Posted on 01/08/2005 9:20:21 AM PST by SheLion
I am surprised Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson didnt refer to the smokers as swine in a pig sty. Isnt that, after all one of the one of the first images that comes to mind when think of a pen? Before I am offended by da mayor I would have to be offended by the reference to the term smoking pens. In a city and state that was founded by a group of people so seriously reviled for their own beliefs in years past, you would think they would be among the first to take a live and let live attitude about the behavior and choices of others. Clearly the past lessons learned about intolerance by the Mormons must now have been forgotten.
Only 88 airports nationwide is hardly a mandate to make ones own airport smoke free. Furthermore if these smoking kiosks are eliminated it will only cause people to find other places to smoke. Delta Airlines is correct in standing behind the rights of the smokers. Perhaps they have taken note that incidence of air rage only became prevalent AFTER smoking was banned on aircraft. It should also be noted that since the ban, they no longer use fresh air to ventilate the planes; instead, they just run the air through a filtrations system which in an enclosed environment further exacerbates the problem.
Mayor Andersons pompous arrogance in stating that the ban will help smokers to break the habit is outrageous. It is not his job to be neither a social engineer nor the arbiter of personal choices. I do know however, that as long as Salt Lake City and Utah continue down this Draconian path of heavy handed intolerance, I will avoid their state in very way possible. I will not travel to it, I will not travel thru it, and I will not support my company scheduling a convention there.
BANS ARE BAD! Read it again, BANS ARE BAD! Banning blacks from white facilities---BAD! Banning books---BAD! Banning Beer---Bad! If the people of Utah agree that these bans are bad, then they must also agree that banning smoking is also BAD! I would certainly hope at this juncture they are starting to realize that any action, that would favor a smoking ban of any type, will only create far more harm than good. IN all fairness I should note their may be one kind of good ban. That of course would be banning Mayor Anderson from further political office at the next election.
As the article stated, over 13% of flights had concentrations over 1000ppm for the entire flight.
That also does not include time taxiing, or sitting on the runway, which can be lengthy.
If you want to pick and choose information that the CONCLUSION of the article has already examined and discarded as irrelevant, feel free.
Now for the third and last time, don't post to me anymore. I've wasted enough time with a closed-minded agenda-driven poster who doesn't bother to read before posting. I should have realized that replying to you is like feeding a mangy stray--the dang thing will NEVER leave. I said you were wrong with my initial post to you, I proved you were wrong with my link in 390, and your method of picking and choosing which information you will USE is extremely boring, like a child that continually says "Why?"
Goodbye.
I read your link. As noted earlier, I missed your post but asked which link you were referring to and I went and read it. It recommends increasing to 7 l/s per passenger. Many planes already meet that standard; some are marginally lower. They say that for long distance flights, most of the time the CO2 is between 500 to 800 ppm which is acceptable. The report sets off no alarm bells nor gives any dire statistics.
You have repeatedly stated that I am wrong but not once have you made a specific reference to a statement that I made that is in error.
You okay,jaime?
Where was I wrong? You made a link but you failed to cite the statement I made that was in error. I found nothing in your link that contradicts my allegation that the author of the story lied.
Here is the author's claim which I said was a lie:
"It should also be noted that since the ban, they no longer use fresh air to ventilate the planes; instead, they just run the air through a filtrations system which in an enclosed environment further exacerbates the problem."
Now where in your link does it show that airlines NO longer use fresh air? In fact your link shows that they DO use fresh air and it only recommends increasing the amount of fresh air slightly.
I think Wild Turkey gets a high from aggravating and arguing.
Why on earth he/she is posting here is beyond me.
What so many smokers are saying is exactly what you are saying:
Property rights take precedence over feelings.
It's the mangy stray dog syndrome. I fed it, now it won't go away. My bad.
Reminds me of cinFLA, and posters like WT are the reason I try not to ever read these threads, as much as I really like SheLion and all the other FRiends I see here...
Ah yes,cinFLA and VRWCminion----unless they are all the same person! Ya never know!
Fabulous. Fabulous. My day is made.
Besides, you have Einstein and Who wants to argue with him?
Actually cigars smell rather good when someone else is doing the smoking. Pipes are rather nice, too. (Didn't Tolkien do pipes?)
He was like this before he changed his name. He gets his teeth into you you can't shake him loose. It's a very unintelligent boring game he tries to play with us.
He puts me in mind of a very lonely person that needs to be noticed. And he latches onto someone and won't let go. Just to have someone to talk to.
Leave Judith Anne alone! Move on.
If you smoke, you are just plain stupid, or else hopelessly addicted. There is no other rational explanation.
I will advise people on this matter, but in the end, an adult decides for himself. However, that does not give the smoker the right to inconvenience and annoy others. If you are a smoker, you can go poison yourself in private, but leave my air alone!
There is another matter here: addicts typically manifest antisocial behavior. In the extreme, we see this in the case of crack mothers who turn to crime and prostitution for the sake of a drug habit, while neglecting their children. Smokers are also addicts, and though most are not as extreme as crack addicts, they are similarly antisocial when it comes to their addiction. Just watch: they are litterbugs, seldom using the ashtrays in their cars. The butts are usually thrown out onto the road. Smokers are generally inconsiderate, and most of them tend toward the obnoxious in personality profile.
As with all generalizations, there are exceptions. Even some addicts can manage to be pleasant. Nonetheless, the tendency of addiction is antisocial.
He was like this before he changed his name. I think he is a very lonely person and latches onto someone just to be able to type to that person. Be it wrong or boring or whatever. He just needs to be noticed.
And if he is sitting there are puffed up and gloating, then he is a bigger jerk then I had first thought. He makes no rhythm or reason.
Advise? Who ask for your advise? None of us on this thread ask you for anything. And there are plenty of places today where you can go and not be around smokers. Lord knows, we sure don't want to be around the likes of you. Leave your air alone? Try staying in your own home.
Smokers are generally inconsiderate, and most of them tend toward the obnoxious in personality profile.
I find you VERY inconsiderate and obnoxious. New to Free Republic are we?
As with all generalizations, there are exceptions. Even some addicts can manage to be pleasant. Nonetheless, the tendency of addiction is antisocial.
Addicts? I don't think the government allows for the legal selling of drugs. Or haven't you noticed. Pleasant? You come in here and stand on your soap box and we are to be pleasant to you? You must think rather highly of yourself. Go to another thread where people might want you.
You are comparing crack addicts to smokers?? Please tell me you aren't really that rude and/or ignorant.
However, that does not give the smoker the right to inconvenience and annoy others. If you are a smoker, you can go poison yourself in private, but leave my air alone!
____________________________________________________________
Do you not understand that we are not talking about smoking in your face here? That businesses are PRIVATE property and their owners have a right to allow LEGAL activity (not crack smoking, fercryinoutloud!) on their premises? Many, many such establishments (not to mention airlines and a score of other public places) have created a separate smoking area so YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE AROUND IT! What is so hard to comprehend about that?
If a business allows smoking on the premises and you don't like it, you are free to go elsewhere, or sit in the *gasp* non-smoking section if they provide one.
Isn't America grand?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.