If you want to ban smoking, then you should go all the way and ban liquor, sugar and fatty foods. Also, if we're going to be serious about enforcing healthy lifestyles, then we should make exercise mandatory, as well as making drug tests random and apply to everyone.

The headline is misleading - the law was tossed out because it didn't include Churchill Downs. Had it done so, then it wouldn't have been thrown out.

bronyaur1: The headline is misleading - the law was tossed out because it didn't include Churchill Downs. Had it done so, then it wouldn't have been thrown out.

Which is actually scarier than than if the law hadn't been thrown out in the first place. Basically the courts are saying that facism is ok, but only as long as everyone gets screwed equally.

Weaver95: bronyaur1: The headline is misleading - the law was tossed out because it didn't include Churchill Downs. Had it done so, then it wouldn't have been thrown out.

Which is actually scarier than than if the law hadn't been thrown out in the first place. Basically the courts are saying that facism is ok, but only as long as everyone gets screwed equally.

Does the law prohibit anyone from smoking in their own home, where it won't poison the air of others in public places?

Smokers should have the absolute right to kill themselves, but not the right to pollute the air in public any more than I should have the right to open up jars of anthrax in public places. Your rights end when they jeopardize my health - does anyone support the right of drinkers to drive intoxicated?

bronyaur1: Smokers should have the absolute right to kill themselves, but not the right to pollute the air in public any more than I should have the right to open up jars of anthrax in public places. Your rights end when they jeopardize my health - does anyone support the right of drinkers to drive intoxicated?

This is what smokers seem to always miss. They don't realize (or maybe they just don't care) that their habit affects others.

bronyaur1: Your rights end when they jeopardize my health


Guess I should stop driving my car then, or using power that is being created by burning fossil fuels. Hell, maybe I should just die to make your life healthier...

/Doesn't smoke, but thinks anti-smoking laws are the beginning of the end of our freedoms.

If you want to blow smoke in my face, that's fine. Just don't complain when I turn my boom box up to 11 right next to your ear.

/lung damage
//ear damage
///what's the difference

Weaver95: If you want to ban smoking, then you should go all the way and ban liquor, sugar and fatty foods. Also, if we're going to be serious about enforcing healthy lifestyles, then we should make exercise mandatory, as well as making drug tests random and apply to everyone.

Theres a difference between smoking and liquor or fatty foods. You smoking in front of me directly affects my health. You chuggin' a 26er of vodka while eating big macs and deep fried donuts doesn't affect my health... unless of course, I vomit from watching you.

xero27: If you want to blow smoke in my face, that's fine. Just don't complain when I turn my boom box up to 11 right next to your ear.

/lung damage
//ear damage
///what's the difference

You can't really die from having your ear drums damaged... you can die from lung damage.

ok i'll stop smoking when you stop driving, because your car creates fumes which may lead to my death

This just in: Smokers think they're better than everyone else.

/reality: smokers are dumb.

Suck it libs!! haha

I'm just going to start carrying one of these:

Burr Guess I should stop driving my car then, or using power that is being created by burning fossil fuels. Hell, maybe I should just die to make your life healthier...

Those things have utility to society. Deliberately setting some chemical-soaked grass on fire and forcing everyone around you to inhale the fumes, not so much.

Smoking != speech.

Kill yourself on your own dime, and register as a smoker so all health benefits can be denied to you.

Burr: Guess I should stop driving my car then, or using power that is being created by burning fossil fuels. Hell, maybe I should just die to make your life healthier...

Society depends on automobile transportation. It does not depend on letting smokers blow their shiat in everyone else's face.

Man On Pink Corner: Burr Guess I should stop driving my car then, or using power that is being created by burning fossil fuels. Hell, maybe I should just die to make your life healthier...

Those things have utility to society. Deliberately setting some chemical-soaked grass on fire and forcing everyone around you to inhale the fumes, not so much.

They are not forcing you to with a gun to stand there and inhale it, are they?

Burr Guess I should stop driving my car then, or using power that is being created by burning fossil fuels. Hell, maybe I should just die to make your life healthier...

That is acceptable. Not that I give a rat's behind whether you live or die, but if you feel you must, be my guest. Please have yourself cremated and scatter your ashes around a tree in a public park somewhere.

Thanks for your help.

Good.

I'm a non-smoker, but if smoker's want to die from lung cancer and other smoking related diseases, let them. As long as I'm not affected from second hand smoke, let smokers die.

Their body, their choice.

"/Doesn't smoke, but thinks anti-smoking laws are the beginning of the end of our freedoms."

I think this sort of mindset is really just the hand of large corporations trying to make you think that, when the reality is, you are giving up your REAL rights minute by minute by not doing anything about government intrusion via spying and things like the so-called PATRIOT Act.

Come back and biatch about not being able to smoke when you've done something about that first.

Burr They are not forcing you to with a gun to stand there and inhale it, are they?

No, but I'll stand pretty much where I please, thanks.

You're the drug addict with the tube full of burning chemicals. You move.

Burr: They are not forcing you to with a gun to stand there and inhale it, are they?

It's called "common courtesy". If you have a filthy habit that affects others in the immediate vicinity, courtesy dictates that you need to keep it at home.

xcoastie: Suck it libs!! haha

Yeah, at least I don't have the blood of 4,000 Americans who have died for nothing in Iraq.

Wow.
Those guys are really stupid.
Even though I've quit smoking I still think its fine to kill yourself outside if people so choose.

It's a big street, if the smoke bothers you, then walk 2 feet that way.

Then again, I'm somewhat of an Albigensian, so being alive is somewhat of a bad habit to me.

Aren't the smoking activists the one sucking it?

What a butt-head!

/Leaving now

So what would be wrong with smoking establishments and non smoking establishments clearly designated with large signs? Then the smokers have a place to congregate and the non smokers have a place to congregate and everyone can choose where to go. The non smokers will not have to be exposed to smoke and the smokers can light up at will.
/compromise apparently a unique concept

Alyna_jf: Theres a difference between smoking and liquor or fatty foods. You smoking in front of me directly affects my health. You chuggin' a 26er of vodka while eating big macs and deep fried donuts doesn't affect my health... unless of course, I vomit from watching you.

While this is true, people getting smashed and eating very fatty foods also has a detrimental effect on society. As a result of fatty foods, more and more people are coming down with diabetes, knee and back problems, etc. Hell, we have reached the point where the current generation has a shorter life expectancy than their parents. This can equate to lost productivity which can drag down the economy as a whole.

I'm a smoker, but I'll respect someone's wishes if they do not want me to smoke around them.

Burr: They are not forcing you to with a gun to stand there and inhale it, are they?

You must not get out much.

I stopped going to bars because I can't stand being in a room with 30+ people puffing their cancer sticks.
I have to take alternate paths through campus to avoid all of the future fry cooks blowing smoke all over the place.
I have to hold my breath when I walk into work every day because of all of the douchebags standing outside, smoking away.

I'm freakishly allergic to cigarette smoke to the point that I vomit if someone blows a lungful in my face. You dickbags can do whatever you want in your own homes, but you've inconvenienced me enough.

Government is the beginning to the end of our freedoms.

altinos: Government is the beginning to the end of our freedoms.

I could not agree with you more. Especially Predient chimp and his goons.

message to all 15 year old boys:

If she smokes, she farks...

When I saw this headline, I thought, "Unconstitutional? What the fark?" I don't support smoking bans, but I believe it is in the power of local governments to enact them.

Then I read the article and realized it was declared unconstitutional because of an arbitrary carve-out for a particular location and it made more sense.

I'd love for every bar and restaurant in the country to go non-smoking. Voluntarily.

Im just afraid that buy taking away the ability of businesses to make their own decisions of how they run their business, your taking away some of our basic freedoms. Maybe it should be like affirmative action, in the sense that it should only apply to businesses that have government funding.

I just feel that it should be up to the business to decide if they want to lose sales to people who don't want to be there because they feel their health is in danger. If they would rather appeal to a group of people who want to kill themselves, let them, hell I don't care if they all die in a smokey bar from cancer, it was THEIR CHOICE to!

Personal Responsibility people! Stop blaming others, if you don't like whats on TV, turn it off! IF you don't want to get cancer from secondhand smoke, leave the area or refuse to give the business any more of your money. IF you want to, make it so restaurants and bars that allow somking have giant flouresecnt orange signs that say "SMOKING ALLOWED" so you don't go there.

Don't let them take away our rights just because you don't like the current situation you are in.

I understand that some people can not get away from certain areas, so make those areas smoke free (which is what they were before the restaurant/bar smoking ban).

/what am I getting myself into..
//dives into the flame

Louisville judge rules citywide smoking ban unconstitutional.

It was struck down because it isn't city-wide. If it were truly citywide it would likely be OK.

/They're doing it wrong.

xero27: I'm freakishly allergic to cigarette smoke to the point that I vomit if someone blows a lungful in my face. You dickbags can do whatever you want in your own homes, but you've inconvenienced me enough.

Being allergic and owning a bar and the government telling you what YOUR customers can do inside YOUR OWN BAR are two different things. If your favorite bar starts letting in trannys are you going to ban trannys because you are affraid your going to hit on one nite?

'We've come too far as a progressive, forward-thinking community to let a legal technicality stand in our way," Abramson said'

Who cares about the constitution, it's just a piece of paper some dead guys signed.

/love the constitution and just wish you terrorist (republicans, 110th congress, and liberty hating americans included) would step off it

Remember people: We have a free market economy, except when it comes to stinky icky cigarettes.

/Thinks no smoking in public buildings is fine.
//Thinks business owners ought to be able to decide if their establishments are smoke free.

AntiNorm: Society depends on automobile transportation. It does not depend on letting smokers blow their shiat in everyone else's face.

I don't smoke, but I've been around a damn lot of smokers. I've never seen a single one that ever blew smoke in someone's face... with the exception of frothing-at-the-mouth anti-smokers who made it their business to walk the 30+ feet from where they were at, loudly faking a sputtering cough, before getting in their face first to proselytize.

I daresay you exaggerate, or were asking for it.

locolobo
So what would be wrong with smoking establishments and non smoking establishments clearly designated with large signs? Then the smokers have a place to congregate and the non smokers have a place to congregate and everyone can choose where to go. The non smokers will not have to be exposed to smoke and the smokers can light up at will.

Well, see, it's like this. There are three basic groups: smokers, non-smokers, and anti-smokers. Now, smokers and non-smokers get along great, and they tend to have lots of fun while doing so, then you have the anti-smokers, who are whiney little biatches that nobody gets along with, and aren't any fun at all. Now, the anti-smokers want to have fun too, but when they hang out together, they find that even another anti-smoker finds them to be whiney little biatches as well. So, the only way they can have fun is to force the smokers and the non-smokers to do things their way. In a nutshell, it's just a bunch of whiney little biatches who can't stand the idea that other people are enjoying something they aren't a part of. And that is why the anti-smokers will never agree to letting the smokers and non-smokers have someplace they can go to have fun where the anti-smoking whiney little biatches won't show up.

Oh, and if I didn't make it clear, I personally find anti-smokers to be whiney little biatches, just to prevent confusion.

Lamune_Baba: I've never seen a single one that ever blew smoke in someone's face...

I've seen these.


Wraithbane: In a nutshell, it's just a bunch of whiney little biatches who can't stand the idea that other people are enjoying something they aren't a part of.

Wrong. Not even close. Anti-smokers don't care either way about people who smoke, they just don't like that smokers tend to be so inconsiderate.

The life cycle of smoking:
1. Begin because you think you're cool
2. Become pariah in public places
3. Clothes, car and house reek
4. Teeth get stained an attractive yellow brown
5. Female voices deepen so you sound like Patty and Selma
6. Spend tens of thousands of dollars and literally burn it away
7. End-Die a horrible death from lung cancer or even worse, slowly suffocate from emphysema
I can see why someone would choose to smoke. If you get cancer, you won't be fat.

Man On Pink Corner 2007-12-22 02:54:01 PM
Burr Guess I should stop driving my car then, or using power that is being created by burning fossil fuels. Hell, maybe I should just die to make your life healthier...

Those things have utility to society. Deliberately setting some chemical-soaked grass on fire and forcing everyone around you to inhale the fumes, not so much.


I see, so if you believe what you do has some sort of utilitatian value then it's ok if it kills me?

hey EINSTEIN.....the taxes that smokers pay for the LEGAL product they consume has utilitarian value as well SEPARATE from their habit ( healthcare for " the children. " ). Your gas taxes on the other hand simply go towards maintaining the roads you use that allow you to destroy then environment and continue to kill people with your fumes as you rock on down the highway.

if you want to make smoking cigarettes illegal then just say so, but you shouldn't be allowed to benefit financially from someone's addiction ( which society does ). In that case, you're no better than a crack dealer.

Self-righteous asshole.

Good luck getting any kind of "constitutional" smoking ban passed in the Carolinas, Virginia, West By-God-Virginia, Kentucky, or Tennessee.

Personally, I love it when I watch state governments set a tax on tobacco, budget for that income, and then complain when smoking slows down and they don't get their expected income.

That's just a wee-bit hypocritical.

/back to your thread now

Weaver95: If you want to ban smoking, then you should go all the way and ban liquor, sugar and fatty foods.

And they would, if studies had shown that beer breath, cheese farts, and twitchy fingers were as potentially cancerous as secondhand smoke.

And no, I don't mind secondhand smoke all that much--but then, I don't have to earn a living serving drinks to people who smoke.

The libertarian in me hates the government telling business what to do.

The selfish jerk in me loves the fact that I can go to a bar and not leave smelling all nasty.

I guess that officially makes me a hypocrite.

/Had to keep a separate "bar coat" in college
//Why is it that bars never seemed to have any air circulation or ventilation?

I love this quote: "We've come too far as a progressive, forward-thinking community to let a legal technicality stand in our way"

Ah, the cry of the modern nanny-state (usually) liberal.

libbynomore2: I see, so if you believe what you do has some sort of utilitatian value then it's ok if it kills me?

hey EINSTEIN.....the taxes that smokers pay for the LEGAL product they consume has utilitarian value as well SEPARATE from their habit ( healthcare for " the children. " ). Your gas taxes on the other hand simply go towards maintaining the roads you use that allow you to destroy then environment and continue to kill people with your fumes as you rock on down the highway.

if you want to make smoking cigarettes illegal then just say so, but you shouldn't be allowed to benefit financially from someone's addiction ( which society does ). In that case, you're no better than a crack dealer.


Nobody has said anything about you smoking in the privacy of your own home (or car, provided you don't litter). If you smoke there, you're not affecting anyone else. It's smoking in public that people are complaining about.

xero27: You dickbags can do whatever you want in your own homes, but you've inconvenienced me enough.


It's too bad there aren't enough non-smokers out there to open their own non-smoking establishments. You'd think that giving business-owners the power to choose how they operate their own business would make the doors wide open for someone to cater specifically to this crowd!

They could make a ton of money! Jesus, with all the noise they make there has got to be one absolutely HUGE market out there to tap in to! It's like printing your own cash!

Nah... fark it. It's easier to just make the government stop people from doing things I don't like.

Freedom at Gunpoint is my favorite kind.

Government shouldn't have the authority to tell businesses if they can allow smoking or not. I have the right to take my money elsewhere. Businesses have the right to dictate if their own buildings are smoke free or not. The only thing I wouldn't mind the government stating is that there must be signs in front of the building stating if it allows smoking or not.

Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal. Smoking is legal.

/But.
//Having sexual relations with animals is not legal in Washington State.