Some restaurant offered cigar dinners on a regular basis. Some states
made them illegal.
It is up to the restaurant to clean after. Going in the next day you'd
never know there was smoking if it was properly ventilated and cleaned.
Why should you care if it is not bothering you? No one is forcing
anyone to do anything.
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 1:13:51 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
Can you not comprehend that I said, sure, that's just like all the times
Green comes in here and tells us he's a Republican. But since he's
demonstrated for years that he's not, no one believe him either. In his
case, he's yet to name a single Republican that he likes, he regularly
rants against all of them, even Reagan was no good.
Then why are you against allowing me to have a private cigar dinner at
a restaurant in a private room? How about a bar that wants to allow
smoking, all the patrons that go there, the staff, are all OK with it,
how is it consistent with conservatism for you to use big govt to deny
them that right? And conservatives don't believe in "common sense", they
believe in smaller govt and allowing people the freedom to live their
own lives, eg smokers have rights too.
Smoking leaves residue and that third hand residue can make people sick.
It's like trying to defend spraying a room with toxic waste in the name
of freedom and then accusing anyone who objects to it of being
controlling and manipulative.
You wouldn't want to be the next group of people in the room that had
been saturated with toxic waste, and I don't want to be the next person
in the room where people may have been smoking.
BTW, people who smoke in one room have no control over where the smoke
goes or where the residue ends up, in addition to, the walking stench of
people going to and fro throughout the restaurant from the "smoking" room.
I imagine there are a few dives that still allow smoking, but their days
I'm all for smaller government and freedom. What I am AGAINST is anyone
poisoning the air I breathe, and smoking does that.
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 11:13:34 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
So far you've given us zero proof of that. Just because you can cite a
study where they found that after someone has been smoking in a car for
hours, the worst possible environment, that byproducts can be found
doesn't prove that anyone has been made sick, nor did the researchers
say that. And that is a very long way from someone catching a whiff
of a cigarette from 25 ft away.
BS. And no one is forcing you to be in the room with me.
Fine. Then have the restaurant free to make that decision. They can
have rooms where smoking is never allowed and rooms where it is allowed.
Disclose it and allow the people to decide. That's the conservative
position. The lib position is to rant on, to force YOUR way onto
everyone, because you know what's good for us.
Not true. You could have separate air systems for the smoking allowed
room. Or whole separate bar/restaurants where smoking is allowed.
Leave the customers free to decide, not libs shoving it down the
people's throats because you think they are too stupid to decide for
Yes, in a few states. The problem is that people like you forced it to
be that way and want to continue to force it, until you control us totally.
That is one big reason why we can't pass any new gun legislation, because
people don't trust libs. They know it's a never ending process to suck
freedom from us all.
It clearly doesn't do it in bars, restaurants that leave people free
to choose. If you want to select a bar that bans smoking, you can
go there. If others want to select one that allows it, they can go
there. But from your statements, it's clear that, the conservative,
logical position, isn't good enough for you. It's typical of libs.
Please read this entire article:
I'll even post the summary for you.
"Formation of carcinogens indoors by surface-mediated reactions of
nicotine with nitrous acid, leading to potential third hand smoke hazards.
This study shows that residual nicotine from tobacco smoke sorbed
to indoor surfaces reacts with ambient nitrous acid (HONO) to
form carcinogenic tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNAs). Substan-
tial levels of TSNAs were measured on surfaces inside a smoker’s
vehicle. Laboratory experiments using cellulose as a model indoor
material yielded a>10-fold increase of surface-bound TSNAs when
sorbed secondhand smoke was exposed to 60 ppbv HONO for 3 hours. In both
cases we identified
1-(N-methyl-N-nitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridinyl)-4-butanal, a TSNA absent in
freshly emitted tobacco smoke, as the major product. The potent
carcinogens 4-(methy-lnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridinyl)-1-butanone and
N-nitroso nornicotine were also detected. Time-course measurements
revealed fast TSNA formation, with up to 0.4% conversion of nicotine.
Given the rapid sorption and persistence of high levels of nicotine on
indoor surfaces—including clothing and human skin—this recently
identified process represents an unappreciated health hazard through
dermal exposure, dust inhalation, and ingestion. These findings raise
concerns about exposures to the tobacco smoke residue that has
been recently dubbed “thirdhand smoke.” Our work highlights the
importance of reactions at indoor interfaces, particularly those
involving amines and NO x/HONO cycling, with potential health impacts."
"Toxic waste is any material in liquid, solid, or gas form that can
cause serious harm to humans as well as other animals and the
Smoking leaves behind toxic waste.
It doesn't solve the issue of secondhand or thirdhand smoke. Even if a
room is set aside for smoking, people still open the doors, come and go
from those smoking rooms and enter the non-smoking area and expose
non-smokers to those contaminants where not only adults may be exposed,
but also children exposed to those toxic wastes.
This issue is not about politics - it's a health issue.
Businesses are free to do that now, but very few of them choose to go
all smoking because too many people don't smoke, now, and that bites
into their bottom line profits. It's not fiscally smart to eliminate a
large percentage of customers in order to accommodate smoking.
You better believe it I'm on the side of forcing smokers to NOT smoke in
any public venue.
Gun legislation has no relevance to the health issues of smoking. It's
also a separate thread.
I don't go to bars, and never have. Bars that are in restaurants I've
been to are all non-smoking environments.
Smoking is not a political issue. It's a health issue, and as a
conservative I'll continue to vote for people who are in agreement with
A good case in point is cruise ships. European cruise ships allow
smoking BUT NOT IN THE STATEROOMS ans NOT ON BALCONIES for safety
American cruise ships allow smoking only in "designated areas" such as
the casino and the "cigar bar" - but those areas are not sealed from
the rest of the ship and are inadequately ventilated. On our last
cruise there was over half of one deck - and a good section of another
deck that i could NOT safely enter. Iincluding one of the highee end
restaurants I wanted to eat in)
Coutesy? You don't know courtesy. You don't know center posting
either. Or current usenet ettiquette. I post my replies IN-LINE
You on the other hand just bitch and whine, posting "Center posted, as
your reply is." with no input at all.
(By the way, your being a moron has nothing to do with being a mormon)
On Monday, July 4, 2016 at 2:23:29 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
The bottom line:
With potential health impacts. Almost everything has a potential health
impact, including many of the things we have in our homes. This study
proves nothing, no surprise. I could do a study on the effects of smoke
generated off a range, conclude that it too has "possible health impacts..
BFD. And this has what to do with catching a whiff of smoke again?
Liberals leave behind toxic waste. How about these awful, horrific
cancer producing products:
On the list is Ajax, hot dogs and shampoo. OMG, we're all gonna die!
And again with the extreme nonsense, no compromise lunacy of the libs.
It's absolutely an issue of politics, which you'd of course realize
if you were a conservative.
Again you demonstrate your ignorance. Businesses in most states
are no longer free to do that. The libs saw to that. If you were a
conservative, you'd know that.
No, they don't because in most states, the CAN NOT. Libs like you
saw to that. There is no compromise.
Well, there you go, typical, talking out of both sides of your mouth.
First you claim that bars and restaurants are free to choose, which
they are not, and then you admit you want to crush that too. THAT
is exactly what libs do. There is no compromise. It's why no one
that's conservative wants to hear about a new gun law, because we
know it's only one step on the lib process that never ends.
It has a lot of relevance, as cited above.
Gee, I wonder why?
If you were a conservative you'd know damn well that it's also a political
I've been thinking about making up a story about the bucket of water I
have on the deck to water the plants.
I would tell people that I put it there as a refuge for Zika virus
mosquitoes. Liberals want more money to remove them but I think we
should protect them to accompany their colleagues taking refuge here.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.