When did smoking go completely beyond the pale?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Watching the local TV news about new initiatives banning cigarettes everywhere, the vox pops are quite extraordinarily hostile. "Good, they shouldn't have any right to spread their filthy pollution anywhere", etc. When was the major "tipping point" where it stopped being a debate and turned into a legitimate floodgate-opening for all this vitriol? Well, maybe it never really was an actual 'debate', but people used to be more polite about it.

― chthonic for the people, Thursday, 11 August 2005 22:45 (twenty years ago)

when celebrities start dying, people start caring.

― tehRZA gibbons (tehresa), Thursday, 11 August 2005 22:48 (twenty years ago)

When the Puritans won.

― Zazas Zazas Nasatanada Katzenellenbogen by the Sea (noodle vague), Thursday, 11 August 2005 22:50 (twenty years ago)

interesting question. I suspect it's something to do with a relative decline in the numbers of people smoking, which eventually reached the stage where non-smokers had sufficient numbers to start being more assertive of their rights.

― DV (dirtyvicar), Thursday, 11 August 2005 22:51 (twenty years ago)

when people start crying, celebrities start dying.

― Googley Asearch (Toaster), Thursday, 11 August 2005 22:53 (twenty years ago)

when celebrities start dying, people start crying.

― Dr. Glen Y. Abreu (dr g), Thursday, 11 August 2005 22:54 (twenty years ago)

Sept. 1st here and then I will no longer have to come home from a bar smelling like an ashtray.

― Miss Misery (thatgirl), Thursday, 11 August 2005 22:57 (twenty years ago)

It's terrible the way people used to get dragged into bars and made to smell like ashtrays.

― Zazas Zazas Nasatanada Katzenellenbogen by the Sea (noodle vague), Thursday, 11 August 2005 22:59 (twenty years ago)

When celebrities start dying, people start buying Heat magazine.

― Markelby (Mark C), Thursday, 11 August 2005 22:59 (twenty years ago)

when the studies about 2nd hand smoke got publicized.

― oops (Oops), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:00 (twenty years ago)

I don't understand no smoking in bars, never will. Bars are dens of iniquity, anyway. But I really hate smoking in restaurants. Smoking and eating simply do not mix. And in the workplace, it's a foregone conclusion.

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:01 (twenty years ago)

When Rock Hudson died. No, wait...

― Pleasant Plains /// (Pleasant Plains ///), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:02 (twenty years ago)

Smoking and eating may not mix, but put 5 minutes between them and it's a divine combination. Still the problem of wafting 2nd hand smoke inclines me to favor the ban in restaurants.

Paunchu OTM about bars though -- I mean seriously, WTF.

― Aaron A., Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:04 (twenty years ago)

Laws that force pub owners to ban smoking are ludicrous. If there's a huge demand for no smoking pubs, why haven't they appeared voluntarily? If I want to let people smoke in my house, why shouldn't I be able to?

― Zazas Zazas Nasatanada Katzenellenbogen by the Sea (noodle vague), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:04 (twenty years ago)

I think that once people felt like the tides were turning against smoking, a lot of people came out of the woodwork who had never admitted publicly that cigarettes actually annoyed the living crap out of them. They (I) had tolerated it because they (I) figured no one else really cared about it. I'm amazed at some of the people I'd never expect who come out and say that they like the smoking ban.

Smokers don't understand because they're used to their stink.

― Hurting (Hurting), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:05 (twenty years ago)

There's a bill on the table in Chicago to ban smoking in bars, and I really hope that political corruption prevails in that one. Some fat tobacco shilling fuck should pay off all the aldermen. SMOKING IN BARS IS NATURAL AND WONDERFUL.

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:05 (twenty years ago)

It's terrible the way people used to get dragged into bars and made to smell like ashtrays.

-- Zazas Zazas Nasatanada Katzenellenbogen by the Sea (noodle_vagu...), August 11th, 2005.

You're right. People who don't like to go home feeling sick have no right to enjoy live music or a drink.

― Hurting (Hurting), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:06 (twenty years ago)

oh no, here we go.

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:07 (twenty years ago)

I hate smoky bars. In Chicago, the club I went to was so thick with it I had to go outside every 20 minutes or because my eyes would start to water and I was coughing/sniffling, etc. I don't mind the occasional cigarette smoke in a bar, but when *everyone* is doing it I may as well just leave, cuz I physically can't stand it.

Of course, in SF, all the bars are non-smoking. Hooray!

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:07 (twenty years ago)

in chicago, everybody smokes. We want none of your clean, sissy California air.

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:08 (twenty years ago)

If you could pass a law GUARANTEEING excellent ventillation in every bar that allowed smoking, I'd be willing to compromise, but this is almost never the case.

― Hurting (Hurting), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:08 (twenty years ago)

90% of the regulars in my local smoke. The other 10% are ex-smokers or don't care. Soon we will all have to walk outside every 10 minutes for a cig to accommodate a few tossers who barely visit the place. Progress is wonderful.

― Zazas Zazas Nasatanada Katzenellenbogen by the Sea (noodle vague), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:09 (twenty years ago)

yeah, I forget what club it was, but it had low ceilings and solid brick walls (and fans that were not operating). Four Tet sucked anyway, we left early.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:09 (twenty years ago)

yeah, i have to admit, too much smoke gets to me, too. even smokers care about proper ventilation. I'm much more hesitant to smoke indoors in the winter, when the windows aren't open and I know I'll be sitting in my own filth for untold months.

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:10 (twenty years ago)

xpost The bar owners in NYC stopped complaining pretty quickly. Seems like business is fine.

― Hurting (Hurting), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:10 (twenty years ago)

It isn't your right to walk into any private pub/bar/restaurant. If the owner wants to let people smoke in there, why shouldn't they? If you don't like it, go somewhere else. Let the Market prevail.

― Zazas Zazas Nasatanada Katzenellenbogen by the Sea (noodle vague), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:11 (twenty years ago)

i much prefer non-smoking bars now actually. but then again, i quit so maybe i've lost my tolerance for smoke.

― gear (gear), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:11 (twenty years ago)

It isn't your right to smoke either.

― Hurting (Hurting), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:11 (twenty years ago)

If the owner wants to let people smoke in there, why shouldn't they?

Because it's a workplace. If a bar absolutely has to have smoking I believe they can get around the laws anyway (at least in CA) by making all of the employees part owner or something.

― walter kranz (walterkranz), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:12 (twenty years ago)

Let the Market prevail.

But what about the children? All those children in bars... I worry about them.

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:13 (twenty years ago)

isn't the push to ban smoking in bars usually under the guise of providing a safe/healthy work environment?
xpost

― oops (Oops), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:13 (twenty years ago)

"If the owner wants to let people smoke in there, why shouldn't they?"

It isn't necessarily legal to subject your patrons to health hazards. You may as well argue that if an owner wants to keep their restaurants filthy and crawling with vermin, why can't they?

x-post

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:14 (twenty years ago)

i don't mind going into smoking bars, though. i still prefer to go other places, though. i quit and stay away from 'em now because the thought of going out like Warren Zevon or Peter Jennings scares the crap out of me.

― gear (gear), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:14 (twenty years ago)

but mmm, that rich, smoky flavor....

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:15 (twenty years ago)

xposts
I can barely go into a bar/club now, for some reason I've become allergic to cigarette smoke since I quit. My sinuses get fucked within minutes. So smoking bans make me really happy on one level, but I find them a bit hard to justify otherwise. Better for employees, at least, though I've never met a cocktail or bartender who was worried about the smoke where they work.

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:15 (twenty years ago)

It isn't your right to smoke either.

That's sticky. It IS legal.

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:15 (twenty years ago)

Okay, I'm overwhelmed with the logical force of the arguments. As long as we make restaurants only serve healthy food.

― Zazas Zazas Nasatanada Katzenellenbogen by the Sea (noodle vague), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:15 (twenty years ago)

i actually like the smoking ban in bars. it's resulted in lots of nice patios and outside seating. i'm so used to the clean bar air now that when i visit places where you can still smoke inside, it really bothers me.

― tehRZA gibbons (tehresa), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:17 (twenty years ago)

I think smoking bans in bars are hard to justify, but every smoker nowadays has to have the sneaking suspicion that they are on their way out (as smokers, if not as dead folk). And they have to be rational enough to understand that this is not entirely a bad thing. Getting angry about it is not a reasonable reaction.

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:18 (twenty years ago)

But what about the children? All those children in bars... I worry about them.

Ha ha, I've actually taken my daughter into bars (she just turned one). Another smoking ban bonus.

― walter kranz (walterkranz), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:18 (twenty years ago)

Kind of true Kenan, but again, why not give people the choice of smoking and no smoking bars?

― Zazas Zazas Nasatanada Katzenellenbogen by the Sea (noodle vague), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:19 (twenty years ago)

If they had a sign out front that read "THIS RESTAURANT IS FILTHY AND CRAWLING WITH VERMIN. ENTER AT OWN RISK. OH AND TRY THE BISQUE", that would be fine with me. Likewise if you knew going in that a place allowed smoking.

― oops (Oops), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:21 (twenty years ago)

Pretty soon no smoking will be the standard everywhere so it's probably time to get used to it.

I don't know what it's like where you are Noodle but here bars/clubs have to have public licenses to operate openly so there's no reason they shouldn't have to follow public, voted-in, ordinances. If they really want to work around it, as places in "dry" counties do, they can become private clubs and require membership. whatever.

Meanwhile I'm a huge patron of bars/clubs/live music. I have severe asthma and often have to leave early b/c I can't breathe. So between me being able to go out in public and not be suffocated vs. someone else having to go outside for a few minutes to smoke. . .let them go outside. I don't want to smoke with them.

― Miss Misery (thatgirl), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:25 (twenty years ago)

I walk into a pub that plays music I don't like. Do I

a) leave and go somewhere else
b) demand that they play music I do like
c) demand that a law is passed so that all pubs only play music I like?

― Zazas Zazas Nasatanada Katzenellenbogen by the Sea (noodle vague), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:25 (twenty years ago)

Music is not a health hazard.

― Shakey Mo Collier, Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:28 (twenty years ago)

I think if anything, a smoking ban is a step toward having smoking and non-smoking places. Obviously the "market" was free to create non-smoking establishments for all of these years and it didn't. There are always loopholes, smoking patios, and people who simply ignore the law anyway so the smoking ban kind of creates this separation between the smoking and non-smoking areas which never existed before.

― walter kranz (walterkranz), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:29 (twenty years ago)

I'm sorry if I'm being repetitively bolshy about this. I see some of the force of the arguments against, and a smoking ban in England really will spoil the quality of nights out for me and a lot of the people I know (who go to pubs regularly). I still haven't heard a convincing argument why individual pubs shouldn't be free to choose though. The protecting staff argument is closest, but there are still plenty of unhealthy jobs that people aren't obliged to take.

― Zazas Zazas Nasatanada Katzenellenbogen by the Sea (noodle vague), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:31 (twenty years ago)

Risks associated with secondhand smoke are greatly exaggerated, thanks to bad science being promoted by all sorts of groups. I don't smoke, but this tends to be a pet peeve of mine in all areas. I'm a lot more concerned about all the chemicals in the air that aren't getting all the press. Fun fact of the day: According to the WHO study, which was buried at the time it was conducted..kids exposed to secondhand smoke in the home during childhood are actually 22% less likely to get lung cancer.

― Aramyr, Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:31 (twenty years ago)

I walk into a pub that plays music I don't like.

Do they have a cabaret license? Are they paying their ASCAP fees? There are rules and regulations surrounding public music so why not air quality?

― walter kranz (walterkranz), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:33 (twenty years ago)

Pretty soon no smoking will be the standard everywhere so it's probably time to get used to it.

This is true enough. I don't mind smoking outside. Another thing smokers don't realize: how much of their hangover is due to chainsmoking throughout the evening.

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:35 (twenty years ago)

I still haven't heard a convincing argument why individual pubs shouldn't be free to choose though.

Well, beacuse it's not a free market issue, it's a public health issue. And the stats back up the fact that smoking bans not only prevent people from being subjected to secondhand smoke, but actually make a lot of people quit smoking. Any government has the right, and certainly the duty, to protect the health of its citizens. Even Ireland has smoking bans in place now. Just in workplaces, but still. Ireland. Land of coal-burning stoves.

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:40 (twenty years ago)

The protecting staff argument is closest, but there are still plenty of unhealthy jobs that people aren't obliged to take.

You realize this is a really bad argument, right?

― oops (Oops), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:41 (twenty years ago)

I will miss going out and having a beer and a cig at the same time, though. A lot of people will.

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:41 (twenty years ago)

Ban burgers then. Cream cakes. Alcohol. Public health is debatably government business, but I'm talking about people's right to endanger their health if they so choose. Go to no smoking pubs if you want to avoid second-hand smoke.

― Zazas Zazas Nasatanada Katzenellenbogen by the Sea (noodle vague), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:42 (twenty years ago)

Go to no smoking pubs if you want to avoid second-hand smoke.

There are none because smokers would have a fit and fight to defend their right to smoke anywhere they please!

― walter kranz (walterkranz), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:45 (twenty years ago)

Ban burgers then. Cream cakes. Alcohol.

That's not right. You can drink alcohol and eat burgers in moderation -- most people do. Most smokers just smoke. It's insanely addictive.

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:46 (twenty years ago)

Now that's a bad argument. If there's a huge demand for non-smoking pubs, people would be well within their rights to create them.

― Zazas Zazas Nasatanada Katzenellenbogen by the Sea (noodle vague), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:47 (twenty years ago)

If you start spilling your beer and burger drippings on me then yes, I'm going to call for a beer & burger ban!

― walter kranz (walterkranz), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:47 (twenty years ago)

I will miss the days of inhaling smoke at my favorite bar. Luckily I can still inhale whiskey and then drive home.

― Dr. Glen Y. Abreu (dr g), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:48 (twenty years ago)

Public health is debatably government business

Your personal health is not the government's business, but public health certainly is. I wish my government would do a whole lot more to protect public health. Actually, you know what? Before you ban smoking in bars, please get the mercury out of my fish.

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:48 (twenty years ago)

Of course, in SF, all the bars are non-smoking. Hooray!

-- Shakey Mo Collier (audiobo...), August 11th, 2005 5:07 PM. (later)

Haha, you don't go out much anymore do you, old man? :-D

― gygax! (gygax!), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:49 (twenty years ago)

Related question: does this mean that glory holes are banned too?

― Dr. Glen Y. Abreu (dr g), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:49 (twenty years ago)

I really haven't noticed that my risk for heart disease increases with every Big Mac the person next to me eats. Find one accurate analogy.

― The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:50 (twenty years ago)

Maybe bars should be required to have a smoking license. Inspections would be done to ensure some reasonable degree of ventilation and there could be a limited amount of smoking licenses to ensure that there would be a certain ratio of smoking to non-smoking places. That seems like a reasonable compromise.

― walter kranz (walterkranz), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:51 (twenty years ago)

Oh my! I am huffing a butt while I write this.
There were, indeed, two non-smoking pubs/bars here before the smoking ban (in massachusetts)went into effect.
I am probably biased, but I think each business owner should decide for him/her self. The law is decided (in terms of smoking bans in the US) on a perceived notion of harm;e.g. that the harm is being caused to the worker.
What it means to me, as a smoker, is that I am not going to stop by the local bar for a drink and a cig. And that means they don't have the commerce they need...
To get back to my initial point, smoking and non-smoking establishments co-existed here, quite peacefully!
Everyone was happy.
Behavior should not be legislated.

― aimurchie (aimurchie), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:52 (twenty years ago)

x posts

The analogy was about the government forcing people to be healthy (smoking bans encourage people to stop smoking). Like Aramyr said above, the second-hand smoke issue is way less clear cut than the dangers of smoking.

Once again, if somebody wants to open a bar that allows smoking, proclaims that smoking is allowed, and warns potential staff that smoking will be allowed, why should that be illegal?

― Zazas Zazas Nasatanada Katzenellenbogen by the Sea (noodle vague), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:53 (twenty years ago)

I have smoked a surprising amount while reading this thread.

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:55 (twenty years ago)

I popped out for a fag 5 minutes ago, but it was me last one.

― Zazas Zazas Nasatanada Katzenellenbogen by the Sea (noodle vague), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:56 (twenty years ago)

i have a vaguely related query: to those of you who smoke, to you have any plans--be they short-tern or long-term--to eventually quit?

― gear (gear), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:56 (twenty years ago)

Also I should start a thread on "Why Pubs in Hull Shouldn't Be Allowed to Close at 11 on Thursdays When I'm Still Sober and Solvent".

― Zazas Zazas Nasatanada Katzenellenbogen by the Sea (noodle vague), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:57 (twenty years ago)

xpost Of course. If I don't quit, I will die from it. Duh.

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:58 (twenty years ago)

I feel like I should quit for my family's sake. I have no personal desire to quit. And y'know, it is quite addictive.

There's a 1 in 4 chance you'll die from it. That's not quite the same.

― Zazas Zazas Nasatanada Katzenellenbogen by the Sea (noodle vague), Thursday, 11 August 2005 23:59 (twenty years ago)

Just for all the people who constantly toot the smokers are killing the rest of us horn..the WHO study found there is no statistically significant risk for non-smokers living or working with smokers. None.

― Aramyr, Friday, 12 August 2005 00:01 (twenty years ago)

xpost Ok, if I keep smoking the way I do, I will die from it.

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Friday, 12 August 2005 00:02 (twenty years ago)

link?

― gear (gear), Friday, 12 August 2005 00:02 (twenty years ago)

Smoking is third on my potential cause of death list, behind booze and getting hit by a car on my way to/from the pub.

― Zazas Zazas Nasatanada Katzenellenbogen by the Sea (noodle vague), Friday, 12 August 2005 00:04 (twenty years ago)

"i have a vaguely related query: to those of you who smoke, to you have any plans--be they short-tern or long-term--to eventually quit? "
Only if you record "For Those About To Quit - We Salute You!!" with other posters from this thread.

― aimurchie (aimurchie), Friday, 12 August 2005 00:04 (twenty years ago)

You mean this WHO study?

http://www.who.int/inf-pr-1998/en/pr98-29.html

― walter kranz (walterkranz), Friday, 12 August 2005 00:05 (twenty years ago)

The way former smokers, who quit under duress due to smoking bans, are now furiously anti-smoking proves that no smoker really wants to be a smoker. They just fool themselves.

I'm quite happy about the recent turn of events. It surprises me, but just a few years ago I was pretty happy about smoking and had smoked for years. I even used to think non-smokers were tightasses and I resented them. Now, just a couple years later, I veer away from smokers on the sidewalk and can't help looking down on them. I now see a hot chick with a cigarette and realize I don't find her so hot and then realize further that it is the cigarette that is turning me off and that she is actually a hot chick. "Too bad she's so stupid, though," I think and reaffirm my disinterest and rejection of her. Then, I think, "Hm, did I think I was stupid when I was a smoker? Nope. Oh well."

― Former Smoker, Friday, 12 August 2005 00:07 (twenty years ago)

Reading yr own personal history into other people's thoughts: Classic or Dud?

― Zazas Zazas Nasatanada Katzenellenbogen by the Sea (noodle vague), Friday, 12 August 2005 00:08 (twenty years ago)

Once again, if somebody wants to open a bar that allows smoking, proclaims that smoking is allowed, and warns potential staff that smoking will be allowed, why should that be illegal?

It shouldn't. I'm with you.

― oops (Oops), Friday, 12 August 2005 00:09 (twenty years ago)

If somebody wants to open a bar that allows drinking, proclaims that drinking is allowed, and warns potential staff that drinking will be allowed, why should that be illegal?

― walter kranz (walterkranz), Friday, 12 August 2005 00:11 (twenty years ago)

It shouldn't.

― Zazas Zazas Nasatanada Katzenellenbogen by the Sea (noodle vague), Friday, 12 August 2005 00:11 (twenty years ago)

But it is if you don't have a liquor license. Why not do the same for smoking?

― walter kranz (walterkranz), Friday, 12 August 2005 00:14 (twenty years ago)

I smoke and have no intention to quit. The problem with smoking bans is difficult, though - I understand why non-smokers are pleased, but having a complete ban on bars with smoking just seems incredibly stupid to me. Yes, I can see it for restaurants and even venues, but pubs have a right to allow smoking. Personally I favour the return to lounge/bar areas - most new pubs are open-plan, but if you have separate rooms then surely you eliminate all problems that aren't staff-related?

― emil.y (emil.y), Friday, 12 August 2005 00:14 (twenty years ago)

Yes, that is the one. The mention of small sample size in the press release is BS. An abstract of the study from the journal it was published in, the Journal of the National Cancer Institute:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9776409&dopt=Abstract

The EPA report which is generally cited by many of the anti-smoking groups is a total joke.

― Aramyr, Friday, 12 August 2005 00:15 (twenty years ago)

x post

I don't have much of a problem with smoking licences, walter (apart from a more abstract argument about state control that's def'nitely not worth going into here), as long as they're available on similar terms to alcohol licences.

― Zazas Zazas Nasatanada Katzenellenbogen by the Sea (noodle vague), Friday, 12 August 2005 00:17 (twenty years ago)

xpost
So your only evidence is a study where the people who conducted the study have concluded that "passive smoking does cause lung cancer and other diseases"?

― walter kranz (walterkranz), Friday, 12 August 2005 00:17 (twenty years ago)

I don't know if the license thing is feasible I was just throwing that out there as a possible middle ground between a complete smoking ban and the absoulte freedom to smoke.

― walter kranz (walterkranz), Friday, 12 August 2005 00:18 (twenty years ago)

I really don't know why this isn't left to the bar/ club owner's discretion. It's ridiculous.

That said, I do love waking up smelling nice and being able to get two or three days worth out of t-shirts and jeans when I'm in CA

― Will (will), Friday, 12 August 2005 00:19 (twenty years ago)

why aren't ~they~ working on a cigarette that doesn't kill you(that much) but still gives you a good smoke? Who will step up and be our Mr. Snackwell(Smokewell?)? Nay, our JONAS SALK!!! I avoid smoking conversations because the "clueless tut-tutting" to "acknowledging how undeniably kickass a good smoke is" ratio is never ever in the acceptable range. Can't we look toward a fresh new smoky tomorrow? I'd fall off the wagon and never look back.

― tremendoid (tremendoid), Friday, 12 August 2005 00:26 (twenty years ago)

There are none because smokers would have a fit and fight to defend their right to smoke anywhere they please!

Lies! I know of several non-smoking music venues and bars that get plenty of business. In most cases it's been because they're either in a building that is all non-smoking (a student union or former hotel lobby, for example) or they're in an older building that would have prohibitively high fire insurance if smoking were allowed. These places all do a fair amount of business and I don't think they suffer for lack of smoking. There are smoking establishments, patios, and entryways within reach where smoking is allowed though. I've only ever heard people bitch about it in the winter.

Also, has anyone else ever been right next to someone who's smoking at a crowded concert? It basically amounts to getting all the smoke blown directly in your face and the occasional cigarette accidentally being put out on your arm. Fun times.

― mike h. (mike h.), Friday, 12 August 2005 00:26 (twenty years ago)

O cigarette, my white & slender mistress...I bring you (via Salon a loooooong time ago) http://www.salon.com/health/feature/2000/02/08/i_smoke/index.html...because ever silver lining has a cloud.

― Laurel, Friday, 12 August 2005 00:31 (twenty years ago)

Lies! I know of several non-smoking music venues and bars that get plenty of business.

OK, my mistake. I don't remember there being any non-smoking venues in LA before the ban but I suppose they exist in some places.

― walter kranz (walterkranz), Friday, 12 August 2005 00:31 (twenty years ago)

Sorry, that should be http://www.salon.com/health/feature/2000/02/08/i_smoke/index.html with no elipses.

― oh rats and double rats, Friday, 12 August 2005 00:32 (twenty years ago)

Again, that's a misreading of the data. Familiarize yourself with the terms used in epidemiological studies, what they are considered to mean, and what is considered of meaning in terms of Relative Risk, etc. Also, one must never forget that correlation does not equal causation.

― Aramyr, Friday, 12 August 2005 00:33 (twenty years ago)

I don't mean in LA but in my area, I assume LA was a smoke-infested hellhole. We still have no smoking ban.

― mike h. (mike h.), Friday, 12 August 2005 00:34 (twenty years ago)

Yeah, I understood. Forgive the ridiculous incoherence in my last post.

― walter kranz (walterkranz), Friday, 12 August 2005 00:37 (twenty years ago)

So, to recap: the only study you can point to concluded that "passive smoking does cause lung cancer and other diseases" but you contend that the World Health Organization misread their own data? Therefore the burden is on me to become a scientist and re-read the data to conform with the conclusion you want to believe?

― walter kranz (walterkranz), Friday, 12 August 2005 00:42 (twenty years ago)

it's a very slippery slope.If this behaviour is legislated, what next? This is one area of legislation that has to do with choice.
And, believe me, it's not a huge step from this to reproductive choice.
Your - or my- preferences should be irrelevant. Telling people that they shouldn't do something is counter productive.
As a smoker, I can relate to being in a smoke-free room. I'm not exactly shoving cigarettes out in your face. I, too, like a smoke free environment.
But I think it's very frightening to dictate behavior and choice.
It's really all about choice.

― aimurchie (aimurchie), Friday, 12 August 2005 00:56 (twenty years ago)

The WHO study was the largest study I have been able to find, and not done using bogus methodology like the EPA, hence my references. There are multiple other studies with similar results. Read more than one line, Walter. A relative risk rating under 2.0 is considered not statistically significant, and you are really looking for more like a 3.0 rating when talking cause and effect. If you wish to pull quotes, have one yourself.

"CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate no association between childhood exposure to ETS and lung cancer risk. We did find weak evidence of a dose-response relationship between risk of lung cancer and exposure to spousal and workplace ETS. There was no detectable risk after cessation of exposure."

I won't make the claim it is totally harmless. But it is ludicrous to be so up in arms about it for spending a couple hours at a smoky bar. If you want real cause for concern, look at the air in LA for godsake. You are breathing that 24/7.

― Aramyr, Friday, 12 August 2005 00:59 (twenty years ago)

This is one area of legislation that has to do with choice.
And, believe me, it's not a huge step from this to reproductive choice.

That's a ridiculous comparison. An abortion is a medical procedure, choosing to smoke a cigarette is not. At any rate we're not talking about the complete criminalization of tobacco but restrictions on smoking in certain public areas. You can't drink on the street in most parts of the US and you're not allowed to be nude in public either. You may argue against those laws as well but the bottom line is it's perfectly common and acceptable for society to decide whether certain behaviors are allowable in public or not.

― walter kranz (walterkranz), Friday, 12 August 2005 01:30 (twenty years ago)

comparing bar smoking bans to restricting abortion is completely batshit, sorry.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 12 August 2005 01:36 (twenty years ago)

look i was a smoker for 10 years, i still "support" smokers and kinda deep down i hate banning smoking in bars but still... i'm not going to protest too much because this is really a "your right to swing my arm ends where my face begins" issue. plus i know too many people w/ cancer & 1 less provoking factor in the air is ok with me

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 12 August 2005 01:38 (twenty years ago)

Ugh, slippery slope arguments.

― Remy (x Jeremy), Friday, 12 August 2005 01:42 (twenty years ago)

Reading yr own personal history into other people's thoughts: Classic or Dud?

Classic. I have all psychology of smoking texts to back me up; they have "blow me" written all over them.

― Former Smoker, Friday, 12 August 2005 02:02 (twenty years ago)

I'm not batshit - but I agree that I'm stretching it a bit thin. I'll bore everybody about reproductive choice on a different thread.

― aimurchie (aimurchie), Friday, 12 August 2005 02:06 (twenty years ago)

There's a surprising amount of concession going on on this thread. Smoking went beyond the beyond the pale RIGHT HERE.

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Friday, 12 August 2005 02:16 (twenty years ago)

it went beyond the pale when i quit

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 12 August 2005 02:19 (twenty years ago)

actually, scratch that, when i visited sf (still a smoker) & totally didn't mind the ban, that's when it did.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 12 August 2005 02:20 (twenty years ago)

it's a very slippery slope.If this behaviour is legislated, what next?

Oh god, how the hell is this even a slippery slope? Can I light other things on fire and walk around with them in public areas? Oh hell no. Can I walk around with my pants off? Nope. What about smoking other things? Hmm.

Slope ain't that slippery. Call me when they're thinking about banning drinking in bars.

― mike h. (mike h.), Friday, 12 August 2005 02:33 (twenty years ago)

No kidding. Smoking is verifiably bad for OTHER PEOPLE, and REALLY REALLY BAD for yourself. This isn't censorship. This isn't curtailing though or expression. This is something that's one of the biggest health risks out there.

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Friday, 12 August 2005 02:37 (twenty years ago)

And even given that, no one is going to stop you from doing it. They're just saying you may have to go outside, or on the patio. Tough titties.

I must reiterate, though, if the guy next to me can take a shot of well whisky, why can't I light up? That's going to make him sicker than my cigarette ever will.

― Paunchy Stratego (kenan), Friday, 12 August 2005 02:40 (twenty years ago)

many xposts, but wouldn't the fact that the public health system has to support a large amount of people with smoking-related illnesses amount to a good reason for it to become a public health issue - which it is reasonable to attempt to control/mitigate by legislative means?

― gem (trisk), Friday, 12 August 2005 02:43 (twenty years ago)

-- Aramyr (Aramy...), August 12th, 2005.

I don't need statistics. I feel like shit every time I spend a could of hours in a smoky bar. I am very glad to have places to go now. And, as it happens, where I live you do have the option -- Jersey City, where the bars allow smoking, or NYC, where they don't. It doesnt seem like people are exactly flocking to my side of the Hudson just to drink in toxic clouds.

― Hurting (Hurting), Friday, 12 August 2005 03:01 (twenty years ago)

I must reiterate, though, if the guy next to me can take a shot of well whisky, why can't I light up? That's going to make him sicker than my cigarette ever will.

cuz it's not his choice dude!! your argument makes no sense

― s1ocki (slutsky), Friday, 12 August 2005 03:13 (twenty years ago)

If the guy next to me can do shooters, why can't I punch him in the face? His jaw will heal faster than his liver.

― Hurting (Hurting), Friday, 12 August 2005 03:15 (twenty years ago)

"Oh god, how the hell is this even a slippery slope? Can I light other things on fire and walk around with them in public areas? Oh hell no. Can I walk around with my pants off? Nope. What about smoking other things? Hmm.

Slope ain't that slippery. Call me when they're thinking about banning drinking in bars. "

I already retreated from my incendiary posts....but, since you're asking, I believe you can light a flag on fire and walk around with it in public areas.You might want to keep your pants on for that!

― aimurchie (aimurchie), Friday, 12 August 2005 03:35 (twenty years ago)

If I can!

― Hurting (Hurting), Friday, 12 August 2005 03:36 (twenty years ago)

but wouldn't the fact that the public health system has to support a large amount of people with smoking-related illnesses amount to a good reason for it to become a public health issue

Gem, in this country, taxes the government receives from tobacco outnumber what gets put back into healthcare.

― Sasha (sgh), Friday, 12 August 2005 03:43 (twenty years ago)

i understand from the wa health dept that that is an absolute myth sasha

― gem (trisk), Friday, 12 August 2005 03:44 (twenty years ago)

not to mention that those taxes are levied by the federal govt and health is a state jurisdictional issue. the wa health system is remarkably light on for federal health assistance

― gem (trisk), Friday, 12 August 2005 03:44 (twenty years ago)

Are you across-the-board smoking ban advocates also behind a push to remove all internal combustion engines from our roads? not only are they highly dangerous the emit deadly smog which I don't CHOOSE to inhale.

― Seuss, Friday, 12 August 2005 04:31 (twenty years ago)

I will defer to your answer, not having any figures at hand. Is it the same Aust-wide?

x-post

― Sasha (sgh), Friday, 12 August 2005 04:32 (twenty years ago)

Are you across-the-board smoking ban advocates also behind a push to remove all internal combustion engines from our roads?

Definitely! Bring on the electric cars! I want mine yesterday.

― walter kranz (walterkranz), Friday, 12 August 2005 04:34 (twenty years ago)

Is it the same Aust-wide?

i assume so, given that health and hospitals is in general a state jurisdictional matter australia-wide. WA tends to miss out on federal funding fairly often due to the lower population, and what there is gets a bit eaten up in providing services (or attempting to) across vast distances, which is obviously less of an issue in the smaller more populous states. i don't have any figures at hand either and i suspect in any case that figures could conceivably be manipulated to support either argument... partly because it would be so difficult to isolate the actual costs of the health care more than that it would be difficult to calculate the excise collected from tobacco sales (which is obviously a lot more easily quantifiable). in any case, i'm inclined to think it probable, given the quite high rates of lung and heart disease which are generally accepted to be correlated with (if not directly caused by) smoking, that the excise on tobacco would be barely a drop in the bucket of the health care costs. because i've seen the health care costs and they beggar belief.

i imagine this would be less of an issue in a nation like the US where health care is apparently supported more by the private system.

― gem (trisk), Friday, 12 August 2005 06:01 (twenty years ago)

Perhaps it was just Medicare...

― Sasha (sgh), Friday, 12 August 2005 06:19 (twenty years ago)

who knows. i wasn't really suggesting that health care costs should be a key argument for banning smoking - after all, those kind of chronic illnesses might equally be caused by boozing and eating big macs and various other activities, and inhaling carbon monoxide like someone up the thread said. however i do think it remains an issue of public health.

― gem (trisk), Friday, 12 August 2005 06:22 (twenty years ago)

The way former smokers, who quit under duress due to smoking bans, are now furiously anti-smoking proves that no smoker really wants to be a smoker. They just fool themselves.

You could just interpret it differently. They want everyone to quit because, that way, they don't have to be confronted with smoking (and how great it is) again. I hate ex-smokers who are now vehemently against smoking the most. You quit, good for you, but don't force others to do so. We all know smoking is unhealthy, we're not stupid. I only smoked for about half a year - I loved it - but, now that I quit, I don't really moan 'n' groan when others do. I would like my husband to quit - he smokes quite a lot - because I do worry about his health. But I'm not going to force him. He knows it's bad, his grandfather died from it for example.

I don't even really complain when people smoke around me now that I'm pregnant. It's not like an hour of smoke will harm my baby. (No, my husband never ever smokes in the house, so it's like living with a non-smoker.)

Gem, research has shown that obesity does not harm as much as previously though. I'm pro-smoking bans. It's a bad habit, I'd hate to see my child smoke. The less he/she's brought into temptation the better. But still I think smoking bans in bars is a bit ridiculous. I'm probably not making sense.

― nathalie sans denouement (stevie nixed), Friday, 12 August 2005 06:31 (twenty years ago)

i wasn't suggesting that obesity is worse than smoking by any means! i'm for smoking bans in workplaces myself. but i am a former smoker and i understand how frustrating it must be for the puffers amongst us to feel blackbanned or whatever. it's a hard one.

― gem (trisk), Friday, 12 August 2005 06:43 (twenty years ago)

Oh no, sorry, didn't mean to imply you meant that.

― nathalie sans denouement (stevie nixed), Friday, 12 August 2005 06:54 (twenty years ago)

90% of the regulars in my local smoke. The other 10% are ex-smokers or don't care.

I think you'll find "that is statistically impossible"

― Onimo (GerryNemo), Friday, 12 August 2005 07:51 (twenty years ago)

But what about the children? All those children in bars... I worry about them.
Ha ha, I've actually taken my daughter into bars (she just turned one). Another smoking ban bonus.

-- walter kranz (kranz_walte...), August 12th, 2005.

absolutely NO offense to yr daughter, but i don't want children in bars. waaaay more annoying than smoking (cards on table: i am an ex-smoker who lives with a smoker).

― N_RQ, Friday, 12 August 2005 07:59 (twenty years ago)

children who smoke in bars are the worst

― ken c (ken c), Friday, 12 August 2005 08:13 (twenty years ago)

Especially when it's our of their arses! Actually they can be handy if you need a smoke machine. Small and compact.

― nathalie sans denouement (stevie nixed), Friday, 12 August 2005 08:22 (twenty years ago)

"your right to swing my arm ends where my face begins"

I am going to use this phrase all the time now.

Even Ireland has smoking bans in place now. Just in workplaces, but still.

Workplaces in this phrase includes pubs, obviously. But not the street, where the street-sweepers work! How is that fair?

Ireland. Land of coal-burning stoves.

Eh, not since the eighties.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Friday, 12 August 2005 08:26 (twenty years ago)

When we visited Dublin (non-smoking city of course) we had to get up and go outside every time we wanted to go for a cigarette, and because there was only two of us, we'd have to go one by one while the other guarded the table and drinks and stuff. So you ended up with throngs of smokers huddled around in the cold while their mates sat indoors on their jacks. Unpleasant, even if you don't smoke.

― dog latin (dog latin), Friday, 12 August 2005 08:56 (twenty years ago)

Smoking bans were one of the few things the Nazis got right. I don't need no capitalistic Jew-whores trying to ruin my pure-as-snow Aryan health.

http://img358.imageshack.us/img358/6949/nazi2a6hm.gif

― Cunga (Cunga), Friday, 12 August 2005 09:38 (twenty years ago)

I also hear that the Nazis wore trousers.

― Hurting (Hurting), Friday, 12 August 2005 11:40 (twenty years ago)

No they didn't, they wore tight leather shorts. NRQ OTM upthread.

― Vicious Cop Kills Gentle Fool (Dada), Friday, 12 August 2005 11:44 (twenty years ago)

or, to put it otherwise, the smoking ban was just one more thing the nazis got wrong. furthermore, like eating meat, smoking is an active form of anti-fascism.

― N_RQ, Friday, 12 August 2005 11:44 (twenty years ago)

FIRST IT WILL BE THE SMOKERS, THEN IT WILL BE BLACK PEOPLE, MARK MY WORDS

― The Ghost of Smoker Logic In Full Effect (Dan Perry), Friday, 12 August 2005 12:17 (twenty years ago)

As ye olde linked article said, "[I smoke] because I'd rather crave nicotine than fascism."

― Laurel, Friday, 12 August 2005 12:20 (twenty years ago)

michael jackson's already gone beyond the pale
xpost

― ken c (ken c), Friday, 12 August 2005 12:27 (twenty years ago)

OH MY GOD THE SMOKING OPPRESSION IS OUT OF CONTROL, SEE THE WAY THEY HAVE BEEN SOLD INTO SLAVERY, HAD THEIR LAND STOLEN FROM THEM, BEEN DENIED THE RIGHT TO VOTE AND OWN PROPERTY AND HAD GIGANTIC SECTIONS OF THEIR FAMILY TREES TRUNCATED THANKS TO DISCRIMINATORY GOVERNMENT POLICIES

― The Ghost of Smokers Have So Much Perspective (Dan Perry), Friday, 12 August 2005 12:27 (twenty years ago)

Here in Oak Park, right next to Chicago, a popular local restaurant/bar fought against a proposed smoking ban. But after it was barely defeated, the owner noticed that the lines for the no-smoking section were as long as ever, while the smoking section was rarely full. So he then *voluntarily* banned smoking, and he says business is up.

Anyway, smoking went beyond the pale when they banned it on airplanes. And what do you know? People liked flying better! And apparently told their friends.

Personally, I love seeing shows in LA or New York, because I don't always need a shower when I get home late, and don't need to throw my clothes in a "stinky" pile - or hang my coat outside - so as not to offend my wife or disgust myself when I encounter the smell first thing in the morning, once my senses have normalized but the intensity of my former wardrobe has remained offensive.

TS: Banning smoking vs. banning cell phone use.

― Josh in Chicago (Josh in Chicago), Friday, 12 August 2005 12:28 (twenty years ago)

Just imagine, these people cause me to smell bad - KILL THEM!

― Vicious Cop Kills Gentle Fool (Dada), Friday, 12 August 2005 12:30 (twenty years ago)

Well, really, if you think about it, something so smelly it makes you smell as well is remarkable, yes? Other than fried food, smoking is about the only thing that permeates so thoroughly. I wonder if you move into a new place if you could tell the previous tenants did a lot of frying? (Answer: yes!)

― Josh in Chicago (Josh in Chicago), Friday, 12 August 2005 12:33 (twenty years ago)

Heck, on a perfect, clear, clean day, a smoker walking down the street leaves a vapor trail a few blocks long. This fascinates me, since there are so many places for that smoke to go, yet it chooses to linger.

― Josh in Chicago (Josh in Chicago), Friday, 12 August 2005 12:34 (twenty years ago)

Just imagine, these people cause me to smell bad - KILL THEM!

i think we kind of kill each other really, in different ways.

― ken c (ken c), Friday, 12 August 2005 12:35 (twenty years ago)

i read (in THE TELEGRAPH) that the reason aircon on airplanes feel so shitty and gloopy and germy is that they no longer have it on full blast, because cleaning air is so expensive. the air on planes was better when they allowed smoking cos they had to turn the filters up to 11.

― N_RQ, Friday, 12 August 2005 12:36 (twenty years ago)

I'm not being killed, who do you think I am, Roy Castle? (xpost)

― Vicious Cop Kills Gentle Fool (Dada), Friday, 12 August 2005 12:37 (twenty years ago)

-"the air on planes was better when they allowed smoking cos they had to turn the filters up to 11."

x-post Apparently you've never flown on a plane with smoking.

― Josh in Chicago (Josh in Chicago), Friday, 12 August 2005 12:38 (twenty years ago)

indeed not! have you ever been a smoker, though? vraiment chouette.

― N_RQ, Friday, 12 August 2005 12:39 (twenty years ago)

as a former smoker and occasional social smoker, i have to say i'm somewhat in support of a smoking ban, if only to get me and my friends who light up once we get a drink, to cut it out.

i find the "dying lung" sensation after a night of heavy drinking a chain smoking the most disgusting feeling in the world. also, go sit in a smoky bingo hall for 2 hours, that smell will put you off smoking for the rest of your life.

i tend to romanticize smoking, though, and sometimes think that people who hate smoking have no business being in bars anyway; go to the fucking macaroni grill or stay home with your chilled glass of chard -- but i'm sure soon i'll be one of these people, like, any day now.

― Homosexual II (Homosexual II), Friday, 12 August 2005 12:42 (twenty years ago)

It's pretty simple, people who don't like pubs shouldn't go to pubs

― Vicious Cop Kills Gentle Fool (Dada), Friday, 12 August 2005 12:45 (twenty years ago)

That's pretty simple, all right.

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Friday, 12 August 2005 12:50 (twenty years ago)

people who wanta a smoking ban are ever christian or flaming fagits

― 3454364567457, Friday, 12 August 2005 12:51 (twenty years ago)

You can smoke (almost) anywhere (except where banned indoors). You can only drink at home or in regulated areas. So if I want a beer, I need to go to a bar. If I want to smoke, I need only reach into my pocket for a cigarette and head outside.

― Josh in Chicago (Josh in Chicago), Friday, 12 August 2005 12:51 (twenty years ago)

Why can't I burn tires in my front yard?

― MOtherFUck@z, Friday, 12 August 2005 12:54 (twenty years ago)

obvious idea: restrict smoking to the very places to which drinking is restricted.

― N_RQ, Friday, 12 August 2005 12:54 (twenty years ago)

Back Door to Prohibition: The New War on Social Drinking

― whiteout (bobnope), Friday, 12 August 2005 12:55 (twenty years ago)

I have sympathy with Josh but, unfortunately, most of the proponents of the smoking ban that I've seen (in the UK at least) are people WHO DON'T DRINK IN PUBS ANYWAY.

― Vicious Cop Kills Gentle Fool (Dada), Friday, 12 August 2005 12:56 (twenty years ago)

I don't go to non-smoking bars and bitch & moan about how I can't light up.

Is there any reason why non-smokers can't show the same tolerance?

― ..., Friday, 12 August 2005 12:56 (twenty years ago)

LIke i said they fagits tats why

― 324545756568, Friday, 12 August 2005 12:58 (twenty years ago)

no but seriously, there's no reason, is there?

― ^not this guy, Friday, 12 August 2005 13:06 (twenty years ago)

I don't go to non-smoking bars and bitch & moan about how I can't light up.

i thought that was the whole point of this thread?

― ken c (ken c), Friday, 12 August 2005 13:09 (twenty years ago)

x-post No sympathy needed. I'm a grown man; I can make decisions where to go or where to avoid on my own, and have never avoided a spot because of cigaratte smoke. But I also don't miss the smell of cigarette smoke when it is restricted.

What about performance spaces - clubs, theatres, etc. - where alcohol is served but where people have come for, ostensibly, something other than just a pint?

Anyway, as an issue of tolerance it's an odd one. Drinking it almost always tolerated, but in its extreme form - drunkenness -, when it frequently infringes on others, it's rarely tolerated. Smoking is its own extreme, I guess - cigarettes smoke whether you do or not!

― Josh in Chicago (Josh in Chicago), Friday, 12 August 2005 13:09 (twenty years ago)

I don't mind the idea of banning smoking in theatres and at gigs. Clubs? Errrrrrrrrrrrr, that certainly would not have worked in my clubbing days, given the amount of other substances being abused.

― Vicious Cop Kills Gentle Fool (Dada), Friday, 12 August 2005 13:12 (twenty years ago)

No, the point was that we all impose on each all the time and that non-smokers need to quit being bitches and make some compromises ie Smoking bars for those that want them, and non-smoking bars for those that don't.

Smokers are not opposed to non-smoking bars, we're not seeking to ban them. That's the key difference. Clearly.

xx-post

― ..., Friday, 12 August 2005 13:21 (twenty years ago)

WHat is this fagit.com

― 64456577, Friday, 12 August 2005 13:25 (twenty years ago)

NEXT THING YOU KNOW SMOKERS WILL BE DEINIED MORTGAGES

― The Ghost of Smoking Leads To An Increase In Whiny Bitchdom (Dan Perry), Friday, 12 August 2005 13:31 (twenty years ago)

they'll need a mortgage just to buy cigarettes soon.

― ken c (ken c), Friday, 12 August 2005 13:32 (twenty years ago)

stop shouting, no one is saying it's a persecution thing, just a courtesy thing. It's not a huge deal one way or the other.

x-post

― ..., Friday, 12 August 2005 13:34 (twenty years ago)

I think the ban IS a good compromise, actually. Everyone can go out together and the smokers can just step outside when they want a smoke. What's the big fucking deal? You have to step into the bathroom to piss, after all.

― Hurting (Hurting), Friday, 12 August 2005 13:37 (twenty years ago)

PEOPLE WHO LIKE TO PISS ON THEIR FELLOW PATRONS WILL BE HERDED INTO CAMPS

― The Ghost of That's Probably A Good Idea, Actually (Dan Perry), Friday, 12 August 2005 13:41 (twenty years ago)

i haven't read this thread but i just started smoking again and it feels GREAT

― some stockholm cindy talking (Jody Beth Rosen), Friday, 12 August 2005 13:41 (twenty years ago)

Everyone can go out together and the smokers can just step outside when they want a smoke. What's the big fucking deal?

tuesday's off, friend.

― N_RQ, Friday, 12 August 2005 13:41 (twenty years ago)

IM A REGULAR SMOKEAHAUNTUS.

― Lupton Pitman (Chris V), Friday, 12 August 2005 13:44 (twenty years ago)

You have to step into the bathroom to piss, after all.
yeah, we lost the battle on that one

― ..., Friday, 12 August 2005 13:44 (twenty years ago)

This entire thread is redeemed by the mental image of Somkeahauntus (Smokahontus?).

― The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Friday, 12 August 2005 13:45 (twenty years ago)

Maybe have a glassed in room in each bar, like they have in airports! Like a telephone booth for smokers!

Actually, that would be a terrible idea. But a funny one to watch!

― Josh in Chicago (Josh in Chicago), Friday, 12 August 2005 13:46 (twenty years ago)

YEAH HOWEVER YOU SPELL IT.

― Lupton Pitman (Chris V), Friday, 12 August 2005 13:47 (twenty years ago)

this may well work to smoker's favours - see smoking outside creates the perfect setting for CHATTING UP HOTT STRANGER GIRLS nonchalantly

― ken c (ken c), Friday, 12 August 2005 13:48 (twenty years ago)

When Tony Blair comes down to my my local boozer and starts downing pints with the lads then I might accept a smoking ban... well, actually, no, I'd move to another pub

― Vicious Cop Kills Gentle Fool (Dada), Friday, 12 August 2005 13:49 (twenty years ago)

both outside, smoking a fag (giving a nice timeframe), both having the victim mentality of having to stand outside (a common bond), and it's quieter outside so it's easier to talk and everyone's relaxed because of the smoking.

and then you can offer them a drink from the bar.

i might take up smoking.

― ken c (ken c), Friday, 12 August 2005 13:50 (twenty years ago)

Tips for smokers: Move to China

They smoke everywhere. At the hotel we were staying in, they would actually place a box of cigarettes as the last course in the dinner, and people would smoke at the beginning and end of their meals, at the table.

― jellybean (jellybean), Friday, 12 August 2005 14:07 (twenty years ago)

God, I love to smoke while I eat. It's one of the great joys of dining for me in Paris, where nobody gives a fcuk, and you can smoke and drink and eat to your heart's content.

Socially, I find the smoking bans in SF kind of interesting, though. Either people leave to go smoke or you go out with someone and it gives you both five minutes of relatively uninterrupted time to catch up, chat, gossip, etc...

― M. White (Miguelito), Friday, 12 August 2005 14:09 (twenty years ago)

is smoking actually beyond the pale? i would say, not.

― N_RQ, Friday, 12 August 2005 14:10 (twenty years ago)

I do appreciate the gathering outside for chatting/being chatted up opportunities, but I'm still missing the lovely tang of smoke and wine in the throat simultaneously. Don't like a whole cig with nothing to sip off of, I just get clogged up and acrid.

I thought the NYC ban did leave room for establishments with a separately-ventilated room but the standards were so high no one would be likely to put one in? As in, it required far more ventilation for that one room than most places have for the whole property, and staff would not have to/be allowed to enter the smoking area at all, ever.

― Laurel, Friday, 12 August 2005 14:14 (twenty years ago)

where has the pressure for banning smoking come from? this has intrigued me. what makes governments legislate on this and not, say, the insane state of farming?

― N_RQ, Friday, 12 August 2005 14:16 (twenty years ago)

Working class people are not allowed to enjoy themselves *ducks*

― Vicious Cop Kills Gentle Fool (Dada), Friday, 12 August 2005 14:17 (twenty years ago)

The middle classes have rights, the working classes have duties *ducks again*

― Vicious Cop Kills Gentle Fool (Dada), Friday, 12 August 2005 14:18 (twenty years ago)

When last I looked, people were not allowed to farm in bars and restaurants, N_RQ, but maybe that's different where you live.

― M. White (Miguelito), Friday, 12 August 2005 14:34 (twenty years ago)

a lot of cockfarming.

― N_RQ, Friday, 12 August 2005 14:35 (twenty years ago)

ha!

― The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Friday, 12 August 2005 14:36 (twenty years ago)

There should be a law, dammit!!!

― M. White (Miguelito), Friday, 12 August 2005 14:38 (twenty years ago)

You have to go outside to farm cock, it's bad for the employees' health if it's done inside!

― M. White (Miguelito), Friday, 12 August 2005 14:39 (twenty years ago)

If you ask me, the case for passive cockfarming remains to be proven

― Vicious Cop Kills Gentle Fool (Dada), Friday, 12 August 2005 14:41 (twenty years ago)

God love the people who have to do that research...

― M. White (Miguelito), Friday, 12 August 2005 14:41 (twenty years ago)

It's the beagles I feel sorry for

― Vicious Cop Kills Gentle Fool (Dada), Friday, 12 August 2005 14:42 (twenty years ago)

ten months pass...

could people just stop being fanatics? on both sides?

you will not get cancer from getting the odd whiff of fag smoke in the open air.

― Roughage Crew (Enrique), Wednesday, 5 July 2006 09:38 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.jti.co.jp/sstyle/manners/ad/change/gallery/images/im_grapic16.gif

― permanent revolution (cis), Wednesday, 5 July 2006 11:51 (nineteen years ago)

;_;

i AM a nonsmoker!

― Roughage Crew (Enrique), Wednesday, 5 July 2006 14:07 (nineteen years ago)

me too

: )_

― RJG (RJG), Wednesday, 5 July 2006 14:09 (nineteen years ago)

also on the way over this morning i cdn't help noticing invisibility of the whooooole city of london:

http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/airquality/smog/images/summer.gif

which bothers me more than al fresco cigs.

― Roughage Crew (Enrique), Wednesday, 5 July 2006 14:10 (nineteen years ago)

hmmmmm

xpost

― Roughage Crew (Enrique), Wednesday, 5 July 2006 14:11 (nineteen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.