The growing trend of smoking bans

Non-smokers waiting for Godot

It’s a three-star establishment.
The restaurant and the cafe bar are split into separate areas. In the dining room, you won't find any ashtrays sitting on the tables; they all keep them tucked away on one specific side table. If a guest reaches for a cigarette without thinking twice, the waiter politely rushes over with an ashtray instead of actually telling the person, "Hey, you can't smoke here."
Now, in the cafe bar, the better row of tables—the sunny spot overlooking the parking lot—is meant for non-smokers. But a group of managers just goes ahead and moves an ashtray from another table to their own so they can light up. In this area, the waiter actually does his job and warns them that smoking isn't allowed, but they just ignore him. The waiter stands his ground and refuses to serve them because of the smoking. The guests storm out, throwing out comments about how they'll just head to the next place where they can smoke freely.
The next day, the owner of this "starred" establishment pulls the waiter aside for a serious talk and basically threatens him: "Do you actually think you're going to earn a paycheck?"
In this particular space, let's just say it right now, there hasn't been any health inspection oversight, aside from maybe during food prep. They just don't show up. They simply don't come.
Sure, inspectors might pop into some business every day, but they only go where their boss sends them (or chooses not to send them).

Listen up, everyone!
To all my fellow smokers.
Whatever you do, don't go quitting all at once.
If we all stop, who’s left to pass away?
Researchers tell us smokers eventually kick the bucket, 😁 and hundreds more succumb to secondhand smoke. 😁 😁

Without smoking, we’d probably all live forever—not that our little planet needs more people on it, especially with all this cigarette smoke polluting the air, right?

So, here's to smoking! 🙂

hiddenviper9 said:Listen up, everyone!
To all you smokers out there.
Don't you dare all quit smoking at once.
So then who exactly is supposed to die?
So, researchers are out here telling us that every single smoker is just destined to kick the bucket. 😁 A hundred people die from secondhand smoke. 😁 😁

Honestly, if we all stopped smoking, everyone would basically live forever. Plus, let's face it—there are already way too many of us on this polluted little planet, especially with all the cigarette smoke clogging up the air.

Well—cheers to smoking! 🙂

😁 [applause] 👋 😂 🤣

mistyscout6 said:That legislation is just a way to grab votes as cheaply as possible. Meanwhile, all this noise distracts us from much more critical issues that aren't being addressed—issues that really should be the priority...

It's true... most political maneuvering follows that exact pattern...

Not just in domestic policy, but globally too...

But honestly, I'd rather they focus on banning smoking instead of, say, restricting abortion access... or obsessing over changing a football team's name...🙄

I know plenty of people who care deeply about not being exposed to secondhand smoke in cafes, restaurants, cafeterias, or college hallways... yet you still see it happening all the time here in the States...

The key is reaching the younger generation... by the time it hits the older crowd, it's already too late...

I feel for nicotine addicts... but back when I started going out, smoking was still considered "cool"... I knew if I started, I'd get hooked... though I never felt that intense pressure to fit in or prove something through cigarettes...

It's also true that the government makes a massive amount from cigarette taxes... which definitely pads the federal budget... but when you run the numbers, the long-term costs of smoking far outweigh the revenue from sales...

And let's not even get started on how much this is actually about tolerance and fundamental human rights...

Wait, isn't there an American distinction between terms like to smoke, to get smoky, or to be filled with smoke?

Like, just "smoking" or "having a smoke"... I feel like that's a completely different vibe altogether.

I read that someone here is complaining about the ban on smoking on planes.😕 Honestly, who is being unreasonable here? Is it crazy to suggest that because of one person's addiction and sheer arrogance, 300 passengers should be put at risk just because they lit up a cigarette and—by some "accident"—set the entire aircraft on fire? At that rate, we might as well have everyone turn on their phones and remote-controlled cars and try to interfere with the pilot.

Every individual has a right to clean air. Therefore, smoking, as a form of air pollution, infringes upon that right. This is why more and more developed nations are implementing bans on smoking in public spaces, and I believe that is perfectly reasonable. However, an individual also has the right to make their own choices, which includes the choice to smoke. Because of this, smokers should be provided with designated, properly equipped areas that are completely separated from non-smokers. Unfortunately, in many places, this usually boils down to a single room where a small sign in a corner says "smoking area," but it hardly matters if you smoke in that specific corner or the whole room when the air is already thick with smoke.

As for smoking in restaurants, I am at a loss for words. It isn't just a matter of poor manners or lack of education; it is a direct threat to public health. Watching proponents of smoking try to deflect by comparing it to things like flatulence, pollen, or car exhaust is frankly ridiculous. None of those forms of pollution come close to the harm caused by secondhand smoke in an enclosed space, which can induce addiction just as easily as active smoking. By that logic, I could walk through the city carrying 10 kg of uranium; since the air is already polluted with all sorts of things, adding a little radioactivity shouldn't matter, right? It's my right, after all.

Smokers can be as offended as they want, but if their actions pollute the air to the point of making it hazardous to others, it is my right to prevent them from doing so. Furthermore, smoking remains one of the greatest hypocrisies of modern society. Smoking is an addiction, whether people want to admit it or not—just like alcoholism or drug abuse. The only difference is that among those three addictions, smoking is the only one deemed socially acceptable due to purely hypocritical and economic reasons.

Only recently have some countries begun to realize that padding the national budget by maintaining a tobacco monopoly and exploiting addiction isn't actually profitable (not to mention it’s immoral). The costs and losses incurred from treating the illness, the drop in productivity and efficiency, and ultimately the loss of life and working years far outweigh the profits gained from a government tobacco monopoly.

So, my stance is this: yes to smoking in outdoor spaces, but a firm no to smoking in public indoor spaces (unless in exclusively designated areas).

Hmmmm. Last time I flew Delta Air Lines, they actually had designated smoking and non-smoking sections, complete with ashtrays built right into the seats.
As for all those rules about phones and gadgets on planes? That’s some outdated 1980s nonsense.
Every single person in first class is carrying a laptop and using it mid-flight anyway.

It feels like it’s been an absolute lifetime since you last hopped on a plane... 😉

mistyscout6 said:Aren't there different American words like SMOKE, to fill something with smoke, or to make it smoky?

Smoking or having a smoke—that’s a completely different thing altogether.

🤔 🙂 🙂 🙂

Someone was clearly trying to be funny.
Here: 🙂

bluewolf4 said:Hmmmm, I guess when I last flew Delta Air Lines, they actually had designated smoking and non-smoking areas, and even had ashtrays built right into the seats.
And honestly, all that stuff about phones and gadgets being banned on planes feels like a fairy tale from the 1980s.
I mean, pretty much every person in first class is carrying a laptop and using it during the flight.

In airplanes, you can't smoke, and at most airports I've visited, there's no smoking either, except maybe in specifically fenced-off areas or some remote corner. Even at train stations in Germany, there’s no smoking, unless you're in those partitioned rooms or near some distant spot...

As for the cell phones and laptops, you aren't supposed to use anything during takeoff and landing. Of course, you technically *can* do whatever you want, and obviously, the plane isn't going to crash just because you used a phone, but I think the small reason behind it is similar to when you're driving a car and you hear that "beep beep" sound coming through the radio... well, the pilots hear that same interference in their headsets, so to avoid any distractions, they'd rather everyone just turns everything off.....

S

Captured from my monitor:

It turns out secondhand smoke is significantly more dangerous than we previously gave it credit for, according to a study conducted by researchers at the University of Washington medical school. They carried out what might be one of the largest global investigations into the fallout of passive smoking, analyzing mortality data for some 600,000 individuals who were listed as non-smokers in census records back in 1981 and 1996, specifically targeting those aged between 45 and 74 at the time. The findings suggest that non-smokers exposed to tobacco smoke face a 15% higher risk of premature death compared to those living in smoke-free households. Based on this research, it's estimated that in the US, secondhand smoke leads to an average of 350 deaths per year, and roughly 500 infants under the age of two end up hospitalized due to respiratory infections.

As a lifelong smoker, if I had my way, I’d love to see the entire tobacco industry just collapse overnight 👎 That would be the only way I could actually quit for good 🙂
Regarding those bans over in Ireland—it's a bit of a toss-up. It feels wrong because, honestly, who goes to a local pub for a beer and doesn't expect to light up a cigarette!? 😲
Then again—why should non-smokers be forced to deal with the smoke?
In the States, we should probably ban smoking in public, but only if they provide dedicated smoking lounges 🙂

Hannah Moore86 said:In America, smoking should be banned, provided that dedicated smoking sections are available.🙂

Actually, smoking in the US is already prohibited in most public indoor spaces—like hospitals, schools, and universities. Certain clubs or bars can apply for specific permits to allow it, but if they get one, they are required to provide a separate area for non-smokers. Similarly, establishments where smoking is banned still have designated zones for smokers.

The real issue is that in America, the laws aren't actually enforced, and you're left feeling powerless to change anything. Most often, these designated smoking or non-smoking areas are either poorly partitioned or ignored entirely. As a result, many public venues—especially bars, restaurants, and clubs—turn into nothing more than massive, smoke-filled rooms. It’s a shame.

bluewolf4 said:Hmm... Last time I flew with Delta Air Lines, they actually had designated smoking and non-smoking sections, complete with ashtrays built right into the seats.
As for the whole debate about phones and gadgets on planes, that feels like a relic from the 1980s.
Nowadays, you’ll find almost every passenger in first class carrying a laptop and working through the flight.

When was the last time you actually flew on a Delta Air Lines flight like that? 1991? I have never once stepped foot on an aircraft where smoking was permitted in any section. In fact, it's quite the opposite; if you were caught with a lit cigarette, I suspect they would eject you from the plane immediately—and without a parachute.🙂 🙂

Regarding cell phones and mobile devices—they are strictly regulated because they operate on frequencies very close to the navigation equipment used during takeoff and landing. If you're feeling particularly brave, try using your phone during takeoff. You'll have three or four flight attendants swarming you within seconds. We once had a situation where a toy phone started ringing right before takeoff; it took us about ten minutes just to explain it was a toy so we wouldn't get kicked off the flight (they couldn't wrap their heads around why we were messing with them in the first place).

Brian Ortiz68 said:Since when were you flying Delta Air Lines? 1991? I’ve never stepped foot on a plane where smoking was allowed in any section. In fact, it's the exact opposite—if they catch you with a lit cigarette, they'd probably kick you out of the plane immediately, and without a parachute for good measure. 🙂 🙂

As for phones and cell devices—they're strictly prohibited because they operate on frequencies close to the equipment used for takeoff and landing guidance. If you actually have the guts, try using a phone during takeoff. Within seconds, you'll have three or four flight attendants swarming you. We tried using a toy phone that started ringing right before takeoff—result: it took us ten minutes to explain it was just a toy so they wouldn't toss us off the plane (they didn't get why we were being such assholes about it).

Yeah, sure, I believe every single word out of your mouth. Bla bla bla.
The last time I flew Delta Air Lines was back in '97, and I smoked on the plane because the people sitting next to me were smoking too.
Back in 2003, when I flew Houston-Kuwait to join a convoy heading to Iraq, I used my laptop during takeoff and nobody said a word. So stop talking nonsense.
Military jets fly the same way any other plane does, and there aren't signs saying electronic equipment is forbidden during takeoff... Same goes for helicopters. About 20 days ago, we flew to another camp because convoys were banned in that region for a few days, and my manager was using his laptop the whole time...
Using cell phones in a plane is recommended against, but it isn't illegal. Maybe Delta Air Lines just has its own specific policy regarding that.

bluewolf4 said:Back in 2003, when I was flying from Houston-Kuwait to join a convoy heading into Iraq, I used my laptop during takeoff and nobody said a word to me. So please, let's not talk nonsense.

Do you really fail to see the distinction between a device like a laptop—which doesn't emit significant electromagnetic waves—and a cell phone, whose primary function is specifically to emit them?

Even on a commercial airliner, you are permitted to use a laptop. The restrictions are strictly focused on cell phones, two-way radios, and wireless mice.

Military aircraft operate under the same principles as any other plane, so there aren't any signs stating that electronic equipment shouldn't be used during takeoff...

Where are you getting the idea that military jets are identical to commercial airliners? It stands to reason that a military aircraft is outfitted with specialized shielding to protect against both active and passive interference, making a single cell phone negligible. A civilian plane simply isn't built with those same defenses.

It is recommended not to use cell phones on a plane, though it isn't legally prohibited. Perhaps Delta Air Lines has its own specific policy regarding this.

This isn't just a matter of recommendation; smoking and using cell phones on an aircraft is absolutely prohibited by law. When I flew with Lufthansa recently, they actually cited the specific regulation and legal statute to me.

Brian Ortiz68 said:Even on commercial flights, they let you use a laptop. It’s just cell phones, two-way radios, and wireless mice that are banned.[/B]
That's not true. They announce over the PA system that all electronic devices are prohibited.
Some planes have icons showing a phone and a laptop crossed out with a red X, but that's usually just during takeoff, which isn't actually the law.



Where are you getting the idea that military jets are the same as commercial planes? A military jet definitely has the shielding to protect against active and passive interference, so one cell phone won't touch it. Commercial planes just don't have that kind of equipment.

And why wouldn't a commercial plane have that equipment? You say "definitely," but is that a fact or just what you think? I'm not talking about a mig, I mean a small transport plane used for moving troops instead of civilians.

[B]

It has nothing to do with recommendations—smoking and using cell phones in an aircraft is strictly forbidden by law. On a Lufthansa flight I took a few days ago, they actually cited the specific article and law.

Whatever, man. I flew Lufthansa coming back from vacation and nobody mentioned any specific law or article.
You probably went on some school field trip. You sound like those kids from the eighties who thought the TV was going to blast them with radiation, so they'd buckle up and take their Walkmans off during takeoff, but made sure to bring a camera to snap pictures of the clouds.
Look, it's illegal to drink under twenty-one here, but nobody actually follows it. It's the same as how spitting on the street is technically against some law in the US, but I've never had a cop write me a ticket for it. It's the same thing on a plane; only people from certain areas who don't fly much take all this stuff so seriously...

What on earth turned this thread into a debate about airplanes and cell phones??!!!🙄

Brian Ortiz68 says:

The real issue is that in America, laws are basically treated as suggestions—you can't actually do a damn thing about it. You see it everywhere: smoking areas that are either totally inadequate or just completely ignored. It turns public spots, especially bars, restaurants, and clubs, into massive, smoke-filled pits. It’s pathetic.

I'm with you. We are honestly a joke when it comes to actually enforcing any kind of regulation. 😁

Zarathustra said:Technically, drinking underage is illegal here, but nobody actually follows the rules. It’s like how spitting on the street is prohibited by some specific ordinance in the US, yet I’ve never once seen a cop hand me a ticket for it. It’s the same deal on planes; it seems like only people from our neck of the woods who don't fly much actually take those regulations seriously...

Look, I travel quite frequently compared to the average citizen of our great nation. I have honestly never seen anyone light up a cigarette anywhere—not even at the airport, let alone on a plane. And don't even get me started on talking loudly on a cell phone. Even in places like Mexico, Guatemala, Thailand, or Turkey (and I mean Turkey!—if you don't smoke there, people give you incredibly strange looks), it isn't an issue.

But what am I even saying? I clearly don't know anything. Laws exist not necessarily to benefit us, but rather to be broken, right? At least, that’s the vibe in the North America. What is the point of upholding moral standards, good manners, or health when we live in the North America? We are North American through and through; around here, ignoring the law doesn't make you a criminal, it makes you a "cool guy." It's a pity, really; we would never survive in Europe with this kind of mindset.

After all, murder is also illegal. Robbing a bank, the government, or a factory is also against the law. Yet, you see people from the North America pull off those stunts and walk away scot-free. So, why shouldn't someone smoke on a plane or mess with the pilot? (And if the plane crashes—well, shit happens).

Go ahead, smoke your cigarettes and chat on your phone, just not on the plane I'm flying on.