![[Nameplate]](http://www.bannergraphic.com/images/nameplate.png)
|
|
Light Rain Fog/Mist ~ |
|
 Email link
 Read comments (29)
 Blog archive
 Share link
Still smokin' -- wherever I'm allowedPosted Thursday, March 5, 2009, at 1:35 AM
I flew south recently for a day to visit with my southern Indiana friends. The day started with the three of us having lunch. It had been a very long time since the three of were last together.
Our conversations turned from "girl talk" to politics. There was an e-mail forwarded between the three of us with questions we were to answer regarding the person who forwarded it. The questions varied from "what is my middle name" to "am I shy or outgoing?" While I seem to know one of my girlfriends well, I found the same was not true about the other. "Jae" and I were walking pals when I lived south. Whenever we had the chance, we walked the path or road at the local park. We have had numerous conversations about our pets, Gus and Mr. Big. The one conversation we never had was political. One of the questions on the forwarded e-mail asked was your friend conservative, moderate or liberal. Of the three, I would have guessed Jae to be a liberal. Turns out, she is no bra burner. She thinks they are the enemy. Jae is conservative. After discovering this new information, the latest smoking ban turned up in discussion. This ban has failed twice in Indiana since April 2007, when Senate removed it from the health care funding bill, which was then passed by House of Representatives. Again in January 2008, when a proposed smoking ban, introduced by Democrat State Rep. Charlie Brown of Gary, died in a House committee without vote or debate. Brown's bill in its initial form would have banned smoking in any enclosed space where the public is allowed. Brown and other opponents of the ban said it would cut down on health care costs and save lives by protecting more people from the ills of second-hand smoke. Last month, the House committee carved out exemptions for casinos, some bars and certain hotels. The amended bill cleared the Democrat-controlled House Public Policy committee and has moved to the House for full consideration. Bar owners and those who spoke on behalf of casinos during a legislative hearing in February, said the smoking ban would negatively impact their businesses and cost jobs. I have to agree with giving business owners the right to decide whether smoking in their establishments is allowed, and people already choose what venues to visit. Jae is a non-smoker. I am a smoker. Being on the opposite ends of the debate, we did agree this ban might be a little much. My habit began as a teenager, but didn't last long. I quit for three years before picking it back up at the age of 22. Seven years later, I am a full-blown smoker. I am used to being the minority with my habit. I try to keep it under wraps and be respectful of my non-smoking friends. We, as a society, have been well informed about the health risks associated with smoking. So, I am left to wonder why there is a need for the government to write into legislation a ban on smoking. "Quitting smoking now greatly reduces serious risks to your health," is only one of many Surgeon General's warnings plastered to the side of cigarette boxes. Since September 2007, smoking has been banned in all businesses including restaurants and bars in Greencastle. Not only am I banned by the city, but also at home. It is out to the garage for us smokers. There is one place I am still free to smoke-it-up -- my car. I saw an air freshener at a local gas station that read, "Soon, I can only smoke in my car." I was incredibly close to buying it. This topic may "open a can of worms," but I remind anyone reading this ... I refuse to give up my smoking for anyone -- friends, a man, family or the government. Although, it may be the cigarette tax that gets me in the end. Comments Showing comments in chronological order [Show most recent comments first] |
Shannen Hayes is the newest addition to the Banner Graphic staff. She joined us on Oct. 13, 2008.
Hot topics Happy St. Patrick's Day(0 ~ 2:38 PM, Mar 17)
Know your rights
Astute Purchase
Did you know: Part II
Stuck
|
Facebook
Twitter
del.icio.us
Digg
StumbleUpon
Technorati
Newsvine
Reddit
Google
![[Feed icon]](http://www.bannergraphic.com/images/icons/feed-icon-14x14.png){kind=icon}
IUPUI has a "smoking ban" on the whole campus. I put quotes on it because there's no enforcement nor should there be. Everyone still smokes where they want, only now there are signs up proudly proclaiming that it's a non-smoking campus.
One major problem is that public streets run through campus. The sidewalks adjacent to those streets are also public property, and the smoking ban doesn't apply to those areas. These sidewalks are the major paths for foot traffic on campus. Really, the smoking ban has moved smokers into the areas where it can bother the most people.
If the school would've done the sensible thing by putting up several smoking gazebos, it would've been welcomed by the smokers on campus. Instead, the zealots have created a rule with no teeth that has only embittered factions of the student body.
Thank the leaders of your movement, violent non-smokers. That smell on the sidewalks of IUPUI's campus is not only cigarette smoke but also the smell of "progress."
Why do all these vehicles drive past the sidewalks that I HAVE to walk down? I have to smell the diesel fumes and breathe in who knows what from the tailpipes. That's why I'm totally for a public driving ban.
First of all, Secondhand Smoke is the issue here. If Smoking did not directly harm those around it, by DEATH and Disease, then smoke all you want. The problem is, when you smoke you do affect an innocent person. Their health is altered because of your PERSONAL CHOICE. Taking Secondhand SMoke out of public places, worksites, restuarants, bars and casinos is to improve the health of those who do not smoke, and hopefully those who do. If you are truely respectful of others who do not smoke, you would be completely for this State Wide Smoking ban...because you would not want to smoke around anyone who chooses to not be exposed to it. DO some more research...obviously you are not educated on this topic. Smoke in your car if you want to, I just hope no children are present when you do, because it is child abuse!!!!!! Also in the home, same thing! Quit thinking you are the victim....We who are being affected by your toxins are the innocent victims.
Secondhand smoke is the issue here. I'm merely pointing out that everyone causes pollution in fantastic magnitudes. No one wants to talk about that, though, because it would require us all to look at our own lifestyle choices in a negative light instead of pointing out the faults of others.
Firing up your coffee maker causes pollution of the air that we all breathe. When you only close your storm door in the winter, it wastes energy and causes excess pollution. When you drive a 5,000 pound vehicle to work every day without carpooling, it wastes energy and causes excess pollution.
When you drive in the winter, you can see exhaust fumes because of condensation. The fumes are still there when it's warm out; you just can't see it. What do you think is coming out of those tailpipes, flowers and bunnies? You'll breathe that stuff all day long but raise hell about catching a whiff of cigarette smoke? That's what doesn't make sense to me.
Why would you not give it up for yourself or those that love you? Is it safe to assume that if loved ones of yours were to take the same stance on a vice of theirs that you disagree with or has negative ramifications, you would support the same stance you take?
Will you exempt me from paying for your health care?
You can smoke in your car all you want as far as I am concerned (hope no children are in there) but when you smokers flip your butts out the window or smoke as you are walking up to a business and you flick your cig. on the ground someone has to clean that crap up and it more times than not is a non-smoker. You hurry to get that last puff in before you go inside and meanwhile my child and I have to walk through the secondhand smoke that we have no choice in the matter to breathe. If you want to smoke in your car or your garage and give yourself cancer, go ahead. But don't force someone else to clean up your mess or eventually pay for your medical bills. I hope for your sake and your loved ones you would look into ways to quit (and for everyone around you too). Thank you.
Representative Charlie Brown is still alive and still serving in the General Assembly.
This same law has done fine in Illinois even in the bar scene. Smokers and people like you feel that they are the only ones that this involves but it doesn't, you are not that important.
In my younger days, I attended many parties held in garages. Those garages were generally packed full of people smoking cigarettes. As far as I can remember, no one dropped dead on any of those occasions. Now, if a car or lawnmower was running in there, do you think that would still be true?
The tailpipes in traffic may not be right in your face, but there are a bunch of them and they're pointed in your direction. Is that not a health concern? Or is it just more convenient to ignore that because everyone does it?
Do I think that hospital waiting rooms should have ashtrays?
No.
Do I think it's appropriate to be able to smoke in a place where the majority of people leave by drinking and driving?
Yes.
MUCH more damage is done to our world by things that we ALL do everyday with no awareness of the consequences. Maybe enough progress has been made in this area and now it's time to focus on something a little more important.
By the way, smaller_gov_now, personal attacks and excessive punctuation don't make good arguments. Doesn't your screenname imply that you want less government involvement in daily life? Or do you relish that involvement and then complain about the bill that comes for it every spring? Just wait till zealots want to take away a little piece of freedom that you care about.
Jaredscousin, if so many non-smokers feel that strongly on the subject, why doesn't the market demand a non-smoking bar? If consumers want something, the market provides it. That's how capitalism works.
Illinois is not a model for us to follow. lol Do you want insane taxes, restrictive weapons bans, and rampant corruption, too?
To smoke or not to smoke...that is up to you and that is your right to smoke in the privacy of your own home or car. Not to smoke and be free of the pollutants is my right and that means in the 'public' as well. Did you know that the pollutants that are let off from smoking and land on the couch, your car seat, the roof of your car, and anywhere around where you smoke...stay there for good? If you plan on quitting to smoke and you have a baby and you use the same car or couch, you're baby will be exposed to the tar, nicotine, and pollutants you once harmed your own body with?
It won't be long and Twinkies will be excessively taxed and eventually only allowed in certain zones, too right? I mean, really, if we are going to attack smokers for smoking can't we also attack all those fatties that eat twinkies?
There you go, smaller_gov_now. I think we are in a cyber pissing contest over nothing. My point has been from the getgo that bar owners should have the right to decide what happens in their property. If non-smokers don't like it, they should find somewhere else to go. You just said that you don't like it, so you don't go.
You wrote, "There is one place I am still free to smoke-it-up -- my car. I saw an air freshener at a local gas station that read, "Soon, I can only smoke in my car." "
Sorry... that's not totally true. The Antismokers tried to get smoking while driving banned on the basis of accidents but their studies bit them in the butt when it turned out that smoking ranked WAYYYY below cell phones and radios and beverages and passengers and such as a problem.
So they narrowed their focus and pulled out their favorite "Save The Children" card. The results can be seen in such nonsensical incidents as the 20 year old Canadian driver getting pulled over and ticketed lat week while the 16 year old passenger got out of the car and lit a cigarette with impunity while the ticket was being issued.
They've also managed to get a number of private businesses, hospitals, schools and such to prohibit drivers from smoking in their cars on the property's parking lots (although some places have made an exception if the smoker rolls up all the windows tightly so the smoke won't interfere with the aroma of all the nice tailpipe emissions nearby.)
Five years ago John Banzhaf of ASH gloated that "No longer can a man say 'My Home Is My Castle' as we are now reaching into the last frontier (of tobacco control)"
If you care at all about your freedom, not just to smoke, but to do ANYthing that the great moral majority may someday disapprove of, you better get educated and you better get active.
I'd recommend starting by reading the "Stiletto" at:
http://encyclopedia.smokersclub.com/257....
It's one-sided and rather radical in its presentation, but all the material inside it is honest and accurate. Print it up and spread it around to your favorite smokin' watering hole if you still have one. It's not as good as Brains by a long shot, but it's free and easy to print and read.
Best of luck!
Michael J. McFadden
Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"
You people still are not seeing the point. Smoking related diseasee is the number one killer in our country!!!! This is killing more people than any thing else out there. We are not against smokers. Smoking is a cronic illness. It is the hardest thing to stop doing! I have much compassion for those who smoke. The fact here is that it is killing innocent people. SMoke knows no boundaries! It does not stay in one place. The toxins in tobacco smoke cause illnesses in non-smokers that can lead to death. Yes, all of these other things can cause people disease and death, but not in the magnitude that smoking and secondhand smoke can. Please do your research before you speak about this issue. Learn the FACTS!!!! Secondhand smoke kills people...more people than drunk driving, car pollution, ect.
There are so many things that kill people besides smoking. People kill people, cars kill people, food kills people, etc etc. It was written by our founding fathers that it is our government's duty to protect us from ourselves, which is what a lot of the smoking bans are based on from what I understand. Find me someone who smokes these days and doesn't know the risks associated with it. I know very good and well what is going into my body when I light up, and its a personal choice I have made in my life pertaining to my personal philosophy. More or less, I know what I may be doing to myself.
As for banning smoking in public places, I feel like that is absolutely ridiculous. Leave it to the business owner!! I understand and am alright with banning smoking on or in government property, public schools, and what not; but when it comes to a private business, such as Moore's, or wherever, just let the business owner decide. If people don't like that a business allows smoking, don't go there...it is as simple as that. The business owner can decide what is best for their business, not the government.
Ok well here is my opinion and its only an opinion, I think its ridiculous that everyone is taking the no smoking then way to seriously. I am a smoker and i am very considerate of others especially non smokers but there are things that others do to offend me and i am not throwing a fit trying to get that banned. Some wear to much cologne and perfume and causes others with asthma to have a hard time breathing we arent slapping restrictions on them. That can be a health risk to asthmatics who breathe that in. I am just making a point that sometimes people dont realize that they have bad habits that bother others as well. If we are going to ban smoking we may as well ban drinking, gambling and all the other things that are hazardous to anyone else. Drinking and driving kills more people than 2nd hand smoke why not ban drinking. Gambling addiction is serious as well we havent banned that. If we are taking some rights away then lets be fair and take them all away or better yet stop the non sense. If you dont like smoking then go to the restraunts that are no smoking. Let us smokers have our places to smoke.
I just think that if the government bans smoking in privately owned places and we as people allow it, they will begin to ban this, ban that, tax this, tax that (Cigarette tax goes up 62 cents next month, and check out the new soda and beer taxes that are trying to be implemented in some states)
It's a really slippery slope that I think we do not need to go down.
smoking bans are created first and foremost to protect the american worker from having to work in an unhealthy environment. If you leave it in those simple terms, it makes all the sense in the world. I do believe in just a handful of exemptions...like VFW and other privately run clubs.
I AM AGANST ANY MORE LAWS AGINST THE PUBLIC. WE ARE SMART ENOUGH TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE WANT TO DO. WE DONT NEED SOME (GOOD,SMART) GUY TELLING US WHAT WE CAN DO.
WE HAVE TO MANY LAWS NOW.
AS FOR SMOKING I AM A FORMER SMOKER,ALTHOUGH I DONT LIKE THE SMELL,EVERYBODY HAS THE RIGHT TO SMOKE IF THEY WANT TO.
Illinois is not a model for us to follow. lol Do you want insane taxes, restrictive weapons bans, and rampant corruption, too
The law to restrict smoking is a good LAW and should be enacted IMMEDIATELY.
You look like a nice girl with a bright smile... for now. Guess you've never seen someone struggle for their last breath thanks to a lifetime of smoking. Guess no one you love has to work in a smoke filled bar just to pay the bills. Find a new job you say? Good luck finding any job these days. I'm looking forward to the blog you post when you honestly confront your addiction.
Why should not it NOT be up to the property or business owner to determine if they want to allow or disallow smoking on their property?
Why don't cities tackle bigger problems such as unsightly structures, outdated landscaping, and drugs--rather than telling business owners what LEGAL ACTIVITIES to and to not allow in their establishments?
To the poster who feels bans are to "protect the worker from working in an unhealthy environment." : That's what OSHA is supposed to do, and they've done if for every OTHER "unhealthy exposure" out there, so why don't we let them decide on a regulation?
Oh. Wait. That's right: They DID decide, over five years ago, that there was NO NEED to regulate smoking in the workplace because any hazard it represented was below the requirements they placed on anything they could find in highly diluted tobacco smoke. The Antismoking group (ASH) that had sued OSHA to force them to come up with a regulation dropped the lawsuit when OSHA told them they wouldn't support a ban and ASH was afraid they'd actually come up with some sort of reasonable regulation instead.
Michael J. McFadden
Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"
bondsman wrote, "What most of you don't accept nor admit is it is simply about control! One segment of society wants to control what another segment of society does. Once that is understood, the focus can be shifted to really important issues."
Bondsman, you're partly correct, but it goes way beyond that. One of the reasons that the antismoking movement has been so successful is that it's brought together many people with wildly different motivations and gotten them all to focus on this one issue. For a very brief but pretty well done one-page summary of the first 50 pages of the Antimoker "Types" as laid out in Brains, see:
http://www.stahlheart.com/wispofsmoke/re...
The "Controllers" represent an important, and very nasty, subset of Antismokers, but they're still just one part of a much larger puzzle.
Michael J. McFadden,
Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"
"Why can't smokers come up with better arguments than ALWAYS going to listing off things that are worse for you??? Those things AREN'T the issue we're all discussing.
-- Posted by smaller_gov_now on Sun, Mar 8, 2009, at 11:05 AM "
Because anti-smokers' argument is ALWAYS how bad it is for you. The issue we are discussing is wanted/unwanted government interference into the health habits of the public and interference with the policies of private businesses.
The problem is that everyone knows it's bad for you. Just how bad in every possible scenario is anyone's guess. The guesses here apparently range from "not harmful at all" to "die instantly". My guess is that it's bad, but just a drop in the bucket at the same time.
I am a smoker. I do not smoke in my house and I do not smoke in my car. I do not stand in front of doorways of public places and I do not throw my cigarette butts on the ground. I work hard, have for 35 years and pay for my own health care. I am appalled that the government is expecting me to help pay health care costs of the "poor and less fortunate" by increasing cigarette taxes. To take a certain group of people and make them pay more taxes is not only unfair but should be unconstitutional! The fact that non-smokers throw all smokers in the same category is ridiculous. There are just as many non smoking people that are inconsiderate and ignorant as there are inconsiderate and ignorant smokers. Be careful non-smokers. When we all have to quit because the cost is outrageous, they will be coming to you to pay for the "poor and less fortunate"!
Yes, Shannen Hayes you are "still smokin"!
There is no question about that and I am fairly certain you will be for years to come.
Smoking is the nastiest habbit a human being can have! Even though other's have said this I'm going to reinforce it by saying that not only is it harming you, but smoking is also harming the health of others. You should awlyas be considerate of people's feelings and generaly well being. So the next time you light up, you should be considerate and ask them if they don;t mind breathing in toxic fumes that could give them lung caner.