Smoking Ban Faces Little Protest (???) Boston

Yahoo News ^ | 16 October 2002

[SheLion]

A proposal to ban smoking in all workplaces in Boston has not met with much controversy.

NewsCenter 5's Kelley Tuthill reported that since Mayor Thomas Menino proposed the ban three weeks ago, there has not been much of a response, according to city officials. The ordinance would make all workplaces smoke free, including restaurants, bars and clubs.

The ordinance will be voted on by the Public Health Commission.

"We haven't received as much input as we expected we would," commission member John Auerbach said. "We received a number of letters -- scores of letters -- and the letters are running about 10-to-1 in favor of the regulation."

Currently in Boston, smoking is relegated to certain sections of restaurants and allowed in bars in clubs.

"We are part of a trend of cities that are going smoke free," Auerbach said. "All the large cities in California are currently smoke free in all workplaces. New York City is debating virtually an identical regulation to ours."

Some Boston bars are starting a petition drive against the ordinance, but at Whiskey's on Boylston Street, managers said that they have no problem going smoke free, as long as their competitors have to.

"It'll hurt business originally, but then people will get used to the non-smoking thing, and business will pick up as usual," manager Austin Eichelberger said.

Cigar Masters owner Steve Saloman said that he is worried that his cigar bar would go out of business if the ordinance is approved. He spent $300,000 moving his 6-year-old cigar bar to Boylston Street.

"We feel that we fall in a gray area," Saloman said. "Everybody who comes in here is here to smoke, so they're not offending anybody."

The commission said there may be an exemption that would allow Cigar Masters to stay open. A public hearing is set for Wednesday night from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. at Roxbury Community College. The commission could vote as early as Nov. 6.

[MacDorcha]

ok, cig smoke is poisoness. they proved it. drinking or inhalling amonia is also poisoness. they proved that. regardless of if you smoke or are around someone else who is, you are breathing the same air.

need more proof aside from health that its bad?

smoke devalues property. cars, houses, boats... only 70 percent of what the same car/boat/house would get without smoking.

smoking costs money. upwards of 2000-5000 a year for the average smoker. that doesnt include chain smokers, and people who smoke more than one pack a day.

smoing costs time. busisnesses lose productive time letting smokers have 5-20 mins a day just to go outside and light up. thats 1250 mins on the low side annual. (and yet they get the same pay as non-smokers, costing even more money)

smokers have to pay more on health insurance.

smoking causes dental troubles. raising dental costs also.

smoking leads to heart disese, lung cancer, and throat cancer.

people in their 40s can lose the ability to talk because of smoking.

a hole, called a stoma has to ripped into there neck just so they can talk (and smoke).

still not convinced its bad? apparently smoking causes brain dysfunction too then. i agree with the bill, that does not make me someone who thinks the govnt should run or lives; that makes me someone who thinks people who dont know whats good for themselves shouldn'trun our lives. (or their own for that matter)

[MacDorcha]

i could care less if you take knidly to me or not, its my voice, and you're wrong. i kept up with freep for years b4 joining.

[MacDorcha]

i pu up with yours, you can deal witrh mine, if not "get outta the kicthen"

[Just another Joe]

um, that wasnt "foggy" it was "foggie" as in, elderly.

Number 1. - I knew what you were talking about. The question mark was for spelling. My reference to "foggy" was a play on words that you, apparently, did not catch.

i dont wanna pay for your cancre-ridden, bed-wetting, useless body to have a little glimmer of life when others your age are vital and walking. you may pay as much tax percent-wise, but you cost us more by having paid smoke breaks, making you not spend as much time working as the rest of us. and then, once you're to sick to work, you'll get us again by laying in a bed and letting dear ol' Uncle Sam give you bed time manner well into your 60's (average age of a non-smoker? 80+) you wanna actually try to convince me that smoking is ok? go ahead. you want to convince me that by expressing support one way or another on a politcal issue makes me not a conservative? bullshit. its all about us expressing our concerns to the govnt. and my concern is that your shrivled lungs will cause me and my kids on down the road, to have asthma, or allergies. my dad quit smoking once he figured out it wasnt safe. he stopped doing it a few months before i was born. i talk to my dad because i love him, and he has givin me more than enough info to not ever be as easly swayed as you were to remain a smoker. you would never have thought of smoking if it werent for someone around you doing it. and you, being weak minded and weak willed, followed like a little sheep. only sheep are innocent, more like a lemming, falling off a pit. i know how to control my life, i know how to handle myslef, and i dont let a few "friends" pressure me into something wrong. you could live to be as wise as this teen, if youd only not be so... liberal minded.

Number 2. - In other words, you are a product of the NEA ridden public school system. You can't capitalize, you can't spell, you can't puncuate, and yet you received a scholarship to a college.
I'm glad that you "earn your keep", however I sincerely doubt if you "keep your keep". If you are employed by a business you pay taxes which go to feed, clothe, and house so many worthless lazy people that you couldn't count them all.
As for you paying for me in my old age - I've already put more money into the system than I'll EVER be able to take out in my old age, so don't give me any cr@p about you paying for my old age.
It's a certified fact that as a whole, smokers put more into the system than they ever take out.
As for smoke breaks - I take my breaks just like everyone else. If I decide to have a smoke on my break that's MY business.
Don't even try to quote me ages about smokers and nonsmokers or I'll ask you to back up your facts.
No I DON'T want to try to convince you that smoking is completely SAFE but it damn sure should be OK to smoke in a private business as long as the owner doesn't object.
HOW IN H#LL are MY lungs going to give you or your kids asthma or allergies? Unless you're one of my descendants (I don't think so) MY lungs can't do a thing to you and yours.
If your dad wanted to quit I'm glad for your dad that he quit. That doesn't mean I can't quit. It means I don't WANT to quit. I get enjoyment from smoking a cigarette/cigar. Anything you get enjoyment from that you don't WANT to quit doing?
As for being liberal minded - I was once like you. Young, stubborn, unwilling to listen to any voice I didn't recognize, even if it was just trying to give me facts and not advice on living my life. I grew out of it. Hopefully you will too.

P.S. - I never said that you weren't a conservative just because we disagree on a subject. You're the one calling ME a liberal.
I DO reserve the right to disagree.

[Just another Joe]

ok, cig smoke is poisoness. they proved it. drinking or inhalling amonia is also poisoness. they proved that. regardless of if you smoke or are around someone else who is, you are breathing the same air.

They have proved that smoking cigarettes is a RISK FACTOR in SOME diseases. Salt is poisonous. Water is poisonous. It's all in the dose.
They have NOT proven that Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS, second hand smoke) is a health factor to ANYONE that doesn't have a pre-existing medical condition. The largest study done to date, by the World Health Organization, failed to find a statistical hazard.

smoke devalues property. cars, houses, boats... only 70 percent of what the same car/boat/house would get without smoking.

Bull, point me to the study that says this.

smoking costs money. upwards of 2000-5000 a year for the average smoker. that doesnt include chain smokers, and people who smoke more than one pack a day.

Ever hear of race car driving? That costs money too AND it's more dangerous than smoking.
It's MY money to spend and I'll spend it on whatever I want to that's not illegal.

smoing costs time. busisnesses lose productive time letting smokers have 5-20 mins a day just to go outside and light up. thats 1250 mins on the low side annual. (and yet they get the same pay as non-smokers, costing even more money)

Already addressed this.

smokers have to pay more on health insurance. smoking causes dental troubles. raising dental costs also.

Already addressed this also.

smoking leads to heart disese, lung cancer, and throat cancer.
people in their 40s can lose the ability to talk because of smoking.
a hole, called a stoma has to ripped into there neck just so they can talk (and smoke).

People are not all alike. I know all about this as my grandfather had this condition due to cancer of the vocal cords. Never smoked a day in his life so don't tell me that smoking CAUSES anything in and of itself. It's a risk factor not a given.

that makes me someone who thinks people who dont know whats good for themselves shouldn'trun our lives. (or their own for that matter)

My first reaction to this is to let you know that your totalitarian leanings are showing through.
My second reaction is to let you know that smokers are not trying to run the antismoker's life, the antismokers ARE, however, trying to run the smoker's life, and the lives of business owners.

[timm22]

Its always a hoot listening to you libbies rant and retch about "big government" yet don't realize that it is *I* (the non-smoker) who have to foot YOUR effin health bills 40 years down the line!!!

It would appear from your profile that you are a conservative. You claim that you will have to pay for smokers' medical bills. As a conservative, what do you think is the proper solution to this problem?

A. Ending the socialist and immoral practice of taxpayer subsidized healthcare, so you won't have to cover the smokers' bills.

or

B. Pushing for more socialism and big government in the form of prohibiting smoking on private property?

[timm22]

I think both you and I agree that smoking is harmful to one's health-like many other perfectly legal activities. But do you think the government should be permitted to ban smoking on private property?

If I own a restaurant, and I want to allow smoking, why should you or anyone else be able to force me to do otherwise? I'm not forcing anyone to come into my restaurant. Anyone who eats there realizes that there will be cigarette smoke in my restaurant, and so they choose of their own free will to risk their health. No one's rights are being violated. Why does the government have to be involved?

[A. Pole]

um, that wasnt "foggy" it was "foggie" as in, elderly

Funny that you mention elderly since tobacco use tends to inhibit onset of Parkinson and Alzheimer. Those diseases can make old people foggy.

[SheLion]

MacDorcha

MacDorcha signed up 2002-08-17.

We have another one is who all ME ME ME and is an anti to the 9th degree! Maybe between all of us, we can show him the truth? If not, he will just keep on with his cancerous lies within his own community where he lives.

Georgia has been pretty quiet. But if there are people there that think and act like this one, Georgia Smokers are in for a lot of grief.

[SheLion]

i pu up with yours, you can deal witrh mine, if not "get outta the kicthen"

You’re getting increasingly harder to read.

You didn’t have to put up with anything from me but the truth. I didn’t slap you with a personal attack. If it’s too hot in here for you, then YOU get out of the kitchen!

[MacDorcha]

thank you for your SANE response to me. i like your opinion, but really, i dont like smoke. the government shouldn't have complete control over us, but then again, some of us don't have even partial control over our selves. lines must be drawn. thank you for being tactful, and i hope i wasnt offensive to you in any way. this is the way a point is supposed to be made, and im happy some people out there still have a sense of respect for others.

[MacDorcha]

1) your smoking affects others around you if you are around anyone at all. dont believe me? next time you crave a cig, just sit in a room full of people smoking. you'll fill your craving.
2) i dont have to punctuate anything that isnt professional, and if i thought you were worth taking time to spell check for, id spell check for you.
3) you are intitled to your opinion, but your opinion is wroing, and i was attempting to tell you why. your stuborness just proves that you have an unhealthy addiction and cant stand improving yourself. that makes you the "lazy" that i so called you guys.

[MacDorcha]

i pu up with yours, you can deal witrh mine, if not "get outta the kicthen"
You’re getting increasingly harder to read


im so sorry you couldnt figure out to put a "t" after "pu" and omit the "r" in the obvious "with." some people automaticaly read through things like that, because they follow the basic logic in language. o well.

[Just another Joe]

and im happy some people out there still have a sense of respect for others.

You get what you give, Mac.
If you want to debate I'll be more than happy to do that. We can pull out our studies and our tables and all that. I can access my "proof".
If you want to call names and flame I can do that with the best of them too.

To this point I think that I've given about as much as I've gotten. I try to keep it equal.

[MacDorcha]

"It means I don't WANT to quit. I get enjoyment from smoking a cigarette/cigar. Anything you get enjoyment from that you don't WANT to quit doing?"

you know how that can translateas far as similar logic?

"it means i dont WANT to quit. i get enjoyment from going to the unemployment office and taking your money. i can do that if i want, it only hurts you, and i dont care about myself. anything you do that gets others around you pissed/ worse off than they were about that helps you out you want to quit doing?"

they both hurt the people who werent even involved in the decision. you take my tax money because you're a bum, or take my health because you smoke around me. either way, it wasnt my say for you to do it.

[MacDorcha]

hey, i made a comment early on, and got flamed, now its a matter of respect that these people dont get. you understood my initial point, and its clear that there is no conflict between us. people like calico and shelion just opened up on me from the get-go and i had to deffend myself from there beligerant behavior. i can just sum up my logic right here.

A political body announced a bill i have no problems with, and in some ways, support. i do not support governmental Big Brother stuff, just this particular bill. i do not appreciate smoking, or people who do not respect others by smoking in doorways/entrances; which guarantees that i must walk through the way and not say a thing because they have that right. in the mean time, everytime i walk in/out of a mall, i must hold my breath for several seconds while walking because smoke makes me gag. i dont think the government should have complete control over us, but some control is what its there for. why do we have them if not to keep a standard and protect us? we control it by our votes and money. you dont like the bill? organize a group to debate it to the policy makers in the area. its that simple.

p.s. to whomever wrote back at me about smoking and cars. smoking does cheapen vehicles, i work with car dealers almost once a month. it does cost more money, and actually, the person who associated it with NASCAR forgot that in NASCAR, they get paid, and not as many people die each year to car wrecks (pro) as do smokers.

[Just another Joe]

your smoking affects others around you if you are around anyone at all.

Anyone, just being in a room, affects the others around them.
There is NO undisputed proof that ETS affects anyone in a harmful fashion unless they have a pre-existing condition.
Is just not liking the smell enough to use the government to ban something?

and if i thought you were worth taking time to spell check for, id spell check for you.

I can live with your spelling, punctuation errors, and non-capitilizations. It's customary net etiquette to write in a letter or formal fashion but if you're more comfortable writing that fashion - so be it.
The attitude isn't going to win you a whole big bunch of friends though.

you are intitled to your opinion, but your opinion is wroing, and i was attempting to tell you why.

I'm voicing an opinion backed up by scientific studies. Can you say that you are doing the same or is yours anecdotal in form?

[Just another Joe]

i do not support governmental Big Brother stuff, just this particular bill.

This particular bill IS Big Brother telling the business owner what they may, and may not, allow on thier property that is legal to indulge in.

the person who associated it with NASCAR forgot that in NASCAR, they get paid, and not as many people die each year to car wrecks (pro) as do smokers.

That would have been me. I wasn't talking about only NASCAR. What about the weekend racers that spend their own money on their cars and don't get paid unless they place?
And are you sure that less race car drivers get hurt, TOTAL, per capita wise than smokers?

When you generalize about a group of people you do ALL people a disservice. There may be smokers that are as you described but I would think that most of the smokers on this forum are not. And when you generalize about smokers, we have been stignatized to the point that we lash out almost reflexively.

[MacDorcha]

http://www.rainbowpediatrics.net/faq/16.15.html. thetruth.com
http://www.who.int/en/

some sites to look through.

[MacDorcha]

Anyone, just being in a room, affects the others around them.
There is NO undisputed proof that ETS affects anyone in a harmful fashion unless they have a pre-existing condition.


and how do you know when a random stranger has a pre-existing condition? or whether or not someone developed one recently?

some more info: http://www.cosmiverse.com/news/science/science05070204.html