Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

Smoking ban Options · View
Dancing_Doll
Posted: Thursday, October 06, 2011 1:14:19 PM

Rank: Alpha Blonde

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 5,988
Location: In your dirty fantasies
lafayettemister wrote:
The attack on smokers continues. Companies are now refusing to hire smokers. Why, you ask? It's all about the bottom line. Money. Don't be fooled about companies offering "Wellness Programs", they don't care about your health. They care about having to pay for your sizable future medical bills. One employer in Texas, Baylor Health Care system will no longer hire people who use tobacco. Anyone already employed but the company will not be terminated, they pay a yearly surcharge of $50. Next year that goes up to $650. BHC will also be spending $60k per year to screen employees for metabolized nicotine in their systems. Guess those employees better not go out to any smoking establisments and get too much second hand smoke. Or worse yet, live with a smoker. Could cost them their jobs. Here is that link....


The ironic thing is that Tobacco companies require an extensive physical before they will hire you.

Even more ironic is that part of your benefits package after being hired is 16 cartons of free cigs shipped to each employee every three months.

I love mixed messages.


lafayettemister
Posted: Thursday, October 06, 2011 1:17:54 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 6,343
Location: Alabama, United States
Dancing_Doll wrote:
lafayettemister wrote:
The attack on smokers continues. Companies are now refusing to hire smokers. Why, you ask? It's all about the bottom line. Money. Don't be fooled about companies offering "Wellness Programs", they don't care about your health. They care about having to pay for your sizable future medical bills. One employer in Texas, Baylor Health Care system will no longer hire people who use tobacco. Anyone already employed but the company will not be terminated, they pay a yearly surcharge of $50. Next year that goes up to $650. BHC will also be spending $60k per year to screen employees for metabolized nicotine in their systems. Guess those employees better not go out to any smoking establisments and get too much second hand smoke. Or worse yet, live with a smoker. Could cost them their jobs. Here is that link....


The ironic thing is that Tobacco companies require an extensive physical before they will hire you.

Even more ironic is that part of your benefits package after being hired is 16 cartons of free cigs shipped to each employee every three months.

I love mixed messages.


I wonder what they're looking for in that physical? And judging by the very generous benefit package, maybe they want their employees to die off. That way they can keep getting newbies that don't earn as much?





When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Socrates
Buz
Posted: Friday, October 07, 2011 11:00:38 AM

Rank: The Linebacker

Joined: 3/2/2011
Posts: 5,185
Location: Atlanta, United States
The way the trend is going before long we will all have a government rationed and supplied diet, all be wearing gray pajamas (like Mao Zedung's China), only allowed to have one hairstyle (same for women as for men, and only allowed to say and write the politically correct vanilla rhetoric of an all encompassing government. The government may even chouuse your mate!!!!!!

Your civil liberties are under attack! Support the ACLU!

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it."
— Thomas Jefferson

"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."
— Thomas Jefferson

I have written a new poem. It is called 'Long Twisty Woman.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/erotic-poems/long-twisty-woman.aspxx
Also, if you wish, check out my co-authored a story with the wonderful DanielleX. It is called 'Focus on Sex.'
You can read it at: http://www.lushstories.com/stories/quickie-sex/focused-on-sex-1.aspx

Guest
Posted: Friday, October 07, 2011 5:05:21 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 473,806
Quote:
except for bartenders, waitresses/waiters, casino workers"" = I am pretty sure that if these people COULD get a better/different job they WOULD.


Not necessarily. I have known several people in my life that have been waitress/waiters as well as casino workers. During high season here some of them make more than $1000.00 a day in gratuities.
Guest
Posted: Friday, October 07, 2011 9:41:57 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 473,806
Well, on a constant basis I have to inhale bums piss and excrement in different parts of public transport, they smell bad, and they look awful. Can we ban bums too?

If we agree to ban them, then I'll quit smoking. Promise.
Guest
Posted: Saturday, October 08, 2011 7:27:10 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 473,806
Live and let live. all that needs to be said.
ArtMan
Posted: Saturday, October 08, 2011 4:56:04 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 6/29/2011
Posts: 638
Location: South Florida, United States
I think the anti-smoking thugs are beginning to take it too far. Regaeman Man

You are invited to read Passionate Danger, Part II, a story collaboration by Kim and ArtMan.
http://www.lushstories.com/stories/straight-sex/passionate-danger-part-ii.aspx

Guest
Posted: Tuesday, October 18, 2011 9:40:04 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 473,806
As an avid cigar and pipe smoker I'd often had this discussion with both my fellow tobacco lovers down at the local cigar lounge and with non smokers. While I have no problem with private owners of establishments choosing to make there bars, restaurants and other public venues smoke free both for the health of there employees and there patrons I do not understand why modern culture finds it so easy to villanize those of us that choose to smoke.

The other issue I have is states like New York which are on some holy crusade to ban smoking from there state entirely. What's wrong with a bunch of men and women getting together in a place to sit talk, and have a good smoke? While I applaud store owners for exercising there right to choose to think about the health of there employees, who gives the government the right to tell me what I can and cannot do?

It's not like I'm somehow incapable of understanding the health risks that I'm taking, in today's information saturated society I am more then well aware of the dangers I place myself under, and as an adult I have the right to make that decision.

Next thing you'll know, they will attempt to impose a fat tax


.....no wait.....too late....
blazestcyr
Posted: Thursday, October 20, 2011 6:33:19 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/19/2011
Posts: 737
Location: where bugs die
i dont smoke....but was taken aback when our city went smoke free...

i do like a cigar once in a blue moon

to me bars and smoke go hand in hand

what if the city went gum free? i dont chew gum but how many people do?

And yes i know what smoking does..my mom's cancer started from that...

but it is a choice...

am i ready for all my choices to be made for me

i dont think so....
1curiouscat
Posted: Thursday, December 01, 2011 10:37:54 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/25/2011
Posts: 1,144
Location: São Paulo , Brazil
This awsome idea would resolve everyone´s problem.
Dont you think?





Overwhelming Reality

From Across the Room
Guest
Posted: Thursday, December 01, 2011 2:03:09 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 473,806
HA! I like it!!
LadyX
Posted: Monday, June 04, 2012 5:13:53 PM

Rank: Thread Mediator

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,678
Location: United States
fish
Selynar
Posted: Monday, June 04, 2012 6:24:45 PM

Rank: Active Ink Slinger

Joined: 3/6/2011
Posts: 26
Well up here in Ottawa, Canada the first smoking ban that we had was in Restaurants, Bars, and things like that. You could smoke in an unroofed patio, but that's it. You know what. It worked out really well. I really don't mind walking 20 feet to have my smoke, when its so much nicer to sit inside without smoke covering the ceiling.

I just recently posted a topic similar to this, since I didn't know this one was here entitled "Smoking Bad, or Good?" and looked in on more of the financial aspect of a country that doesn't smoke... I'm not sure what the price is in the US but in Ottawa its $8-$13 for a pack of 25 cigarettes.

Ottawa just recently took the smoking ban too far, where now we are no longer able to smoke in public parks, government controlled parks, patios, and within 9 meters(about 30ft) from any public entrance, and no bus stops.

That is going to be annoying as all hell, for me personally. Mainly because I Bus, and if its late, I smoke.... I hate waiting.

As far as the original poster's question goes... You're right people can change jobs, but in my experience, already going through that. People will bitch and moan, but overall it'll be a lot more enjoyable for everyone.... the small exception being small town bars where 90% of the people smoke, and the rest just don't care. Even then restaurants, fine, bars.... let it go a little.

But yes, going to bars, and clubs is a whole lot nicer now that the whole place isn't smokey.
lafayettemister
Posted: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 7:32:56 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 6,343
Location: Alabama, United States
Florida city will not hire tobacco users in order to save on insurance premiums

Delray Beach, Fl. bans the hiring of any new employee that has used tobacco products within the last year. Following the lead of two other Florida cities. One of those, Hollywood, Fl. has an immediate termination policy for any employee caught smoking.

North Miami had a similar ban in place from 1993 but ultimately removed the ban because it didn't save money and limited recruitment. Also they had to fight a lawsuit from an employee who refused to sign an affidavit agreeing to quit smoking. As a local attorney put it, "Where do you draw the line?" Jay Wolfson, who is both a constitutional attorney and University of South Florida professor of public health, asked WPTV. "Smoking is a legal behavior and there are a lot of other legal behaviors that cause risks to the population: drinking soda, eating fatty foods, consuming alcohol, sky diving."

These restrictions will eventually spill over into the private sector. Employers are not going to hire smokers, overweight people, diabetics, women of child bearing age, whatever. The proverbial slippery slope is getting closer and closer.





When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Socrates
TheGulfCoaster
Posted: Friday, October 26, 2012 2:46:47 PM

Rank: Story Verifier

Joined: 1/2/2011
Posts: 581
Location: Sarasota County, United States
I personally just don't get why tobacco products are available for sale in this country! When I was a 'kid' around the time most of my peers began their disgusting cigarette habit, they were around $.35 a pack and there was no positive proof that tobacco caused cancer, just a 'hunch'. Well, now it is a proven carcinogen and the product is readily available everywhere. I still see 'Kids' who aren't supposed to be allowed to smoke, smoking in public and they obviously started after tobacco was declared a carcinogen (there are at least 19 carcinogens in tobacco or tobacco smoke), it reduces the life expectancy by between 13 and 15 years, and it affects others through second-hand smoke, yet it is still sold in the U.S. (and I'm sure most everywhere else in the world, too). Look up Tobacco and Health in Wikipedia! I'd also like to see parents smoking in a home with Children as well as Pregnant or Nursing Mothers who smoke charged with Child Abuse or Endangerment.

My point is this, there have been many chemicals, food dyes, artificial sweeteners, etc. that were BANNED following their classification as a known carcinogen. WHY IS TOBACCO STILL ALLOWED FOR SALE IN THIS COUNTRY??? Those food dyes or artificial sweeteners didn't have any second hand affects and they were still outlawed. Personally, I have had ex's with smoking habits in the past, but never again. If a girl wants to smoke, that is a perfect way for me to boot her to the curb or never let her be with me in the first place. It's a filthy, disgusting, dangerous habit and one that shouldn't be allowed to continue in this country.
tazznjazz
Posted: Friday, October 26, 2012 3:34:27 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/30/2012
Posts: 329
Location: under bright lights, United States
I think bar owners should be the ones to decide if they want to be smoke free instead of having it the law.
Freedom of choice is what this country should be about, our experiment with spirits should have taught us that.

Smoking is an terrible habit, but is legal and those that smoke should have a right to smoke in a bar that caters to them.

TheGulfCoaster
Posted: Friday, October 26, 2012 4:52:07 PM

Rank: Story Verifier

Joined: 1/2/2011
Posts: 581
Location: Sarasota County, United States
tazznjazz wrote:
I think bar owners should be the ones to decide if they want to be smoke free instead of having it the law.
Freedom of choice is what this country should be about, our experiment with spirits should have taught us that.

Smoking is an terrible habit, but is legal and those that smoke should have a right to smoke in a bar that caters to them.



That's my point exactly - it shouldn't be legal and it's not a 'moral decision' it's a proven health fact that tobacco use can and does cause a variety of cancers!

I can't get some of my favorite childhood snacks any longer because a food dye or artificial sweetener was found to cause cancer. I can't get Carbon Tetra-Chloride or several other chemicals I use in my job any longer for the same reason. Since tobacco causes cancer, why is it still legal? The savings in health care alone over the course of a generation would more than make up for the loss of tax revenue (I say make the shareholders of these companies that manufacture and sell these carcinogen causing agents should pay all the health costs for smoking related cancer as well!)
kylie_kained
Posted: Friday, October 26, 2012 6:03:57 PM

Rank: Detention Seeker

Joined: 8/17/2010
Posts: 994
Location: Over your Knee Screaming and Kicking!, United King
Being a smoker I realize the risks to myself so understand that others don't want to breathe in my smoke. I strongly agree about bars now been a while now in the u.k since the ban was introduced. We have designated outside areas that are for smoking which is fine when the weather is good but when it rains or snows is not in anyone's interest. 35 bars per month are now closing on average because of loss of trade where smokers are now staying at home to drink and smoke. Why not introduce a designated smoking room that way bars wont close all customers would be happy and the smokers who were getting forced health issues from outside smoking wont clog up the health system.

















Guest
Posted: Saturday, October 27, 2012 3:30:34 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 473,806
TheGulfCoaster wrote:


That's my point exactly - it shouldn't be legal and it's not a 'moral decision' it's a proven health fact that tobacco use can and does cause a variety of cancers!

I can't get some of my favorite childhood snacks any longer because a food dye or artificial sweetener was found to cause cancer. I can't get Carbon Tetra-Chloride or several other chemicals I use in my job any longer for the same reason. Since tobacco causes cancer, why is it still legal? The savings in health care alone over the course of a generation would more than make up for the loss of tax revenue (I say make the shareholders of these companies that manufacture and sell these carcinogen causing agents should pay all the health costs for smoking related cancer as well!)


You can't get carbon tet cause it causes liver failure. But besides that I think you're missing the point of why it's legal here. Do you have any idea how much money the tobacco companies make or how much they back politicians? That's why it's still legal here. Money talks and bullshit walks. Always has, always will.
Milly
Posted: Sunday, October 28, 2012 7:23:29 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/17/2012
Posts: 294
Location: Wherever I lay my head, United Kingdom
I'm a smoker...but even I agree with the smoking ban in the UK or anywhere else for that matter. It's perfectly fine for someone to engage in something that may have a detrimental effect on their health but to inflict that on others I think is wrong. It's right that smokers are limited because of their habit.
I do, however, agree with KylieKained. Pubs and bars are suffering due to the smoking ban - as a child I grew up in smoke filled pubs. The idea of a smokers room seems far more sensible than smoking outside the pub anyway as nobody has to walk pass a mass of smokers to get into an establishment.
TheGulfCoaster
Posted: Monday, October 29, 2012 2:58:19 PM

Rank: Story Verifier

Joined: 1/2/2011
Posts: 581
Location: Sarasota County, United States
chefkathleen wrote:


You can't get carbon tet cause it causes liver failure. But besides that I think you're missing the point of why it's legal here. Do you have any idea how much money the tobacco companies make or how much they back politicians? That's why it's still legal here. Money talks and bullshit walks. Always has, always will.


I agree with you Chef Kathleen, I know exactly why tobacco has not been banned. It just points out the hypocrisy of our government and the people who decide these things. I used Carbon Tet to clean electronic equipment, (a lot of film guides, anywhere that celluloid film met warm steel parts in various projectors and in many other TV and Radio Studio engineering cleaning and repair tasks) the chemical was wonderfully effective - If Carbon Tet was a 10, the chemicals designated to replace it were a 2 or 3. I was told by the vendor I purchased my cleaning and other chemical from that it was a carcinogen (and is in fact listed as a group 2-B carcinogen). I would have happily worn a mask and gloves while using it if it were still available, but instead they banned it, and it didn't kill all that many people. My point is allowing a known carcinogen for sale just makes no sense. The fact that profits apparently are more important than the public health just boggles my mind! I'm waiting for a courageous legislator to submit a bill banning tobacco sale and manufacturing in the US. There are plenty of high profit cash-crops that would grow really well on tobacco land, so they wouldn't lose much money or kill many jobs, especially since so much corn is now being diverted to ethanol production, driving food prices to ridiculous levels. Hell let them grow other non-food high ethanol yield crops or other crops that are GOOD for people instead of millions of acres of a product that kills nearly a half MILLION American citizens a year (it's true, look it up) C'mon congress, grow a pair, save some lives!
Guest
Posted: Monday, October 29, 2012 5:49:08 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 473,806
TheGulfCoaster wrote:


I agree with you Chef Kathleen, I know exactly why tobacco has not been banned. It just points out the hypocrisy of our government and the people who decide these things. I used Carbon Tet to clean electronic equipment, (a lot of film guides, anywhere that celluloid film met warm steel parts in various projectors and in many other TV and Radio Studio engineering cleaning and repair tasks) the chemical was wonderfully effective - If Carbon Tet was a 10, the chemicals designated to replace it were a 2 or 3. I was told by the vendor I purchased my cleaning and other chemical from that it was a carcinogen (and is in fact listed as a group 2-B carcinogen). I would have happily worn a mask and gloves while using it if it were still available, but instead they banned it, and it didn't kill all that many people. My point is allowing a known carcinogen for sale just makes no sense. The fact that profits apparently are more important than the public health just boggles my mind! I'm waiting for a courageous legislator to submit a bill banning tobacco sale and manufacturing in the US. There are plenty of high profit cash-crops that would grow really well on tobacco land, so they wouldn't lose much money or kill many jobs, especially since so much corn is now being diverted to ethanol production, driving food prices to ridiculous levels. Hell let them grow other non-food high ethanol yield crops or other crops that are GOOD for people instead of millions of acres of a product that kills nearly a half MILLION American citizens a year (it's true, look it up) C'mon congress, grow a pair, save some lives!


Very interesting. Thanks for the info on Carbon Tet.
JillMom
Posted: Thursday, November 08, 2012 3:28:17 PM

Rank: Rookie Scribe

Joined: 5/31/2012
Posts: 8
Location: United States
Rembacher wrote:


I don't see this as a right being removed by law. I see this as a right being protected by law. My right to clean air, and the previously mentioned pregnant worker's right to not expose her baby to harmful toxins. As for the motorcycle riders, that must be specific to your state/country. In Canada we've had motorcycle helmet laws probably as long as we've had seat belt laws, if not longer. The theory is twofold, one, it protects riders from their own stupidity, and with our public health system, it helps me from having to pay for someone else's stupidity.

Sometimes lawmakers do actually do things for our own good, when we've shown we have no inclination as a group to do anything about it on our own.


Just how far does a smoker have to stay away from you? Now we have entire cities (Belmont, CA for example) that have banned smoking everywhere including inside your own home. Now we have two states that have legalized recreational pot smoking, even though it contains the very same chemicals that tobacco does. Oddly enough, the fine for smoking pot in a place such as a city park is much, much less than for smoking a cigarette.

Now we are starting to see laws springing up on the size of a soft drink, the amount of salt you can use, the type of fat you can use, if you can give a toy away with a meal .... and on and on. Just who are the stupid people here?

How soon we forget when they tried to pass a law that all buckets must be sold with a hole in them because the majority of infant drownings occur in a bucket.
Guest
Posted: Thursday, November 08, 2012 3:46:31 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 473,806
How in the world do they know if you smoke in your own house? How do they enforce that?
JillMom
Posted: Thursday, November 08, 2012 7:59:31 PM

Rank: Rookie Scribe

Joined: 5/31/2012
Posts: 8
Location: United States
I have no idea, just stating that there are those who think even your own home is too close to them. I suppose a nosy neighbor could turn you in or if you ever needed the police for anything else you better hide your ashtrays first.
Guest
Posted: Friday, November 09, 2012 1:20:45 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 473,806
JillMom wrote:
I have no idea, just stating that there are those who think even your own home is too close to them. I suppose a nosy neighbor could turn you in or if you ever needed the police for anything else you better hide your ashtrays first.


What a fucked up law.
Guest
Posted: Saturday, December 07, 2013 5:14:19 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 473,806
I know this is a very old topic but I agree that smoking should be banned in outside places. Last night there was the Christmas Tree lighting of the city where I live in. However, while waiting in the line for my little one to see Santa someone near by lights up and starts smoking. I felt that it was completely rude. They could have walked away but they didn't. And when someone asked them to take a few steps back from the line of children, they got an attitude saying it was a free country. I don't like being exposed to cigarette smoke so I choose to avoid places where I know it will be. But I shouldn't have to avoid standing in line at the movie theater or enjoying an outdoor concert because I don't want to be around it.

I personally think it should be against the law to smoke and drive with young children in the car. I hate when Im driving down the road and see someone smoking with their children in the car and all the windows rolled up. Do they not realize the damage that this is doing, not only to themselves but to the children as well?
Guest
Posted: Saturday, December 07, 2013 5:14:26 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 473,806
I know this is a very old topic but I agree that smoking should be banned in outside places. Last night there was the Christmas Tree lighting of the city where I live in. However, while waiting in the line for my little one to see Santa someone near by lights up and starts smoking. I felt that it was completely rude. They could have walked away but they didn't. And when someone asked them to take a few steps back from the line of children, they got an attitude saying it was a free country. I don't like being exposed to cigarette smoke so I choose to avoid places where I know it will be. But I shouldn't have to avoid standing in line at the movie theater or enjoying an outdoor concert because I don't want to be around it.

I personally think it should be against the law to smoke and drive with young children in the car. I hate when Im driving down the road and see someone smoking with their children in the car and all the windows rolled up. Do they not realize the damage that this is doing, not only to themselves but to the children as well?
kornslayer1
Posted: Saturday, December 07, 2013 5:18:33 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/1/2011
Posts: 574
Location: Mishawaka, United States
Well, it's bad for other people, and it bad for them too. People are gonna say something. So, that's the risk you take when you smoke.

Thanks for reading my posts, now go to my profile, and check out my stories.
If you have, thanks for reading. It's always appreciated. I know I don't have a Recommended read, or Editors choice, but I think you'll be happy with any story you choose. I write the way I write, and try my best.

Guest
Posted: Sunday, December 08, 2013 6:27:07 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 473,806
I fully support bans on smoking in public, if smokers want to surround themselves in a cloud of toxic fumes and poison themselves that's their choice but they should not be able to poison others with the filthy habit.
Users browsing this topic
Guest 


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.6 (NET v4.0) - 11/14/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.