A great start would be anywhere anyone complains about it
so all public places, townhouses, detached homes if the stench is detectable off site like a neighbors yard. smoking should be illegal around any child anyone under 21
we asa nation really need to extqunish smoking completely.
the fiancial and personal costs, are just way too high
On private property, if the owner or someone who lives there objects to
it (assume that defendant children object, like with rape).
Yes.
I remember something about how someone who smoked for 40 years has spent
enough money to buy a house (and the house isn't putting poison in your
lungs).
A couple of years ago, we had an election here about allowing sales of
beer and wine. I'd much rather have cigarette sales illegal.
Of course, alcohol isn't completely harmless, but at least you don't
have alcohol fumes coming out of the user and infecting others.
Of course, freedom IS limited when actions can harm others. Your freedom
of smoking conflicts with others freedom of breathing. If that wasn't
so, I'd have nothing against smoking (at least nothing other than
unwanted fires).
On Saturday, May 28, 2016 at 3:13:14 PM UTC-4, Mark Lloyd wrote:
Except of course that this was posted:
Add your reply was:
My smoking in my house, does not harm you and it's none of your business.
It's not up to you or big govt to force us to comply just because you
think it's bad for us. And the same libs who are out to shut down all
smoking are out to tell you how much fat you can eat, how much salt you
can have, what size soda you can buy.
If I'm smoking in the street and you don't want to breathe it in, don't stand next to me. Does not smoking make you a stupid fuckwit who can't think for himself?
--
While most Americans believe that getting rid of religion is an impossible goal, much of the developed world has already accomplished it. Any account of a ”god gene“ that causes the majority of Americans to helplessly organize their lives around ancient works of religious fiction must explain why so many inhabitants of other First World societies apparently lack such a gene. The level of atheism throughout the rest of the developed world refutes any argument that religion is somehow a moral necessity. Countries like Norway, Iceland, Australia, Canada, Sweden, Switzerland, Belgium, Japan, the Netherlands, Denmark and the United Kingdom are among the least religious societies on Earth. According to the United Nations’ Human Development Report (2005) they are also the healthiest, as indicated by measures of life expectancy, adult literacy, per capita income, educational attainment, gender equality, homicide rate and infant mortality. Conversely, the 50 nations now ranked lowest in
terms of human development are unwaveringly religious.
--Sam Harris (An Atheist Manifesto)
Some would strongly disagree with that. There are people who get
significant headaches from just a single inhalation.
That being said, I would agree with those who think we have gone
overboard on restricting smokers.
A major financial company I have done work for put out a broadcast email
to all employees and contractors - telling them that it was *not* OK to
stand outside of a building and smoke... and, instead, they could only
smoke in designated, out-of-sight areas behind buildings.
Reading between the lines, I came away with "We are a respected
financial institution and people are trusting us to handle their money -
and we do not want anybody to think than any of us are foolish enough to
have become addicted to nicotine."
I thought that was a little over-the-top.... and I'll go along with "If
I don't like it, I can always move."..... but in situations where people
do not have the option of moving...
When I'm in an elevator and some addict that has just stubbed out their
cigarette gets in and exhales, all I can think is "If you had farted,
you'd be embarrassed....".
There's always one..... but most people don't have a problem. These freaks must have problems near any kind of smoke presumably, bonfires etc? Why should the rest of the world take care of these people?
Unless he's continuing to smoke the cigarette, I don't see the problem. If he does, you can ask him to put it out or simply leave the elevator at the next floor. Please people, think for yourselves to overcome a situation, instead of trying to find blame somewhere. Has everyone become a lawyer or something?
--
There was an old man from Limerick,
Who was completely unaware of the short often humorous poems that shared the same name as his hometown.
If you smoke, you would not see the problem. When I smoked, I could
not understand why a woman I knew always complained about the smell of
her clothes and hair when she came home from work as a barmaid....my
olfactory senses had adapted to it and I did not notice it.
The problem is that he *stinks*, his breath stinks, his clothes stink,
and when he exhales that last lung full of smoke into the elevator *it*
stinks....
I'm not a smoker. But I like the smell of it and will take a cigarette if offered one. But I don't see the point in smoking (tobacco) regularly as it has no effect on me whatsoever.
--
My wife sat down on the couch next to me as I was changing channels. She asked, what's on TV?
I said, Dust.
I think it's more along the lines of 'we want our customers to have a
healthy experience entering into our place of business. We put smokers
in the back of the building because it's out of site, our customers
aren't exposed to the smoke, and some of our employees are simply
addicted to the nicotine'.
The problem with smoking on the job is that smokers take multiple "smoke
breaks" during the day above and beyond regular company provided break
times. It's a waste of company time.
That is simply a result of the silly smoking policy.
It is also far from the most disruptive thing at work. People screwing
with their phones all day is a much larger waste of company time.
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.