Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NYPost)   It's now illegal to smoke in New York City. In other news, it took three reporters to write this article   ( divider line
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

162 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Mar 2003 at 11:51 PM (14 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

370 Comments     (+0 »)

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Newest | Show all

2003-03-30 04:45:33 PM  
Was at a bar until about 4 last night. Nobody gave a damn about it. They already said they were not going to write fines until may.

I have a feeling they will crack down at first, make a few examples, but then just look the other way.
2003-03-30 04:46:13 PM  
But you can tie up traffic by laying down in the street.
2003-03-30 04:57:54 PM  
I love smokeless bars. Nothing is better than getting home at night and not smelling like you just spent the last four or five hours in a chimney.
2003-03-30 05:04:16 PM  
Good! Maybe it will encourage more people to quit. I quit 15 years ago. The more taxes and more restrictions that are put on cigarettes and smokers, the more people that will quit and the more lives that will be saved. Even if it just saves one life, it will be worth it. Anyone who thinks that their right to expel toxic gasses from their pie-hole to the detriment of the health of innocent bystanders can go fark themselves.

The tobacco companies are essentially murderers. They have lied to people about the dangers of smoking and have caused the deaths of millions of people. How they can be allowed to operate in this country is beyond my comprehension.
2003-03-30 05:21:27 PM  
"Oh, but there's no PROOF that smoking causes cancer... It's all coincidental".

I actually heard this from someone before.
2003-03-30 05:37:31 PM  
03-30-03 05:04:16 PM DaveGrossman

The government should not be telling you whether you can or cannot smoke, and should not use "incentives" to do that, either. The government should be there to tell you that smoking is bad for you, but if you want to kill yourself, that's ok. The logical extension of this of course is to legalize drugs, but that's a whole different thread.

Also, government should not be controlling of private property this way. If bars want to allow or disallow smokers, it should be their choice, and let the people "vote with their feet", as it were.
2003-03-30 05:39:09 PM  
I wouldn't have a problem with this law except for the lack of choice. How about and either or system? Then you'd have smoking bars and non-smoking bars and, I wouldn't have to listen to people whine about smelling smoke at a bar.
2003-03-30 05:41:02 PM  
If you don't want this to happen don't sit back and assume it won't be enforced. Here in California its actually been effective. 98% of bars in my area (Long Beach) are smoke free, even dives. You have to work to find the one bar that has all its exceptions in order so that smoking is allowed.

A liquor license is a powerful thing to hold over a bartenders head. The 30-day grace period is your last chance New Yorkers. Stop having silly die-ins and protest something you have a chance to stop.

Oh, I don't smoke. Never have, never will.
2003-03-30 05:57:50 PM  
Part of the job of the government is to protect its citizens. The FDA is supposed to protect us from products that are dangerous or deadly. Somehow, tobacco is not regulated by the FDA even though it is clear that nicotine is a drug. It probably has to do with the high-priced tobacco lawyers and lobby that keeps the government from being able to shut them down.

Every single club or bar that I've gone to in California is accomadating to smokers. They are allowed to go outside to smoke if they want. They are not banned from the establishment. Why should a non-smoker be essentially banned from a club that allows smoking just because they are concerned from their health? What about the rights of non-smokers to not be subjected to cigarette smoke? I think that trumps the smoker's right to smoke where they want.

The statistics about how many people are killed by cigarettes are mind-boggling. This war in Iraq is insignificant when compared to the damage that tobacco has done to the people on this planet. Maybe we should go to war with the tobacco companies.
2003-03-30 06:22:19 PM  
Have you seen the statistics for people killed in car accidents? How about accidental drowning? I know I find thinking for myself to hard and am all to glad government is there to tell me what to do.
2003-03-30 06:32:42 PM  
When used as designed, a car does not kill. When a boat is operated as designed and care is taken to avoid bad weather, the passengers will not drown.

When used as designed, cigarettes kill. That's the difference. That's an important difference.

Analogies are a powerful tool. However, they are more often used as a tool to make an invalid argument seem valid. You can't compare cigarettes to cars. You can probably make more valid comparisons to alcohol or marijuana though. The natural argument is then do we go after alcohol? Marijuana is already illegal even though it seems to be less dangerous than both legal products tobacco and alcohol.

The difference between cigarettes and alcohol though, is that when used in moderation, alcohol can be beneficial to your health. Cigarettes are not. Anything can be abused to the extent that it becomes dangerous. The nature of cigarette smoking and its addictive properties make it easily abused ( er, used as directed ) and hard to give up.
2003-03-30 06:41:08 PM  
When used properly cigarettes don't necessarily kill. You hear all the time about how some 100 year old says their secret to longevity is 3 cigarettes and a shot of whiskey a day. Cigarettes increase you chances of catching various illnesses they don't give them to you.
2003-03-30 06:41:17 PM  
DaveGrossman: I thank God that there is a kind and benevolent government bureaucracy to force me to be a better person. Personal improvement and growth through force.
2003-03-30 06:58:51 PM  
[image from too old to be available]
2003-03-30 07:03:32 PM  
photoshop THAT.
2003-03-30 07:27:07 PM  
Since when has going to a bar intended to be a healthy thing? Over comsumption of alcohol, unprotected sex with whoever you pick up. Smoking is only part of the total package.
2003-03-30 07:52:28 PM  
I live in Florida, where the smoking ban was recently voted into effect. I'm torn on the whole issue. On one hand I think it's way cool not to have to put up with second hand smoke. On the other hand, I have friends and family that smoke, and they are having a hard time with it. Sometimes I end up sitting alone at a bar because everyone's gone outside to smoke. Then on the third hand, I think what's next? Alcohol? Perfume? Loud noises? Polyester?
2003-03-30 08:23:19 PM  
F-14Tomcat: Touche. :)
2003-03-30 08:56:43 PM  
Thats big of you Grossman, I'm impressed.

/Flame snuffer.
2003-03-30 09:02:43 PM  
Thanks. I'm not trying to start a flame war. Just express my opinion. Others are welcome to theirs. If the other person's opinion doesn't resort to invalid arguments or ad hominum attacks, I'm willing to accept it. An argument made with sarcasm or irony gets extra points. :)

I used to smoke. My brother has smoked for over 10 years. He's tried to quit many times and has spent a lot of money on nicotine gum and stuff. He'll probably die from cigarette smoking. The company that makes the cigarettes he smokes will only be concerned about finding another smoker to replace him. I hate the tobacco industry. I'll leave it at that.
2003-03-30 10:08:19 PM  
Its really a tough one to call. While I understand its not fair for workers to put up with the smoke, it is a bar, and nobody forces them to work in it. They knew going in it would be smokey. Same goes for patrons. Likewise if it is something that so many people wanted, how come there were no non smoking bars before the ban?

My biggest issue with this though is its not NYC. If you asked me a year ago I would have bet anything NYC would be one of the last places to adopt a law like this. Yes, its a very liberal town, but its also a place where the residents expect certain things from living there, like alot of smokers. Things like the dings in your car, the high costs of anything, and the occasional mugging, while not desirable, will not cause anyone to think twice. Its NY.

I say we bring dinkins back for a few weeks, he would get this place back to what it is supposed to be in no time.
2003-03-30 10:11:30 PM  

Dave while I see your point, its unfair to put the blame on the tobacco companys. Even 10 years ago everyone knew smoking was bad for you. Common sense without even involving science. You ever see smokers run marathons?

Maybe if the extra money that was taken from smokers went into real research for treatment in breaking the addiction, or cancer research, alot of this would be a moot point. Instead it gets pissed away on stupid tv adds, and filling budget holes.
2003-03-30 10:38:37 PM  
Cigarette smoking is so ingrained in society that people are willing to, at least initially, ignore the dangers when trying smoking for the first time. Everybody knows what peer pressure is like in high school. The need to fit in often overrides common sense and common knowledge. The tobacco companies take advantage of this and sell cigarettes using image over anything else.

The tobacco industry lied to the public for decades and manipulated cigarettes to make them more addictive. It wasn't even that long ago that the heads of the major tobacco companies testified that they did not believe that nicotine was addictive. The tobacco industry has committed enough crimes against humanity that they should be fined and sued out of existance. Unfortunately, a judge isn't allowed to award a judgement that would put a company out of business. These companies are just plain evil. I would be ashamed to be part of same species as these tobacco executives if I considered them human.
2003-03-30 11:02:09 PM  
Just noticed you were from the bay area. I hardly think you are in a position and unbiased enough to make an accurate judgement on what is in the best interests of new yorkers.

East coast baby
2003-03-30 11:14:40 PM  
2003-03-30 11:32:46 PM  
LineNoise: You ever see smokers run marathons?

You do see Europeans ride the Tour de France and smoke. They're competitive too.

/Not advocating it, just trivia.
2003-03-30 11:37:01 PM  
I've only been in California for 5 years. Before that I was in Chicago where smoking is still allowed. I also used to smoke. So, I think I have enough experience to be able to state my opinion with some basis in fact.

In my opinion, it is infinitely better to be able to go to a club without having to inhale someone else's stale second-hand smoke or have a new expensive shirt burned by a careless smoker or go home smelling like an ashtray.

If I want to go out to dinner or to a club, I should be able to do so without being subjected to potentially cancer-causing second-hand smoke. My right to not be subjected to this smoke should trump any smoker's rights to, er, pollute the environment.

By banning smoking in restaurants and clubs, more people are likely to quit, fewer people are likely to start smoking, people are less likely to get lung cancer or emphezema due to exposure to second-hand smoke. So a smoker has to go outside to satisfy their habit. Big deal. The Marlboro man wasn't afraid to smoke outside. Er, well, until he died of lung cancer from smoking.
2003-03-30 11:54:38 PM  
speakign of unprotected sex

am i the only one who's notice the lower frequency of boobies links?
2003-03-30 11:56:58 PM  
All I can say is GOOD, and yes it did take 3 people to write that small little article :|
2003-03-30 11:57:00 PM  
God, easterners are pro-choice about abortion only. Everything else is subject to massive regulations.

Get me outta here.

And DaveGrossman...most people overlook the fact that the people who spend money at clubs and bars and enjoy them the most aren't the same Mormons who want to ban everything...if you're worried about how your Brooks Bros. shirt that was just pressed is going to smell after a night at the bar, you should just stay home and drink your Chablis anyway.
2003-03-30 11:57:15 PM  
I recently went to L.A. and the bars there were smoke-free. I love to smoke when I drink beer, but at the bars in L.A. I didn't have the urge to smoke as badly because there weren't as many "reminders" of smoking. If I lived there I'd quit immediately.

However, living on the East coast, it's EVERYWHERE. I hope the NYC ban is well-enforced, and the Tobacco companies suffer.

Smoking stinks, and I hate it. Now..... where's my lighter?
2003-03-30 11:58:30 PM  
[Interesting] It's now illegal to smoke in New York City. In other news, it took three reporters to write this article

Actually it took four.

"By HASANI GITTENS, TATIANA DELIGIANNAKIS and ERIN CALABRESE...Additional reporting by Daniel Schiff"

Now that's journalism, I guess.
2003-03-30 11:58:36 PM  
the strokes surrender.
/because no one had said it.
2003-03-30 11:58:44 PM  
I smoke, drink, and run marathons, but not in New York. Sub 3's dawg.
2003-03-30 11:59:00 PM  

I think boobies should be posted two at a time

2003-03-30 11:59:17 PM  
"Why should a non-smoker be essentially banned from a club that allows smoking just because they are concerned from their health?"

Becuse the club owner wants to allow smokers and could not care less about people concerned with their health.
Rat [TotalFark]
2003-03-30 11:59:57 PM  
I quit when my wife told me I could get a new Harley if I'd just put 'em down

That half a pack I had when she made that announcement is still laying on the shelf in my garage, next to where I keep my tools/oil/spare parts

I can't stand the smell anymore, it makes me gag, and I apologize to all that I may have offended over my 25 year habit

2003-03-31 12:00:20 AM  
corection: 4 reporters.

"Additional reporting by Daniel Schiff"
2003-03-31 12:00:36 AM  
Maine has been smoke-free in resturants for some time now, but when it all started, there were places to enact a "fee" so that they could be a private club. The state still fined them and forced many places not willing to go smoke-free to close their doors. Now, what I wonder is, if a place were to say that you could not enter unless you smoked it would be discrimination, but they have the right to say that You CANNOT smoke once inside. It just dosn't seem fair.
Yes, I smoke, but I do so respectfully (ie, I don't blow smoke, or smoke around kids, elderly)
2003-03-31 12:01:07 AM  

I have no idea what banning smoking in bars and restaurants has to do with your statement. If you want to discuss this, please have the courtesy to put some thought into your argument. If you can't do that, I doubt you'll ever make it as a lawyer.
2003-03-31 12:02:20 AM  
"I just quit smoking" = " I just found God," as far as annoyance level goes.
2003-03-31 12:03:41 AM  
03-31-03 12:02:20 AM Millay
"I just quit smoking" = " I just found God," as far as annoyance level goes.

Yes, with the exception that quitting smoking is good for you.
2003-03-31 12:03:56 AM  
It's been this way in california for a few years and it's not that big of a deal. When the law was first put in place people did not care however as the years went on everyone got used to the idea of not smoking indoors.
2003-03-31 12:04:08 AM  
Freedom surrenders again.
Kat [TotalFark]
2003-03-31 12:05:01 AM  
I don't care for cigarette smokers, it's not a pretty habit. I do care about banning things...makes me worry that more things will get banned until I have to wear state mandated outfits that aren't even becoming...
2003-03-31 12:05:29 AM  

Smoking is legal, per Feds and State govt's. If you don't like it, vote in reps that will ABOLISH it. And not live off my tax money paid by buying smokes. I would love to see it abolished, so I can see how good they can manage their budgets without tax dollars.

Yep if you don't want to smell like secondhand smoke, I understand. But until smoking has been outlawed, I'll smoke 'em cause I have 'em.

2003-03-31 12:05:58 AM  
The hell with property rights.
2003-03-31 12:08:06 AM  

With additional reporting by a fourth reporter no less.

This must be earth shattering to the NY readership.
Rat [TotalFark]
2003-03-31 12:08:50 AM  
Kat, you could make
these look good:

[image from too old to be available]
2003-03-31 12:08:56 AM  

Okaaaaay. I think I'll just forfeit this argument. I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.
Displayed 50 of 370 comments

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Newest | Show all

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.