Surgeon general: No safe level of secondhand smoke

I hereby retract my reasonable solution to this problem. I also would never deprive my BBS brethren of fatty's post-beatdown, post-arrest posts as he becomes the Malcom X of smokers rights.

By Any Means Necessary!

 

Fatty, you know I'm a smoker and you know I wish these comprehensive bans were not happening, but you're wrong on both counts.

Not only will a ban definitely pass in Houston, it will happen everywhere in the continental United States -- probably within the next five years at the longest. (I only give it that long because I expect places like Virginia, Kentucky and North Carolina to hold out as long as they can.)

And the penalties to establishments that repeatedly ignore the ban are so incredibly severe, you can absolutely count on them observing it.

Not only that, but you can count on the regulars to help enforce it whether they smoke or not, in order that the bar they love does not get closed down. I was in a fairly crowded bar in Providence last year (the ban there had passed a few months prior) and a guy lit a cigarette and hid it under a table. Several of us knew the owner and jumped down his throat immediately. I personally took the cigarette out of his hand, put it out and gave him a piece of my mind. None of us were happy about the ban and each of us at the table were smokers, but we also knew that that guy's cigarette could cost the owner tens of thousands of dollars and that the one after that one could cost her the bar.

When (not if) this law passes in Houston, don't even try lighting up at Rudyards or Poison Girl. If I'm around, I'll personally put your cigarette out and help throw you out the door.

 

Smoking bans cause violence.

 

You miss the point. I was only illustrating that these other things have a positive side to them, while smoking has no positive side at all. And, feeding an addiction to stave off the negative effects of said addiction; getting your fix, if you will, is not a positive side.

Also, I'm not sure why you keep bringing up the automobile argument. I completely support cutting back on gas consumption. I don't own a car and I ride the subway regularly.

The difference is that the brain freeze affects only you while the cigarette affects those around you as well.

 

I can't even imagine Rudyard's without smoking.


P.S. none of you anti-smokers responded to my argument. Was it too long?

 

No, you miss the point. Smoking has a positive side just as you having a 'tasty' steak has a positive side to it. It is only your uninformed opinion that smoking has no 'positive' side. To illustrate I posted the article from Richard Klein earlier in the thread. I guess you skipped that part.

 

To whoever it was that said that smoking had no positive effects, wrong.

The following science is going to be simplified greatly.

Nicotine is a normalizing drug. It acts as both a stimulant and a depressant based on the smoker. If the smoker is feeling low, the nicotine stimulates the system upwards, normalizing the smoker. If the smoker is feeling anxious and up, the nicotine depresses the system downwards, again normalizing the smoker.

It also differs from other recreational drugs such as alcohol, heroin and the like because it allows people to be more productive while on it. It is very similar to caffeine in this way. The increase of acetylcholine in the brain increases focus and allows greater concentration.

There have been several studies done regarding mood regulation through nicotine. One I remember reading involved people on long car drives. It was controlled for smokers and non smokers. People handled it much better while using nicotine.

Nicotine is an extremely beneficial drug. Don't believe the hype.

(This is all coming from a non-smoker btw. I find cigarette smoke irritating when I go out, but I also like believing in facts instead of propoganda.)

 

You completely miss the point.

In general, a transaction or interaction conducted with smoking has no added benefit than a transaction or interaction conducted without it.

In general, noise has beneficial effects that make transactions and interactions run more efficiently insofar as human beings are physically built and conditioned to use noise in their daily lives.

Therefore, you pointing out the physical effects of nicotine = irrelevant for this reason, and for the reason that we're not talking about nicotine, we're talking about smoking.

 

This law won't pass anytime soon. And as far as anything with regards to the latter, let's just say when I'm looking for a fight, I usually find one.

 

After last night's draft I need to bum a smoke from Updawg and have a beer on Meowgi's patio bar.

 

This is simply not true. Your distinction is artificial and akin to saying: 'it's not green vegetables that are physically beneficial but the vitamins and fiber IN THEM that are beneficial, therefore green vegetables are irrelevant to a discussion of beneficial foods to eat.' That there are desirable physical effects is fairly relevant but even sans that there are nonphyscial benefits to smoking ala the Klein article.

 

Smoking is bad for you, on a net basis.

But if you think I'm arguing for a nicotine ban, I'm not. Chew away!

 

That's arguable but neither here nor there. The point being made was that there are physical benefits to smoking. That there are disadvantages also does not deny that point. A 'net basis' evaluation does mean there are no benefits.

 

...well there are benefits to homicide and acid rain too and all sorts of other activities. But like smoking they too carry around a lot of negative externalities.

 

A, that wasn't the point. I was refuting the guy that said that smoking has no positive effects.

As to what the net effects are... can you really make that generalization? It's a personal choice, weighing the personal health risks versus the benefits. It's been shown that second hand smoke has no significant detrimental effect on non-smokers.

As to smoking vs chewing... that's not up to you to legislate. I like the vegetables and vitamins issue. Some people want to eat vegetables rather than take a multivitamin. Some people want to smoke to get nicotine rather than chew it. Deal with it, it doesn't concern you.

 

Amen, brother.

 

C'mon Sam. Those are wholly unlike smoking and is disappointing you'd stoop to cheap comparisons.

 

Watching Sammy play you fools like a fiddle is pretty comical. He tosses you just enough rope to let you hang yourselves with your own ridiculousness. Benefits to smoking? Are you kidding me? HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

 

Can you say 'rose colored glasses?'