Do you think smokers are being discriminated against?

[lilminx]

NYC is about to ban smoking in bars and restaurants. Smoking will be permitted in restaurants and bars where there is a separate smoking room, in cigar bars, and outdoor cafes.

There is a smoker's rights group that say they are being discriminated against.

Regardless of whether you smoke or not, do you agree? Why or why not?

 

[busybody..]

Yes, they are!

And the ought to be!

If they wish to kill themselves....stink up their clothing....They shouldnt inflict their stupidity on others.

Their health insurance should be Xtupiled....and if they cant afford it....they shouldnt be treated.

The cig tax should be raised to $20 per box.

And in summation, SCREW the FUCKHEADS.

In my life, I only went out with a smoker ONCE.....and as soon as I found out.....I told her....."Here is $50, take a cab home"!

 

[Guest]

It seems by definition to be discrimination, yes.

Whether it's a good idea or bad idea is a different issue though.

Hi minxy!

 

[Cuckolded_BlK_Male]

No. Of course not. Smokers stink like shit. If they want to smoke, stay home and smoke. No bus boy or waiter wants to have to breathe that shit 40 hours per week.

Oh, and the taxes need to be raised on tobacco products ... I'd say about $2.50 more on a package of cigarettes.

 

[Whizz Kid]

Re: Yes, they are!

In my life, I only went out with a smoker ONCE.....and as soon as I found out.....I told her....."Here is $50, take a cab home"!

What a lucky girl she is. you ignorant fucking asshole.

 

[Whizz Kid]

NYC is about to ban smoking in bars and restaurants. Smoking will be permitted in restaurants and bars where there is a separate smoking room, in cigar bars, and outdoor cafes.

There is a smoker's rights group that say they are being discriminated against.

Regardless of whether you smoke or not, do you agree? Why or why not?

Didn't they try that in NYC before?

 

[SINthysist]

But what's wrong with a good 'ol-fashioned Witch Hunt every now and again to stir the peasants up?

 

[busybody..]

Re: Re: Yes, they are!

What a lucky girl she is. you ignorant fucking asshole.

Piss Kid

What am I IGNORANT about?

 

[plasticman33]

I'm going to start a smokers only airline, coupled with smokers only airports and hotels! I'm tired of seeing poor smokers standing outside, huddled together in the pouring rain and snow. This is cruel and unusual treatment, their lungs aren't strong and subjected to the elements they could die from pneumonia or flu. Call you civil rights attorney's, file a class action suit!!

 

[TheDR4KE]

No.

Discrimination is where someone is not allowed to do something, e.g. eat in a restaurant, based on some characteristic that is irrelevant to the action, for example skin colour, eye shape, that sort of thing. Smokers are allowed to eat at a restaurant, drink at a bar.

They are no longer allowed to do something else at this place of food and/or drink. Smoking is recognised as harmful to health, just like driving at high speeds for example. It is a law to keep the population safer and healthier. This should be compared with safety standards in construction, with speed limits, with blood alcohol limits on driving, etc etc etc...

Quack

the Drake

 

[RegisteredTroll]

Re: Yes, they are!

In my life, I only went out with a smoker ONCE.....and as soon as I found out.....I told her....."Here is $50, take a cab home"!

Wow, only could afford the cheap hooker, huh?

 

[Whizz Kid]

Re: Re: Re: Yes, they are!

Piss Kid

What am I IGNORANT about?

Depending on how much sleep you get, I'd guess about 17 hours a day?

 

[RegisteredTroll]

LOL!!

Whizz Kid - 1
Busybody - 0 as usual

 

[Lost Cause]

All you need is to brand smokers with an "S"...

Use the Hitlerian method of exclusion, demonizing, and public hate toward a group that practices a different lifestyle. Next they can use it against meat eaters, gays, different classes, and political preference. Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness is only allowed if you're politically with the herd! Sieg Heil! FTW!

*New York can do what they want to feel good, I wonder if they ever measure monoxide levels on the sidewalks? Fools.

 

[TheDR4KE]

Re: All you need is to brand smokers with an "S"...

*New York can do what they want to feel good, I wonder if they ever measure monoxide levels on the sidewalks? Fools.

Probably -- that's why we have emission regulations for engines. I guess you'd rather those not exist because it is discriminating against people who drive bombs that belch black smoke like some sort of home made Bond car?

Do you honestly not see the difference between discrimination about factors irrelevant to the action, and the elimination of health threats to other people?

This is fascinating. Thanks for the thread minx. Oh, and thanks for that av. :wolfwhistle:

Quack

the D

 

[capricious_chic]

I honestly don't see what the big deal is. There are several things that one has the right to do, just not in public. For example, one is entitled to masturbate. Doing so in public can lead to arrest.

As a smoker (ugh, yuck, gasp), I don't feel as if my rights are infringed upon, or that I am being discriminated against. It is my choice to smoke, it is also other's choice to not be exposed to second-hand smoke. All the cool kids now, don't smoke.

The separate area idea is great, but expensive so many places will not renovate to accomodate smokers.

It is amusing to me that there is a smoker's right group. Just goes to show that there are not enough things out there for people to feel passionate about.

 

[Whizz Kid]

"I like my cows to smoke, so I can get nicotine in my milk."
Dennis Leary

 

[bluespoke]

As a smoker (ugh, yuck, gasp), I don't feel as if my rights are infringed upon, or that I am being discriminated against. It is my choice to smoke, it is also other's choice to not be exposed to second-hand smoke. All the cool kids now, don't smoke.

Exactly. Well put. Non smokers have the right to breathe unpolluted air, especially when they are eating.

As passive smoking has proved to be dangerous to health it is arguable that it is the responsibility of smokers to ensure that they do not injure anyone else with their habit.

 

[plasticman33]

Everyone of us who smokes, knows it is not healthy! But it is a decision each of us make. Yes it is an addiction, but it could be beaten if an individual so chose. For those who don't smoke, I appreciate your right to make that decision and would not infringe on your right to clean air. Someone could make a fortune setting up smokers only establishments. Non-smokers could be allowed, but then they'd probably file suit to stop us from killing ourselves!!

 

[capricious_chic]

"I like my cows to smoke, so I can get nicotine in my milk."
Dennis Leary

He just makes me giggle!

 

[Whizz Kid]

Judge Orders Woman to Stop Smoking or Risk Losing Visitation Rights With Son
By Bryan Robinson

March 27 — A mother may have to choose between her son and her right to smoke a Joe Camel in the privacy of her home.

Last week, an upstate New York judge ordered Johnita DeMatteo to stop smoking at home and in her car if she wanted to continue having visitation rights with her son, Nicholas. The 13-year-old allegedly complained to his lawyer and father last August that he did not want to visit his mother because cigarette smoke permeated her home.
DeMatteo said she would comply in order to see her son, but insisted the order was not fair.

"I will do whatever I have to, but I think there are a lot more issues than to stop smoking," DeMatteo told Good Morning America today. "That doesn't solve the problem of the intrusion into people's personal lives.

"The point is, I don't smoke when my son is in the house, and I don't smoke in my car when my son is in the car," she added.

Her son's lawyer, William Koslosky, said the boy had complained repeatedly about the smoke, and that it was ultimately a health issue.

"This case is all about safety and health for children," he said on GMA. "This is a preventive step and a justified step."

Nicholas lives in Rome, N.Y. with his father David and his paternal grandparents, none of whom smoke. Koslosky and Nicholas' father concede that he is not allergic to tobacco smoke and does not suffer from a condition, such as asthma, that would be aggravated by his mother's pack-a-day habit.

But State Supreme Court Justice Robert Julian, citing studies on the dangers of secondhand smoke, said the mother's smoking habit was not in the best interests of her son and his long-term health.

" will conclude that the best interests of Nicholas dictate that he shall not reside in, or visit, or occupy any residence or motor vehicle of the parties in which smoking of any type occurs at any time and that he shall be in a smoke-free environment to the extent practical outside the home," Judge Julian wrote in his 22-page ruling.

The judge said several courts in New York and other states have barred parents from smoking in cases where they risked aggravating their children's preexisting illness or allergy. He said he found no precedent for his ruling, but felt the courts had a right to intervene when a child's health — even if it is excellent — is at risk.

A Pawn in a Parent War?

Johnita DeMatteo's attorney, Joan Shkane, has called Judge Julian's order intrusive and says it violated her client's right to smoke. Johnita, Shkane said, has a right to smoke in the privacy of her home and her car.

Shkane stressed that Johnita never smokes in her son's presence, whether it be in the car or when he stays with her in her upstate New York home. If she needs to smoke when she has Nicholas, she goes out on her porch.

Nicholas, Shkane added, never previously complained to his mother himself about her smoking habit. She suspects that the Nicholas' father and paternal grandparents are really behind the smoking complaints and have placed the boy in the middle of their long-running ugly divorce, a charge they have publicly denied.

"Under the judge's order, the father can request urine samples, air samples from her home and that's just another way he [the father] is intruding on her life," Shkane said. "And what they've done is turn Nicholas into a little informant."

Beyond Smoking and Visitation Issues

But for Shkane, the issue is about more than smoking or even the visitation issue surrounding Nicholas. Under Judge Julian's order, Shkane argued, both parents could be accused of putting Nicholas in harm's way by bringing him to a restaurant, a mall, or any place where there is smoking or the boy is exposed to gas fumes.

"This is about how far we are going to let others intrude on our lives," Shkane said. "The line has been drawn too far in this case. Where do we draw the line?"

However, Johnita DeMatteo and Shkane have not decided whether to challenge Judge Julian's order. They have 30 days to decide whether to request a hearing to present scientific experts to contest the judge's findings. If they do not, Judge Julian with make his order official and that will set the stage for an appeal.

But Shkane said they cannot afford an appeal, especially after two years of a "very expensive divorce."

"We cannot afford to present scientific experts," Shkane said. "Appeals are very expensive. What we need to know is whether there are people out there who feel strongly out there about this issue to help us. Whether it be people from the ACLU or [representatives] from the tobacco companies, we just want people to know if they feel strongly about this issue, we're here and please contact us."

 

[Kuntmode]

n/a

Was there a study done into this? Was this decision done based on majority rule, or the minority do-gooding one?

Smoking may indeed be a habit that is not a healthy one, but to me it is a hypocritical situation that governments worldwide seems to continue to do.

The majority of smokers are polite enough to ask another person if they mind if they smoke. Most would not smoke in a resturant anyway. Surely the decision lies with the person that owns the resturant. If they put out astray's then they are allowing smokers to smoke there if they wish. Those who don't smoke should be aware that someone may do so, so maybe it should be them who go outside. There are always going to be differences of opinion on this topic, but one thing still remains.

Governments like to be seen as not condoning smoking because it harms a persons health as well as others, yet they don't do anything at all to stop smoking. The price of cigarettes has risen over the years, but this isn't an attempt for governments to stop smoking, but moreso a revenue raising stunt to recoup taxes and money which governments have paid out to people who sued for passive smoking.

Those who don't smoke seem to always like to look upon the people that do as being no good based on their habit. What some seem to forget, is many smokers worldwide try to kick the habit and struggle these days because of the high price of cigarettes. Nicotine is a drug like any other. When your system has been filled with that drug for many years, depriving yourself of it isn't easy.

I would like for those non smokers to give up something they are addicted too.

Stop eating chocalate. Stop eating ice-cream. Stop having sex.

Over the years scientific studies found that the chemicals contained in cigarettes were indeed a lot more than use to be in them years before. The dosage of nicotine had risen which results in someone craving for a cigarette.

Smoking patches and other remedies were introduced by governments to help smokers kick the habit as well as a hefty advertising campaign.

Why wasn't this as successful as they hoped?

Smokers didn't participate as they would have liked. You wonder why when the price for patches and chewing gum is more than the smokes you buy.

Smokers are discriminated against and are also exploited based on their addictions.

I don't like the smell of perfume some women wear. Certain people talk in a way that irritates me in a resturant. I don't like the way some eat their food. Sometimes you can smell the odour of other people in a resturant.

Smoking may not be a habit that is welcomed by many, but it is also a habit that governments have done fuck all to sort out,other than slug the smoker and basically exploit their addiction for financial gain.

 

[bluespoke]

Re: n/a

.

I don't like the smell of perfume some women wear. Certain people talk in a way that irritates me in a resturant. I don't like the way some eat their food. Sometimes you can smell the odour of other people in a resturant.

Unless you have peculiar allergies then neither the smell of perfume nor the way people talk or eat can kill you. Passive smoking can.

You also said earlier you'd like non smokers to give up something, I did - smoking! More than 20 years ago. Not everyone who doesn't smoke is a patronising whinger, some of us have been there and know how difficult it is. We also know the dangers.

 

[Killswitch]

I say Tax the fuck out of alchohol, and liquor. Especially wine.

Put a 2 dollar tax on a botle of beer.

My smoking hasn't killed entire families.

~~~~~~~~or~~~~~~~~~

Caused us all to pay higher auto insurance rates.

Oh and while your at it put a 10 dollar tax on each bullet sold in this country.

And what the hell tax the income tax returns too....what the hell.

I say bring back the tax on food too...why not....especially tax the hell out of fast food.

Hypocrites.

 

[plasticman33]

I say Tax the fuck out of alchohol, and liquor. Especially wine.

Put a 2 dollar tax on a botle of beer.

My smoking hasn't killed entire families.

~~~~~~~~or~~~~~~~~~

Caused us all to pay higher auto insurance rates.

Oh and while your at it put a 10 dollar tax on each bullet sold in this country.

And what the hell tax the income tax returns too....what the hell.

I say bring back the tax on food too...why not....especially tax the hell out of fast food.

Hypocrites.

RIGHT ON!

Obesity is a greater health risk than smoking!