Will Smoking Be Banned in the Stadium

[jkeough]

its not that big of a deal dwn here...most people smoke in the designated areas...they even give smokers their own TV's

I cant believe this is even an issue

[ItsNotGonnaBeAlright]

its not that big of a deal dwn here...most people smoke in the designated areas...they even give smokers their own TV's

I cant believe this is even an issue

So long as there are smokers, smoking will be an issue whether it actually affects someone else or not. Look at homosexuality. No one is affected by homosexuals except homosexuals, yet people still manage to make it an issue.

[Guild]

My point was that it harms others and therefore should be banned. Anything that harms others crosses the line of freedom in my book.

As far as any other thing you discussed, if something harms other people around you, it should be fixed. Cash for clunkers is a start for the vehicle problem you brought up. However I believe there should be more AFFORDABLE electric vehicles out on the market to cut down on the carbon dioxide and I believe we should already have a alternative to oil. Then eventually all these carbon dioxide expelling vehicles you see now would be obsolete. But I dont want to get off topic here. Like I said, if it harms others around you it should be banned.

Everything that harms others around you should be banned.

Everyone yelling loudly at games harms my hearing.

Everyone yelling loudly at games should be banned.

Obviously not the case but I believe this example shows the weakness in the logic of your argument. The fact is that you will argue against it because you do not like it for whatever reason there may be (and there are plenty I know). However by arguing against it you argue against individual freedom while accepting the damaging cost of other things because it is convenient to you.

Not trying to be personal so do not take it as though I directed my post specifically at you KillerKat. I am just using your response to make my own point (overuse of "you" sorry)

[KillerKat]

Everything that harms others around you should be banned.

Everyone yelling loudly at games harms my hearing.

Everyone yelling loudly at games should be banned.

Obviously not the case but I believe this example shows the weakness in the logic of your argument. The fact is that you will argue against it because you do not like it for whatever reason there may be (and there are plenty I know). However by arguing against it you argue against individual freedom while accepting the damaging cost of other things because it is convenient to you.

Not trying to be personal so do not take it as though I directed my post specifically at you KillerKat. I am just using your response to make my own point (overuse of "you" sorry)

You got to use common sense though. Having smoke in you that damages your lungs, and it wasn't even your choice, is not the samething as yelling. It's like owning a gun. Its not illegal to own a gun, but it's illegal to use that gun to shoot others and harming them. Smoking in public harms others and there's a long list full of dangers to them. A smoker is putting their smoke in their lungs when the secondhand smoker doesn't want it. The secondhand smoker wasn't the one that decided he/she no longer cared about their own health. The smoker made that decision and is violating that person with their smoke. How is that different from harrasment?

[Guild]

You got to use common sense though. Having smoke in you that damages your lungs, and it wasn't even your choice, is not the samething as yelling. It's like owning a gun. Its not illegal to own a gun, but it's illegal to use that gun to shoot others and harming them. Smoking in public harms others and there's a long list full of dangers to them. A smoker is putting their smoke in their lungs when the secondhand smoker doesn't want it. The secondhand smoker wasn't the one that decided he/she no longer cared about their own health. The smoker made that decision and is violating that person with their smoke. How is that different from harrasment?

Automobiles do even more damage to all of us everyday. They should be banned.

Computer Screens are damaging our eyesight. They should be banned.

It's not that I necessarily disagree with you from a common sense standpoint, but I do disagree with restricting individual freedoms. It does have to happen (restricting some individual freedoms) but I think that especially in this case an outright ban is overboard. If there are designated smoking sections then nonsmokers can avoid those sections and from my point of view if there are said smoking sections smokers should respect the other people and use them as they are getting the respect of being particularly recognized as people whose rights are trying to be restricted as little as possible.

I am a smoker for the record. Though why anyone would want to smoke before halftime unless drunk I don't really get :sifone:

[ItsNotGonnaBeAlright]

why anyone would want to smoke before halftime unless drunk I don't really get :sifone:

If you're a Panther's fan, it's because you know what's coming.

[thunderraiden]

My point was that it harms others and therefore should be banned. Anything that harms others crosses the line of freedom in my book.

As far as any other thing you discussed, if something harms other people around you, it should be fixed. Cash for clunkers is a start for the vehicle problem you brought up. However I believe there should be more AFFORDABLE electric vehicles out on the market to cut down on the carbon dioxide and I believe we should already have a alternative to oil. Then eventually all these carbon dioxide expelling vehicles you see now would be obsolete. But I dont want to get off topic here. Like I said, if it harms others around you it should be banned and public smoking does.

Well pick up your picket sign and get those cars off the road then, speed it up douche.

Read the source information on bullet points five, six, and ten.

And if you expect me to believe that "scientific" study for one second from you have lost your mind. Just like we finished talking about, carbon dioxide from cars would produce 100 times for harmful emission than second hand smoke. There is no control factors in that study and its run by ALL biased sources.

Im all for respecting people and smoking outside and away from them if they are the types that hate cigarette smoke, i understand some of you had traumatic childhoods and when you see a cig you remember seeing ur mom getting hit by your dad smoking them and so on and so forth, or some of you people just need something to bitch about because you love the smell of your own farts you're so damn smug but to say that someone smoking outside or in a bar bothers you is absurd.

I'm a social smoker, i can go a day without a cigarette and refuse to smoke before 5PM no matter how i feel and usually go until 9PM without smoking. I save smoking usually for just when I'm drinking but I do let loose some nights with a single cigarette just so i don't pick up the bottle as an excuse to smoke. I have been doing this for about a year so no, the fallacy about having to smoke more cigs does not apply to me. If i do drink ill smoke maybe 3 or 4 that night until the buzz wears off.

Sure, i can understand banning cigs in restaurants and even at work where yes it does bring down productivity but the one place i like to smoke and where people go to let go of reality (bars) and the good old outdoors where teh smoke disappears instantly? get a life you smug asshole, whats your next vendetta against humanity? oh tahts right, attacking health care reform. Have at it you unholy pricks.

[KillerKat]

Automobiles do even more damage to all of us everyday. They should be banned.

Computer Screens are damaging our eyesight. They should be banned.

It's not that I necessarily disagree with you from a common sense standpoint, but I do disagree with restricting individual freedoms. It does have to happen (restricting individual freedoms) but I think that especially in this case an outright ban is overboard. If there are designated smoking sections then nonsmokers can avoid those sections and from my point of view if there are said smoking sections smokers should respect the other people and use them as they are getting the respect of being particularly recognized as people whose rights are trying to be restricted as little as possible.

I am a smoker for the record. :sifone:

Well I did mention the automobile situation. Again, got to use common sense. There's no way the government can ban automobiles. We dont have that many alternatives right now. Like I said, we can only produce more electric cars, etc. and make them more affordable so that the cars of today will become obsolete.

I'd have no problem if there was a designated smoking section far away from any other person so that they can't sniff the smoke, kinda like shooters have their own spots called shooting ranges, but not all smokers will follow the rules and instead choose to smoke wherever they please. And just like owning a gun is legal, but harming another person with that gun is illegal...I believe smoking should be dealt with the same way.

We have the freedom to do whatever we want, including harming others. But when we harm others, we also have to face the consequences. And I believe public smoking should face the consequence of a ban or becoming illegal.

[Guild]

Well I did mention the automobile situation. Again, got to use common sense. There's no way the government can ban automobiles. We dont have that many alternatives right now. Like I said, we can only produce more electric cars, etc. and make them more affordable so that the cars of today will become obsolete.

I'd have no problem if there was a designated smoking section far away from any other person so that they can't sniff the smoke, but not all smokers will follow the rules and instead choose to smoke wherever they please. And just like owning a gun is legal, but harming another person with that gun is illegal...I believe smoking should be dealt with the same way.

We have the freedom to do whatever we want, including harming others. But when we harm others, we also have to face the consequences. And I believe public smoking should face the consequence of a ban or becoming illegal.

While I can respect your belief I think you may be putting it before the rights of others, especially considering the study that your knowledge of the effects of secondhand smoke is likely based on. This I cannot respect.

[KillerKat]

While I can respect your belief I think you may be putting it before the rights of others, especially considering the study that your knowledge of the effects of secondhand smoke is likely based on. This I cannot respect.

What right does the smoker have invading my lungs with his/her smoke?

[Guild]

What right does the smoker have invading my lungs with his/her smoke?

The same right that fans in the fervor of the moment have to invade my hearing with damagingly intense soundwaves. (I am not actually against this but it is an equivalent example)

[KillerKat]

The same right that fans in the fervor of the moment have to invade my hearing with damagingly intense soundwaves. (I am not actually against this but it is an equivalent example)

Well a yell can't do that unless they're directly yelling in your ear. I believe if someone does damage to your hearing like that intentionally, you might have a case to sue, IDK. I would be against people yelling directly in other people's ear intentonally too if you're gonna be nit picky about this lol. On the topic of sound, there is a limit to what time you can play loud music that's considered disturbing the peace. May or may not be relevant...

[Guild]

The amount of sound created by a stadium crowd is significant enough to damage your hearing over time. So the example stands whether someone yells directly (ouch) in your ear or not.

But at this point I think you are avoiding the point of my argument and trying to nitpick details.

<3 KillerKat I guess we won't see eye to eye on this one

[KillerKat]

But then again, if you're talking about just being in a crowd and it's loud with cheers, then you already know the consequences of being there at the event.

When someone is in public however, anyone may decide to light one up at any time.