NH: Free Staters kill statewide smoking ban

[ArmandTanzarian]

My thought is good for them - it should be a free-market decision, not regulated. I despise breathing second hand smoke about as much as anyone on earth, but why should the .gov be involved, when if there's a demand for smoke-free, the market will provide?

 

[Just_a_dude_with_a_gun]

FYI, all the major cities (NYC, SF, LA,) in states that have banned indoor smoking have the worst industrial polution and smog issues.

Cigarette smoke, 1st or 2nd hand, isn't going to kill you any faster than
the sweet diesel fumes our illustrious metropolis' offer.

 

[Camp David]

My thought is good for them - it should be a free-market decision, not regulated. I despise breathing second hand smoke about as much as anyone on earth, but why should the .gov be involved, when if there's a demand for smoke-free, the market will provide?

Bravo to NH!

On this "second hand smoke" you mention... what about applying it elsewhere? You drive on interstate and breathe "second hand smoke" all the time... carbon monoxide from muffler emissions... doesn't seem to bother anyone. You live in society saturated with scents, perfumes, and all manner of airborne additives yet it doesn't seem to bother anyone. It is only for tobacco that the term "second hand smoke" is used as an antagonistic charge. Every city and small town has muncipal waste treatment plants, generation stations, and other factories producing exhaust which doesn't seem to bother anyone, yet "second hand smoke" is used only to smear tobacco users.

Political correctness run rampant makes cigarette and cigar users the bane of newfound radicals seeking no "second hand smoke"; these radicals seek to deny smokers their rights yet these same people start their vehicles and "exhaust" just as much as the entire population. Hypocrisy unleashed.

What is truly tragic about this issue is that the same folks that wish to ban cigarette and cigar smokers are the same folks that agree to tax them heavily to pay for schools and other needed civic improvements and then relish the heavy revenue therein generated.

I have a right to smoke. Why? Chances are I am paying for your children's school and your local roads!

 

[Trip20]

Good job Free Staters.

I smoke. I still go to non-smoking establishments. My area is becoming non-smoking unless a certain majority percentage of your sales comes directly from alcohol sales. If the majority of your sales are food - you must be a smoke free establishment.

I don't agree with the government making these decisions, I think it should be up to the owner of the establishment.

But, much to my amazement, I found an added benefit to drinking in a non-smoking bar/restaurant.

When I go out for dinner and drinks, the drinks make me smoke two to three times as much. If I'm at a tavern that does not allow smoking, I smoke much much less because I'm having to go out front to do so. I feel much better the next day due to having smoked less.

Non-smoking establishments annoyed me at first. But after having the above experience time after time, I realized it wasn't that bad of a situation, and actually helped me smoke less.

I do not throw cigarette butts out of my car, nor do I toss them on the ground when out in public. There's always a trash can near by, you do not need an ashtray per se. Get rid of the burning "cherry" by rolling the butt back and forth between your thumb and forefinger just in front of the filter, then put the extinguished butt in the trash can.

Would you take your garbage can at home and dump it's contents in the middle of a park? Then don't do it with 2,000 cigarettes over a few years time. That crap ends up in the waters I fish.

 

[Car Knocker]

You drive on interstate and breathe "second hand smoke" all the time... carbon monoxide from muffler emissions... doesn't seem to bother anyone. You live in society saturated with scents, perfumes, and all manner of airborne additives yet it doesn't seem to bother anyone.

I think that's an overly broad statement. I have often heard people complain about the effects of smog, throat searing, eye-watering smog. I know I certainly did when I lived in L.A. for a short period of time. Perfume can bother me if very strong and over-applied. Some new carpeting can drive me out of the house with major headaches. Many people are allergic to the glues used in manufactured products in construction. When I worked at the Almond Growers plant in Sacramento many years ago, some people taking the tour would get nauseated from the pervasive odor of cooking almonds.

In other words, there are many well-known air-borne irritants in our world.

 

[EricTheBarbarian]

im not a smoker but second hand smoke is just more bs to be able to put the heat on smokers to advance the idea of outlawing smoking.if people really prefer not smoking we don't need a law to tell us what to do. this country is so messed up I could see marijuanna being legalized and tobacco outlawed. If you dont like second hand smoke dont hang around people who smoke. That's not too hard but you dont have any right to tell them to quit smoking because it bothers you. Go away from them if its such a big problem. i've never heard of anyone in real life getting a disease, cancer or dying from second hand smoke even though thats not what the media wants you to believe. If second hand smoke is worse than first hand why don't people start smoking to avoid second hand smoke and only get first handas silly as it sounds. This is just another issue for the government to control it's people and has little to do with tobacco. It seems that more kids these days do drugs than smoke cigarettes because cigarettes are bad. Tobacco use doesn't make you worthless and you could easily have a full time job using tobacco all day long. I've had two grandparents who died from smoking first hand cigarettes but did not die until they lived to be about 70 years old. Something that kills you when you are 70 does not seem like a big threat to me. That can't be said for other drugs or alcohol. No one in my family died from second hand smoke but from what I've heard from the media I am lucky that my entire family didn't die from the terrible second hand smoke. I'm not sure too many cocaine or other drug users live into their 70s. Being worried about tobacco is just more nonsense that people complain about these days. Smoking a cigarette doesn't impair your ability to drive and inturn kill thousands of people in car crashes every year like alcohol does. People do not turn to prostitution or rob stores because they desperately need their fix from tobacco like other drugs. Well lets make a huge campaign saying its terrible, but thats not enough. Lets say second hand smoke is bad so the nonsmokers will put pressure on the smokers to quit. That seems to be the main reason with second hand smoke. Let's make tobacco growing a big hassle too so now a large majority of tobacco is imported from china and venezuela and send more jobs overseas. I just dont understand how all of the problems in this country with substance abuse tobacco is the number one concern. Another reason I see for this is people who use tobacco are not breaking the law. It is alot easier to make someone who already follows the law to follow even more restricitions than someone who has no regard for the law at all. The war on tobacco just seems ridiculous to me and I'm sure a bunch of people are going to tell me how evil tobacco is, but thats just my .02 worth.

 

[Old Dog]

Dude, paragraphs are your friend (and will encourage people to actually attempt to read through long posts).

We've been round and round on smoking regulation in this forum. What a fruitless debate. If you all want to equate the rights of smokers with other civil rights, have at it.

Me, I've seen too many smokers live out the endstage of their lives in utter misery as they suffer from COPD, other heart problems and lung cancer.

Plus, I hate coming home from a bar or club stinking like other peoples' nasty smoke. I prefer to enjoy my cigars in the privacy of my own home, where I share my smoke with only willing participants in my vice.

 

[Cellar Dweller]

"Now that everyone is talking about it, it's a perfect time to do it,"said Audet, whose bar goes smoke-free the first week of July. "As long as everyone does it - at least the majority - it won't have that much impact on business."

...and there's the rub. Militant anti-smokers NEED government intervention to "equalize" the playing field, because usually owners are too afraid of lost business to do it themselves (militant antis are either too cheap to start their own establishments OR too business-savvy).

Several towns in IL got their municipal bans; now they want county-wide bans to "equalize" with the towns that did not ban smoking. Where does it end? They GOT what they wanted and it isn't good enough, they must dictate/control their neighbors who choose otherwise. Very postmodern-American

Even if every business in New Hampshire bans smoking themselves, there's the OPTION of someone starting a smoking establishment or changing back to smoker/non-smoker split areas. Which is as it should be...

 

[Erebus]

Seriously - last time I traded my Accord, one dealer knocked off 3 grand because it "smelled like smoke".

If you think just tossing the butts out the windows resolves this issue you are only fooling yourself. You exhale the somke IN THE CAR!! My father used to insist that you couldn't smell smoke in his truck until he quit smoking. He had to have the interior professionally cleaned and still it can be smelled after it's closed up tight on a hot day.

And I just love it when a burning butt explodes all over the hood of my freshly waxed Corvette. The dull grey spot it leaves marvelously breaks up the sparkling red finish.

I certainly agree that no one should have the right to not have cigarette butts thrown at their car.

Gimme a break...

 

[jamz]

Good for NH. I don't smoke and I hate going to smoking places*, but it still should be up to the business owners.

It's nice to just pick any restaraunt and not have it ruined by smoke, but it's not worth having massive bans for this to take place.

Also, FWIW, I recall that restaraunt/bar owners actually see an increase in customers after the initial decrease after they disallow (mandated or not) smoking in their establishments, when nonsmoking people like me realize they can have a place to go that is smoke free.

-James

Don't get me started on cigarettes allowed/pipes or cigars not allowed though.

*does not apply to cigar bars!

 

[Phetro]

Dude, paragraphs are your friend (and will encourage people to actually attempt to read through long posts).

We've been round and round on smoking regulation in this forum. What a fruitless debate. If you all want to equate the rights of smokers with other civil rights, have at it.

Me, I've seen too many smokers live out the endstage of their lives in utter misery as they suffer from COPD, other heart problems and lung cancer.

Plus, I hate coming home from a bar or club stinking like other peoples' nasty smoke. I prefer to enjoy my cigars in the privacy of my own home, where I share my smoke with only willing participants in my vice.

Let's have a little fun with this post. How about this:

Dude, paragraphs are your friend (and will encourage people to actually attempt to read through long posts).

We've been round and round on driving regulation in this forum. What a fruitless debate. If you all want to equate the rights of drivers with other civil rights, have at it.

Me, I've seen too many drivers live out the endstage of their lives in utter misery as they suffer from being impaled on various engine parts, run over, and thrown through their windshields into head-on collisions.

Plus, I hate coming home from a gas station or parking lot stinking like other peoples' nasty fuel. I prefer to enjoy my automobiles in the privacy of my own home, where I share my fuel with only willing participants in my vice.

Now, shouldn't everyone only drive in the home too?

 

[Old Dog]

Ah, Phetro, sorry, you simply cannot equate the two; there's no analogy to be made here. Do you require an explanation?

 

[torpid]

Plus, I hate coming home from a bar or club stinking like other peoples' nasty smoke. I prefer to enjoy my cigars in the privacy of my own home, where I share my smoke with only willing participants in my vice.

Perhaps you should talk to the bar/club managers and owners and explain that you find the smoke irritating, and if they don't change their smoking policy, take your business elewhere?
If so many folks object to smoky clubs, surely the ones that choose to be smoke free will be packed to the gills with appreciative smoke-sensitive folks.

Ha- just kidding!
We all know it's better to use the government to force businesses to ban smoking so that nonsmokers shouldn't have to be inconvenienced with such a ridiculous burden.

(And I'm a nonsmoker who hates smoky clothes too.)

.

 

[PCGS65]

I'm getting to like New Hampshire more and more. Keep government in their place.

 

[GunnySkox]

I have stopped patronizing "smoke free" bars and restaurants, and urge others to do the same, simply because: if they don't respect your rights, what matters the object of their scorn? I rarely smoke...but I never go a moment without demanding freedom.

On someone else's property, you don't have any rights (except the obvious ones, don't get technical with me). If you're on my property, and I say "don't smoke" you either don't smoke or you leave. If you're on my property, and I say "no wearing red shirts" you either don't wear a red shirt or you leave. If you're on my property, and I say "no Mexican Jew Lizards" (lO'$) and you're an iguana with a dad from Chihuahua and a Hasidic Mother, then you leave.

You don't have the "right" to do something on someone's property that they don't like.

~GnSx

 

[torpid]

I have stopped patronizing "smoke free" bars and restaurants, and urge others to do the same, simply because: if they don't respect your rights, what matters the object of their scorn? I rarely smoke...but I never go a moment without demanding freedom.

On someone else's property, you don't have any rights (except the obvious ones, don't get technical with me). If you're on my property, and I say "don't smoke" you either don't smoke or you leave...

You don't have the "right" to do something on someone's property that they don't like.

The first poster chooses to make his choices with his dollar, not through governmental regulation. If nonsmokers would actually bother to do this and popularize nonsmoking establishments (instead of forcing everybody to bend their preferences) this all would be a non-issue.

The second poster says that a property owner should be the one to dictate what happens on his premesis (in the post, choosing to forbid smoking). If nonsmokers would actually bother to accept this outlook regarding business owners choosing to allow smoking, this all would be a non-issue.

.

 

[Art Eatman]

This is getting to be more about smoking and less about New Hampshire and civil rights and voting. The former loses; the latter wins.

The referee/judge will return.

, Art

 

[benewton]

I live in NH, love it, and I smoke.

I also "vote" on this one with my dollars.
No smoking and we don't eat at your place, and, trust me on this one, good places to eat can be hard to find out in the woods.

So it goes, but, for sure, I'm not paying a hundred bucks or so for a meal and then retreating out the front, or, perhaps, back door, prior to coffee/desert, state law or not.

We'll stay home first.

Which, given the coming north and pushing this crap, might be best anyway.

So, libertarian that I am, good on the free staters.
Positive contributions to personal freedom are VERY much appreciated.

For the Corvette guy, please explain exactly why you need a 160 or so MPH car, with the usual gas consumption figures, in a (max) 70 MPH speed limit world. Can't you just conserve energy?

And don't you care about the polution that you generate? If you're driving a sports car, you're doing so alone, or, at most, with one other person. Wouldn't you serve the health of those around you better by commuting by bus?


For the rest of the health Nazis, please don't litter!

If you birth them, they're your problem, and you don't have the right, even en mass, to strip resources from the rest of the more responsible people to fund your obligations, although I am forced to recognize the brute force behind the demands...

As for me, I suspect NH is about done, since there are way too many who, having killed their own state, are now moving elsewhere, and not just NH, to recreate their current environment in somebody else's home.
With the same results, of course, although it's hard to imagine the Cape Cod Orca created anywhere else at any time.

Oh well, so it goes, and my best to all.

 

[Firethorn]

I also "vote" on this one with my dollars.
No smoking and we don't eat at your place, and, trust me on this one, good places to eat can be hard to find out in the woods.

Perhaps unfortuantly, I also vote with my dollars, and don't frequent places that won't allow me to stay away from cigarette smoke.

Still, there's plenty that can be done. Tricks with air handling and such. Seperate rooms. Even Restraunt chains that allow or ban smoking entirely if they wish.

I agree with Art, this is about freedom to make a choice. It's the restaurant's choice. Even if all the restaurant's ban smoking, at least they did that themselves.

 

[Live Free Or Die]

I'm proud of the FSP members who worked hard to defeat the smoking ban. This whole issue isn't about smoking, or second-hand smoke, etc. It's about fear, control, and the desire of the anti's to create a world without any sharp corners. It's the same underlying sickness that drives most anti's, including the anti-gunners. It warms my heart to see people stand up to the inexorable onslaught of groupthink -- and actually win.

There's a fellow I work with who's a diehard anti-smoker activist. Because he's asthmatic, he believes nobody should be able to smoke anywhere around him. He gleefully touts the successes of all the states/counties that have enacted smoking bans in restaurants and other public places. He has a sort of scorecard on his door, showing which "brave, forward thinking" governments have legislated the loss the freedom of its smoking citizens. At the bottom he includes the following quote, attributed to Margaret Mead:

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.

Well, for the sake of irony, I'd like to apply this quote to the FSP members who got the job done in NH. Thanks guys.

Also, let me veer off topic for a moment:

For the Corvette guy, please explain exactly why you need a 160 or so MPH car, with the usual gas consumption figures, in a (max) 70 MPH speed limit world. Can't you just conserve energy?

And don't you care about the polution that you generate? If you're driving a sports car, you're doing so alone, or, at most, with one other person. Wouldn't you serve the health of those around you better by commuting by bus?

Was this intended to be sarcastic or ironic? If so, I must have missed it. If not, then...that's one of the silliest non-sequitirs I've seen this year.

 

[Art Eatman]

And on that note...