Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 51

Thread: Suffolk county NY considering banning smoking in private residences

  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by RevolverRob View Post
    Meat and smoking now. Vaping tomorrow. Alcohol after that?

    Iím convinced that part of the secret agenda to legalize weed and make it extremely accessible is to make it easier to ban booze again.
    The odd patchwork of cannabis laws has only convinced me there is no master plan.

    Aren't nicotine vapes banned in San Francisco, while thc vapes are legal? Even though all those deaths were linked to contaminated cannabis products. Puritanism. If I don't do it, it is evil.

    If we ever got President Bloomberg, would we end up like Mega-City One?

    Name:  b48c5ede321e52704cf95053319a1571--judge-dredd-junk-food.jpg
Views: 270
Size:  25.4 KB

    No booze, sugar, coffee-- and no tobacco outside the smokatorium.

    The above page has a pic of the real thing in Japan. Wow.

    Name:  Pic 3.jpg
Views: 270
Size:  75.8 KB
    "...if you donít like revolvers in various shapes and sizes (and, given the thrust of your post, *especially* 5-shot compacts with proven ammo), then you donít like America. Fact." --Sidheshooter
    Heinlein was right. Let's hope it's not Nehemiah Scudder on the ballot in 2024.

  2. #22

  3. #23
    Dude Supporter
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Quote Originally Posted by Sanch View Post
    ...For those who think I'm a libertarian except when it suits me, I concede that may be the case...
    Yes. That's exactly it.

    I don't care for tobacco use at all. I might suffer from a less acute but similar situation as you, because often times when I'm around tobacco smoke I feel a very uncomfortable tightness in my chest, and I need to get fresh air for a little while before I feel like I can breathe comfortably again. It sucks sometimes, but I live my life accordingly and don't use tobacco. I avoid places that allow indoor smoking as much as possible. Is what it is.

    But I believe that demanding state-enforced limitations on other people to accommodate my tastes/needs/beliefs for (insert whatever reason here) is the antithesis of freedom or liberty.
    Accommodations by the state shouldn't come at the expense of other people. Audible crosswalk signals for blind folks don't eliminate the walk/don't walk signs. Ramps for handicap access doesn't ban the use of stairs. No change of behavior or restriction is imposed on anyone else for those accommodations.

    You are calling yourself a libertarian while justifying the abrogation of other people's rights to use a legal product because of how it bothers you. In a living situation you willingly put yourself into. That you also have the power to get yourself out of, albeit like many decisions it's not a perfectly comfortable one free of additional expense or complications.

    If it's that much of a personal hardship, you should move. Get a different job where there's more space and less people.

    I dated a girl for awhile who had an apartment neighbor with astonishingly good hearing. That 3x divorced harpy loved to bitch about every little tiny noise we dared make in that apartment. We couldn't watch movies at all unless we used headphones. We couldn't wash dishes, cook, or take a shower after about 7pm, and the real kicker was when she'd bitch about me leaving at 4am because of my Army obligations. After trying to work it out myself, we tried to work it out with the landlord. When that failed, I helped my GF *move* so we didn't have to deal with that crap. Yes, it cost money and it was a temporary hardship to make that happen but life was much better once it was all done.

    I can't stand it when people refuse to empower themselves to make their situation better, and instead want to blame other people and make other people take the hit.
    Empower yourself! Decide what's really important to you, and change your life for your happiness (and health) accordingly.

  4. #24
    I went to an open house yesterday. The sellers were obviously smokers, though it seemed they were trying to hide it (not an ashtray in sight). Every person that showed up when I was there, noticed it right away. Many of which left without seeing the whole place.

    Interesting though that itís not on the PA disclosure form.

    That said, Iím opposed to this type of tyranny, and deeply disturbed by the arrogance.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Western Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by Sanch View Post
    But for condos, apartments, I do support a ban of smoking there. Or at the very least, make sure the legal system allows an apartment/condo to specifically ban smoking everywhere, including inside the units, and allow for eviction if this is violated. Then the free market will allow the 10% of smokers to all live in one apartment complex to themselves, and the other 90% of us can live in a smoke-free location. As the article mentions, air does transfer between units. The main reason I've never bought a condo is because of numerous complaints online of shared air handlers pushing cigarette smoke between one condo unit into another. It's common enough that you'll find many posts on various internet forums about it. And the condos generally do nothing because they can't prevent someone from smoking in their own unit.

    For those of you who oppose tyranny, please consider a free market solution that allows apartments and condos to enforce a smoking ban to results in immediate eviction. Then there's no tyranny. You choose to lease an apartment or buy a condo there, you agree to those rules. The government wouldnt be involved except for the force associated with an eviction.

    Also, those of you who either smoke or are ambivalent to smoking, please recognize that there are negative reprocussions to people around the smoker that are completely unavoidable. Own a gun, be safe, it bothers no one else. Shoot heroin, don't drive a car or operate heavy machinery while doing it, it bothers no one else. Download porn and masturbate at home, no one is bothered. Most "sins" that people dislike actually don't impact anyone else unless you're really careless or reckless. With smoking, it's 100% impossible not to negatively impact people around you. It's just a matter of scale. To me, I'm bothered to the point of feeling naustious, getting a headache, coughing, and not breathing well. To someone else, it might "only" cause them to have a marginal 1 in 100k chance of increased cancer from the second hand smoke exposure or to make their clothes smell and make them slightly uncomfortable. But it's impossible not to negatively impact others while smoking to some extent. Whereas it's completely possible to avoid negatively impacting others with other vices.

    To be clear, I think people should be able to own full auto belt fed guns without a background check, drink as much soda as you want, should be able to buy any opiate over the counter without a prescription, should be able to have edible marijuana, buy cocaine over the counter, etc. But cigarette smoking is something that can't be done without hurting others. Even in your own home unless you have some kind of special filtration system. Most of the things liberals rally against are things that only hurt the person doing them. Smoking is an exception where it can't not hurt everyone around the smoker.

    Maybe that's the answer. If you want to shoot in your backyard and have enough land, you build up a berm for safety of your neighbors. Maybe if you smoke inside your house you install a special air filtration system so the smoke doesn't leave your residence.

    For those who think I'm a libertarian except when it suits me, I concede that may be the case. It's a philosophical struggle for me my entire life. Please answer this: should people be able to play loud music inside their home as loud as they want even if it exits their shared walls of a condo/apartment, or if it's a single family house but the music is so loud it goes into everyone else's house? Because the argument of "it's my damn home, I should be able to do any damned thing I please" should also apply to loud music. Arguably, if your neighbor plays loud music all of the time, you could spend tens of thousands of dollars on special noise proofing materials, double pane windows, or walk around with ear plugs. But it's your neighbor infringing on your right to enjoy quiet peace of your home, so shouldn't it be the neighbor who has to spend tens of thousands of dollars to sound proof their unit/home so that their loud music that they choose to play and enjoy doesn't escape and negatively impact other people?

    And if you think smoking should be okay but loud music is a nuisance, then consider what alternatives the infringed upon neighbor has. For loud music, you could simply wear ear plugs. For cigarette smoking, you need a respirator. The respirator is significantly more inconvenient than ear plugs to try to live a normal life. Thus, I'd argue if you support smoking you also need to support loud music.
    Everything everyone does has a negative impact on somebody somewhere. That alone renders your entire argument moot.

    And your last example is even weaker. Loud noises in close quarters impact everyone negatively. Smoking indoors doesn't.

  6. #26
    Site Supporter BobLoblaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Smoking indoors is an issue that will take care of itself. We can hang out but I'm not doing an extra load of laundry for one outfit. We'll go to my place or somewhere else instead. This sentiment as well as house-selling woes (noted earlier) are forms of social discouragement that will eventually sort the matter without additional laws.

    Also, I know it's not my place and I don't like to say stuff like this but if you do smoke, try to give it up. Good people are few and far between. We don't need to lose any more and fuck cancer.

  7. #27
    don't gaslight me, bro' blues's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    blue ridge mtns
    When the gov't and insurance companies get together to dictate what you can and can't do, you're already headed down the slippery slope.

    Mountain climbing? Too dangerous.

    Motorcycles? Perish the thought.

    Contact sports? As long as we get our piece from the player's union and luxury taxes etc.

    I can see where exposing children unnecessarily to poisons might present an argument to be hashed out...but adults on their own...your lungs, your life.

    (Ex smoker here. Not at all an evangelist on the topic.)
    Dare to speak the truth

  8. #28
    I quit smoking ages ago. I don't like smelling cigarette smoke, but I'm not a prissy little wuss about it.

    As with many similar situations, I find that I still like cigarette smoke better than I like sanctimonious busy bodies.



  9. #29
    Site Supporter Zincwarrior's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Central Texas
    States' rights. If they want to do that, thats their purview.

  10. #30
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Erie County, NY
    Thus in Suffolk county, thousands of folks will be puffing their cancer sticks over their buried and hidden weapons of war and magazines in their basements. Waiting for the boogaloo, they cough away, listening to the waning days of Rush.

    Here's a joke from an old friend, a long time abuser of cigarettes and alcohol from the 70's. His fate wasn't pleasant.

    A man gets on a plane and sits down next to woman passenger. During the flight, he takes out the centerfold from Playboy (told you this was old) and jerks off. As she sits there in horror, he takes out a pack of cigarettes and asks: Mind if I smoke?

    Think about this from a government tyranny, libertarian, does it hurt you, does it offend you? - point of view.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts