We'll soon clear air with smoking ban

[mrscsi]

I see monkey nuts is still on the warpath.

It really is quite entertaining, to listen to the anti-smoking Nazis talk about how they have rights, but nobody else seems to.

But while it's entertaining, it's also disturbing, because these people absolutely 100% believe that.

To all the apologetic smoker's who say that the rest of us are not being courteous, go dig up Neville Chamberlain, ask him if he had to do it over again, would he had appeased Hitler in 1939.

We have been courteous, and we have appeased, for 30 years we have done this, have antismoking Nazis stopped for one moment at parity? Absolutely not.

They don't want parity, they want to reach 100% when they do not represent 100% of the population.

I'm all about parity, I'm all about free market and letting business owners decide who to cater to. If that means a 80/20 split non-smoking to smoking so be it.

If that means a 90/10 split I'm cool with that too. What's so terrible with that?

They're afraid that they won't have any place to go. Do you know why they're afraid? Because in the past they have not patronized businesses enough to warrant the business owner for going 100% smoke-free.

And they're doing it again with over 200 bars and restaurants closing in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area distanced smoking ban has been enacted.

As a group smokers tend to patronize establishments that cater to our wants. The antismoking fascists, and alas most rabid non-smokers do not. Even if an establishment of 100% smoke-free by force of law they don't patronize and support that business.

That's the bottom line here folks. It's not about smokers rights or non-smokers rights, neither of which exist. It is about economics.

It is about property owners rights, and property owners having the right to choose whether or not they make a profit.

Just the way it is, all the rest is just a smokescreen pun intended.

Mr. SCSI ryomag.com

[Rusty Blade]

>To all the apologetic smoker's who say that the rest of us are not being courteous, go dig up Neville Chamberlain, ask him if he had to do it over again, would he had appeased Hitler in 1939.<

What does Neville Chamberlain, Hitler and 1939 have to do with the smoking bans of today?
Hopefully you are not using that old line of "well,Hilter didn't smoke so all you non-smokers are Nazi's".
That's like telling your kid it's okay to do coke and drink because the president of the United States does / did.
He doesn't smoke, does he? The President I mean.

[Sheri]

Rusty Blade wrote:

>To all the apologetic smoker's who say that the rest of us are not being courteous, go dig up Neville Chamberlain, ask him if he had to do it over again, would he had appeased Hitler in 1939.<
What does Neville Chamberlain, Hitler and 1939 have to do with the smoking bans of today?
Hopefully you are not using that old line of "well,Hilter didn't smoke so all you non-smokers are Nazi's".
That's like telling your kid it's okay to do coke and drink because the president of the United States does / did.
He doesn't smoke, does he? The President I mean.

The First Lady smokes as did many of our Presidents. I know that Kennedy did, Ford was a pipe smoker; Regan smoked in his younger days; Bush hit the cocaine pipe; Obama does/did; etc. But, that is beside the point about Hitler's smoking bans. We study history for a reason: to learn from it and not repeat the same damn mistakes over and over. Hitler used smoking bans to gain control over people's behavior early in his reign of terror, just as the current Health Nazis are using them to gain control over what we smoke, drink, eat, how we exercise, etc. Some of us would rather stop them now before they go the full route, but if you'd rather have your personal life dictated, you can go right ahead and cheer smoking bans. Others of us are not going to let that happen.

[Rusty Blade]

Well, I would go along with your history point but Hitler's policies did eventually fail because of the black-market his bans created. While he thought he had the health of his people in mind he didn't count on them wanting to do what they want to do and doing it anyways. Also, since you are a history buff, you know there is a bit of a difference between Hitlers total control over government and death squads and some committee that are a bunch of health nuts? I think it would relate more to McCarthyism here in the U.S. than Hitler. But, I don't smoke so what do I know?

[Sheri]

Rusty Blade wrote:

Well, I would go along with your history point but Hitler's policies did eventually fail because of the black-market his bans created. While he thought he had the health of his people in mind he didn't count on them wanting to do what they want to do and doing it anyways. Also, since you are a history buff, you know there is a bit of a difference between Hitlers total control over government and death squads and some committee that are a bunch of health nuts? I think it would relate more to McCarthyism here in the U.S. than Hitler. But, I don't smoke so what do I know?

McCarthyism is a very good analogy for the denormalization techniques of the anti smokers. As for Hitler though, he did not start with a bang. He started with a whimper, and smoking bans "for the good of the people and of course for the children" were one facet of his campaign to become the "father" of all Germans. He managed to convince the people that he was there, looking after them, and then he SPRUNG. You might want to view two videos to see the similarities of the youth campaign both in Nazi Germany and in the US today.
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
http://www.youtube.com/watch...

[Sheri]

I just watched this video about McCarthyism and thought how very similar it was to the modern version http://www.youtube.com/watch...
where anyone who questions the anti-smoking campaign must be a stooge for big tobacco. Today many scientists who dispute ASH's claims are being silenced. Here is an article explaining that unfortunate modern witch hunt. his commentary accompanies two articles submitted to Epidemiologic Perspectives & Innovations in response to a call for papers about threats to epidemiology or epidemiologists from organized political interests. Contrary to our expectations, we received no submissions that described threats from industry or government; all were about threats from anti-tobacco activists. The two we published, by James E. Enstrom and Michael Siegel, both deal with the issue of environmental tobacco smoke. This commentary adds a third story of attacks on legitimate science by anti-tobacco activists, the author's own experience. These stories suggest a willingness of influential anti-tobacco activists, including academics, to hurt legitimate scientists and turn epidemiology into junk science in order to further their agendas. The willingness of epidemiologists to embrace such anti-scientific influences bodes ill for the field's reputation as a legitimate science. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerende...
and a defense by Enstrom who was attacked and left for slaughter by these same creeps..http://www.tobacco.org /news/254415.html

[fluteman greg]

Real Free America wrote:

<quoted text>
Here we have a nickel getting on a dollar. You need to grow up fruity.
Guys like you is what pisssed off the world and started the bans.
This is your old buddy here....I do not want to hear your crap about being the only guy in America that respects the public.

Can't handle an honest answer huh? If someone doesn't like a particular smoking policy, then speak with the person who set the policy. DUH!!! ROFLMAO@U!

[smokebychoice]

While I understand the motivation behind the supporters of the smoking-ban, I can not and will not bend my stance on the fact that it is wrong. When I have been approached by various people about this ban, they complain about bars mostly. Over 65% of the bar patrons in my town are and have been smokers for some time. What is to prevent the people who can't tolerate second-hand smoke from buying a six pack, and enjoying it in the comfort of their smoke free home. They chose to go a bar they knew would be frequented by smokers. They chose to put themselves in that enviroment. Its a choice, is all I'm saying, there are enough businesses that practice non-smoking for people to not have to put up with it. So please leave the few remaining havens that smokers have alone, and go elsewhere

[azmac]

Looks like a lot of the states are losing money big time.Taxing smokers are not going to make up for their bad judgments.Smoking bans are not helping either. They cause loss of business and jobs.
http://www.cbpp.org/1-15-08sfp.htm
see how much your state has loss.Guess who will help make up the lost money.YOU DO.

[Canserman]

Not only dose someking make you look cool, and get you laid, but it is also healthy! To ban it is just plain nuts. Why whould any body be behind this loney Idea. I'll tell you who. People who are stupid that's who. People who whant to make choices for you. poeople who whant slowly take away YOUR RIGHT TO SMOKE!
I'm not gunna let my kid get rasied in a smoke less envoerment. thats why I MAKE him smoke six pacts a day. Oh and before you start in with your bullcarp about "canser, and rotting teeth, sceand hand aids." Let me tell you something. ITS ALL A MYTH!! Yes all of it. Just like global warming or world war 2. I thought Pennsylvania was smater than this, but it aperaers I mistaken.

[Sheri]

Canserman wrote:

Not only dose someking make you look cool, and get you laid, but it is also healthy! To ban it is just plain nuts. Why whould any body be behind this loney Idea. I'll tell you who. People who are stupid that's who. People who whant to make choices for you. poeople who whant slowly take away YOUR RIGHT TO SMOKE!
I'm not gunna let my kid get rasied in a smoke less envoerment. thats why I MAKE him smoke six pacts a day. Oh and before you start in with your bullcarp about "canser, and rotting teeth, sceand hand aids." Let me tell you something. ITS ALL A MYTH!! Yes all of it. Just like global warming or world war 2. I thought Pennsylvania was smater than this, but it aperaers I mistaken.

The biggest myth in your post is that you are a middle school graduate. Did you see all of those red squiggly lines under words like "envorerment" and "aperaers"? Those lines are there to let you know that you need to learn to spell common words or at least use spell check. It makes you look stupid when you don't...like your post.

[Free_America]

Canserman wrote:

Not only dose someking make you look cool, and get you laid, but it is also healthy! To ban it is just plain nuts. Why whould any body be behind this loney Idea. I'll tell you who. People who are stupid that's who. People who whant to make choices for you. poeople who whant slowly take away YOUR RIGHT TO SMOKE!
I'm not gunna let my kid get rasied in a smoke less envoerment. thats why I MAKE him smoke six pacts a day. Oh and before you start in with your bullcarp about "canser, and rotting teeth, sceand hand aids." Let me tell you something. ITS ALL A MYTH!! Yes all of it. Just like global warming or world war 2. I thought Pennsylvania was smater than this, but it aperaers I mistaken.

looks like an anti trying to look stupid ... like they need help!

[azmac]

We can not have a miss white America but the blacks can have a miss black America.Smokers can not have a smokers only place but non-smokers can have a non-smoking place.I see we have went to a democracy we are no longer a Republic.We are now under mob rule. Which means that the constitution and Bill of Rights are now scrap paper..The Government is supposed to work for us, we now work for the Government.Enjoy folks your liberties are now gone.

[Penny from Tenney]

azmac wrote:

We can not have a miss white America but the blacks can have a miss black America.Smokers can not have a smokers only place but non-smokers can have a non-smoking place.I see we have went to a democracy we are no longer a Republic.We are now under mob rule. Which means that the constitution and Bill of Rights are now scrap paper..The Government is supposed to work for us, we now work for the Government.Enjoy folks your liberties are now gone.

I just want to know why your American flag is up side down?

[azmac]

Penny from Tenney wrote:

<quoted text>I just want to know why your American flag is up side down?

The up side down flag means distress or emergency .Written under my flag it says "A Nation in Distress" You can click on the pictures it makes them bigger

[Penny from Tenney]

I totally agree! This is a nation in distress.

[Anonymous]

azmac wrote:

We can not have a miss white America but the blacks can have a miss black America.Smokers can not have a smokers only place but non-smokers can have a non-smoking place.I see we have went to a democracy we are no longer a Republic.We are now under mob rule. Which means that the constitution and Bill of Rights are now scrap paper..The Government is supposed to work for us, we now work for the Government.Enjoy folks your liberties are now gone.

Very interesting points!

[Christine]

Well well. Here we go. What is next? Making abortions illegal? I'm sorry, let me be more clear. Killing unborn children, will that be next? Or maybe letting us take prescription drugs that have more harmful side effects than what they are meant to cure? oh my, what is next. What next will OUR GOVERNMENT tell us we can and cannot do with our own property and our own bodies? I can hardly wait. If an establishment allows smoking and you don't like it, then do not go. If an establishment does not allow smoking and you don't like it , do not go. Purty easy folks. Even for us dumb blue collar workers that like to go the bar for a cold one and a smoke while we unwind from a hard days work paying our politicians wages, understand that one. What would Ben Franklin have thought about this? Look that one up.

China...it's on the way here too. Bush has no right to reprimand them for the treatment of their people when we are headed in the very same direction.
Democracy: When the sheep have guns too...not just the wolves.
So let us watch the small business man trying to make a buck, go under. Bars that depend on the food sales to make ends meet, will go under. If there is no food sales, they will have to raise the price of drinks. No one is going to pay more for a drink and not be able to enjoy a cigarette to boot.
So there goes the American dream. And did I mention all the loss of tax dollars? Did anyone even reckon this to a previous happening called prohibition? That didn't work too well either. What is next?
No marijuana? I mean, it is harmless with no chemicals or known side effects. Besides hungry, happy & sleepy. No one has EVER died from Marijuana. Can we say that about anything else?
Hmmmm. What is next?
I know, how about no bars...period. I mean, liquor and beer has got to be harmful to a person. Drink...don't smoke.(?)

Potato chips...now there is a very harmful thing. they are pure fat and we are a nation of obese people. We should be saved from ourselves.
Let us save the earth some more. I mean, like it hasn't done a good enough job taking care of itself for thousands and thousands of years. Let us pay more attention to the earth....instead of the inhabitants of it. WE need more help than the earth does. But let us spend more and more money and senseless time on useless things to show our power over ....I mean for our Government to show their power over us. While you sit in your private clubs and smoke your fine cigar and sip on Scotch on the rocks. And let us make exceptions. The Casinos may lose revenue if this smoking ban hits home! So if THEY find they are losing revenue...they can expand to 50% smoking. Uh, what about the little guy who may lose money due to this communistic act? Ah, shucks man, we just dumb ole folk that will just sit here and take it.
I wonder what the kickbacks were to Ed for his signature.
I know of many non-smoking people and organizations who are just as up in arms as smokers over this.
Did everyone forget that we have a Constitution? Bill of Rights? How ashamed I am of the power that is thrown around in fancy in this country.
You see, it is not so much the smoking. It is that we are being told what we can and cannot do to our bodies and on our property as business owners.
Print this. Odds are you will not.
Ashamed in PA

[Dallas]

harleyrider1978 wrote:

<quoted text>mY MOTHER SMOKED PREGNANT,MY WIFE SMOKED PREGANT before during and after,even when we changed the kids diapers we smoked..........no frigging harm to anyone.......your problems arent smoking its brain washing by the wackos and you bought it..........

There's no way to respond to a statement so ignorant.

[Musician]

Penny from Tenney wrote:

I totally agree! This is a nation in distress.

Thank for acknowledging that much.