• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

New Smoking Ban Good or Bad?

What of the New Ban.

  • Good

    Votes: 19 27.1%
  • Too far

    Votes: 49 70.0%
  • Other

    Votes: 2 2.9%

  • Total voters
    70
I wouldn't be referring to others making something incredibly stupid when you don't even know you brought it into the debate.

WTH you talking about? Didn't he say that he brought it in as an EXAMPLE? And now you're claiming...well, refer to the bold part above.

While he may have brought it in as an example it was USA_1 that turned it into an arguement about how the guy was at fault for not taking the vaccination (despite having no evidence of whether he did or not). THAT is where it got stupid. You're making it even worse by making just as stupid posts like the one I just quoted.
 
WTH you talking about? Didn't he say that he brought it in as an EXAMPLE? And now you're claiming...well, refer to the bold part above.

While he may have brought it in as an example it was USA_1 that turned it into an arguement about how the guy was at fault for not taking the vaccination (despite having no evidence of whether he did or not). THAT is where it got stupid. You're making it even worse by making just as stupid posts like the one I just quoted.

He didn't mention this is an EXAMPLE in his first post with swine flu did he?

Perhaps USA-1 was providing an EXAMPLE with his post too. In that case using your logic since both used it as an EXAMPLE then swine flu was never even brought into this debate.


Nothing here , move on.
 
He didn't mention this is an EXAMPLE in his first post with swine flu did he?

Personally I thought it was obvious.

Perhaps USA-1 was providing an EXAMPLE with his post too. In that case using your logic since both used it as an EXAMPLE then swine flu was never even brought into this debate.

Yeah....doubt it. As for the rest... :roll:
 
My friend Kevin just died from H1N1 not 3 days ago. He was a pilot and in very good shape. Did not smoke or drink.

He will not have to worry about a heart condition or lung cnacer.

Edit: he was around 47 years old. I am 48 and still smoking.

Comparing H1N1 to heart conditions and cancer are like comparing apples and mangoes for goodness sake. H1N1 is a viral infection that ANYONE can get. I just recovered from a Nolo virus infection. However, where it would take a person who is not all that healthy (ie a smoker or someone who is overweight/obese) five days to recover, it only took me two. Even my doctor was surprised somewhat at my rapid recovery...
 
Maybe, maybe not,.

I think we has humans or overlooking something.

Everybody is born everybody dies, one can not escape death.

How you die is irrelevent, how you live should be your choice as long as it don't intefere with somone else.

I say if you don't like my space step off.

And I choose to live my life by eating reasonably healthy foods with plenty of fruits and veggies with lean meats and a lot of exercise. That keeps me VERY healthy and happy. I choose to surround myself with friends who have a similar lifestyle. As such, I have very few friends who smoke and frankly don't want the people addicted to a weed to impose their poisonous habit upon me and my friends. If you want to smoke, do it away from the rest of us...
 
Comparing H1N1 to heart conditions and cancer are like comparing apples and mangoes for goodness sake.

That was not a comparison, it was an example. This was abundantly clear to everyone but you. :roll:

H1N1 is a viral infection that ANYONE can get. I just recovered from a Nolo virus infection. However, where it would take a person who is not all that healthy (ie a smoker or someone who is overweight/obese) five days to recover, it only took me two. Even my doctor was surprised somewhat at my rapid recovery...

So what? My point was even if you are healthy and do everything like Kevin, or the Grape Nuts runner who had a heart attack, you are going to die.

The anti smoking crowed seems to think somehow they are immune to premature death. It is abundantly clear you are not. ;)
 
I wouldn't be referring to others making something incredibly stupid when you don't even know you brought it into the debate.

Uhhhhhhhh? Reading is fundamental is all I have to say. :mrgreen:
 
And I choose to live my life by eating reasonably healthy foods with plenty of fruits and veggies with lean meats and a lot of exercise. That keeps me VERY healthy and happy. I choose to surround myself with friends who have a similar lifestyle. As such, I have very few friends who smoke and frankly don't want the people addicted to a weed to impose their poisonous habit upon me and my friends. If you want to smoke, do it away from the rest of us...

Then don't come near us. Simple. It is a choice that you have, whether you want to admit it or not.
 
USA, these are simply desperate addicts. Their world is falling apart.

More and more employers are refusing to hire smokers . Their possesions such as cars and homes are valued less due to the stench.

Smoking restrictions will continue.

The average cost of a pack of cigs will continue to spiral upward from $5 a pack. Smoking two packs a day costs them $3,200 a year now.
In NYC a pack of cigs is now $11!

And so it goes. But as I have said you can smoke all you want in your homes and cars but keep that crap out of my air.

Your air?
I did not know air could be posessed.

If it is as you say "your air" do something about the smog, the carbon monoxide, and oh yeah sulfer, just to name a few.
 
Last edited:
This is to funny. Desperate addicts? World falling apart?

Over the top much? :lol:

A bit far if you ask me.

Of course I could quote the people that did smoke, maybe just some of them.
John F. Kennedy, Abraham Lincoln, Dwight Eiesonhower, George Patton. Einstien, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson Winston Churchill, Martin Luther King jr..
All bad addicts, all graet men.
 
And I choose to live my life by eating reasonably healthy foods with plenty of fruits and veggies with lean meats and a lot of exercise. That keeps me VERY healthy and happy. I choose to surround myself with friends who have a similar lifestyle. As such, I have very few friends who smoke and frankly don't want the people addicted to a weed to impose their poisonous habit upon me and my friends. If you want to smoke, do it away from the rest of us...

It is you and yours that should stay away from us. \

There has always been nonsmoking resturants but you guys wanted all resturants to be nonsmoking.

There can be nonsmoking areas but you guys want all areas to be nonsmoking

Even bars and outof the way rundown bars where no health freak would go to are nonsmoking places.

Why nobody that cares abut their health would go there anyway.

And what about these greasy spoons where all they serve is greasy foods that's considered nonsmoking too.
Even though nonsmokers don't go there.

This isn't about health or what's good for the American people this is about power and control.
In short screw the individuals rights or the nonconformist you agree with us. it's the new law.

Well, I for one don't lay down for nobody so be healthy eat salads, drink bottled water only, no caffine, no nicotine,no fried foods, no booz, might want to stay away from classic rock music r anything strenuous like sex, and be happy.

I like a good smoke, a good cup of coffee,a thick steak, rock music and sex.
I quit drinking cause it was my choice nobody made it for me.
 
I like a good smoke, a good cup of coffee,a thick steak, rock music and sex.
I quit drinking cause it was my choice nobody made it for me.

Good post over all. Just wanted to say that the part I quoted here reminds me of Demolition Man with Sandra Bullock and Stallone. :) Great movie with a damn good moral to the story. ;)
 
Good post over all. Just wanted to say that the part I quoted here reminds me of Demolition Man with Sandra Bullock and Stallone. :) Great movie with a damn good moral to the story. ;)

Likwise, a good post from you as well.

I can't believe I forgot the scene from Demolition Man, as many times as I've watched it.

I knew there was something familiar about that line when I wrote it. lol.
 
That was not a comparison, it was an example. This was abundantly clear to everyone but you. :roll:



So what? My point was even if you are healthy and do everything like Kevin, or the Grape Nuts runner who had a heart attack, you are going to die.

The anti smoking crowed seems to think somehow they are immune to premature death. It is abundantly clear you are not. ;)

You were making it in response to the other examples... that smacks of a comparison in this context...

I never said I was immune to premature death, but my ability to fight back against a nasty virus is far better than that of the overwhelming majority of people due to my lifestyle, especially smokers...
 
Then don't come near us. Simple. It is a choice that you have, whether you want to admit it or not.

My problem is generally when smokers come near me! You want to smoke, do it away from the rest of us and don't come next to me and light up. Smokers are amongst the most inconsiderate, irresponsible people on earth, but that is your right. It is NOT your right to subject the rest of us to your poisonous lifestyle...
 
You were making it in response to the other examples... that smacks of a comparison in this context...

I don't agree, but I see your point.

I never said I was immune to premature death, but my ability to fight back against a nasty virus is far better than that of the overwhelming majority of people due to my lifestyle, especially smokers...

Not you in perticular, but others have said as much. As for the virus thing, smoking does repress the immune system but....

Although the health risks of tobacco smoking are well documented, there is increasing evidence that smokers have a lower incidence of some inflammatory and neurodegenerative diseases. Many of the adverse and beneficial effects of smoking might result from the ability of cigarette smoke to suppress the immune system. Nicotine, which is one of the main constituents of cigarette smoke, suppresses the immune system but might have therapeutic potential as a neuroprotective and anti-inflammatory agent. - Effects of cigarette smoke on the immune system. [Nat Rev Immunol. 2002] - PubMed result

As with most things in life it has good and bad.

So by smoking my chances of other things is less than yours. Not saying this is a good thing, but it blows some of the more asinine arguments out of the water.
 
Last edited:
I don't agree, but I see your point.



Not you in perticular, but others have said as much. As for the virus thing, smoking does repress the immune system but....

Although the health risks of tobacco smoking are well documented, there is increasing evidence that smokers have a lower incidence of some inflammatory and neurodegenerative diseases. Many of the adverse and beneficial effects of smoking might result from the ability of cigarette smoke to suppress the immune system. Nicotine, which is one of the main constituents of cigarette smoke, suppresses the immune system but might have therapeutic potential as a neuroprotective and anti-inflammatory agent. - Effects of cigarette smoke on the immune system. [Nat Rev Immunol. 2002] - PubMed result

As with most things in life it has good and bad.

So by smoking my chances of other things is less than yours. Not saying this is a good thing, but it blows some of the more asinine arguments out of the water.

While on balance smokers have lower life exectancy and more disease than non-smokers, I haven't really made a big deal of that on this thread. Others have. I would just like to be able to live my life without my rights being infringed upon by smokers. If you want to smoke, do it. Just keep your poison away from me. If you need to light up, do it in a place where there are not non-smokers (and especially children) present...
 
While on balance smokers have lower life exectancy and more disease than non-smokers, I haven't really made a big deal of that on this thread. Others have. I would just like to be able to live my life without my rights being infringed upon by smokers. If you want to smoke, do it. Just keep your poison away from me. If you need to light up, do it in a place where there are not non-smokers (and especially children) present...

I don't really see where your rights are being infringed upon the probabilities of you dying are not any greater after short term exposure to a smoker as he walks by you. It's an inconvenience, yes. Offensive, I can see that considering the smell. But I don't see where you personally were infringed upon if dynamically nothing is different between before the smoker walked passed you till after the smoker passed by you.

As for the second statement, I think smoking should be allowed on any private property at the discretion of the property owner. Since smoking is a legal activity, any property owner may choose to allow any legal activity to occur on his property. As such, places like restaurants and bars should be allowed to set their own rules towards smoking/no smoking.
 
I don't really see where your rights are being infringed upon the probabilities of you dying are not any greater after short term exposure to a smoker as he walks by you. It's an inconvenience, yes. Offensive, I can see that considering the smell. But I don't see where you personally were infringed upon if dynamically nothing is different between before the smoker walked passed you till after the smoker passed by you.

As for the second statement, I think smoking should be allowed on any private property at the discretion of the property owner. Since smoking is a legal activity, any property owner may choose to allow any legal activity to occur on his property. As such, places like restaurants and bars should be allowed to set their own rules towards smoking/no smoking.

An excellant post sir, although we are on differant sides or the coin.
I smoke, you don't.
I salute you for haveing an open mind for the rights of the people smoking or nonsmoking.
 
Actualy this debate isn't too far from the debate of religion or politics.

Both have some people that say think and act as I do, and both have some people saying believe as you want and I will believe as I want, and both have some people who have the idea of doing what they want and just being left alone in peace.
Just like this debate thread
 
Back
Top Bottom