Is it right to discriminate against tobacco smokers

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by Bowser, Apr 3, 2009.

?

How do you feel about the status of smokers?

  1. They are harmless. Leave them alone.

    6 vote(s)
    27.3%
  2. They need aggressive encouragement to break their addiction.

    8 vote(s)
    36.4%
  3. We need secondclass citizens to stigmatize. Screw 'em.

    2 vote(s)
    9.1%
  4. I'm a smoker.

    6 vote(s)
    27.3%
  1. Bowser Namaste Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,828
    It's getting ugly in Oregon, and the democrats are responsible. They banned smoking from bars and taverns. They have increased the tax on a pack of smokes by 60 cents. Now we have a lunatic state legislator who's pushing for a new law that requires a doctors prescription in order to purchase any product that contains nicotine. I'm feeling resentful towards our democratic party here. They have reduced my kind to a minority and are taking full advantage of the situation by subjecting smokers to exclusionary status within our society. If it was anybody else, there would be an outcry proclaiming discrimination.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Oli Heute der Enteteich... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    Ha, they banned smoking in pubs here.
    Cue large numbers of people buying six packs and staying at home.
    Cue large increase in pubs closing due to loss of revenue.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Bowser Namaste Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,828
    Yeah, we are seeing the same thing here. I will still go to the bar for a draft, but I won't stay for two. There just doesn't seem to be much incentive in going to the bar when you must stand outside for a smoke.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Oli Heute der Enteteich... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    Especially in British weather!
    I talked about it with the landlord of my local, just before they introduced the law: and his reply was "I'm gonna lose business, but I can't blame the smokers at all."
    IMO they should at least have tried designated "smoking pubs".
    Then if you're non-smoker it's your decision.
    To my knowledge not one of the non-smoking regulars in my local ever complained about the smoke or its effects.
     
  8. Norsefire Salam Shalom Salom Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,529
    The free market
     
  9. shorty_37 Go! Canada Go! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,140
    They banned smoking in restaurants and bars here (Canada) a long time ago.
    My best friend works at the hospital and they banned smoking on the property at all, even outside. They leave the property and cross the street and all stand out there and smoke in the middle of winter. They end up taking longer breaks because it takes a lot longer to throw on a coat and cross the street.

    Since I was never a smoker it doesn't affect me. I do like not having to breathe in other peoples smoke when I am out at a restaurant though.
     
  10. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    They did the same in Queensland a while ago. With some bars, especially those that serve food, you cannot even step outside to smoke as there is a smoke free zone around the premises.

    So you see people walk up the street and smoke away from the bar.

    They had tried smokers zones in the bars here and set up huge ventilation systems and kept pumping fresh air into that zone. But they abolished that with the new laws. I suspect some bars did lose a lot of business initially.

    I have to admit, I detest eating at a restaurant or a cafe and having people smoking near me as I am eating. I just think it is rude. The same way that I find people who talk on their mobile phones during a meal are rude.

    I think they have gone a bit overboard here. My husband is a smoker and I hate hearing him whine about it.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  11. CutsieMarie89 Zen Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,485
    You shouldn't live in California then, smoking has been banned everywhere, even some college campuses are smoke free. I believe the only places you're allowed to smoke inside are in Casinos (which are mostly on Reservations, so technically not in CA, I guess). And you can expect to get in some major trouble if you smoke on an elementary school campus. Personally I think smokers in California are treated like lepers, that no one wants to associate with. You should see the look of disgust on people's faces when they find out you smoke. Serious discrimination here, but I don't complain because I don't smoke and it's nice to not have to choke on it while I'm eating at a restaurant (I remember those days).
     
  12. Bowser Namaste Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,828
    Part of our problem in Oregon is that we follow the CA example. I blame the democrats for it. They are hellbent on reducing and regulating personal liberty, which is why I will vote republican in the future.
     
  13. cosmictraveler Be kind to yourself always. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    33,264
    Here you go!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    It looks like a cigarette, it tastes like a cigarette, it feels like a cigarette, but it isn't a cigarette, it contains no tobacco, and the "smoke" is vapor.
    Containing state of the art micro-electronic technology this re-chargeable e-cigarette produces a real smoking experience without any of the deeply unpleasant side-effects of tobacco.

    As you inhale, a tiny battery vaporizes liquid inside the cigarette producing smoke. You insert the Nicotine cartridges of your choice (it comes with a set of 5) that will release nicotine - or if you choose to skip the nicotine altogether, try our 0mg (None) Nicotine cartridges or you can choose from High Nicotine (16mg), Medium Nicotine (11mg) or Low Nicotine (6mg).

    Of course some people may come up to you telling you to put your Electronic Cigarette out (it looks that real), but there's not much to worry about, it’s NOT a real cigarette, there is NO real smoke, flame, tar or tobacco.

    It comes with 2 batteries and a home electric charger, and since there is no flame or real tobacco, it’s unaffected by the smoking ban… this e-cigarette is considerably better for you than traditional cigarettes, and will save you a fortune in the long run.



    http://smokingeverywhere.com/elec_cigarette.php
     
  14. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    It doesn't produce smoke, but it does produce vaporized nicotine, which means that it makes invisible second-hand "smoking", and so is almost as dangerous as real smoke.

    Anyway, I don't think the prescription legislation will pass. I'm all for a high tax on tobacco. I think bars should be allowed to allow smoking in some circumstances. Tobacco is legal, alcohol is legal, you should be able to provide a forum for the consumption of either or both.
     
  15. Liebling Doesn't Need to be Spoonfed. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,532
    You mean that people who tie a few on are staying home to drink because they can't smoke? Wait, that also means they aren't getting a a car and driving home from the pub either. Sounds like a win-win to me

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    For the record, I have nothing against smokers at all, provided they don't fill the same air I breate with their heavily polluted air. If they want to smoke outside provided it's not at the door of a place I'd like to go into, in their cars or homes, I have no problem with that at all. If a bar owner wants a smoking environment, they can post a big sign that says smoking allowed, but also suffer a higher tax to cover everyone's extra medical costs.
     
  16. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    Why did they ban smoking in pubs ?
     
  17. Liebling Doesn't Need to be Spoonfed. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,532
    In Illinois they have, in restaurants too.

    I live on the Wisc/IL border, and since I am a non-smoker... I simply don't go to bars in Wisconsin. The bars up here on the IL side have seen no decrease in business, nor has the other side, now everyone who doesn't smoke goes to IL and those that do, go to WI. Not a big deal, so I don't see why bar owners aren't allowed to make the same choices.
     
  18. Oli Heute der Enteteich... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    Because the government ran out of actual policies and felt that as the government they has to do something, anything to be seen as doing something.
    So they decided to start interfering with personal choice...
     
  19. Liebling Doesn't Need to be Spoonfed. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,532
    In all fairness, when personal choice taxes the public health system (I am speaking of Canada and some European countries) so heavily that it is going bankrupt... I think that some policy is needed so that all people can still get health care. I mean, I'd hate for my child to get sub-standard care for a major injury because the taxman had to spend $800k a year for the cigarette smoker on chemo and long hospitalization for lung cancer because of his personal choice. Canada's health care system was seriously in the red before the ban and the steep increase in cigarette taxes. You can still kill yourself with cigarettes there, but you pay a lot back into the system for that choice.
     
  20. Oli Heute der Enteteich... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    Driving to the pub?
    Who would do that with the drink driving laws?
    Yes, some, a very small minority, do that.
    Of course, if you want to talk about cars and pollution...
    How about those who exercise their personal rights to drive down to the corner shop, or take the kids to school rather than letting take a ten minute walk.
    Or is that somehow different from smokers killing everyone else?

    Pay a higher tax?
    In the UK the tax on cigarettes paid for the National Health Service - smokers are the ones who effectively subsidised everyone else's medical costs.
     
  21. Liebling Doesn't Need to be Spoonfed. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,532
    That's not the way it was in Canada or other Euro nations. Uk might be the only difference.

    But yes, I also think that people who drive their cars uneccessarily should also pay higher tariffs for their pollution. I have no problem with that at all. I drive an extremely gas efficient and low emissions car during the winter, and I ride my bike to work when it's not storming out for just that reason.
     
  22. Oli Heute der Enteteich... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    Pfft, since the collapse of the Soviet Army the NHS is now the largest single organisation Europe: somebody's gotta pay for it

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  23. CutsieMarie89 Zen Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,485
    Personally I'm glad people can't smoke indoors. When you're have to share a relatively confined air space it'd be awful rude of you to smoke there, I can only hold my breath for so long. Smoking physically affects everyone in the room. Not just the smoker.
     

Share This Page