# smoking ban



## huntnfishn1 (Feb 8, 2009)

*Is the smoking ban in public places a good rule?*​
yes5265.82%no2734.18%


----------



## huntnfishn1 (Feb 8, 2009)

hey if you guys could give me your oppinions on the new SD smoking ban id appreciate it. Its for an extra credit project.


----------



## doublereed (Mar 27, 2009)

We have the smoking ban in MN and it's really not that bad. The bars complained about it before it went into effect but after it went into effect they all just built some enclosed or fenced in decks for people to go outside and smoke on.

I was working in a bowling center at the time so it was affecting us. The bowlers have to go out in between games to have a quick smoke so it slows down the night a little bit, but as a non-smoker it was nice to work in a smoke free environment.

Only about 25% of our bowlers smoked at the time. We lost some of them but we gained some non-smokers that didn't hang around because of the smoke.

It depends on which side of the isle you're on. As a smoker I'd dislike having to go outside to smoke, but at the same time if you go to a friends house or something many go outside to smoke anyway.

It's pretty awesome for non-smokers to not have to smell the smoke in the bars, restaurants and other establishments.

Brad
PM me if you need resource information.


----------



## BeekBuster (Jul 22, 2007)

Im a smoker and i love the smoking ban!


----------



## taddy1340 (Dec 10, 2004)

Used to be a smoker...about 7 years removed now. I'm for the ban. You can sure tell the difference after a night in a bar...man, I don't miss that smell.


----------



## The Norseman (Jan 8, 2005)

Morning Everyone,

Hey, I am not a smoker, never have/never will.

I feel a ban is a very bad deal, here's my take on it. Without getting on my soap box, 
It seems like every time we turn around somebody is willing to take
something we have away.

What I think is that the American people do not realize what is slowly
happening. Our American Government is slowly taking privilages and
rights away.

I believe very soon we will realize the things we like to do are going to 
be very resricted, taxed to death, or taken away....whether it be Smoking
Guns, ATVs, trying to buy a house, etc. (I think you get what I'm talk'n about).

If I want to smoke, I'll smoke and you tell'n me what to do.

By the way Government is getting worse because fool's keep voting in the
worst people.


----------



## Jungda99 (Nov 17, 2006)

I love the smoking ban.

Clothes don't stink the next day and the hangover is significantly less.

I love to smoke while I am drinking....with the smoking ban I typically don't smoke at all because I don't feel like going outside.

I think people are much more likely to take there kids bowling ect.on a sat night becuase they don't have to worry about the lane next to them chain smoking.


----------



## Ref (Jul 21, 2003)

The smoking ban law was one of the best laws to come around in a long, long time. With all the the information about the deadly and detrimental health issues related to smoking, and second-hand smoke, I'm surprised at all the peolple that continue to light up. Every time I see a smoker...I think " there's another idiot". Don't they realize what they are doing to their health? What hurts even more is when I see a smoker in a car with little children in the car with them. Those poor kids are being forced to breath in that second-hand smoke. The kids don't have a chance.

Even more frustrating is seeing employees of the health industry (clinics, hospitals etc.) standing outside the front door lighting up!!!!!

Without getting into big business, jobs etc. how can the gov't continue to support tobacco companies when they know that they are killing thousands of people in this country every year? If that was an outside interest killing U.S. citizens, how long would the gov't put up with it??????


----------



## taddy1340 (Dec 10, 2004)

Ref said:


> The smoking ban law was one of the best laws to come around in a long, long time. With all the the information about the deadly and detrimental health issues related to smoking, and second-hand smoke, I'm surprised at all the peolple that continue to light up. Every time I see a smoker...I think " there's another idiot". Don't they realize what they are doing to their health? What hurts even more is when I see a smoker in a car with little children in the car with them. Those poor kids are being forced to breath in that second-hand smoke. The kids don't have a chance.
> 
> Even more frustrating is seeing employees of the health industry (clinics, hospitals etc.) standing outside the front door lighting up!!!!!
> 
> Without getting into big business, jobs etc. how can the gov't continue to support tobacco companies when they know that they are killing thousands of people in this country every year? If that was an outside interest killing U.S. citizens, how long would the gov't put up with it??????


Agree 100% Ref. I also find it hilarious when someone walks out of the gym/fitness center, gets in their car and immediately lights up.

IMO, banning has nothing to do with taking away more of our rights. It's a public safety concern...not much different than making you wear a seat belt. Last year alone the state of WI paid more than $433M in smoking related healthcare. Governments have a vested interest in seeing less people smoke. I say jack it up to $10/pack.


----------



## Decoyer (Mar 2, 2002)

I'm for it.

I'm all for personal rights of every citizen, until they begin to effect the health and well being of society.


----------



## Fallguy (Jan 23, 2004)

I'm opinionated, sometimes oblivious, and sometimes an a-hole. So here's my take on it: 

I think it's funny when I see people standing outside a business smoking on their break on a cold January day, freezing their buttocks off while I am nice and warm.

On the other hand, I see the tobacco industry as one of the businesses that helped start our country.

So tell me....am I just opinionated, oblivious, an a-hole, or all three!?


----------



## Doogie (Feb 23, 2007)

Im gona play devils advocate here for a sec.

what about the tobacco industy? just shut it down and put thousands out of work, from the farmer to the gal working in the tobacco shop? or just the smoking side of it, so now eveyone switches to chewing tobacco.

if your in the bar and everyone but you smokes(been there done that where everyone else in the bar went out for a smoke) what are you going to do, sit in side and twittle your thumbs, or go out side and inhale the 2nd hand smoke anyway??

theres bars in MT that dont allow smoking in them because they serve food, and some that still allow smoking in them, its your decision what bars to patronize


----------



## Save Hens (Mar 15, 2008)

Well it is nice coming home not smelling like smoke


----------



## Ref (Jul 21, 2003)

The tobacco industry may have helped start our country, but now it's killing our country......it's time that it goes. Just because the industry has thousands of jobs, doesn't give it a right to kill people.

Another point....think of the Billions of dollars that is spent by health insurance companies on smoking related health issues....this is in part what drives your and my health insurance premiums up.

Smokeless tobacco.....On one hand, people that use this product are at least giving cancer to themselves, not to everyone else. That is the BIG issue that smokers really don't get. On the other hand, spitting that crap out is one of the grossest (spelling?) things that there is. It's also pollution and littering. What happens to that stuff after it hits the ground, snow, water or spit cup? uke:

I will now step down from my soapbox.


----------



## Csquared (Sep 5, 2006)

If anyone believes the smoking ban is for health reasons please explain to me why, for an annual fee, bars can have themselves exempted from the law in my state. Smoking is banned in bars here, unless the bar buys a "permit" for a few thousand dollars. :wink:

I don't know the details of the SD law, but here it's not hard to figure out where their heart is.

I have never smoked a cigarette in my life, and the smell of smoke is revolting to me, but I liked it the old-fashioned way when the bar owner decided if he wanted people smoking in his bar or not....not the govt. If so many people truly are bothered by smoking then it seems to follow that the owner who didn't allow it would have most of the business anyway.

But if we are going to outlaw activities based on what a simple voting majority "doesn't like", I'm pretty sure we'd have the votes to get rid of rap music! :lol: There's another thread debating whether or not *THAT* is bad for our health, too! :wink:

And I know a lot of people who live in the country who don't like the sound of gunfire. 

Where does it stop?

Cigarette taxes will most likely lead to a very small % of smokers in the not too distant future. When that happens, where will the govt find the lost revenue? And how will we be able to "fight" their efforts to get that revenue from another source if _THAT_ source happens to be something we actually *DO* care about after we've allowed them to set a precedent with the tobacco industry?

We have reached the point where lawyers are actually trying to sue McDonald's for their fat clients.

Like I said before...where does it stop?

Just a thought. :wink:

:2cents:


----------



## HARRY2 (Jul 26, 2004)

The goverment starts telling people what they can and cant do on their own property, this is not good no matter how youlook at it. I smoke but dont really care because i can wait till i leave to have a smoke.


----------



## Ref (Jul 21, 2003)

The gov't is there to make decisions concerning the best interest of the citizens of this country. Staying alive is in the best interest of it's citizens.

I've watched people go through an agonizing death because they smoked....I've also watched someone go through an agonizing death because of second-hand smoke. It wasn't pretty or pleasant. If ANY of you would have watched what I did, you would be in favor of a smoking ban too.


----------



## HARRY2 (Jul 26, 2004)

I know i will get alot of grief about this but i put second hand smoke right up there with global warming, a myth the liberals cooked up so they can continue to feel good about themselves.

Jesus, according to some more people die from second hand smoke than the people who smoke the damn things.

And banning smoking in bars, just downright sh$&. Listen to yourselves, you sound just like the people who hate guns and want to get rid of them. 
They use they same reasons and arguments.


----------



## HARRY2 (Jul 26, 2004)

Ref said:


> The gov't is there to make decisions concerning the best interest of the citizens of this country. Staying alive is in the best interest of it's citizens.


Yeah, because the government knows whats best for us.


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

Ref said:


> Without getting into big business, jobs etc. how can the gov't continue to support tobacco companies when they know that they are killing thousands of people in this country every year? If that was an outside interest killing U.S. citizens, how long would the gov't put up with it??????


The tobacco company isnt killing anyone.

When was the last time a tobacco company MADE someone smoke/chew? Thats right.....NEVER!

People make their own choices.

Come on man, thats like saying colt is responsible for gun crime.

As far as the smoking ban, I like it being a non-smoker. But I dont think im in favor of these "total bans".......I would be in favor of something like only a certain percentage of liquor licensed establishments can have smoking in them.

I agree with some of what Norseman said.


----------



## Csquared (Sep 5, 2006)

Ref wrote:


> I've watched people go through an agonizing death because they smoked....I've also watched someone go through an agonizing death because of second-hand smoke. It wasn't pretty or pleasant. If ANY of you would have watched what I did, you would be in favor of a smoking ban too


Ref, I don't know how old you are, but reaching the conclusion I have never watched a cancer victim die because I am not in favor of the govt taxing a specific industry at a new level is the kind of logic that also believes this :



> The gov't is there to make decisions concerning the best interest of the citizens of this country.


The govt is there to protect us from foreign threats and to protect me from you...end of story. It is *NOT* there to protect me from_ ME._ There isn't a person alive who believes smoking isn't bad for their health, but in a free country you can make that choice.

I don't mean to take issue with you, Ref, but inferring my opinion would be different if I knew what I was talking about is a pretty good way to coax a response from me. :wink:

I had the extreme misfortune of losing a 45 year old brother-in-law and a 52 year old hunting buddy to lung cancer, so don't think my opinion is the result of misinformation or naivity. Both of those guys smoked because they wanted to, and I could have sold tickets if and when someone tried to tell either of them they couldn't smoke_ because it was bad for them and they knew best._ 

You have a lot more faith in the govt than I do, it appears, as I do not think for one second they care a bit about what's best for me. They should devote their efforts to protecting our shores and foreign interests and let me worry about me.

Do you do much reading? In case you haven't noticed there are "experts" trying to convince the govt that red meat will kill us, too. So if you believe it is their job to make decisions for us...in our best interest, of course...when they conclude you can't eat whitetail deer because it will give you colon cancer will you consider that overstepping their bounds, or merely looking after your best interests? :wink:

Or how about New York deciding we should only drink diet soda, so they want to tax the regular stuff at a higher rate....in our best interest, of course. Are you OK with that?

Or............how about diseases carried by mosquitos. I read somewhere that scientists had determined what colors mosquitos were most attracted to. Should the govt outlaw those color shirts? :lol:

I'm obviously being facetious, but my point is the same as in my initial post.............where will it stop?


----------



## Turner (Oct 7, 2005)

I am for the ban. I also believe that it should be put out to a public vote and let the people decide not the government.


----------



## Ref (Jul 21, 2003)

I stand behind my posts. I would not change a sigle statement in any of them. I also still believe that the gov't should step in and shut down the tobacco industry. You are right, the gov't is there to protect me from you.....the you being the tobacco industry. The buddy that I watched die from second-hand smoke was not a myth like someone compare it to global warming.

I'm not going to nit-pick every every statement in these posts. I've said where I stand.

Obvioulsy there are going to be people on both sides of social arguement. You guys are entitled to your opinion.


----------



## Csquared (Sep 5, 2006)

> I've said where I stand.


Not exactly, Ref.

The question was, where will it stop?

I'm asking for your opinion here. In your opinion, what are acceptable limits of control ,by the govt, on the populace?

You've said where you stand on the smoking issue, but the reasons you've used to justify the ban leaves the door totally open for much more govt intrusion into private lives, so I'm asking you to clarify.


----------



## Ref (Jul 21, 2003)

I believe in judging one issue at a time. This topic is about the smoking issue. We need to get rid of the health issues related to smoking. It's killing our country. I also still believe that the gov't has the right to step in and make laws in the best interest of it's citizens. To me, that is a huge part of their job.

Do I agree with everything that our gov't has done in the past? No, I do not. But that doesn't stop me from supporting the gov't smoking ban because I think it is a great step in the right direction.

Where wil it end? It will never end. There will always be social issues to agree and disagree on. That's why our great country is a democracy, not a dictatorship.

To not support the stopping of smoking and it's health issues because you are afraid of the next issue is wrong.


----------



## ruger1 (Aug 16, 2006)

The Norseman said:


> Morning Everyone,
> 
> Hey, I am not a smoker, never have/never will.
> 
> ...


Well here is my problem with that logic. There are smokers across the financial spectrum. However the majority of smokers exists in the lower income realm. Or is it most of the lower income folks are smokers? Either way, smoking causes serious health risks. Those health risks convert into my tax dollars being spent when poor people go to the physician for smoking/poor health related issues. Following that logic, poor smokers are actually taking money out of my pocket. Basically poor people cannot afford to smoke. If you can pay your own insurance and medical bills, Smoke away! If you receive gov't assistance, I (the gov't) gets to tell you how to live.

The golden rule, "He who has the gold makes the rules."

I support the ban. I really going out to bars and restaurants and not smelling like an ash tray at the end of an evening.



> The tobacco company isnt killing anyone.
> 
> When was the last time a tobacco company MADE someone smoke/chew? Thats right.....NEVER!
> 
> People make their own choices.


That is very true. The problem is most people are to stupid to be allowed to make those decisions. Most of the general population is lucky that breathing is a natural and subconscious function. They'd forget to breathe.


----------



## Jungda99 (Nov 17, 2006)

Darwinism

enough said.

But like I said before...I really like going to the bar and not coming home smelling like smoke.


----------



## DodgeLynn (Aug 28, 2008)

Up here its banned in ALL public places, with the exception of designated smoking areas.

I love it!


----------



## rockthief (Apr 5, 2008)

regarding tobacco companies going out of business, I expect they have had contingency plans in place for many years and money invested in the infrastructure to get those plans going. Smoking costs billions in health care and also consider maintenance to buildings. Ever have to clean a place whre there is smoking you will know what I am saying.
I knew a guy had throat cancer, had the operation to cut it out, had to breath through a hole in his throat. Guess what? He smoked through that hole after all he had been through! That blew me away.


----------



## HARRY2 (Jul 26, 2004)

I just find it starange that with all of the chimicals we are eating, breathing, and rubbing on our underarms that somehow SECOND hand smoke, the stuff that my lungs have already exhaled is somehow killing millions of people every year.

I think it is a well funded propaganda machine by people with nothing better to do execpt convince themselves they are a good person by doing things like this.


----------



## Jungda99 (Nov 17, 2006)

WOW...we have the sharpest knives in the drawer posting tonight

Second hand smoke is the smoke coming off the end of the your cigarette when you arn't inhaling it. I.E. NOT FILTERED like the stuff going in your lungs.

So what that means is also the stuff you inhale directly from the cigarette is less harmfull than what we inhale. Granted you also are inhaling the same second hand smoke that we do so you are getting a double whammy.

When you smoke we don't have the option of the "filter"

Back in the day I used to love smoking cigarettes HS/college. But to me it just got old...didn't taste the same and was just a plain waste of time/money.


----------



## HARRY2 (Jul 26, 2004)

Jungda99 said:


> Second hand smoke is the smoke coming off the end of the your cigarette when you arn't inhaling it. I.E. NOT FILTERED like the stuff going in your lungs.
> 
> So what that means is also the stuff you inhale directly from the cigarette is less harmfull than what we inhale. Granted you also are inhaling the same second hand smoke that we do so you are getting a double whammy.


Thanks for the laughs, that is the best thing i have heard all day. You say you like going to a smoke free bar? We have those in Jamestown right now, i see no need to make them all smoke free, you have yours we have ours.

I guess you antis are all the same ,not happy till you have everything just the way YOU want and the hell with everybody else.


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

Ref said:


> I stand behind my posts. I would not change a sigle statement in any of them. I also still believe that the gov't should step in and shut down the tobacco industry. You are right, the gov't is there to protect me from you.....the you being the tobacco industry. The buddy that I watched die from second-hand smoke was not a myth like someone compare it to global warming.
> 
> I'm not going to nit-pick every every statement in these posts. I've said where I stand.
> 
> Obviously there are going to be people on both sides of social arguement. You guys are entitled to your opinion.


If that is your logic, than the Gov't should also move in and shut down the auto industry. Im a good driver, but someone else may kill me as they are not a good driver. They should also shut down firearm manufacturers. Again, someone may use a gun to kill someone else. They should outlaw masturbation as it makes your eyes go fuzzy.

The govt has no right to protect me from me.

And again, the tobacco company is not "you". Their not forcing cigarettes down anybodies throat. To punish them is NO DIFFERENT than punishing a gun manufacturer because their product killed someone.

People make stupid choices, and as Ron White says, "you cant fix stupid". And its still their choice to make.

Your logic is skewed.

I get sick of the "truth" commercials. If you dont know smokings bad for you by now, than you should maybe be weeded out of the gene pool anyway. People know its bad, yet they still do it. Tax the crap out of it like they already do, non-smokers make the choice, STOP HANGING OUT IN SMOKEY AREAS, and moooove on people. I dont need the govt to pass asinine laws to "protect" me. Im smart enough to make the choice to NOT go into smokey bars. To NOT hang out around smokers. Its really pretty simple when you down to it.

The buddy that died from second hand smoke? Why was he exposed to so much second hand smoke? Did he work in a bar? Get a new job. Did he hang out with smokers? Find new friends. Did his family have a predisposed genetic affinity to cancer? If so, he probably would have gotten it regardless (yes, it happens, girl I went to HS with had her tongue cut out from mouth cancer, no smoking, no chewing, genetic predisposition).


----------



## barebackjack (Sep 5, 2006)

ruger1 said:


> > The tobacco company isnt killing anyone.
> >
> > When was the last time a tobacco company MADE someone smoke/chew? Thats right.....NEVER!
> >
> ...


No argument there. But its still not my problem. If they want to kill themselves, they can go right ahead and do so.

I know given the choice between a "smoking" bar and a "non-smoking", ill go to the non-smoking. But theres room for both.


----------



## HARRY2 (Jul 26, 2004)

ruger1 said:


> The problem is most people are to stupid to be allowed to make those decisions. Most of the general population is lucky that breathing is a natural and subconscious function. They'd forget to breathe.


Wow, you must be a genius or something, i mean you think so highly of yourself and all. How great it must be to wake up in the morning knowing that just because you dont smoke you are clearly superior to the average human being.

I have some advice for you, dont pay your taxes, then Obama will give you a cabnet position becasue you would fit right in with that group.


----------



## swift (Jun 4, 2004)

Harry using your logic it should be okay to drive drunk. Afterall you are over twenty one and make the payments on your vehicle every month. The govt shouldn't be sticking their nose in your private affairs. It is nonsense to think that people that don't smoke should have to endure your lack of self control. Go smokeless when you go to the bar. I have never had to strip down in the garage because some idiot was spitting snoose on me all night but I have because of second hand smoke.


----------



## HARRY2 (Jul 26, 2004)

swift said:


> Harry using your logic it should be okay to drive drunk. Afterall you are over twenty one and make the payments on your vehicle every month. The govt shouldn't be sticking their nose in your private affairs. It is nonsense to think that people that don't smoke should have to endure your lack of self control. Go smokeless when you go to the bar. I have never had to strip down in the garage because some idiot was spitting snoose on me all night but I have because of second hand smoke.


So whats wrong with the current set-up in Jamestown? We have a few smoking bars and a few non-smoking bars. I see no need for non-smokers to have have every single bar smoke free.

I did not complain when ND banned smoking in most public places, i do not believe anyone should be subjected to smoke if they do not desire to be. I also do not not believe that non-smokers think it is fair to outright ban smoking in public, why cant we smokers have our few bars where we can enjoy our freedoms?

When Fargo pulled their BS, they forced a cigar bar to close down, a damn cigar bar, a CIGAR BAR where customers go to smoke and owners and employees had a choice to be there. How messed up is that. Do you think that cigar bar was offending anyone?

There comes a point where people only think that their freedom is important and forget that others have rights also. Kinda the same way muslims sue christians because a monument or picture in a public place offended them.

I respect your rights but dammit i want mine too.


----------



## Nodak_Norsk (Aug 5, 2007)

I am happy with a smoking ban 

It is RARE here in California to have to walk by smokers anywhere. Funny story about that too...I was once walking with my daughter in front of a restaurant (she was wearing squeaker sneakers), and passing through a group of smokers, they scuff and one says "Oh my god, that is SO annoying!" I lost my damn mind on the guy for it! My daughter's squeaking shoes were annoying? Sorry they aren't harming you, but the inconsiderate smoking was damaging my daughter's little lungs and mine. Her shoes promote proper foot development, so they HELP.

Smokers make me so angry. If you are driving in front of me smoking, I will pass you (illegally if need be) just to get ahead of the smell. It is disgusting. I have never smoked a day in my life, and neither has my husband. Which is great, because most Marines smoke AND dip--sometimes simultaneously. EWWWWW!


----------



## Ref (Jul 21, 2003)

Smoking bans are sweeping the states across the country. Even the small poll on this thread is 70% in favor of the smoking ban!!!!!!!   

The negative posters on this thread can be sarcastic and argue your point. Some of you have said that our logic is skewed. You have that right to disagree, but the HUGE majority in favor of the bans DO have the correct logic. We have this one right. I'm glad that I am part of the positive comments on this thread supporting the ban.


----------



## MOB (Mar 10, 2005)

I'm torn by this smoking ban in SD. As a non smoking tobacco user (Copenhagen), I've always felt like I should be able to share my tobacco end product with a smoker. If I have to breathe your smoke and wear it home, you should have to wear some of my tobacco spit. I enjoy smoke free bars and not smelling like an ashtray, but it is not right for the government to tell private business owners what they can or can't do on their property within reason. If you don't like smoke - go somewhere else or work somewhere else. No one is forcing you to go there. 
The SD smoking ban in bars is also going to put the hurt on video lottery revenues. I don't gamble on the video lotttery (voluntary taxation), but many smokers do. The Indian casinos will also benefit from this smoking ban, as they allow smoking. This will shift revenue from the people of the state of SD to the non taxpaying reservations


----------



## Jungda99 (Nov 17, 2006)

HARRY2 said:


> Jungda99 said:
> 
> 
> > Second hand smoke is the smoke coming off the end of the your cigarette when you arn't inhaling it. I.E. NOT FILTERED like the stuff going in your lungs.
> ...


What you don't understand is you have the option to smoke if you want to. You can always go outside. When you come in a bar and smoke my only option if I don't want to "smoke" is to leave.

Therfore you are now basically makeing decisions for me.


----------



## Jungda99 (Nov 17, 2006)

HARRY2 said:


> swift said:
> 
> 
> > Harry using your logic it should be okay to drive drunk. Afterall you are over twenty one and make the payments on your vehicle every month. The govt shouldn't be sticking their nose in your private affairs. It is nonsense to think that people that don't smoke should have to endure your lack of self control. Go smokeless when you go to the bar. I have never had to strip down in the garage because some idiot was spitting snoose on me all night but I have because of second hand smoke.
> ...


Heck according to Harry we might as well open schools back up to smoking.

why should the government tell us we can't smoke in schools.

You should be able to smoke while watching your kid's basketball game. Right...because it just isn't fair that they don't have smoking schools


----------



## brittanypoint (Feb 15, 2009)

> Heck according to Harry we might as well open schools back up to smoking.
> 
> why should the government tell us we can't smoke in schools.
> 
> You should be able to smoke while watching your kid's basketball game. Right...because it just isn't fair that they don't have smoking schools


I think you have completely mistrewn Harry2's logic. I also think you should look at history and see what happens when the goverment has taken control over various issues. Its called communism. Or Nazi Germany.

Ruger1, i think you are too stupid to own a gun based on your own statement. Since when did stupidity become not agreeing with someone. These people choose to smoke. I choose to chew. Regardless of their habits, i dont thing stupidity is the correct word.

I think the ban is a good thing, but I do not believe it should be every bar and every restarant. The government has enough control over everything. Why in the hell should they get more. If an owner chooses to allow smoking in his bar/diner, let him. Those people it offends can stay out. And if they choose not to allow smoking, then the same goes.

As far as shutting the tabacco companies down because thier product kills people, you need to think that through. Beretta makes shotguns, a guy just used one on his wife about 6 weeks ago near here. He missed mostly, but the gun injured her. Same logic, lets shut beretta down. How about Colt, the 1911 has killed people all over the world, does that make it Colt's fault? If you hold true to your logic we should shut down every industry in the US. In some way some one has chosen to use the product and has killed or gotten killed by it.


----------



## ruger1 (Aug 16, 2006)

brittanypoint said:


> Ruger1, i think you are too stupid to own a gun based on your own statement. Since when did stupidity become not agreeing with someone. These people choose to smoke. I choose to chew. Regardless of their habits, i dont thing stupidity is the correct word.


I'm not so sure about that. I'm in cardiac medicine so I think I have a fair amount of knowledge and expertise regarding this topic. Everybody and I mean everybody knows that smoking DOES and WILL cause significant adverse health affects. Everybody knows that these adverse affects WILL cost a lot of money in medical care. Money that most people don't have and don't have insurance to cover.

To me, knowing that smoking WILL cause you to become sick and adversely affect your life and the lives of those around you (including those subjected to your second hand smoke). By definition that is stupid.

Stu-pid
adjective, -er, -est, noun 
-adjective 1. lacking ordinary quickness and keenness of mind; dull. 
2. characterized by or proceeding from mental dullness; foolish; senseless.
3. tediously dull, esp. due to lack of meaning or sense; inane; pointless.


----------



## USAlx50 (Nov 30, 2004)

ruger1 said:


> That is very true. The problem is most people are to stupid to be allowed to make those decisions. Most of the general population is lucky that breathing is a natural and subconscious function. They'd forget to breathe.


You're right. maybe we should just have Obama, pelosi, and reid make all of the decisions on how everyone in the country is to eat and exercise. Hell why dont we have a mandatory diet, it would be in the best interest for everyone. Far fetched, yeah, but some of you people make me wonder if you think anyone in america is capable of making decisions for themselves anymore. Its focking rediculous.

 **** Edited for content****  Jesus, you cant drive behind someone smoking :lol: are you serious? Why do you drive at all, dont you know you are killing the earth! do you want to kill the earth so everyone dies!?


----------



## ruger1 (Aug 16, 2006)

USAlx50 said:


> You're right. maybe we should just have Obama, pelosi, and reid make all of the decisions on how everyone in the country is to eat and exercise. Hell why dont we have a mandatory diet, it would be in the best interest for everyone. Far fetched, yeah, but some of you people make me wonder if you think anyone in america is capable of making decisions for themselves anymore. Its focking rediculous.
> 
> 
> > USA, when I look at the world all I see are dollar signs. Personally I don't care if someone sucks on a smoke or suck starts a pistol. What I do care about is the money (taxes) it costs you and I. When another's actions cost me money, I should get to dictate said actions.


----------



## brittanypoint (Feb 15, 2009)

So what, I see the effects of fire everyday, but I dont think the guy is stupid who uses matches. Everyone knows smoke is bad. But because they choose to smoke, they are stupid in your "educated" eyes. All the chemicals in smoke is what does the damage right? Think it through. We should only eat food out of our own gardens and raise our own meat because of all the chemicals and additives in them. Those chemicals can be just as bad. We've just okayed them because the FDA has approved thier use after one person in this many died. Thats ok, that person was irrelevant. Its the same concept. Don't drive your car, its polluting the ozone layer and the fumes from that are just as bad as second hand smoke. In your line of work, you ought to know this, living kills. It does not matter whether you smoke, or drink or live in a bubble, something is going to get you.


----------



## MSG Rude (Oct 6, 2003)

Enough of the name calling. 1st and only warning.


----------



## swift (Jun 4, 2004)

The people that think the govt is pushing this smoking ban is both right and wrong.

They are right in the sense that the state govt is made of the people for the people. It is the citizens of the state that is pushing for a smoking ban.

They are wrong in the idea that Washington DC politics have anything to do with this. Our president smokes two packs a day. Pelosi and Reid have nothing to do with writing state law in North Dakota or any other state. Heck, Conrad, Dorgan and Pomeroy's only real influence in state law is the way they vote as citizens of ND. It is effective to throw out names of federal legislators to make your arguement but it really doesn't have any merit.

Being in a room full of smoke is the same to me as being in a room full of Europeans. No matter where you go you can still smell them.


----------



## brittanypoint (Feb 15, 2009)

> Enough of the name calling. 1st and only warning


Edited, my apologies


----------



## USAlx50 (Nov 30, 2004)

ruger1 said:


> USAlx50 said:
> 
> 
> > You're right. maybe we should just have Obama, pelosi, and reid make all of the decisions on how everyone in the country is to eat and exercise. Hell why dont we have a mandatory diet, it would be in the best interest for everyone. Far fetched, yeah, but some of you people make me wonder if you think anyone in america is capable of making decisions for themselves anymore. Its focking rediculous.
> ...


Yes, I understand that side. It balances me quite a bit in this topic. I just have a problem with the overall attitude of the government saving everyone and making everyones decisions for them. The government sure helped destroy our auto industry and now they are using our money to bail them out.. Thinking about this crap gets me all fired up :******:


----------



## Bgunit68 (Dec 26, 2006)

barebackjack said:


> They should outlaw masturbation as it makes your eyes go fuzzy.


I'm sorry, could you use bigger font I can't seem to make out the words.


----------



## HARRY2 (Jul 26, 2004)

Jungda99 said:


> HARRY2 said:
> 
> 
> > Jungda99 said:
> ...


Do you read well?


----------



## HARRY2 (Jul 26, 2004)

Jungda99 said:


> HARRY2 said:
> 
> 
> > swift said:
> ...


 Reading is fundemental, read the whole thing then read your reply. Then go sit in the corner and think about it.


----------



## HARRY2 (Jul 26, 2004)

ruger1 said:


> brittanypoint said:
> 
> 
> > Ruger1, i think you are too stupid to own a gun based on your own statement. Since when did stupidity become not agreeing with someone. These people choose to smoke. I choose to chew. Regardless of their habits, i dont thing stupidity is the correct word.
> ...


 Guns are dangerous as well, assault rifles, shotguns with pistol grips, any gun capable of accepting a detachable magazine which can hold more than ten rounds, pistols which can easily be hidden on a persons body.

I see no need for anyone to have a gun, i do not UNDERSTAND why peole think they need these things, they kill more children than any other 2 things combined. And dont even get me started on cop killing bullets, why in the world do we allow these powerful bullets on the street?

You all know what BS that these statements are, well thats what all you anti-smoking guys sound like. You will not listen to logic and you are unwilling to comprimise in the least little bit.

Just because you work in a hospital does not give you the right, it is none of your damn buisness or anyone elses what i put into my body, and before we get another post from someone to caught up in their own damn smokefree greatness, i already said several times before YOU HAVE YOUR SMOKEFREE PLACES NOW ** edited for content** sit down and enjoy the smell of your own farts, move to san fransico and drive a damn hybrid. I am done with this.


----------



## Ref (Jul 21, 2003)

Harry2,

It would be real easy to be sarcastic with you, but I'm not going there. You really didn't do any good for the guys that were on your side in this issue. Your last post wasn't needed. Up until you "lost it", this discussion had been somewhat civil even though there was disagreement on the issue.


----------



## Csquared (Sep 5, 2006)

I wouldn't say Harry "lost it". He didn't infer the use of any words most of us don't hear everyday anyway 

I took it as a display of passion. If we aren't passionate about our opinions here perhaps we should be knitting socks with our time instead. :wink:

If you think that was losing it, Ref, look through some old posts from the "left" on the abortion issue in the political forum. They practically have foam dripping from them because the poster was so worked up he was foaming at the mouth! :lol: :lol:

I love spirited discussions like this. I haven't seen any name calling yet. 

One thing I'd like to add since I'm here is to be very careful justifying health risks as a means to outlaw specific activities. As mentioned, that could be used as an argument against cars, guns, beer...etc.

Also remember that when it was revealed that smoking caused cancer somewhere around 50% of adults were smokers...so nothing was done. But now that smokers are outnumbered 3 to 1, they've decided to act.

Coincidence? 

I would love to believe the govt acted on this for health reasons....but I don't. And do some research on the 1998 tobacco industry "deal" with several states and consider what would happen to the cost of your favorite 12 pack if they used the same tactics to "control" drunk driving. 

Enjoy the smoke free environments, but don't stop reminding your elected officials that we can handle it from here! :wink:


----------



## Csquared (Sep 5, 2006)

> barebackjack wrote:
> They should outlaw masturbation as it makes your eyes go fuzzy


.

Bgunit68 wrote:


> I'm sorry, could you use bigger font I can't seem to make out the words.


How did I miss *THAT*!

LMBO !!!!!!!

I'll buy you a :beer: , Bgunit68......while we can still afford it !!!! :wink:


----------



## Ref (Jul 21, 2003)

csquared,

You're probably right about some other posts on different issues, but Harry2 went way beyond what was necessary in his last post. I still think he "lost it". He lost all credibility with me to discuss this topic any further. This thread is on the Open Forum, not Hot Topics.


----------



## Csquared (Sep 5, 2006)

You're certainly entitled to that opinion, Ref, but if Harry seemed over the top there, you should probably avoid the hot topics forum! :lol:


----------



## MossyMO (Feb 12, 2004)

Having a smoking or no smoking establishment is 100% the business owners decision. Big brother has no right making that business decision; whomever decides to be a customer to the business, that is their decision.

Is a smoked ham or venison jerky infected with hazerdous material then?


----------



## Nodak_Norsk (Aug 5, 2007)

USAlx50 said:


> ruger1 said:
> 
> 
> > That is very true. The problem is most people are to stupid to be allowed to make those decisions. Most of the general population is lucky that breathing is a natural and subconscious function. They'd forget to breathe.
> ...


I drive a hybrid actually :wink:


----------



## USAlx50 (Nov 30, 2004)

Nodak_Norsk said:


> USAlx50 said:
> 
> 
> > ruger1 said:
> ...


My god, you are a better person then I!


----------



## Ref (Jul 21, 2003)

csquared,

I usually do stay off of the Hot Topics Forum. Alot of those threads are either too far left or too far right for me. :beer:


----------



## Csquared (Sep 5, 2006)

Well, as Gunny Highway always said...."A man's got to know his limitations" :wink:


----------



## Nodak_Norsk (Aug 5, 2007)

USAlx50 said:


> Nodak_Norsk said:
> 
> 
> > USAlx50 said:
> ...


And by then, I assume you mean "than".


----------



## The Norseman (Jan 8, 2005)

Wow, this is getting to be a very interesting thread.

Where there is smoke, there is fire.


----------



## DodgeLynn (Aug 28, 2008)

Bgunit68 said:


> barebackjack said:
> 
> 
> > They should outlaw masturbation as it makes your eyes go fuzzy.
> ...


 :bop: :rollin:


----------



## MSG Rude (Oct 6, 2003)

This thread has run its course.

Please refer to the http://www.nodakoutdoors.com/forums/terms.html
and pay attention to the 'language' sentence.

There are young adults that use this site too.


----------

