Oct 2005

#98 · Apr 5, 2004

So, some reporters just dug up this total absurdity where, according to one of our laws, there’s actually no way to penalize someone for breaking that exact same law.
I mean, maybe it doesn't apply to smoking specifically, but it’s still pretty ridiculous—like if you walk into a tiny local coffee shop with just two rows of tables, and somehow it's perfectly fine to smoke at one table but totally forbidden at the next.

I guess when this regulation was first drafted, they were probably just reacting to whatever mess was already happening at the time, but honestly, newer businesses shouldn't even be getting permits under those weird rules.

At the end of the day, smoking isn't really about personal freedom or legal crackdowns; it's more about a person's level of basic decency toward everyone else in the room.

Justin Gray89 NewcomerOP

1 message
joined Aug 2003

#99 · Apr 5, 2004

Melissa Gonzalez9 said:It’s probably like that in London, but things are a bit different here in the States. We have very few luxuries and a much lower standard of living compared to the UK. Most people are far more preoccupied with just making ends meet on a daily basis than they are with their actual health—we just don't have that luxury yet...

It is quite paradoxical, I suppose, how so many Americans, while struggling just to afford basic staples like bread and milk, feel the need to pair them with a pack of cigarettes. You see so many people complaining about barely surviving, yet they end up spending upwards of $333 a month on smoking between the husband and wife. 👎

Betty Hill82 Member

49 messages
joined Nov 2004

#100 · Apr 5, 2004

swiss said:That law is just a cheap way to buy votes. Meanwhile, all this noise distracts us from much more critical issues that aren't being addressed—issues that actually should be our top priorities...

Just my two cents on this: 👍

Glad to see you're on board. 🙂

The growing trend of smoking bans

🔗 Similar threads