'I have never smoked, yet I have paid the price'

Karen Lindquist tends to limit her political involvement to voting, but recently two things have changed: The Legislature began to debate a smoking ban in restaurants and, in December, she was diagnosed with ... Full Story
First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Andy

Saint Paul, MN

#1 Mar 30, 2006
Ok. This is going to be a long and heated thread. But, lets set one thing clear before all the arguments start. The idea about all these laws is NOT to keep people from smoking. Its to keep people who dont smoke from having to breath in the leftover toxins in cigarette smoke. So lets not waste any time with "your telling us we cant smoke" and "I have a right to smoke if I want". Its NOT about that. Its about the fact that even though you may have a right to smoke, you DONT have the right to make someone else smoke. And please, no stupid arguments about things like "Well, my car gives off fumes, so its ok for me to do the same in a restaurant". Its not the same, not at all.
Patty in Derry

AOL

#2 Apr 1, 2006
Actually, I think it should be a matter of choice for the proprietor. If they indicate that the facility caters to smokers, then the public has the choice whether to eat/drink there or go elsewhere that is "smoke-free". But to force all restaurants/bars to be smoke-free is bureaucratic and takes yet another right away from the small business man.
Andy

Saint Paul, MN

#3 Apr 1, 2006
Well, the law is based on employee health moreso than the customers. In other words, businesses are being told that they have to provide a safe environment for their employees to work in. So, like all other industries, bars and restaurants have to take their employees health into consideration. The catch to this is that as an employee, you cannot choose to "exempt" your employer from protecting you and accept the risk on your own. So the state will step in and say no one can be at risk from certain elements, even if they are willing to be.
As far as business is concerned, if all bars and restaurants go smoke free, then no one will have the advantage, it will be a level playing field.
Patty in Derry

AOL

#4 Apr 1, 2006
hmmm Andy you make a very good point.But as far as a level playing field, I must disagree. Private clubs are exempt from this law...i.e. VFW, Elks etc. And you are right in that every employee has the right to work in a smoke free environment. Just as I as a smoker have the right to take my business where they cater to my needs. But in a state that has no helmet law, and that's a good thing, why dictate. I know I am fighting a losing battle here, but if I was so vehemently opposed to something, I wouldn't work there. Meaning, if I hated smoking, I wouldnt work in a place that allowed it. My biggest objection is NH is well-known for its hands off government, which, frankly, the rest of the country could learn from. Now we are bending. That makes me sad
nonsmoker

Tarrytown, NY

#5 Apr 2, 2006
I agree with pattyinderry. When I first heard my home state was considering this I almost fell off my chair. This is awful. New Hampshire is known for its hands off government and it needs to stay that way. The smoking policy should be optional for business owners and not shoved down the throats of everyone. It works in Portsmouth where a lot of the businesses are voluntarily putting a smoking ban in effect.
Patty in Derry

AOL

#6 Apr 2, 2006
Thanks nonsmoker, I appreciate your candor. You got my point exactly. Its all about choice. Wear a seatbelt, helmet, give birth, smoke, take drugs, whatever!!! There is a business that caters to everyone and everything. The beauty of this state is that government doesn't dictate. And as one of the original thirteen colonies, I think we have managed to exemplify what our bill of rights truly stands for. Personally, I think anyone who drives a motorcycle and doesn't wear a helmet is nuts. Buts that is THEIR choice. I choose to wear a seat belt. But please dont shove that law down my throat. I also choose to smoke. I work, I pay taxes, and I vote. Stop trying to regulate where and when I can indulge that.
Andy

Saint Paul, MN

#7 Apr 2, 2006
The smoke policy cannot be optional, because its not about customers, its about employees. As an employer, you cannot allow a hazardous condition to exist one it has been identified. Now that there has been so much disscusion about the health issiue surrounding smoking, every business will have to address it. Eventually, there will be no more smoking in public places, anywhere. As litigation progresses, all businesses and municipalities will follow suit to avoid being held responsible. Its not even a question of whether it will happen, just when.
Andy

Saint Paul, MN

#8 Apr 2, 2006
One thing about private clubs. Only clubs that are actually "private" we be exempt. Any bar or club that you can walk into off the street without being a member will not qualify as private. So places like the VFW and the Elks will either have to enforce the member guidlines, or adhere to public policy. So, they will not have the advantage over your local vendors.
Bob from Tyngsboro

Saint Paul, MN

#9 Apr 16, 2006
Patty in Derry wrote:
Thanks nonsmoker, I appreciate your candor. You got my point exactly. Its all about choice. Wear a seatbelt, helmet, give birth, smoke, take drugs, whatever!!! There is a business that caters to everyone and everything. The beauty of this state is that government doesn't dictate. And as one of the original thirteen colonies, I think we have managed to exemplify what our bill of rights truly stands for. Personally, I think anyone who drives a motorcycle and doesn't wear a helmet is nuts. Buts that is THEIR choice. I choose to wear a seat belt. But please dont shove that law down my throat. I also choose to smoke. I work, I pay taxes, and I vote. Stop trying to regulate where and when I can indulge that.
Patty, you may have chosen to smoke, but you dont have the right to make that decision for some one else. If you can come up with a way to smoke without poisoning the person next to you, go right ahead. But until you do, my choice is NOT to have those chemicals in my system. So keep your selfish habit, but do it at home. Your comparison to helmets and seatbelts is illogical. If I chose not to wear a seatbelt, it dosent hurt YOU. If I chose not to wear a helmet, YOU dont suffer a head injury. Do you get the difference yet? If my hobby of choice was to target practice in my backyard, people in my area would have a right to complain because I would be putting them in danger, and I would have to stop, for the safety of others. I would not have the right to make that choice. Got it yet? You dont have the right to hurt others with your drug addiction. It may have taken society a while to come to that realization, but now that it has, you can kiss your stupid and inconsiderate habit of smoking around others good bye. Deal with it.
Patty in Derry

AOL

#10 Apr 17, 2006
Wow, Bob, now that was a tad rancorous. You are right, in that no one has the right to inflict their "bad" habits on others. My belief is and remains to be it should be a matter of choice to the proprietors. And as far as my "illogical" argument regarding the use of seat belts and helmets. Actually, society DOES pay in the event of an accident, in the form of higher insurance premiums, and God forbid, that person should be incapicated for their lifetime, we all pay for it. Personally, your approach scares me. Diplomacy goes a long way dude. One can be eloquent and still deliver the message.
Retired2005

Berkeley, CA

#11 Apr 17, 2006
I have a simple philosophy regarding "rights"... yours stops where mine starts, and for those that insist on shoving their rights down my throat, I shove back... and hard.
The same concept can be applied to any legislation designated "for the public good."
Concerned American

AOL

#12 Apr 19, 2006
Okay...I am going to out on a limb here....does anyone want to form a FOR SMOKERS ONLY Club? Only folks who smoke or know smokers need apply. We are not a bad group, we accept everyone. The only drawback is we smoke. Most of us are pretty funny, articulate, and we tend to hide our habit. The ironic thing is, the smokers head out back to indulge and the rest of the party seems to follow. Its cool tho, cuz we know we're bad. Amd our bad habit makes other feel superior, but, the bottom line is, the best conversations start with smokers. Sorry
Andy

Saint Paul, MN

#13 Apr 20, 2006
Does anyone remember why this thread was started? It was becauseof an article about Karen Lindquist of Hudson who is actualy going to die because of second hand smoke. But, I guess its worth it if it means selfish people can continue to indulge in their drug addiction. I mean hey, tough luck, right guys ? We wouldnt want to infringe on anyones rights. So we lose a coulple of moms and wives, a couple of dads and sons who dont even smoke themselves. Its worth it, so smokers can be comfortable and free.
Weapon ofMass Disturbance

Taunton, MA

#14 Apr 20, 2006
Nothing adds to the enjoyment of wafting the acrid stench of low class drug addiction into the air more than the knowledge that someone else is suffering from its effects.

http://weaponofmassdisturbance.blogspot.com/
Bob

United States

#15 Apr 25, 2006
Patty in Derry wrote:
Actually, I think it should be a matter of choice for the proprietor. If they indicate that the facility caters to smokers, then the public has the choice whether to eat/drink there or go elsewhere that is "smoke-free". But to force all restaurants/bars to be smoke-free is bureaucratic and takes yet another right away from the small business man.
At one point many years ago, owners would also discriminate against Afro-Americans. With wisdom, this has become a thing of the past. Owners were taught by this not to discriminate on the grounds of race, religion or disabilities. It's called civil rights.
Sean

Philadelphia, PA

#16 Apr 26, 2006
Patty in Derry wrote:
Actually, I think it should be a matter of choice for the proprietor. If they indicate that the facility caters to smokers, then the public has the choice whether to eat/drink there or go elsewhere that is "smoke-free". But to force all restaurants/bars to be smoke-free is bureaucratic and takes yet another right away from the small business man.
I believe this would be called Discrimination. An owner does not have the right to determine who can enter a public building.
Andy

Saint Paul, MN

#17 Apr 26, 2006
Sean wrote:
<quoted text>

I believe this would be called Discrimination. An owner does not have the right to determine who can enter a public building.
Well, they did not mean that certain people CANT enter, they are just saying that people would be smoking inside, and non smokers would be aware of this.
What the owner of the building would NOT hace the right to do would be to provide a hazardous place for his employees to work. Dont forget, this isnt about customers complaining, its about workers being exposed to second hand smoke. Its not about customer rights or owner/employer rights, its about the health of the employees. And, if the state fails to protect employees within its boundaries, they will leave themselves open to legal action. Try to stay on track with this issue. Employee rights, not customers or owners.
LIVE FREE OR DIE

Lawrenceville, GA

#19 May 22, 2006
I want to personally thank Senator Clegg and the twelve Senators who said no, to the statewide ban on smoking. I believe that a no vote, was a vote for freedom and a vote that should tell business owners to do what they think, is the right decision for their clientele. Let's not forget to thank our Local Reps ( Representative Sharon Carson, Dan Dumaine, Jim Headd, Karen Hutchinson, Bob Intone, Betsy McKinney, Sherm Packard) who voted to protect our freedoms, that we enjoy, in beautiful New Hampshire.
As a retired US Marine, disabled, Desert Storm Veteran. who has been in many countries with limited freedoms or in some case's none. I've learned to appreciate the freedoms that we have in our country and worship the ground, that I walk on, as a American, just like yourself.
All Senators should be commended for voting on what their beliefs are. That is what makes New Hampshire, the Live Free or Die State, that many are so proud of. It's great that we can agree, to disagree and still have great respect for each other.
I as a new nonsmoker, am smart enough to walk away from a business that has smoking and at the same time respect that business owners decision. After all smokers have rights too. I know, that if a restaurant has smoking, than I will go to another one, if I so choose. It's a beautiful life, when we can choose and not have big government doing it for us.
Keep in mind, that yesterday; eggs were bad for you, today there good, thank GOD we do not ban everything that doctors say are bad for you or will kill you.
I respect all the Senators for standing up for what they believe in. Freedom will prevail! "LIVE FREE OR DIE."
Thank You,
AL Baldasaro
Gloating

Windham, NH

#21 Apr 22, 2010
LIVE FREE OR DIE wrote:
I want to personally thank Senator Clegg and the twelve Senators who said no, to the statewide ban on smoking. I believe that a no vote, was a vote for freedom and a vote that should tell business owners to do what they think, is the right decision for their clientele. Let's not forget to thank our Local Reps ( Representative Sharon Carson, Dan Dumaine, Jim Headd, Karen Hutchinson, Bob Intone, Betsy McKinney, Sherm Packard) who voted to protect our freedoms, that we enjoy, in beautiful New Hampshire.
As a retired US Marine, disabled, Desert Storm Veteran. who has been in many countries with limited freedoms or in some case's none. I've learned to appreciate the freedoms that we have in our country and worship the ground, that I walk on, as a American, just like yourself.
All Senators should be commended for voting on what their beliefs are. That is what makes New Hampshire, the Live Free or Die State, that many are so proud of. It's great that we can agree, to disagree and still have great respect for each other.
I as a new nonsmoker, am smart enough to walk away from a business that has smoking and at the same time respect that business owners decision. After all smokers have rights too. I know, that if a restaurant has smoking, than I will go to another one, if I so choose. It's a beautiful life, when we can choose and not have big government doing it for us.
Keep in mind, that yesterday; eggs were bad for you, today there good, thank GOD we do not ban everything that doctors say are bad for you or will kill you.
I respect all the Senators for standing up for what they believe in. Freedom will prevail! "LIVE FREE OR DIE."
Thank You,
AL Baldasaro
Hey Al guess what..... Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha.
Plain Talk

United States

#22 Apr 22, 2010
Gloating wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey Al guess what..... Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha.
I know how you feel. After years of the same old crap, I get to go out to eat without having it ruined by someone who not only is addicted to drugs, but is proud of it as well.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Londonderry Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06) 4 hr AN NFL FAN 120,750
Loan needed urgently (May '14) 8 hr max 0824263852 40
Nashua considering bus runs to Lowell commuter ... Jan 26 reality is a crutch 1
Review: Chris Nacos Auto Sales (Jul '11) Jan 26 Dawn Hayward 6
msjs and zepose great price Jan 24 greeny 3
Woman Sues Over Having To Buy 2 Plane Seats (Feb '06) Dec '14 Angry White Unite... 312
List of open shelters, warming centers in New H... Nov '14 The Insider 1

Winter Storm Warning for Rockingham County was issued at January 29 at 9:47PM EST

Londonderry News Video

Londonderry Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Londonderry People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 9:10 pm PST