A woman called me today, apparently upset that the Weekly has endorsed Prop 201 (which would ban smoking in bars) and Prop 203 (which would tax cigs to pay for preschool programs). While some of what she had to say was freaking insane (at one point, she said that studies linking smoking to cancer were “bunk”), she got me thinking: What rights do smokers have to smoke?
My position as of this moment: Smokers cost society a lot, in terms of medical costs; if raising taxes gets smokers to cut down and/or quit, or gets fewer people to start, then that’s fantastic. And secondhand smoke kills, so therefore, smoking in bars should go. (And I am sorry, I don’t buy the argument that a blanket ban on smoking in bars will hurt business that much. I am sorry, but the bars in California seem to be doing just spiffy.)
However, I am open to hearing good arguments on why smokers have the right to smoke in bars and why taxing the hell outta cigs is wrong. Persuade me.
This article appears in Oct 26 – Nov 1, 2006.
Smokers die young. It saves us money on Social Security benefits.
Nicotine is as American as apple pie. Look at a dollar bill. That guy made his money, selling tobacco. Got his slaves to do all the work. The 400th anniversary of Jamestown, and you want to go against tradition?
What’s wrong with people who are also chemically dependent on alcohol, wanting to smoke in bars? There are gas masks available to the people who work in them. Sure, they need to shower and change clothes after every shift, but smokers are good tippers. Bar employees should be able to make enough money to pay for that.
The pubs in Ireland, where we recently visited, don’t allow smoking any more, and they certainly didn’t seem to be hurting. I guess a pint or two of Guinness takes the edge off nicotine withdrawal.
On one level, if they raise the cost of a pack of cigarettes, it may drive smokers away from purchasing in-state. I understand from a friend that a pack of Benson & Hedges — about $5 a pack in Arizona — is about a buck in Mexico. And Web sites out there sell cartons of cigarettes for $20 or so, compared to the $75(?) for a carton in AZ. Weak argument, but forseeable.
Regarding the proposition to tack on eighty cents to a pack of cigarettes to support education, I’d say it is easier to try to implement a costlier vice tax on a minority segment of society versus the majority. In other words, if this were proposing a higher vice tax on sales of alcohol, more people would be financially affected and might reject it.
From last weeks weekly: “That’s like saying, ‘Well, should we allow restaurant owners to serve french fries?’ Because we all know if you eat too many french fries, you’re gonna get fat, and it’s going to be bad for your health, and ultimately it’s going lead to diabetes,” Strongin says.
This quote is a bunk argument. When someone eats a too many French fries it affects only them. Whereas smoking your nasty cigs affects me if I am around it.
I am not sure how I feel about the props, on the one hand do I want our government telling our citizens how they can live? But on the other this doesn’t affect just the smoker; it affects everyone who happens to be stuck around them.
I used to frequent a restaurant that had a smoking and non smoking sections, but the ventilation system was all the same so no matter where you sat you still got to smell nasty smoke while your trying to eat.
Eh, I cant wait for November 8th when all this is over!
As far as smokers wanting to retain their rights smoking…We’ll I want to retain my rights to farting in your face while you’re eating dinner in a restaurant. Statistics show that absolutely no one dies from having someone else fart in your face while eating dinner. Being farted at in a restaurant causes absolutely no proven lung cancer or long term issues.
Hence, I will continue farting in your face while you’re trying to enjoy a meal with your family and friends.
Smokers = Farters.
What the HELL difference does it makes whether or not YOU feel that you’re not annoying the hell out of anyone around you? Why the hell do you think you have the undeniable right to MAKE ME and my family BREATH you damn 2nd hand cigarette smoke? You selfish, spineless, confused, inconsiderate, inept, insecure knuckle dragger.
Smokers are weak. I hate the lame excuses that “I’ve been smoking 2 packs a day for 20+ years and can’t stop…” Well, guess what, THAT WAS YOUR F&CKIN CHOICE! Don’t try and blame anyone else for your stupidity. Lemme guess, one day you just FELT the urge to start smoking right? Stupid, mindless moron…SMOKING IS LEARNED! You HAVE to want to try and get used to smoking you retard.
Oh Yeah! If we get rid of you damn morons, we’ll also reduce the states littering by 10 fold! STOP THROWING YOU DAMN CIGARETTE BUTTS OUT THE DAMN WINDOWS – IT’S YOUR F’CKING TRASH!!!!
I’ve got nothing for you on this one.
This is real simple, let the owners of the restaraunts and bars decide if they want smoking in THEIR places of buisness. If they do the non-smoker does not have to patronize those buisness. Go to one of the non-smoking bars or restaraunts. Why do you feel you have the right to tell a bar or restaraunt owner how to run his buisness? If you don’t like it, don’t go there. Wasn’t that simple?
Well Rob, take a moment to reread my “#5 comment above”…
You’re taking the cowardly, indecisive, “let’s all come together, hold hands and sing kumbayah…” approach. HERE’S what I’m saying Rob, SMOKING IN A PUBLIC PLACE SUCKS & IS EXTREMELY OFFENSIVE & POINTLESS! If there’s a PRIVATE club or bar or restaurant that wants to allow smokers – that’s their idiotic decision, in this case. However, when it comes to PUBLIC restaurants, bars, etc….it should be outlawed. Get a spine…
“This is real simple, let the owners of the restaraunts and bars decide if they want smoking in THEIR places of buisness. If they do the non-smoker does not have to patronize those buisness. Go to one of the non-smoking bars or restaraunts. Why do you feel you have the right to tell a bar or restaraunt owner how to run his buisness? If you don’t like it, don’t go there. Wasn’t that simple?
“
Bud, I’m sorry to tell you I wasn’t taking the cowardly, indecisive way out. No “let’s all come together, hold hands and sing kumbabayah”. What I was trying to say in apolite way was IF YOU DON’T LIKE IT DON’T GO IN THERE!! You talk about about the private bars and restaraunts, MOST OF THEM ARE PRIVATELY OWNED! Give me one good reason why YOU should be the one telling these bar and restaraunt owners how to run their buisnesses. Maybe you want to tell them how to prepare the food and and run the cash register? People have choices. If they don’t think R-rated movies are there cup of tea they can go see the PG one next door. No one forces them to go the R-rated movie. If they don’t like the content of a show on cable tv they can change the channel. If you don’t like bars and restaraunts that allow smoking, GO TO ONE THAT DOESN’T! Don’t tell other people other people how to run their buisness or life. Do you want someone from the outside coming in and scrutinizng your buisnee or home? Again I’ll ask, what give YOU this right?
This message of common sense comes from a NON-SMOKER.
Rob, I think you’re straining the metaphor here. We DO in fact tell restaurants how to prepare food and run the cash register. To a certain extent.
After rereading my message I would have to agree with you on that John. I probably should have used a better example of operations practices to make my point.
Proposition 201, just like the Anti-illegal and anti-homosexual propositions that all passed (or came very close to), it’s all about one group of people having a chance to point their fingers at another group of people and saying “That’s the bad guy”. It’s self-righteousness run out of control. my position is simple: I tried being courteous, respectful, ‘hey,mind if I smoke this?’. But that wasn’t good enough, no. So now, wherever I may legally do so, I will smoke without any regard for your complaints at all. If you have a problem with it, run for office or go get another proposition sponsored. I’m done with diplomacy.
David: I am sorry you feel that way. But here’s the thing: Someone else’s legal status or sexuality can’t cause YOU harm. Your smoking can. While I understand your frustration, your comparison is invalid and inane.
Jimmy I think you are mistaken on both issues concerning illegal immigration and sexuality. Illegal immigration takes away jobs from americans. It also drives down wages because american buisnesses will hire illegals for cheaper wages. I am in the contracting buisness and see it happen all the time. Though it isn’t a health issue it does effect the standard of living for lower income americans.
Let’s face the facts and admit it to ourselves. We all kmow the primairy way HIV is transmitted. This also is passed on unkowningly to genral public. On Friday it was reported in the news that the average HIV infected person racks up over 600K of medical bills in their life. Medical costs is one of the issues the anti-smoking folks have used to push their agenda. How long before some homophobic zealots use this as a battle cry to persecute gay men? It scares me to think what their solution to the problem would be.
I am disappointed Jimmy that none of your bloggers, or you for that matter, have not been able to come up with a legitimate response to my earlier comments (#10)on the personal choice of going to a smoking or non-smoking establishment. I thought for sure Bud would come back with some insight. I have to agree with David. I think it is one group wanting to have the power to control how another segment of society lives.
OK, Rob, I’ll bite. First, there are stats on both sides on both the aisle regarding the cost and the benefit of illegal immigrants. Stats are a funny thing: They can be twisted to fit agendas. As for HIV, your comments are stunning in their ignorance. HIV hits a lot of gay folks, yes, but look at Africa — it ain’t about gay sex there. And in the U.S., according to trends and stats, it isn’t all just the homos, either. So, either drop the bigotry or the ignorance there, bub. As for your comment No. 10 … the vast majority of people who frequent bars are nonsmokers. Yet the vast majority of bars allow smoking, because they’re afraid of losing the smokers’ business. Thus, if you’re a nonsmoker who wants to go to a bar, you have to deal with the smoke that fills your lungs with cancerous smoke and makes your clothing smell like ass. Now, this will be a moot point. Bar owners don’t have to worry about alienating smokers who are customers, and nonsmokers don’t have to worry as much as secondhand smoke. And the smokers? Well, they have to go to the patio to smoke. That’s it.
(Prop 201 was) all about one group of people having a chance to point their fingers at another group of people and saying “That’s the bad guy”.
Honestly, I wouldn’t say 201 was created like that, but I would associate that mentality with the Bashas’ Prop 203. 203 implements an additional 80-cent tax on a pack of cigarettes to fund early-childhood-education and health programs. Since it is a vice tax, I would rather see that tax be placed on alcohol, because a much wider range of citizens buy alcohol. The tax would placed across the board better, and that seems much fairer. Counter-arguments that don’t involve bigotry will be welcomed.