EPTSmoking Ban in NYC - Page 30
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Joementum
787 Posts
| ||
|
iFU.pauline
France1781 Posts
| ||
|
Cyba
Romania221 Posts
On May 25 2011 11:54 v3chr0 wrote: Smoking isn't healthy, I understand that. But laws like these make people think it's reasonable to trade simple freedoms like this in turn for a feeling of security in some fashion. These laws never go away, they get more and more restrictive, it gives police a reason to harass or fine you. It's stupid. Leave it up to the private businesses to sort where people smoke and don't. It's already illegal and unfriendly in many places, there doesn't need to be more restrictions, people who smoke already pay with their health, and money. Since they're talking about something that is only felt by other ppl then themselves people tend to try to do lame stuff of the sort. | ||
|
Cyba
Romania221 Posts
On May 25 2011 11:59 ZeromuS wrote: A law like this has been in place in Ottawa Canada. I don't want to say anything bad of smokers - by all means I believe it is a personal choice and decision that is made with full knowledge of what the effects are. This being said I personally have never liked smoking and have mild asthma so for me when this law came into effect here it became a lot easier to go out to restaurants and parks without having a harder time breathing or coughing. So I think its a good thing but really for smokers its just public buildings If i read that correctly and parks so you can always go somewhere not too far away to smoke. That's how it is in most places, and it's quite reasonable. | ||
|
Spidinko
Slovakia1174 Posts
On May 25 2011 11:54 v3chr0 wrote: Smoking isn't healthy, I understand that. But laws like these make people think it's reasonable to trade simple freedoms like this in turn for a feeling of security in some fashion. These laws never go away, they get more and more restrictive, it gives police a reason to harass or fine you. It's stupid. Leave it up to the private businesses to sort where people smoke and don't. It's already illegal and unfriendly in many places, there doesn't need to be more restrictions, people who smoke already pay with their health, and money. I don't know man. I just don't consider it much of a freedom debate. This law restricts you from annoying/doing harm to others with smoking. If you are a considerate smoker you wouldn't be doing anyway. It's like bringing a fart in a can and spraying it in parks. We have a very different perspective on this I guess but trust me when I tell you I'm exposed to second hand smoking a lot and it pisses me off. You may not realize how much some people hate it. Anyways, laws like these will make sure that fewer people will start smoking. That's a good news for sure. You can't prevent smokers from smoking. But you can prevent people to become smokers (to some extent). | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
| ||
|
StephanLindner60311
10 Posts
| ||
|
tjosan
Sweden120 Posts
On May 25 2011 17:56 WhiteDog wrote: I just don't understand why non smoker should decide if we should or should not smoke. Freedom anyone ? I just don't understand why smoker should decide if we should or should not get cancer. Freedom anyone ? | ||
|
4lko
Poland76 Posts
On May 25 2011 17:04 paulinepain wrote: smoking should only be allowed at home where it annoys nobody, i don't like the smell of cigarettes, wherever i am, in a parc or going to work, or outside in a bar, smoking is bad and should be removed from the market. I had known people that died because of that, I don't see how it is possible to argue on such topic. We're not arguing about the fact that smoking's bad for you. The problem is that banning something just because someone might get hurt by using it is just plain wrong. Let the administrator of the place regulate it on his own behalf. Public spaces (government administrated I mean), banned ? Sure - just provide an isolated space for people to smoke. But bars ? Seriously ? If the owner wants smokers in his place, let him do it. It's not like you have to go in to that specific place if you don't like the smell of cigs. For all I care you should be able to open a place where you let in only asian midgets on coke if you want to. | ||
|
Arnstein
Norway3381 Posts
On May 25 2011 17:56 WhiteDog wrote: I just don't understand why non smoker should decide if we should or should not smoke. Freedom anyone ? Freedom is good, but do you really want to have the freedom to get hooked on a drug that takes a lot of your time and money, and can even kill you? The pleasures you get from tobacco minimal, and they are nothing to what the bad sides are. | ||
|
ChinaRestaurant
Austria324 Posts
On May 25 2011 21:33 Arnstein wrote: Freedom is good, but do you really want to have the freedom to get hooked on a drug that takes a lot of your time and money, and can even kill you? The pleasures you get from tobacco minimal, and they are nothing to what the bad sides are. So according to this logic, no one in NYC should have a private car. Driving a car can potentially kill you and others, and the exhaust fumes are harmful to others, and cars cost a lot of money. With the amount of public transportation available in NYC it shouldnt be too hard for people to live without a car of their own. Less traffic congestion, less smog, etc etc. Smoking bans have been/are quite a big discussion in austria as well the last few years. A few days (or weeks?) ago they actually started enforcing the smoking area seperation law, (if you want to call it that) as in taking away their licences, forcing every bar or similar establishment to have a seperated smoking area. Bar owners lose quite a lot of money from their smoking customers when they cant have a cigarette to go with their beer and decide not to go out for a drink. If the owner of a bar is okay with risking his health working in an environment that will give him more profit, it should be his own decision, just like a nonsmoker can decide for himself not to go to a bar that has no seperated smoker/nonsmoker area. edit: typos as usual | ||
|
Onieh
Netherlands104 Posts
On May 25 2011 21:33 Arnstein wrote: Freedom is good, but do you really want to have the freedom to get hooked on a drug that takes a lot of your time and money, and can even kill you? The pleasures you get from tobacco minimal, and they are nothing to what the bad sides are. Their own time, money and life. I dont smoke but understand why others do. Who the hell are you to tell other people not to smoke. Its their choice. | ||
|
jaydubz
21 Posts
On May 25 2011 21:49 ChinaRestaurant wrote: So according to this logic, no one in NYC should have a private car. Driving a car can potentially kill you and others, and the exhaust fumes are harmful to others, and cars cost a lot of money. With the amount of public transportation available in NYC it shouldnt be too hard for people to live without a car of their own. Less traffic congestion, less smog, etc etc We've already gone over this. The automotive industry and the act of driving is heavily regulated. You can't just drive on sidewalks. It's illegal to drive drunk, reckless, etc. There are also societal benefits to automobiles. | ||
|
ChinaRestaurant
Austria324 Posts
On May 25 2011 21:58 jaydubz wrote: We've already gone over this. The automotive industry and the act of driving is heavily regulated. You can't just drive on sidewalks. It's illegal to drive drunk, reckless, etc. There are also societal benefits to automobiles. Hence why i said private ones, im not talking about cabs or busses etc. I dont suggest taking away your mobility. But be honest, who needs a car of their own in NYC? | ||
|
jaydubz
21 Posts
On May 25 2011 22:02 ChinaRestaurant wrote: Hence why i said private ones, im not talking about cabs or busses etc. I dont suggest taking away your mobility. But be honest, who needs a car of their own in NYC? Do you live in the NYC area? If you did I think you would understand why people need private cars. I would also think you understand the limitations of the NYC public transportation system. But I'm assuming you don't. NYC isn't limited to Manhattan. There are four additional boroughs. Travel between Jersey, Long Island, and Connecticut is frequent. Moving North/South in Brooklyn and Queens is difficult. But this isn't a thread about transportation and NYC. | ||
|
RockIronrod
Australia1369 Posts
Yes, you have the freedom to shit. But do it in the appropriate areas for Christ's sake. I do not want to smell you shit, I don't want you to shit in public around other people, and by the hammer of Thor don't you dare shit around children. | ||
|
brum
Hungary187 Posts
| ||
|
Vul
United States685 Posts
On May 25 2011 22:12 RockIronrod wrote: I treat smoking like I do shitting. Yes, you have the freedom to shit. But do it in the appropriate areas for Christ's sake. I do not want to smell you shit, I don't want you to shit in public around other people, and by the hammer of Thor don't you dare shit around children. I think if it were really being treated this way they would create smoking areas in parks instead of just banning it. If people are shitting in the park, you don't ban shitting, you build a bathroom. | ||
|
hotbreakfest
United States145 Posts
| ||
|
RockIronrod
Australia1369 Posts
On May 25 2011 22:20 Vul wrote: I think if it were really being treated this way they would create smoking areas in parks instead of just banning it. If people are shitting in the park, you don't ban shitting, you build a bathroom. If people are shitting in the park you arrest those people and enforce the laws of not fucking shitting in the park. | ||
| ||
