Yay! More non-smoking fascism

[Cats Against Frist]

Calif. City Bans Smoking in Public Places 2 hours, 38 minutes ago

CALABASAS, Calif. - No more smoking in the park. Lighting up on the sidewalk could bring a fine. Dining on the restaurant patio? Don't bother asking for matches.

One of the strictest tobacco bans in the nation went into effect in the Los Angeles suburb of Calabasas last week, making smoking off limits in public places where someone else might be exposed to secondhand smoke: indoor businesses, outdoor businesses, parks, outdoor cafes, even apartment building common areas.

"We just don't want anyone blowing smoke in someone's face. Unfortunately, what smokers do is harmful to everybody else. People should have the right to breathe clean air," said Mayor Pro Tem Dennis Washburn.

--snip--

But if a nonsmoker asks a smoker to stop, the smoker must snuff it or face a possible fine in the hundreds of dollars or even a lawsuit.

******************************************************

Obviously, the salient point here is that any nonsmoker can ask a smoker to stop smoking, outside, anywhere in this city.

Not too long ago, I was headed to a movie, and I was smoking a pre-movie cigarette, on the sidewalk, about 50 feet away from any entrance. This pale, wicked-witch-of-the-west-looking person was coming toward me, on the sidewalk. She had some kind of band-aid on her nose. When she approached, I kind of put my cigarette on the side away from her. She gave me a nasty look, and put her hand up, next to her face, and gave a very fake cough. In this California city, she could demand that I put my cigarette out, and, if I didn't, I could face hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines.

We've argued on here, about whether free adults should be able to have a cigarette, in bars. From what I've seen, most smokers are rational, and willing to compromise. However, it seems the laws are starting to cater to the "I'm allergic to smoke," crowd (no one is allergic to smoke), those who are simply irritated with it, and those who don't like the smell, or consider it an inconvenience. Since when do people have a right to say that I can't smoke a cigarette on a public sidewalk. That's not good sense, at all, and, as far as I'm concerned, there is no argument to be made. NO ONE will die from getting a whif of outdoor smoke, and only the most sickly, hypochondriac, haters amongst us would take issue with having to breathe in a little whif of tobacco smoke, every once in a while.

I'm about to head to Seattle, where I won't be able to smoke within 25 feet of a door, window or air vent. Pretty soon, if more laws like this pass, I won't be able to smoke anywhere. The reason that this is important is because we see a very slippery slope, here -- first it was public places, then private places that were deemed "public" by authoritarian delusion, and now a person can't even smoke outside.

Who here can make an argument that there is any practical (i.e. not delusional or fascist) reason why people should not be able to smoke outside, fairly freely. I can understand, right in a doorway, but, is there any evidence, whatsoever, that the greater good is being served by banning outdoor smoking?

[unblock]

1. it's fascist to ask someone to not spray noxious toxins in the air?

whatever. you're the one who's doing the hating here. for your information, i'm allergic to tobacco in all forms, including smoke. my nasal tissues inflame to the point where i cannot breathe through my nose given only a small amount of exposure to tobacco smoke. go ahead, accuse my of being a sickly hypocondriac, but my allergist would disagree with you.

try something more considerate, like the patch, when in public.

jeez, what some people won't to to protect their "right" to spew carcinogenic, allergenic, toxics in other peoples' faces. do you honestly think i have a legal right to spray skunk musk mixed with benzene in your face?

feel free to smoke in your own backyard or your car or your house and try to think a bit more of other when in public.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[unblock]

13. ah yes, cars pollute so i can pollute. good argument.

nevermind that car emissions are heavily regulated, that you CAN get fined for pulluting too much from a car, and that cars are immensely important too nearly everyone's livelihood and economic well-being and to the economy at large.

can i spray that skunk musk & benzene now?

[U4ikLefty]

34. this is an examlple of a "liberal"...note the quotes!!!

The enemy is not only in the Rethug party.

[Cats Against Frist]

37. No, the enemies are the nanny-nanny authoritarians

And they can be found in both parties, that's for sure. Yes, I'm liberal, which means two things: a. I like to seek rational solutions to conflicts and b. that I'm going to leave good people to make decsions, about their private lives, to themselves. Rick Santorum can make an argument about how gays are "ruining the family." Non-smokers can whine about how they shouldn't have to walk by a smoker. Same thing. Same paranoia.

[U4ikLefty]

41. Maybe they'll start to say they're "allergic to the homosexual lifestyle"

and so they must ban all public diplays of homosexuality. Didn't you know "second-hand gayness" can cause those your kids to be gay!!!

LOL...good one!!!

[converted_democrat]

44. I don't buy it..

Smoking outdoors in no way could effect you period, unless your face is directly in front of their face and you make an effort to breathe in the smoke.. It simply rises and dissipates too quickly to be able to cause harm in an outdoor environment.. The last time I was in the hospital the girl next to me had just had a baby a day before.. She asked the doc if her husbands smoking outside would hurt their baby's environment, and he laughed at her and said "You new Mom's.." He said of all of the outside pollutants out there smoking is the least of one's worries.. She said that she had heard otherwise, and before the mess was over he brought in a breathing specialist and an oncologist to put her fears to rest.. They all said the same thing, it rises and dissipates too quickly outside to do any harm to anyone besides the smoker themselves..

[valerief]

2. I think, you'd have to quit smoking to experience what a non-smoker

feels breathing in the smoke. You can easily smell cigarette smoke 50 feet away.

[Cats Against Frist]

3. Because someone "smells" cigarette smoke

isn't a compelling reason to BAN it.

[valerief]

6. Well, if you're smelling it, you're breathing it.

[Cats Against Frist]

11. But, is it harming you, or going to harm you

enough to make a law about it? Is it any more harmful than diesel fumes or any other common, everyday smell-inconvenience?

[valerief]

45. Diesel fumes are harmful, too.

We should be using less harmful fuel and cigarette manufacturing should be outlawed. But my two cents is worth just that. Two cents.

[unblock]

7. be real. if tobacco were regulated like any other food or drug

it would have been banned long ago.

the only reason it's not is because non-smokers make accomodations for inconsiderate addicts. you should be grateful that we let you smoke at all.

[Triana]

10. it's not a matter of just smelling it...

...study after study has shown that second-hand smoke breathed by a non-smoker does cause health issues. What gives smokers the right to damage the health of others by arbitrarily forcing them to breathe cigarette smoke? This is akin to the bu$hit regime removing or lowing the allowed levels of murcury in drinking water - thereby arbitrarily forcing people to drink murcury-laden water (or water with higher than recommended levels which are known to present health problems). Same with their filthy air policies and their other polluter-friendly policies. We are all affected by it. That isn't to just say "it stinks" - it's harmful to people's health and no, smokers DO NOT have the right to decide to harm OTHER PEOPLE's health. If they want to harm their own that's their business but when they start foisting their habits (second-hand smoke) on others that's where a light might ought to be drawn.

Also, to an ex-smoker, cig smoke is not only smelly, but it hurts the lungs - it's PAINFUL to breathe, can cause sore throats, headaches, and nausea. Like a previous poster said, you'd have to BECOME an ex-smoker to understand this. Ex-smokers are most sensitive to cig smoke and it's not just 'the smell'. THEN, there's the health risks which ex-smokers quit smoking so that they didn't HAVE to be exposed to.

[johnaries]

16. If you are outside, you are not "breathing" the 2nd hand smoke

unless you're right on top of the smoker. Smoke RISES! I can see banning it in contained areas, but not outside.

[unblock]

20. what are you talking about? try LOOKING at the smoke sometime.

you can sometimes see it rise, yes, but on other days in still air, you can see it linger or drift sideways for quite a long time.

[johnaries]

61. I smoke outside every day at work, and it always floats up

unless there is a breeze, which disperses it even quicker.

I have NEVER seen it "linger" or "drift sideways" on a still day outside. Inside, yes. Never outside.

[Cats Against Frist]

22. I live in rural Iowa

And, I happen to, in a swift contradiction to my smoking habit, only purchase organic food. During the fertilizing season, sometimes the smell of anhydrous gets so bad that I can't walk out of my house, without my eyes burning. Therefore, I feel that I should demand that all people only buy organic food, because anhydrous burns my eyes and lungs. I also live part-time in the city, with choking diesel fumes, and toxins from factories. I would also like to demand that all people stop driving cars and using anything made out of plastic. If you're not eating organic food, I would like you to change that, or I'll report you to Big Brother, and you can go bankrupt over it. To the co-op, you go.

Again -- I'm asking for rationality. Is outdoor tobacco smoke really going to harm anyone? It's the outdoors, you know, and outdoors, there is a lot of space.

[johnaries]

12. OUTSIDE? Unless you have the nose of a dog, I find that

totally unbelieveable. Uncontained, smoke rises, and disperses well above head level. If you can "smell" it from 50 feet away outside in an uncontained area, I suggest your "smell" is purely psychological.

[unblock]

15. it depends on wind patterns, concentration, air circulation, etc.

i've certainly had my share of smokers walking right past me and exhaling right in my face.

nothing "psychological" about it. more like denial from an addict trying to pretend that he's not being incredibly rude by smoking in public.

[Cats Against Frist]

24. Well, exhaling in someone's face is rude

But, if you're harmed by someone smoking a little bit away from you, I think, yes, it is psychological.

[unblock]

52. hmm, real persuasive. i think it's believe my doctors rather than you.

[Cats Against Frist]

58. If your doctors are telling you that you're allergic to cigarette smoke

I'd find a new doctor.

[Lolivia]

65. You don't believe in allergies?

How odd. I would say that it's a pretty extreme position to say allergies don't exist.

[unblock]

73. he's just saying that tobacco is the 1 thing that no one's allergic to.

tobacco is hypo-allergenic.

:rofl:

[Cats Against Frist]

76. You might be allergic to tobacco, itself

if someone makes you eat it, or rubs it on your skin. Tobacco smoke does not contain the tobacco allergen.

[Cats Against Frist]

75. I didn't say that I don't believe in allergies

THOUGH, since we're on the subject, I think that most allergies and autoimmune "disorders" are hypochondriac bullshit for people who wouldn't know what to do with themselves if they let themselves feel good, for a day in their life.

No one is allergic to ETS. It's not an allergen. Irritant, yes. Allergen, no.

[valerief]

70. LOL.

You're cracking me up!

[johnaries]

69. I would never exhale in your face.

If you read the OP, she is talking about standing away from everyone else and being as thoughtful as possible toward non-smokers. The non-smoker APPROACHED HER.

I am referring to the statement "smelling it from 50 feet away", not about "blowing it in someone's face". I agree those people are rude.

[valerief]

46. I didn't say outside.

[Cats Against Frist]

51. Outside is the discussion we're having, here

as opposed to the other debates, which, though still fascist and authoritarian, have at least logical and/or rational points for the non-smokers to argue.

[valerief]

67. Oh, I thought the discussion was about the law

One of the strictest tobacco bans in the nation went into effect in the Los Angeles suburb of Calabasas last week, making smoking off limits in public places where someone else might be exposed to secondhand smoke: indoor businesses, outdoor businesses, parks, outdoor cafes, even apartment building common areas.

[mconvente]

4. Im with you 100%

My grandmother died as a result of complications to smoking, my uncle had to have part of his lung removed as such, and my mom has been smoking for over 25 years - thank god my uncle and mom quit. There's NO DOUBT that smoking is bad for people - even second hand smoke. But it's completely egregious to ban smoking on a public sidewalk. I suppose waiting in line or a big crowd is different, but at a bus stop or even by yourself, there's no need for someone to have to put out his or her cigarette. I'm just totally against the government regulating abortion and the such, and regulating personal choices with cigarettes falls in that line too.

[unblock]

5. some sidewalks are ALWAYS crowded. think manhattan, e.g.

[Cats Against Frist]

9. I hear what you're saying, but be logical, please

When people are outdoors, there are lots of places to stand. I'm going to say it, straight up, but if one is more affected by a whiff of cigarette smoke than the diesel fumes in Manhattan, I'm pretty sure that person is crazy.

I'm not asking for a smoking v. nonsmoking debate -- I'm simply asking how occasional outdoor smoke is going to harm a nonsmoker. And I'm asking for rational reasons.

[unblock]

17. you've never heard of a study on second-hand smoke?

not pushed by the tobacco institute, that is?
they all show damage.

if you have kids, to you smoke around them? is not, why not, if you think it's harmless?

i'm also not saying that diesel fumes are harmless, just that i don't have an allergic reaction to them.

[Cats Against Frist]

I've never heard a study on second-hand smoke outdoors

And, no, I don't smoke in my house, or car, and I don't exhale in my son's face. That said, do I sit in a chair, on the porch and smoke, while he plays, running, sometimes up to me, and sometimes 100 feet away, in the yard? Yes. Because I'd be crazy if I thought that it was going to hurt him.

[in_cog_ni_to]

21. Anti-smoking Nazis do NOT possess the ability to be logical or reasonable.

or rational. My sister is one. She's truly pathetic.

[bbgrunt]

56. exactly. they have the same zeal as any fundamentalist.

[in_cog_ni_to]

14. Riiiiight. This is LOS ANGELES!!!!!!!!

I posted the other day on a thread about this. The one and only time I was ever in LA we wanted to go to the beach and the SMOG was so THICK you couldn't even see the FREAKIN' WATER!!! and we were standing on the sand!

This is just ridiculous. Outside smoking isn't going to kill anyone. These people have just gone to the extreme because they can. I'm looking forward to the day anti-smoking nazis are discriminated against. I CAN'T WAIT. They have no qualms about giving our rights as smokers away ( it IS still legal). When their day comes, and it will, no one will have any rights left to be able to defend THEM for whatever the nazis go after them for. We'll see how they like it.

[randr]

27. Speaking of the beach

Have you ever plopped your self down in the sand and dug your hand in to feel the warm purity and had a cigarette butt or more come up.
Please, is it too much to ask smokers not to discard their butts anywhere they like?

[in_cog_ni_to]

32. I NEVER discard butts on the ground. Never have. n/t

[Cats Against Frist]

36. Me neither.

I stomp the cherry out, squeeze it, and find the nearest trashcan.

[randr]

38. Thank you very much

Would you please pass you kindness along to other smokers?

[nini]

30. Calabasas has their own govt - it is not L.A. per se

I really doubt you were standing on the sand and couldn't see the water :eyes: The only thing that would do that would be a very heavy fog. Smog does not accumulate at the coast like it does inland so you should come up with another way of describing L.A's smog. The smog by the way is an issue but not as bad as it used to be or worse than other places any more.


To speak on this issue as a non smoker who hates cigarette smoke - I think this law is over the top. If someone wants to smoke then they should have the right to do so as long as it doesn't affect others. Being outside a distance away from others is not affecting others. It's a stupid law and needs to be amended to consider both sides.

[randr]

18. Civility must replace "fascism"

First, there really are people who are allergic to cigarette smoke. Like most people who suffer allergies they should assume responsibility and avoid situations of exposure.
Second, I am an ex smoker who enjoyed the endless nights in smoke filled bars and restaurants. As I grew more sensitive to the smoke I would occasionally ask the local bar owners if they could install proper smoke filtering devices, even suggesting that the tobacco industry should contribute in some financial manner. This was obviously far too much to ask from those that would profit.
At last I pushed the habit aside and now find myself among the "anti-smoking" crowd. However, I do not seek legalistic solutions to the dilemma. I would suggest a more "civil" approach.
As most of us have been taught from childhood, it is rude and unmannerly to fart in public. Not that the odorous gasses could cause any physical harm, unlike cigarette smoke, but because we have learned to be "civil" about it and to accept the embarrassment if we let a good one get out. I would hope that smokers would adopt a similar attitude and be a bit more responsive to others sensibilities. Non-smokers could, on the other hand, learn to point and snicker at offenders rather than resort to legalities.

[Tanuki]

64. "responsibility"?

I find it odd that you assume that people with allergies are "responsible" for this medical condition and should, therefore, "avoid situations of exposure", even if that simply means going out in public like anyone else. What about all the people with any other kind of disability, who have worked so hard to legislate reasonable accommodation in our society? I respectfully encourage you to reconsider this position.

[Cats Against Frist]

80. Free adults can discriminate about who they stand by, on the sidewalk

that's the beauty of this life, don't you think? If you have legs, you can move them. I, too, as a considerate smoker, can move far enough away from you that secondhand smoke isn't going to harm you. the point is, that there's no need to call in the five-o, and bankrupt someone because you don't like their smoking.

[Fleshdancer]

19. Can they ban farting too?

Or horrible body odor?

Yeah yeah, smoking is bad and while I don't smoke (never have) I think this ban is ridiculously intrusive.

[Minstrel Boy]

25. Does second-hand farting cause cancer?

If not, "Excuse me" is sufficient.

[Fleshdancer]

33. Should people be forced to eat healthy and excercise too?

How far are we going to take this?

[Minstrel Boy]

59. There's no such thing as Second-Hand Donuts.

Get the picture?

[Cats Against Frist]

35. Is someone walking by a smoker going to get cancer

from their smoke?

[Minstrel Boy]

57. How many smokers must a non-smoker walk past

before saying this is an unacceptable risk?

How many times do my children have to cough walking in the wake of second-hand smokers?

Health Canada TV spot, "Refuse to be a Target":

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hl-vs/tobac-tabac/fact-fait/fs-if/tv-tele-heather_e.html

[Cats Against Frist]

71. Sorry

I have a child who is very well taken care of. I also do not smoke in the house, or the car, and I ask my mom to smoke outside, when we come to visit. That said, I will take my son to outdoor festivals, where people smoke, to a gathering, now and then, where people may be smoking inside, and I take him, maybe once a month, to the local bar, for lunch, where people are smoking. I make these decisions, because I am intelligent enough to understand what kind of exposure to smoke is going to hurt him. I'm neither paranoid, stuffed full of bad medical advice, or a hypochondriac.

In the ad you put up, the woman said "the air was blue," where she worked, with smoke. That is not comparable to me smoking a cigarette on a park bench, more than 10 feet away from a ninny-nanny two shoes. To try to make that comparable is nuts.

[johnaries]

74. Worse, it contributes to Global Warming. n/t

[Minnesota Libra]

23. The only pollution allowed is from factories/vehicles ....nt

[seaglass]

26. I have to say I agree with you and in fact, although I don't know

about the allergy part. I find many non-smokers to be much ruder and nastier than smokers.

I'm a considerate smoker, even when I am outside smoking I walk far away from where people are to have a cigarette. If someone approaches me when I'm smoking, it is their choice.

When I started this semester at school a woman, non-smoker obviously, sat next to me in class. She then got up and moved a row away and made a remark that she couldn't stand the smell (obviously there was a smell of smoke on my clothes). How rude was that? I don't mind that she moved at all and I can understand that she didn't like the smell of smoke. But keep your thoughts to yourself.

[Cats Against Frist]

31. Exactly.

That's what I'm saying. Outside is big. I can see banning smoking in amphitheater seats, or stadiums, because people may have an assigned seat, or there may be limited seating. People cannot get up and move. We're talking about, however, beaches, and parks and sidewalks, where, only creepy-ass people that you don't know and stalkers are getting close to you enough to smell your smoke.

If someone is sitting on a park bench, and I want to have a cigarette, I'm not going to go plop down next to them, and light up. Even though I think they'd have to be crazy to be bothered by it, I still wouldn't do it. I might, however, sit on an unoccupied bench, and have a cigarette. If someone needs to get within 10 feet of me, then that's their problem, and their choice. If someone's walking by, and they're bothered by it, IMHO they need counseling.

[Fleshdancer]

42. actually, I think ex smokers are more rude than non-smokers

obviously both groups would be considered "non-smokers" but in my experience, friends and family members who have never smoked (myself included) don't really care all that much about it, especially outside. The small group of ex smokers I know tend to be a bit dramatic about smelling smoke.

:shrug:

[BlooInBloo]

Asking nonsmokers to NOT be fascist wrt smoking... gl

lol - I don't think it's possible for them...

They're just soooo itchin to open up a big can of righteous indignation on those smokers who are committing genocide against nonsmokers with their 2nd hand smoke....

This is part of what the general public doesn't like about Democrats. They often whine n bitch n complain like wusses.

[pinto]

28. I smoke. Common courtesy shouldn't have to be codified, but

I have no problem with the law. Someone asks that I not smoke, I'm glad to oblige.

[gizmo1979]

29. This and other cities should lose any

benefit from cigarette taxes.Smokers pay enormous amounts of taxes and they should have the right to smoke.I'm annoyed by bratty children in restaurants but I don't think they should be banned.Leave the smokers alone.You're not going to die because someone smokes cigarettes outside.If we could get these same people to be this zealous about a war,and civil rights or corruption in government we'd be alot better off.There are real issues for you to stand behind smoking in the open air isn't one of them.

[hedgehog]

39. This law has very little to do with health and a lot to do with comfort

Laws like this are enacted when a minority persists in engaging in behavior that the majority finds rude and offensive. Face it smokers, you're right up there with people who let their dogs take a dump on the sidewalk, with people who litter, etc. We've passed laws to prevent such anti-social activities and now smoking in public is being added to the list. You may not be able to smell cigarette smoke, but the rest of us can. Don't even get started about all the butts left lying around. Who knows, maybe a law against picking your nose in public is next, but that's the way it is. Unless you're going to be a hermit, you've got to get along with other people.

[Cats Against Frist]

43. But how come that sentiment doesn't work in reverse

It's clear that it's not about health. And I don't think "mob rule," is the solution to everything. The majority also thinks that gays shouldn't get married, and that a woman's right to choose should be restricted. It's about mature adults accomodating others. My whole point in making this post is that those who are imagining themselves harmed over outdoor tobacco smoke have stepped over the line, and are no longer accomodating, but being fascist. We're not talking about indoors, or in businesses -- we're talking about outside.

[U4ikLefty]

49. ..and you think this is okay..to pass a "anti-nose-picikng law???

I guess I'll take my enginereing degree and be a hermit in a FREE country!!!

BTW, littering is already against the law.

[unblock]

55. amen, but i guess the smokers think anti-littering laws are fascist, too..

[glitch]

40. Yay! More pro-smoking fascism.

Big tobacco bankrolls Bush and the Republican party. How many thousands a year do you indirectly contribute to their effort?

Make your actions match your rhetoric.

[Cats Against Frist]

47. You can't call smokers fascists

Because they don't have any power. And, other than smoking, I'm a fairly responsible consumer -- more responsible than anyone I know, actually. I think I'm doing my part, though I do have the one thing -- smoking. And mostly, I buy loose tobacco from smaller manufacturers -- though I will buy a hard pack, once in a while. My actions are largely moderate -- unlike smoke nazis.

[Minstrel Boy]

68. "they don't have any power"

Doesn't feel that way when I'm forced to breathe their noxious shit.

Fuck this false victimhood. Smoking kills, and second hand smoking kills innocents.

[glitch]

79. Not a good argument - Fascists will use whatever power they have.

Even if it's just the power to annoy. Look I used to be a smoker, I know all the rationales. I ordinarily don't contribute to save the smoker threads, because I know you can't listen until you're ready. That's the power of the addiction, and believe it or not I have a lot of sympathy for where you are at. I don't expect to convince you.
When you're ready to quit, you'll quit.

But until then, please stop your whining. You're tarnishing the whole "sneer in the face of certain cancer" mystique, which as an ex-smoker I resent. ;)

[ForrestGump]

48. Cool

I guess I can stop carrying my little spray can of gasoline now.

[rpgamerd00d]

50. Its not fascist, its a great law, and I support it 100%.

Air Freshener is not harmful, yet if I stood in public and sprayed people with it, I would get arrested for assault.

Why should cigarette smoke be any different? Its an annoying smelly cloud of smoke blown at people. You do not have the right to stink-ify people with your noxious vapors, period. And that isn't even getting into the proof or lack of proof about the harm of 2nd hand smoke.

[valerief]

53. Many artificial fragrances *are* harmful.

Just because their ingredients are protected trade secrets doesn't mean they don't cause bodily damage over time.

[Cats Against Frist]

54. There's a difference between a rude smoker who walks

up and stands by a non smoker, and lights up, and lets the smoke go in his or her face, or exhales in his or her face, and being able to sit on a park bench, by oneself, and read a book, far enough away from any sane people who might be bothered, and smoke a cigarette. There is also a difference between walking into a building where twenty people are smoking at the exit, and having to walk by, and get a little whif of smoke on the sidewalk. You are not "stinkified" because someone is smoking 10 or more feet away from you, at a park, or on the beach. YOU should not be able to ask ME to put out a cigarette, just because you're an asshole, when I'm being courteous.

[unblock]

62. when mrs unblock comes home, i can tell when SHE'S walked past a cigarette

and she can do the same with me. she's not allergic, just an ex-smoker who has regained her sense of smell.
this is NOT psychological.

the stuff lingers in your clothing, especially sweaters.

[rpgamerd00d]

66. I think you are confused.

You wrote:

"There's a difference between a rude smoker who walks up and stands by a non smoker, and lights up, and lets the smoke go in his or her face, or exhales in his or her face, and being able to sit on a park bench, by oneself, and read a book, far enough away from any sane people who might be bothered, and smoke a cigarette."

Yes, thats what the law is for. If you are alone on a bench, you can smoke all you like! However, if someone comes and sits next to you, and then is bothered, you have to move or stop smoking. This is fair and the way it should be. I can't fathom why you'd think otherwise.

[tyedyeto]

77. Excuse me...

if I was smoking while sitting on a park bench with NO ONE around and someone sat down next to me, I'd be telling them to move. I was there first.

Take it another step further, I am sitting on said park bench with my pooch. Neither one of us is smoking. Again, somone sits down and tells me to leave because they are allergic to doggie hair. Who moves?

[tyedyeto]

60. Let's also ban all perfumes and colognes...

deodorant, too, for that matter. They give me a headache so let's ban everything that can 'stink-ify' people with noxious vapors.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

63. Bunch Of Fascist Fuckers. Let Them Try To Do That To Me.

In fact, I'm debating whether I should start intentionally blowing smoke in people's faces while I still have the freedom to do so LOL

They can go fuck themselves. Let them make whatever sick discriminatory laws they want. If I want to smoke in a park, I'm gonna smoke in the fucking park, period. Let's see them try and stop me :rofl:

[FrankBooth]

72. Yay! More whining hyperbole

Fascism? Looks more like democracy to me. Get used to it.

[misternormal]

78. I am a smoker...

... I am not going to walk up next to you and smoke... I will find a spot that will not offend anyone... but if you see me smoking, stay the fuck away from me. If you come walk up next to me on your own accord, keep your mouth shut.

I do what I can to accomodate you, so just leave me the hell alone.

Did I spell it out well enough for you?

[pinto]

81. Locking.

smoking, fascism, nazism, nose picking, farting....mod consensus is to put this thread out.

Thansk for your consideration.