/ck/ - Food & Cooking

File: 145 KB, 1050x720, 23SMOKE1-master1050.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 02:18:51 2016 No.8416072 [Reply] [Original]

If you owned a bar, why should the government tell you that you can't let people smoke inside? The government doesn't have a stake in the bar. You paid for everything within the walls. Shouldn't you set the rules? Everyone inside, from the customers to the employees consent to being in that room. No one is forcing anybody to stay inside a second longer than he wishes. Nothing is preventing your employees from leaving to find other work. Nothing is stopping anyone from opening a no-smoking bar or pub to cater to those who find smoking offensive.

Banning smoking in drinking establishments was a catastrophe to our personal liberty. Even if you're a non-smoker, if you're a man of principle then I hope you agree.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 02:21:03 2016 No.8416076 Because second hand smoke is a public health issue at worst, a public nuisance at best. Get fucked, addict.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 02:24:39 2016 No.8416083 I just have to walk through the cloud of smoke of the fuckers standing outside the restaurant and I can still get whiffs of the stink clinging to the insides of my sinuses two days later.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 02:25:23 2016 No.8416084 >>8416076 Since when is the inside of a bar a public concern?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 02:28:24 2016 No.8416091 >>8416084 When the public started walking through the door

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 02:30:00 2016 No.8416097

>>8416083

So much fucking this.

I went to grad school in Manhattan right around the time they banned smoking in bars and when I got out of class around happy hour downtown I'd literally have to walk through a fucking non-stop cloud of smoke for blocks to get to the closest subway stop because of everybody smoking on the sidewalk outside of all the bars. Most disgusting thing to have to deal with every single day - and I'm an occasional smoker myself.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 02:31:25 2016 No.8416099 >>8416084 "Why's that health inspector keep saying we need to sanitize dishes and clean the mold out of the ventilation? The inside of this bar isn't a public concern"

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 02:33:51 2016 No.8416105 >>8416091 Did you miss the point, or are you one of those people who think the inside of your bedroom is also a public concern? Typical leftist. Authoritarian as long as it doesn't inconvenience you.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 02:34:11 2016 No.8416106 >>8416072 >being a hardcore ancap unironically You people are living memes

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 02:34:42 2016 No.8416108

>>8416099

That's a retarded analogy.

Everyone going to a restaurant expects clean dishes and healthy ventilation. Choosing a smoky bar or ordering alcohol is a personal choice that you know is unhealthy, but nonetheless a choice adults should be allowed to make for themselves.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 02:44:00 2016 No.8416121 >>8416105 Bit of a difference between a private residence and public business

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 02:45:17 2016 No.8416124 File: 943 KB, 1600x1071, 1443392846079.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] ITT: a bar is NOT a pub ok

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 02:47:36 2016 No.8416130
File: 1.80 MB, 2560x1600, 1438892897357.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>8416121
he obviously regards his bar to be a private establishment

didn't you know that anti-discrimination statutes violate the first amendment's guarantee to 'freedom of assembly'?

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 02:49:31 2016 No.8416134

>>8416121
A private business has a lot more in common with a private residence than a public building, ie. courthouse, public school

It's a choice for a person to patronize a business like it's a choice for the barkeep to refuse service like it's a choice to not let you into my house if I don't feel like it.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 03:00:25 2016 No.8416153 >>8416134 >private business no such thing

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 03:02:24 2016 No.8416157

>>8416134
A private business is still patronized by the public, even with the right of refusal of service that the owner possess. Full restriction on who could enter patronize the business would change it from a public business to a private club, if you wanted to go that far

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 03:35:37 2016 No.8416217 >>8416072 Just come here to tell you that you are very very very very very very stupid turd just in case you were thinking that your are clever troll, no you are stupid turd

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 03:55:04 2016 No.8416245

Smoking was banned around the 1950's when the tobacco companies told Jewish bankers to fuck off away from their investments and that their companies were making a lot of money from a product that has existed since ancient times from primarily white middle-class families.

In retaliation, Dr Shekelstein and Phd. Yiddgold published articles and created a false health campaign stating that smoking caused cancer in every cell of your body and successfully destroyed the tobacco empire for not being extorted by the Jews.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 03:55:59 2016 No.8416250

>>8416105
>Did you miss the point, or are you one of those people who think the inside of your bedroom is also a public concern?

Public vs private property. You have opened a premise to be used explicitly by the members of the public and so you must adhere to laws concerning such establishments.

Wheeze louder through your breathing mask cancer breath.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 03:59:02 2016 No.8416257

>>8416217

Explain.

Someone in this thread said the opposite view is "typical leftist", and I consider myself left as fuck, but completely agree with OP.

It's one with to restrict things that affect everyone like plastic bags, guns, fossil fuels, refined sugars... but if people are going to choose to smoke, go into a smoke filled bar, drink alcohol, etc., all of which require you to be a certain age, only affect you, and are clearly labeled as bad for you, you should be able to make that choice, and shouldn't be penalized or taxed more for making a life decision that doesn't even affect other people.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:00:03 2016 No.8416258 File: 98 KB, 873x341, Bildschirmfoto_2016-12-30_09-34-58.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8416072 not Food & Cooking related >>>/pol/ >mod is retarded anyway, pic related

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:02:03 2016 No.8416265 Because democrats approve of the government deciding instead of the private holder. >>8416076 Smoking sections are not served by waiters. Problem solved, dipshit.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:03:43 2016 No.8416267 >>8416072 >>8416258 >not Food & Cooking related Good idea OP's thread is not Food & Cooking related at all and is stupid on top of it Mods what you say

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:12:18 2016 No.8416286 File: 251 KB, 1148x635, look-at-this-shit.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8416258 I fucking hate /ck/ mods so much

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:13:27 2016 No.8416289 >>8416267 tobacco threads are cooking related, this thread is just an extension of that. also the no fun allowed mentality is horseshit and you should fuck off

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:14:46 2016 No.8416292 I am a man of the principle that smoking indoors is gross

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:17:02 2016 No.8416296 >>8416286 you should be shot >>8416289 you just went full retard. this thread is for /pol/, not /ck/

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:17:19 2016 No.8416298 [DELETED]

>>8416286

>actual discussion about policies related to eating and drinking establishments
>verging on being off topic because mostly about tobacco and treading on /pol/ territory
vs.
>most blatant off topic shitposting possible that deserved to have been banned on sight

Yeah, the two are totally analogous.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:17:53 2016 No.8416299

>>8416072
Because anti smoking lobby is big and powerful and can get away with it
Truth is second hand smoke doesn't exist, people don't smoke more at bars and little beta males don't like the smell but don't have the balls to ask you to stop
Same reason you see cancer patients in the box. It won't stop you from smoking but it sure will make your life a little worse

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:20:24 2016 No.8416306 >>8416296 oh ok, well maybe reԁԁit is more your taste then. >>8416298 both are food related and yet both get banned. die in a ditch.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:20:47 2016 No.8416308 >>8416105 >The insides of a bedroom Anything goes as long as you get enthusiastic signed consent notarized with at least two witnesses from an adult of at least 21 years unless you are muslim

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:22:41 2016 No.8416310 >>8416289 OP take you stupid thread and slide violently up your faggot ass

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:23:10 2016 No.8416312 >>8416153 Hey there karl

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:25:49 2016 No.8416315

This thread makes me hope there is government regulation regarding tipping in the near future. Then tipping threads will become political just like this thread and will become off topic, and hopefully we'll no longer have to deal with that bane of this board.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:29:02 2016 No.8416322

Complaining of second hand smoke in a bar is like complaining you got fat because you ate too many burgers. Just fucking leave the bar. Just fucking put down that third burger. Don't get smoking banned in bars and don't ban eating more than two burgers just to save peoples' fat asses from themselves.

Statist fucks.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:31:06 2016 No.8416325 >>8416072 OP sucks dicks and licks anuses for FREE.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:32:44 2016 No.8416328 >>8416072 Because govt wants control of EVERYTHING and they will convince you to let them because "safer"

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:37:19 2016 No.8416333 >>8416328 >there are people who actually think like this

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:38:16 2016 No.8416336

>>8416250
>Public vs private property. You have opened a premise to be used explicitly by the members of the public and so you must adhere to laws concerning such establishments.

This. By opening a bar, I.E: A business that derives its income by serving members of the public, you are bound contractually to promise not to harm them directly or indirectly. You could let people smoke inside if your business was not open to the public - there are gentleman's clubs that do this for example.

If you disagree with this, consider that I could literally drop arsenic in food otherwise, and it would be legal by your logic since "why should the state tell me what to do?" or "I paid for everything, shouldn't I set the rules?" or "Nothing is preventing people from choosing not to die of fatal poisoning."

Furthermore consider that we live in a democracy. The government acts as an interest group for the residents, and enforces what they believe to be in their best interests. Ergo, a significant number of people believe that restricting public smoking and smoking inside privately owned business is beneficial to them, so the government chooses to enforce that. You can argue that this is a tragedy of the commons or that democracy is bullshit, but then again...

>No one forces you to live in a democratic country, asswipe. :^)

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:43:14 2016 No.8416343 >>8416336 Why are you comparing a numale such as yourself walking into a bar and being displeased by the smoke and sneaking poison into food?

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:45:14 2016 No.8416346

>>8416336

>go to a concert and have your ears subjected to music far louder than a healthy sound level
>go to a beer garden and subject your body to alcohol that the surgeon general has told to is terrible for your body
>go to a fast food restaurant and everything on the menu far exceeds healthy levels of saturated fats and sugars recommended by the fda

Yeah, in all of those cases you can just as easily chose to abstain, just like you can chose not to go to a smoking friendly bar. Cigarettes are clearly being unfairly targeted and taxed.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:49:15 2016 No.8416353 >>8416106 Calling wanting businesses to be able to choose whether people can smoke inside is not hardcore ancap and calling it such a thing is hilariously stupid

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:49:30 2016 No.8416354 >>8416106 This isn't ancap dumbass and it certainly isn't hardcore

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:52:23 2016 No.8416359 >>8416336 >promise not to harm customers >serve alcohol

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:52:46 2016 No.8416361 >>8416072 I'm going to ask MODS if this thread is /ck/ related >>8416267 >>8416289

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:53:39 2016 No.8416364 File: 67 KB, 771x680, drake_pepe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] because I'm a big bad authoritarian statist

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:56:41 2016 No.8416371 >>8416364 No, because we know that smoking is bad for peoples health. And idiots who smoke cigarets should not be provided medical help in publicly financed hospitals.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 04:58:28 2016 No.8416372 >>8416371 surely an identical argument could be made against drinking though?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:01:43 2016 No.8416374 >>8416372 Exactly, if drinking alcohol in excess contributed to your health problems you should not be provided medical help on taxpayers dime.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:01:49 2016 No.8416376

>>8416372
When you drink you aren't automatically endangering others by the mere act

Why are you even mad about this anyway, I don't smoke but being able to step out to chill with a friend and take a few drags seems very nice and intimate . Not worth cancer but still

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:02:43 2016 No.8416377

>>8416371
I agree. And we should do the same for people who eat red meat more than three times a week. And people who drive sports cars. And people who do not exercise at least three times a week. And overweight people. And the unemployed.

Government is good; praise taxes!

t. Hillary campaign volunteer

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:03:57 2016 No.8416382 >>8416376 >When you drink you aren't automatically endangering others by the mere act VERY GOOG POINT Smoking cigarettes around others is a crime.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:04:24 2016 No.8416383 >>8416372 And the same could be made about fast food, so lets ban all fucking fast food threads already. >tfw this just might turn out to be the most productive /ck/ thread of all time

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:05:00 2016 No.8416384 >>8416377 don't be stupid now see this >>8416376 >When you drink you aren't automatically endangering others by the mere act >>8416382

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:07:41 2016 No.8416392

>>8416382

>smoking cigarettes around others is a crime

And yet people (including children - think of the children!) need to walk down the sidewalks in front of bars and restaurants where people go outside to smoke. Nobody needs to go into smoking approved establishments, and all you need to do is put up a sign out front to let people know it's a smoking bar, just like certain bars are 21+.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:08:06 2016 No.8416393 >>8416384 If you feel "endangered" by standing next to a smoker, why don't you just fuck off and leave? No one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to breathe in all that terrible secondhand smoke.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:08:40 2016 No.8416394

>>8416343
Because the tobacco smoke actually contains arsenic. :^)

>>8416346
"Fairness" does not, in any way, shape, form, or fashion take part in the lawmaking process. The argument that "it is possible to do self-harm, therefore we should legalize all forms of self-harm" is a rather terrible one. It is essentially a perfect world fallacy.

#1: Harmful substances should be controlled, which justifies banning smoking in pubs.
#2: But not all harmful substances are controlled.

Notice how #2 does not in any way attack the justification given by #1?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:09:13 2016 No.8416395 >>8416377 and people having anal sex because it's known fact that those receiving in the anus later in life have problems with holding their stool, they have anus leakage issues and have to wear diapers and have lot's of anus cancers

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:10:01 2016 No.8416397 >>8416394 #1 doesn't really hold up as an axiom though

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:12:32 2016 No.8416401

>>8416397
If you want people to back it up, they can just cite utilitarianism and maximizing public health as the utility being maximized, and as usual in ethics debate, good luck attacking utilitarianism. At that point we are also beyond the line where the conversation is anywhere near understandable for 90% of 4chan.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:12:44 2016 No.8416402

>>8416376
Tell that to all the people killed by drunk drivers.

Tell that to all the people who died of heart disease from unhealthy food leaving loved ones destitute and clogging up half the beds in the ICU.
>bbut I can't be held accountable...they made those burgers too cheap and tasty for my lard ass to resist!

Welp, time to make more laws.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:13:14 2016 No.8416404

>>8416376
I'm not particularly mad desu, I don't mind going outside for a smoke when I'm somewhere crowded like a busy pub, but when I'm in a cocktail bar in the middle of winter, it's nice to be able to smoke at the bar itself.
I didn't really used to care until I went to prague on holiday and could do this

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:14:17 2016 No.8416408 >>8416401 >At that point we are also beyond the line where the conversation is anywhere near understandable for 90% of 4chan. on that I think we can agree

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:14:48 2016 No.8416410

>>8416394

>it is possible to do self-harm, therefore we should legalize all forms of self-harm

That's backwards, though. The unfairness comes from the fact that tobacco has been seeing an insane amount of increased legislation over the past couple of decades compared to comparably harmful things that have seen seemingly zero legislation/taxation simply due to the fact that they're more widespread and it's easier to pick on a smaller group, plus there's a ton of propaganda causing millennials to think cigarettes are the devil while middle school kids are pounding multiple energy drinks before noon like it's nothing.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:17:51 2016 No.8416416 >>8416404 >but when I'm in a cocktail bar in the middle of winter, but you don't give a shit that others have to breathe your fucking poisonous smoke I hope you die from lung cancer ASAP so you don't expose others to your activity you selfish asshole

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:20:02 2016 No.8416421

>>8416410
It does not matter whether or not it's "fair", or if "tobacco is being picked on" for the argument here. Let me demonstrate by quoting wikipedia.

>Posit (fallacious)
Seat belts are a bad idea. People are still going to die in car crashes.
>Rebuttal
While seat belts cannot make driving 100% safe, they do reduce one's likelihood of dying in a car crash.

Likewise:

>Posit (fallacious)
Controlling tobacco is a bad idea. People are still going to find harmful substances to indulge on.
>Rebuttal
While controlling tobacco doesn't make indulging on harmful substances impossible, it reduces the amount and risk of doing so.

In order to even have an argument, you need to find a way to attack the claim that harmful substances should be controlled to begin with, or to demonstrate some significant benefit to *not* controlling tobacco in particular.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:21:22 2016 No.8416422 >>8416416 sadly for you I'm 21 and smoke like a pack every two months so doesn't look like it's gonna happen anytime soon friend.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:25:43 2016 No.8416432

>>8416421

I already have made an argument.

See, >>8416392

My other arguments weren't that smoking wasn't bad and shouldn't be regulated, but simply that it wasn't somehow worse (that's obviously arguable) than any number of other things that haven't been seeing anything close to the kinds of regulations, restrictions, and taxations that tobacco has been in the past 15-20 years.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:26:41 2016 No.8416435

>>8416404
>>8416416
I knew couple of people who had lungs cancer (they smoked cigarets for many years) and they died from that cancer and dying from it is very painful apparently,
,but I had no sorry feelings for their suffering and their death because many times they smoked right in my face and
I hated that but was not able to go away from it for various reasons and I was actually glad when they died,
because I was not exposed to that shit anymore.

Fuck you smokers I hope all of you die very soon very painful deaths

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:28:29 2016 No.8416440 >>8416435 reasonable

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:30:09 2016 No.8416442 File: 22 KB, 380x232, Nick[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8416435 Okay. I'll keep smoking. Sucks for you about your legs.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:31:03 2016 No.8416445

>>8416422
you are so very mistaken thinking that smoking from time to time will not get you lungs cancer,
how come then second hand smokers get tobacco related lung cancers

you are 21 years old and naive, do some reading on it
some people can smoke for 40 years 2 packs /day and get nothing for 40 years others will
get lung cancer smoking very little for just few years,
depends on your lungs idiot

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:31:39 2016 No.8416446

>>8416432
>but simply that it wasn't somehow worse (that's obviously arguable) than any number of other things that haven't been seeing anything close to the kinds of regulations, restrictions, and taxations that tobacco has been in the past 15-20 years.

Which, as already covered, and explained thoroughly, is not an argument against the control against tobacco. Even if you are right there it does not matter. We can still say that

A: Tobacco is harmful (true)
B: Harmful substances should be controlled (undisputed)
Therefore C: Tobacco should be controlled. (follows from claims that are either true or undisputed)

I mean, seriously. I know that arguing on the internet is dumb, but still.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:33:59 2016 No.8416451 >>8416359 What if I told you that it was illegal to serve intoxicated people alcohol? >>8416374 And if your religion caused you to not have an abortion you shouldn't get any welfare.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:34:32 2016 No.8416452 >>8416072 Only OK if you advertise it on the outside. Also: what if I want to go out with non-smoking friends?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:35:10 2016 No.8416455 >>8416445 all cancer is just a game of probability anon. the risk is very low at the amount I smoke, and I am ok with it. I'm not at risk of other disease such as emphysema or w/e so I indulge occasionally when I'm drinking.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:39:19 2016 No.8416466 >>8416245 Do you really believe this? It's not even the right time frame. Everything else is just silly stuff without source.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:39:31 2016 No.8416467

>>8416446

>therefore tobacco should be controlled

A point I explicitly conceded in the post you replied to. My main argument was actually in agreement with the OP (I was the anon who lived in NYC and walked past clouds of smoke every day after smoking was banned in bars because the sidewalks where literally crowded with smokers).

My tangential point was just that it seems like tobacco has been picked on much more than other things (like corn syrup/refined sugars). I'm also visiting family in California right now, where they just had a vote to add a $2 tax on each pack of cigarettes, which honestly seems like straight up discrimination against a particular group who made a lifestyle choice to me (yeah, that might sound like a stretch to some people), and I'm constantly seeing these "Truth" commercials on TV against smoking which are so completely ass backwards ("smoking has created a wage gap! lets start a revolution!") that I have to change the channel every time they come on.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:44:57 2016 No.8416469 With this logic I can safely kill children and serve human meat for food cause shit, it's my restaurant, I can do whatever I want. This is what I'm seeing here.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:47:15 2016 No.8416474 >>8416469 >and the retards get in their two cents

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:50:13 2016 No.8416477

>>8416455
please print my post and your brave arrogant response and keep it in a safe place or frame it and hang it on the wall,
and when day in the future comes when you get diagnosed with lung cancer read it and think of what I told you and what your response was.

In mean time don't be an asshole, be a decent person and go out of your way not to expose others to your poisonous smoke.

I like to add something to my story here >>8416435 ,I did many times wished that those smokers die ASAP so I don't have to be exposed to their habits, so maybe I did curse them to die.

So you anon don't provoke others you in their minds and in their hearths to curse you to die in pain for being an asshole
and a bully by smoking in their faces in their space so they have to breath that poison.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:52:12 2016 No.8416479 >>8416072 Rock, flag and eagle.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 05:52:42 2016 No.8416481 File: 17 KB, 312x350, f133da1deff8f70bee97864a0719e060[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8416477

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 06:08:23 2016 No.8416497 >>8416469 >allowing businesses to allow the possibility of customers raising other customers risk of lung cancer while stinking up the place is akin to allowing businesses to serve human child meat in food really makes you think

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 06:17:57 2016 No.8416509 >>8416474 >>8416497 If we're gonna let people do stupid shit then why stop at lung cancer?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 06:33:19 2016 No.8416527 >>8416481 He has fucked up arms too

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 06:39:06 2016 No.8416534 >>8416134 Except I don't need to ask your permission to go into your business if there's an OPEN sign on the door. This is what's called a public place. It may be private property, and you can kick people out, but it's still regarded as public.

>>	Gunz Fri Dec 30 06:40:32 2016 No.8416537 >>8416336 You're a fucking retard. If I mow lawns for people for money, you can't force me to mow your lawn for money. Stay the fuck out of my life your narcissistic twat

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 06:56:49 2016 No.8416552 >>8416537 >doesn't even understand what is being said There's a retard here, and it's you.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 06:58:16 2016 No.8416556

Having smoking banned from bars is basically a liberal rabbit fence-me-in mentality so they can feel safe without giving any consideration to personal freedoms. So when a handful of latte sipping fuckfaces don't like smoke they bitch and moan and then make up some safety protocol that eventually passes through congress because pushover faggots make up about 90% of the population and it ruins literally everything since the dawn of civilization.

It's purely a matter of legal control over the safety and well-being of a population that increases in regulation more over time until you're not allowed to curse or fart in public out of fear of making a child cry somewhere in a 10 block radius.

It should be that if a bar wants to allow smoking, or even have a smoking lounge, they should and not have treehugging ctrl-left trying to control everything they find unappealing to their limited tastes because their own miserable meek lives are beyond their own responsibility, the pussyfaggots.

Soon beer is gonna be banned from bars oh wait that already happened 100 years ago and it didn't work because these cockspankers think they know so much about what's good for everyone else but themselves. Yet more frustrating failed policies that serve to make everyone's life fucking miserable because liberal faggots have no agency and get offended at the very concept of enjoyment.

that being said, something something less fire hazards something cleaner air something public health but still fuck you

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 07:03:26 2016 No.8416561 I never used to go to bars but since they banned smoking I've been going about once a week for a beer and a meal. All the lowlife smokers are all out the back in a designated smoking area so I don't have to put up with their shit either.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 07:06:50 2016 No.8416566 >>8416556 WARNING VERY STUPID POST AND POSTER DON'T WASTE YOUR TIME READING

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 07:14:56 2016 No.8416573 Just vape dude.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 07:20:35 2016 No.8416580 File: 1.39 MB, 1600x1233, bigstock-Diet-Beautiful-Young-Woman-Ea-43219744-1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8416084 >this public space is of no concern to the public

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 07:22:58 2016 No.8416582 >>8416257 you are a turd

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 07:25:26 2016 No.8416585 >>8416346 Are you literally retarded?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 07:26:48 2016 No.8416586 >>8416392 >smoking outside is the same as smoking inside kys

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 07:28:05 2016 No.8416589 >>8416556 Grow up, kid.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 07:32:02 2016 No.8416591 >>8416582 Agreed, he is turd. he is stupid troll that all

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 07:47:42 2016 No.8416609

>>8416374
If you pay taxes you are owed the services that money goes toward.

Now (this may not apply in the jewnited states) but alcohol and cigarettes prices in soviet canada are at least 50% tax; half as a deterrant and half as a measure to pay for their negative health and social effects.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 07:58:38 2016 No.8416623

>>8416446
I don't see how you can take for granted that "harmful substances should be controlled".

The argument that, were you to apply that universally, it would be an unjust hinderance on people's freedom to choose is legitimate.

And your argument only states that it should be controlled, and not how or why. The topic of the OP (consenting adults exposing themselves to tobacco smoke in bars) is still possibly not a valid thing to control based on the principles you've outlined.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 08:07:15 2016 No.8416631

>>8416097
Yeah, ex smoker (pack a day for 12 years) here. I always tried to be courteous with my abuse of tobacco, I figure if a woman can get pissy because I used the wrong kind of shampoo 2 showers ago and she can still smell it, being in the same room as burning cigarettes, for a non-smoker, must be torture.

But some people have the "I've got mine, fuck everyone else" mentality and they get wildly indignant if you even imply that going out of your way to be nice could be a good thing. As if common courtesy is for fascists. Whether it's picking up after yourself, or smoking, or covering your mouth when you sneeze, or just talking way the fuck too loud. People think the whole world revolves around them.

It's why I don't go out anymore, even though they banned smoking a long time ago. Too many shit people.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 08:14:28 2016 No.8416636

If you owned a bar, why should the government tell you that you can't let people murder inside? The government doesn't have a stake in the bar. You paid for everything within the walls. Shouldn't you set the rules? Everyone inside, from the customers to the employees consent to being in that room. No one is forcing anybody to stay inside a second longer than he wishes. Nothing is preventing your employees from leaving to find other work. Nothing is stopping anyone from opening a no-murdering bar or pub to cater to those who find murdering offensive.

Banning murdering in drinking establishments was a catastrophe to our personal liberty. Even if you're a non-murderer, if you're a man of principle then I hope you agree.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 08:44:14 2016 No.8416665

>>8416108
You go there expecting it but you don't mind it being regulated, right? Just because you expect sth doesn't mean the owners would keep the kitchen clean, the regulations ensure that, not your expectation. And once some cunts started expectind to eat without some obnoxious asshats smoking right next to them im restaurants some people expanded that rule to be true in most bars.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 08:48:53 2016 No.8416675 >>8416631 >I figure if a woman can get pissy because I used the wrong kind of shampoo 2 showers ago and she can still smell it Shut the fuck up you loonball.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 08:50:05 2016 No.8416676

>>8416333
>there are people who actually think like this
sure there are
You forget that loads of poeple here come from a supppsedly well developed country that doest't have a proper healthcare and if someone wants to give them any of it they dub him a communist at best.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 08:54:46 2016 No.8416678 >>8416675 I don't understand what's your problem with his post. That anon posted great story and presented himself like a very respectful descent dude. I think you are the loonball and maybe you totally misunderstood his post, read it again.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 08:56:03 2016 No.8416679 >>8416678 >I figure if a woman can get pissy because I used the wrong kind of shampoo 2 showers ago and she can still smell it I figure if a woman can get pissy because I used the wrong kind of shampoo 2 showers ago and she can still smell it

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 09:03:38 2016 No.8416693

>>8416679
>being in the same room as burning cigarettes, for a non-smoker, must be torture.
and read the rest of the sentence you moron
>being in the same room as burning cigarettes, for a non-smoker, must be torture.

Maybe you are too stupid to comprehend English, read and understand the whole sentence not just pick part of it and get pissy, fucking dike

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 09:05:44 2016 No.8416698 >>8416072 smoking is literally retarded i smoked all throughout my 20s, quit at 28, 0 regrets. grow up.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 09:10:02 2016 No.8416709

>>8416072
i want my patrons to live longer so they can come to my bar more. erasing smoking from the bar aids in achieving this goal

>b-but alcohol kills you too

that's a good point, but alcohol and tobacco at the same time is not a good combination at all for a person's health. i'd much rather stick with what i'm selling if i were to open the bar in the first place.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 09:10:02 2016 No.8416710 >>8416693 >I figure if a woman can get pissy because I used the wrong kind of shampoo 2 showers ago and she can still smell it You are a vile, obnoxious pig!

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 09:15:26 2016 No.8416716 >>8416710 That's the only way to deal with stupid provocative dikes like you. No fucking mercy, if you are the one who first insults others you get back what you send out. >>8416675 >Shut the fuck up you loonball.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 09:20:46 2016 No.8416720 >>8416710 You must be obese yes?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 09:21:07 2016 No.8416721 >>8416477 haha what I also enjoy going to the beach, but I'm not scared of skin cancer you dolt. How is this arrogance?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 09:21:49 2016 No.8416722 >>8416709 woa nice job missing the point there buddy

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 09:25:59 2016 No.8416728

I actually agree with OP, every time I walk past a pub there's 4 or 5 idiots blowing clouds into my face.

It would be much better if they had a smokers bar and give cancer to each other instead. There's no reason why we can't have smoker friendly bars and non-smoker bars.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 09:40:16 2016 No.8416740 >>8416072 >The government doesn't have a stake in the bar. It's THEIR LAND.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 09:40:20 2016 No.8416741 Here you can just open a smoker pub, as long as you don't serve food and only have one room/a small pub. I think it alright.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 09:40:31 2016 No.8416742

>>8416072
No one enforces it, you can even smoke whatever the fuck you please in some Virginia shops. They have lounge chairs, magazines, radio, TV, wifi, outlets and free samples on the table.
Try visiting. Their pipe tobacco, black cav especially, is danker than you can imagine. I had bitches running up to me telling me how good it smelled, and naturally I deferred the attention because of autism.

There are full size humidors too, but cigars are overpriced decorative pieces that do nothing but clog up and cover you with nicotine. I love little cigars, backwoods are good too, but double wrapped mouth dildos that squirt black semen all over your face are the literal definition of "a fag."

Anyways there are a million bars that you can still smoke in. They just define themselves as "private clubs" and charge monthly fees of $40-50. Win-win for them, but I'm not fucking stupid, I walk about an extra 100 steps to the store and buy my alcohol. I also smoke outside because I'm not a massive pussy who can't handle 30 degrees.
You indoor smokers must've never been homeless if you can't get your asses outside for a couple minutes. This is one of the dumbest feats of mankind, exposing himself and his family to severely toxic ammonia gas an rebreathing it until it's gone.
Get an empty tube, burn it and tell me what it smells like. Asthmatics can smoke cigars etc, but not cigarettes, for this reason.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 09:49:29 2016 No.8416750 daily reminder quitting smoking before 40 reverses 90% of the bad health effects of smoking look it up faggots, it's true

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 09:56:40 2016 No.8416765 >>8416716 WHy do you hate women, you fat, disgusting virgin!?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 09:59:42 2016 No.8416768 >>8416765 she is not woman, she is a fat disgusting dike

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 10:14:55 2016 No.8416787 File: 40 KB, 640x345, bernays.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8416072 Torches of freedom.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 10:18:47 2016 No.8416794 >>8416768 Disgraceful.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 11:10:40 2016 No.8416864

>>8416742
>there are a million bars that you can still smoke in. They just define themselves as "private clubs" and charge monthly fees of $40-50.
Really this is the answer. Back when smoking was seen as little more than a bad habit and a nuisance non-smokers tolerated it in public. But once the fact that it was a public health risk became undeniable that tolerance vanished. But smoking is still legal, just not in public places. If you want to be part of a private smoking club go right ahead.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 12:41:47 2016 No.8417042 >>8416299 This Anyone who complains about the smoke is a sensitive idiot. >>8416416 Hope you realize that car exhaust is more harmful than second hand smoke Kys

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 12:43:02 2016 No.8417045 >>8416445 >how come second... They do not

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 12:55:58 2016 No.8417081 If there was such a demand for non-smoking bars, then how come bar owners didn't go non-smoking on their own? The free market exists to fill these needs. If no business is offering it it's likely because the demand isn't there.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:01:18 2016 No.8417099

>>8417045
The second hand smoke thing is a matter of severity and long term exposure. Children who lived in small homes where both parents were heavy smokers were more prone to lung problems than children of non-smokers. That logic was carried over to employees of the nightlife industry by a leap of faith, but not an unreasonable one.

Bottom line: if you think the smell of someone's smoke is going to hurt you you're an idiot. But if you spend 8+ hours a day in a room thick with cigarette smoke it's not unreasonable to think that could do you some harm. It's not like smoking a pack a day, but it's still a fair bit of exposure.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:03:01 2016 No.8417105 >>8417099 A child has no choice about their parent smoking around them. An adult has a choice in working at a place that allows smoking. People need to learn to take responsibility for their own well being.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:03:16 2016 No.8417106 >>8416864 But bars are private venues already...

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:07:55 2016 No.8417121 >>8417106 If you allow anyone to enter then it's a "public venue".

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:10:57 2016 No.8417129

>>8416580
It's a private space, into which members of the public may or may not be admitted as guests.

No-one has a right to enjoy the property, save at the behest of the owner of the rights to that property.

The ban on smoking is a tool to facilitate the further removal of private property rights.

The next step is to extend them to vehicles, streets, and eventually peoples own homes.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:16:42 2016 No.8417150

>>8416072
In my state Oregon I guess it makes sense because cannabis is currently legal to the public, and if they removed no smoking in bars laws as they are people could challenge the laws pertaining to using cannabis in public because of all the tobacco smokers

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:19:32 2016 No.8417161 >>8416072 What about those places in bars/casinos that are separated and have extreme ventilation that you are allowed to smoke in Couldn't someone just make their bar "that" place, or atleast on paper, so that everyone could smoke inside ?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:19:45 2016 No.8417162 >>8416072 >first time on /ck/ >see this thread Fuck yeah

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:20:27 2016 No.8417166

>>8417105
>An adult has a choice in working at a place that allows smoking.
Maybe so, maybe not. Workplace safety regulations exist because experience without them was often grim. How many children were killed or maimed in Philly's notorious mills back in the day? How many miners died of black lung? How many sharecroppers simply starved to death during the 1930's? Why couldn't these people have simply taken responsibility for their own well being and chosen other lines of work?

Because they didn't have the luxury of other options. When you allow dangerous, hazardous work situations to exist you're basically screwing over those so poor and desperate as to have no better choice than to work in them. Ignoring this fact has screwed over generations of poor people in America, and continues to do so. You don't see too many rich people smoking these days (beyond an occasional cigar), do you?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:20:48 2016 No.8417168 >>8417150 And? Why would smoking weed in public be a problem?

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:21:11 2016 No.8417170

>>8417161

I'm sure that could be done in some places, but the laws regarding it are complicated and vary from place to place. In some areas smoking is allowed in bars. In other places it's banned period. In others it's OK with special ventilation like you mentioned. It all depends on the location & the relevant laws in that area.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:21:36 2016 No.8417172 >>8416072 >>8416084 >>8416105 >>>/pol/

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:23:14 2016 No.8417178

>>8416072
>Even if you're a non-smoker, if you're a man of principle then I hope you agree.

Agreed 100%. I fucking hate tobacco smoke. I think it's disgusting, and I find it unpleasant to be around. But I disagree with these laws even more. Nobody is forcing me to hang around a smoky bar--if I don't like the atmosphere there then I will simply leave.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:25:26 2016 No.8417186 Don't like cigarette smoke? Don't enter an establishment where smoking is allowed. Problem solved. Everybody can live in peace instead of arguing about other people's decisions.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:27:19 2016 No.8417188

>>8417166
>You don't see too many rich people smoking these days (beyond an occasional cigar), do you?

Literally every successful person I know is a cigarette smoker for some reason, though, not to mention the fact that it seems like every big celebrity is a smoker.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:31:00 2016 No.8417194 >it's not fair i can't smoke everywhere i want >it's totally fair if non-smokers don't smoke wherever i want

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:31:23 2016 No.8417195 >/ck/ discusses prohibitions in gastronomy >/pol/ discusses "red pilled" media >/tv/ discusses Jack It's a full circle.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:33:23 2016 No.8417202 >>8417168 I dunno. Why would being drunk in public be a problem?

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:33:28 2016 No.8417203

>>8417178
>Nobody is forcing me to hang around a smoky bar--if I don't like the atmosphere there then I will simply leave.
>>8417186
>Don't enter an establishment where smoking is allowed. Problem solved.
What about this? >>8417166 What if you hate smoke, know being around it could have a negative effect on your health, but the only job you can manage to find is one that has you working in a smoke filled environment 8+ hours a day? You bite the bullet and do it.

The freedom argument only works when options are available to all people. The problem is that the poor don't have as man options as everybody else. For a poor person it might not be a question of just avoiding a smoky bar because working there might be the only job they can find. Tolerating the smoke and possible health risk can be the difference between working and being unemployed.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:33:57 2016 No.8417204 >>8417202 It shouldn't be. Unless you're driving.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:34:27 2016 No.8417205 >>8417203 What weird city do you live in where smoking bars are literally the only place that is hiring?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:35:30 2016 No.8417208 >>8417121 They don't allow anyone [everyone] entry. Children, dogs, irish, niggers, women and banned customers.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:39:31 2016 No.8417219

>>8417203
>but the only job you can manage to find is one that has you working in a smoke filled environment 8+ hours a day?

I think that's a ludicrously contrived situation. I doubt that ever happened for anyone, anywhere.

>>The problem is that the poor don't have as man options as everybody else.

But that problem will always exist, with or without the laws we're discussing here. I know that many people (myself included) want everyone to have a an equal and fair chance. But the sad reality is that life is NOT fair or equal, and we should stop trying to force it to be.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:42:06 2016 No.8417224

>>8416446
But harmful substances shouldn't be controlled.

In an educated society, each person should control their consumption of harmful substances.

i.e. Every smoker knows smoking is unhealthy. And every smoker chooses to smoke, nevertheless.

In addition:
1. You should define "harmful".
2. I'm aware of my claim that will trumps "addition".

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:42:24 2016 No.8417225 >>8417219 So if the poor don't deserve to be protected from second hand smoke, which other unnecessary protections should be abolished?

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:43:49 2016 No.8417226

>>8417205
I live in a city where the only places you can smoke are hookah joints. And my point has nothing to do with my neighborhood, but the general acceptance of hazardous workplaces under the argument that people are free not to work there. Which means only the vulnerable (poor and not well educated) will be working there, because they have the least choice about where they work.

>>8417219
>But the sad reality is that life is NOT fair or equal, and we should stop trying to force it to be.
Agreed. But one thing we CAN do is assure workplaces are not hazardous environments, so the jobs the poor are forced to take don't end up killing them, like black lung did for a couple generations of miners.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:44:36 2016 No.8417228 >>8417225 How does that work in the situation whereby I am the owner of the bar, and I am the sole person on the premises? Would you agree that in such situations, I would be perfectly entitles to operate a bar which permits smoking?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:45:14 2016 No.8417230 >>8417226 So the city you live all low wage or low skill jobs are hazardous? There's no fast food places, grocery stores, construction jobs?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:46:14 2016 No.8417234 >>8417230 >construction jobs >not hazardous

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:48:50 2016 No.8417239 >>8417234 Well there's no smoking there so they must not be. ^_-

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:49:56 2016 No.8417244 >>8417239 >construction jobs >there's no smoke

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:50:24 2016 No.8417245

>>8417226
>Agreed. But one thing we CAN do is assure workplaces are not hazardous environments

We can't assure anything. Even the most modern, regulated, safety-conscious operation is not immune to accidents. What we can do is try and reduce problems. We can't "assure" anything.

And furthermore, that effort has a cost. Increased workplace safety laws certainly have an effect with fewer or less severe accidents, etc. But they also have the unwanted side effect of driving up costs and harming efficiency, which is why so many jobs are outsourced to 3rd-world countries. Everyone likes the idea of improved safety. But it's no so easy to make the call when you look at the big picture including lost jobs.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:51:11 2016 No.8417249 smokers are disgusting, keep your nasty habbit to yourself.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 13:59:22 2016 No.8417264 File: 635 KB, 1280x720, chug.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8417249 Obesity is more disgusting and kills more people every year yet we allow people to be fat in public.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 14:03:59 2016 No.8417273

>>8417230
It has nothing to do with where I live. There are plenty of jobs everywhere that involve a degree of danger, but that's taken into account with the compensation. Military service, law enforcement, commercial fishing, oil drilling and the like are examples. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about situations where the safety conditions are ignored because the people working are poor so no one gives a shit. Sweatshops, for example. I know of several manned by Chinese women immigrants. There's no fucking way the working conditions at these places are legal, but who gives a shit, rite?

>>8417245
>lost jobs.
Automation is what has caused most low skill jobs to be lost, not the cost of safety regulation. As for the few jobs actually sold out to 3rd world countries I assure you these are the kinds of jobs only the most poor and desperate among us would do if they had remained here. It's part of our duty as a society to see to it these people are not being exploited, and historically we've done a shit job of it.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 14:07:00 2016 No.8417284 >>8417264 It's very rare to breathe in other people's fat

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 14:08:42 2016 No.8417289 >>8417284 He's right as far as public health issues are concerned. Obesity is gonna cost a lot more in taxpayer dollars than smoking in the long run.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 14:09:14 2016 No.8417291

>>8416072
Anyone who lives in a country with socialized medicine is at the mercy of their government.
At the end of the day it's not the smoker, the bar owner or the canceree who will be paying for any impending cancer patients.
It's the tax payers and the government has to midogate these possibilities

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 14:14:09 2016 No.8417307

>>8416072

even the majority of smokers are glad we can no longer smoke inside public places. quit being a faggot. you think it was a catastrophe of our personal liberty? what about the health of the other people? what about the health of the people who work there? are you going to say it wouldn't be hard to staff a full bar with only smokers, and then only find smokers who want to go to that bar? because it won't just be smokers. it will be plenty of non-smokers dragged there by their idiot friends who don't want to go to the bars that don't allow smoking. basically you're a pussy who doesn't like to stand in the cold. you're probably fat too.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 14:15:03 2016 No.8417313

>>8417291
>It's the tax payers and the government has to midogate these possibilities
That's why cigarettes are still $5 or less a pack in some US states, but if you go to the UK, Canada or most of Europe they're much more. The tax helps defer some of the social cost of a smoker's health in the long term. Last time I was in Australia cigarettes were over $25 a pack. Makes perfect sense if the government provides health care. I smoke, but I'd happily pay $25 a pack for cigarettes (would make it easier to quit) in return for health care that wouldn't cost me $10,000 if I broke my leg.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 14:16:39 2016 No.8417316

>>8417273
>Automation is what has caused most low skill jobs to be lost, not the cost of safety regulation

They are related. Automation may nor may not be cost-effective depending on the cost of having the same job done manually. Safety regulations make the cost of manual labor go up, which can determine whether or not automation is implemented or not.

>>It's part of our duty as a society to see to it these people are not being exploited

Bullshit. There were (historically) an awful lot of very shitty jobs. We look back in our history books and say wow, that really sucks. It's too bad people were being exploited like that. But what we're missing is that those people needed their jobs so badly that they were willing to put up with those horrible working conditions. Unless we are talking literal slavery those employees CHOSE that work because as bad as it might have been it beat the alternative--no work. And who are we (as a society) to tell a person that he/she can't do a job that they are willing to do.

>>few jobs
Few? Please. They make our clothes. Our cars. Our electronics. Our furniture. Our children's toys. Our tools. The majority of our industrial machinery. A great deal of our food. It's a massive number of jobs, not "a few".

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 14:18:38 2016 No.8417321 >>8417291 You say that it's preferable to be at the mercy of hospitals who make up numbers for your bills and insurance companies who duck you as much as they can

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 14:25:47 2016 No.8417331 >>8417291 >midogate mitigate

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 14:28:56 2016 No.8417339

> If you owned a shop, why should the
> government tell you that you can't let people
> smoke inside? The government doesn't have
> a stake in the shop. You paid for everything
> within the walls. Shouldn't you set the rules?
> Everyone inside, from the customers to the
> employees consent to being in that room. No
> one is forcing anybody to stay inside a
> second longer than he wishes. Nothing is
> preventing your employees from leaving to
> find other work. Nothing is stopping anyone
> from opening a no-smoking shop to cater to
> those who find smoking offensive.

> Banning smoking in shopping
> establishments was a catastrophe to our
> personal liberty. Even if you're a non-smoker,
> if you're a man of principle then I hope you
> agree.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 14:29:24 2016 No.8417342

>>8417321
>hospitals who make up numbers for your bills

Exactly this. Go to any hospital in the US and ask for an itemized estimate of the cost of a procedure and associated treatments and you will not get one. In what other realm of a free market economy do you not receive estimates for services to be performed?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 14:35:13 2016 No.8417358 >>8417224 >But harmful substances shouldn't be controlled. Congratulations! You are the retard of the day!

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 14:37:51 2016 No.8417364 >>8417342 Now ask yourself WHY the healthcare industry is unique in that regard. Answer: BECAUSE the government is involved so heavily.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 14:42:43 2016 No.8417381

>>8417316
>who are we (as a society) to tell a person that he/she can't do a job that they are willing to do.
The only reason why we have workplace safety legislation in the first place is because we've had to confront the horrors this way of thinking puts the poor through repeatedly in our history. Do you thin the women who burned to death in the Triangle Shirtwaist fire were just experiencing an occupational hazard, and enforcing fire codes would have been a blow to their freedom? How about all the miners who died of black lung? Was that a matter of freedom or lack of options? My guess is their widows would say the latter.

My point is that as a society it is our duty to determine just how predatory an employer can be to their employees, or we'll just drift back to the days of the company store. The law of the land is to "assure as far as possible every working man and woman in the Nation safe and healthful working conditions."

>>8417364
Because they spend so much money lobbying the government, and members of their boards sit on government committees. If the government ruled them instead of the other way around things would be much less fucked up, but profits would be lower.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 14:47:20 2016 No.8417398

>>8417381
>Because they spend so much money lobbying the government

Not really. The main problem with the cost boils down to what Medicare and Medicaid will pay for certain procedures. Every year the gov't publishes a list of maximim payouts for what procedure. The result is a lack of competition because hospitals always bill the maximum permissible amount. It's price-fixing.

>>If the government ruled them instead of the other way around things would be much less fucked up

Except we know this not to be the case, empirically. My family is from Denmark. They are often cited as having one of the best socialized health care systems on the planet. Yet my own family's experience shows the exact opposite. I can elaborate if you want (currently leaving that out for sake of brevity).

The government does a bad job at nearly everything it does. Why? Because there is no competition to force things to be done efficiently. If the gov would back AWAY from health care then free-market competition would lower prices in a heartbeat, as with any other industry (who also have lobbyists).

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 14:55:05 2016 No.8417423 >>8417364 >the govt forces hospitals to not give estimates for procedures Bullshit. It's because they don't want to have to exist in a competitive environment. Read an intro text on economics, imbecile.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 14:57:48 2016 No.8417435

>>8417398
>It's price-fixing.
Yet for private insurance hospitals can charge whatever they like without regulation. That takes a lot of money out of the system.
>The government does a bad job at nearly everything it does.
I don't see it that way at all. The government just does too little to serve the people because its focus has become on doing what's best for the large corporations who lobby it. Unregulated corporate interests have historically always screwed over both the customer and the employee in this country, so I'm not buying into any fantasy that they would not in the future. The problem is that the regulation in place favors businesses over citizens.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 15:00:12 2016 No.8417443 >>8417398 WHO healthcare system rankings: Canada - 30 Denmark - 34 US - 37 Both empirically and objectively, the US fares worse.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 15:03:50 2016 No.8417457

>>8417423
>>the govt forces hospitals to not give estimates for procedures

I never said that, anon. I think you misunderstood me, or perhaps I wasn't clear. My point was that government interference was responsible for prices being high. I didn't comment on estimates at all.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 15:06:21 2016 No.8417464 The evidence that "secondhand smoke is harmful" is actually epistemologically quite weak. If we are going to argue, then we should see these smoking bans as what they really are: Nuisance ordinances.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 15:07:32 2016 No.8417467

>>8417435
>Yet for private insurance hospitals can charge whatever they like without regulation.

Yep. Which nobody will pay if the prices are egregious. In just about every other industry companies compete for the best possible prices to offer to the customer. Healthcare is an exception to this because of government involvement.

>>I don't see it that way at all....

Please understand that I'm not supporting ANY form of lobbying. In my opinion, corporations have no business governing, nor does the governemnt have any business getting involved in business dealings. The two are entirely seperate. When one gets involved with the other bad things aways happen. I'm advocating the REMOVAL of government involvement from health care (and that includes lobbying), since empirically we see that nearly everything the gov't does it does poorly.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 15:07:33 2016 No.8417468 What do you mean they don't give estimates? They don't tell you how much the procedure is before the operation?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 15:07:50 2016 No.8417469 >>8417464 >see these smoking bans as what they really are: Nuisance ordinances. And matters of public health policy to discourage smoking in general.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 15:13:56 2016 No.8417485

>>8417467
>I'm advocating the REMOVAL of government involvement from health care (and that includes lobbying), since empirically we see that nearly everything the gov't does it does poorly.
That's putting your trust in unregulated profit motive to assure your health care is quality and cost effective. What we have already is way too fucking close to that for my taste. The only thing that would get me to think along those lines would be having my fortune tied to that industry. Since it isn't I find myself (along with most of the civilized world) taking the opposite of your stance.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 15:19:59 2016 No.8417502 >>8417468 Of course they do.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 15:26:23 2016 No.8417514

>>8417485
>That's putting your trust in unregulated profit motive to assure your health care is quality and cost effective.
Yes, exactly.

>>What we have already is way too fucking close to that for my taste.
What we have is nowhere close to that. The medicare/medicaid policies of the government are literal price fixing. That's the antithesis of free market competition.

>>e having my fortune tied to that industry
Why would you want that? With actual competition in the health industry the fat profits will dwindle to very little compared to what they are now.

>>most of the civilized world
Exactly. We've seen that kind of health care attempted by various methods, and we've seen that it doesn't work very well. Empirically.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 15:28:07 2016 No.8417518 >>8417502 So they do get an estimate.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 15:28:45 2016 No.8417519

>>8417485
>That's putting your trust in unregulated profit motive to assure your health care is quality and cost effective

We already do that with many health-critical things, such as our food supply, electronics, automobiles, etc.

(fun fact: the voluntary testing that private insurance companies put cars through is far more rigorous than Govt-mandated tests)

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 15:29:48 2016 No.8417521 >>8417518 Well, yeah.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 16:48:59 2016 No.8417673

>>8417502
Try, just try one time, to get an itemized estimate for a simple procedure, say gallbladder removal. They will not give you one. They might say in general, "around $50,000, or so" and then present a bill of $90,999.99 when you had no complications, whatsoever.

There are some industries that require government control to ensure quality and fairness in pricing, medicine being the primary example. That's why the US ranks below every first world country and some third world countries - far to little control.

The US medico-pharma bois want the best of both worlds: no regulation and no freemarket competition.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 16:57:05 2016 No.8417696 >>8416676 Don't worry, the majority of people on Obamacare come from states that overwhelmingly voted for Trump. Stupid is gonna stupid.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 16:59:36 2016 No.8417708 >>8416698 Reproduction is literally retarded. I knocked up a handful of girls all throughout my 20s, threw them all down a flight of stairs and started pulling out at 28, 0 regrets. grow up, the world is overpopulated as it is.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 17:03:05 2016 No.8417724 >>8416083 Yeah, I'm sure you're on stage 3 lung cancer too

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 17:04:45 2016 No.8417726 >>8417673 No. When my arm broke they told me exactly how much it would cost before going ahead with the procedure..

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 17:05:37 2016 No.8417729 Don't listen to these limp-wristed retards, OP. You are correct, it is your property and individuals are voluntarily entering the establishment knowing the risk. End of discussion.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 17:07:47 2016 No.8417732
File: 44 KB, 314x295, 1406704264733.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

A lot of people are giving you shit OP, but I think a bar should be allowed to have smoking inside if they choose to, provided that there's a sign informing customers of that decision. It would be the customers decision whether or not they wanted to go into a bar with smoking inside, if they hate smoke, then they can choose not to enter the bar, I don't see what the problem is. I don't smoke and I can't stand cigarettes, but I don't see why it would be a problem if it was inside the bar, where customers have been informed that smokers will be in. It's not like your forcing anything on anyone if it's the customers decision.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 17:15:12 2016 No.8417754
File: 63 KB, 500x514, phsformal.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>8416072
I fucking agree. You're already drinking poison if you're at a bar to start with. Suck it up, buttercup.All it does is force the smokers (and vapers) out in the cold to be panhandled.
t.totally not a bar owner

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 17:23:57 2016 No.8417772

>>8416676
>dub him a communist

It's humorous. I live in one of the poorest of the poor red states and subscribe to the local weekly county paper for shits and giggles. The socialist label wasn't usable anymore since they wore it out on Obama, who was anything but. So they had to come up with a label for Sanders and it was of all things, Bolshevik.

And people wonder why most of the US considers flyovers ignorant trash that are proud of their ignorance.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 17:24:28 2016 No.8417773 >>8416072 Except that there are still bars that allow smoking... You can operate a bar that is smoking/non-smoking, but it can only be one or the other (generally)

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 17:29:10 2016 No.8417786 >>8417773 >there are still bars that allow smoking Maybe in deep South flyover land, but I don't think anybody was talking or even thinking about irrelevant places like that.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 17:30:55 2016 No.8417791 >>8417726 Oh, how kind. I guess they figured you'd go driving around town with a broken arm getting alternative estimates, didn't they? Or maybe they just happened to be visited by Marley and the 3 ghosts the night before and suddenly became altruists.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 17:35:05 2016 No.8417796

>>8416072
I was pissed of at first at this smoking inside buildings ban, but now I kinda like it.

I like that I actually smoke less, and I really enjoy the stepping out of the pub/bar to grab a smoke. If I go out solo then it is a nice break from the music/noise inside. But most of the time it is the perfect excuse to have a personal chat with someone.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 17:36:51 2016 No.8417800 >>8417796 >most of the time it is the perfect excuse to have a personal chat with someone Or you end up getting bothered by some random drunk or homeless.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 17:38:26 2016 No.8417803 >>8417791 SO you admit you've been lying this whole time.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 17:40:45 2016 No.8417811 >>8417796 >addicts can only have good chats when they are getting their fix God, you drug addicts are a pathetic bunch.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 17:43:46 2016 No.8417819 >>8417811 >jelly that he misses out on a third of interesting conversations and hookups because they happen over over a cigarette

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 17:45:03 2016 No.8417821

>>8416333
They do. If you don't think that bureaucratic agencies like the health department don't fund biased research to create more busy work for the agency then you are dumb. Case in point a couple of years ago the FDA funded a study that (((found))) aging cheese on wood to be dangerous. Lmao a practice tested and proven for thousands of years is dangerous?! No my friend but the FDA needs to look like they are still important even though the American food industry today is the world standard in health and safety.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 17:45:03 2016 No.8417822 >>8417819 >he genuinely believes this lol

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 17:45:21 2016 No.8417824 >>8417819 >a cigarette Truly interesting conversations involve needles, rolled up bills, or razor blades.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 17:47:04 2016 No.8417827 >>8417786 > Colorado is the deep South Hokay friendo; there's a big wide world out there beyond your parent's basement

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 17:51:53 2016 No.8417837 File: 58 KB, 1024x768, latest[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8417822 It's true, dum dum.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 17:55:01 2016 No.8417843 >>8417827 >Statewide smoking ban: On July 1, 2006, the Colorado Clean Indoor Air Act went into effect, banning smoking in all enclosed workplaces statewide, including bars and restaurants. Casinos, initially exempt, were added to the ban Jan. 1, 2008.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 17:59:15 2016 No.8417851 >>8417843 REKT

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 18:07:53 2016 No.8417868

>>8417822

Most smokers are on something of a regular schedule with their smoking.

When I was an undergrad I made tons of friends and girlfriends simply because I found myself having 5-10 minute conversations with the same people every day just because we'd both happen to have a smoke at the same time and place, and just because of that we really got to know each other.

I even got really good face time with a couple professors the same way, which I never could have gotten if I scheduled office hours like a normal chump. Smokers belong to a special club, deal with it.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 18:11:47 2016 No.8417874 File: 11 KB, 267x400, d0PYh7N.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8417868 >this level of delusion

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 18:17:34 2016 No.8417887 >>8417874 >provide anecdote involving friends and girlfriends >anon clearly cannot relate and spazzes out: "it must be delusion!!!"

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 18:18:39 2016 No.8417891

>>8417868
>never could have gotten if I scheduled office hours

"oh sure I'll write up a letter of recommendation, gladly!"

Is the professor talking to the kid who comes to office hours regularly, or the guy he happens to engage in degenerate behaviors with?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 18:19:34 2016 No.8417896 File: 213 KB, 600x350, multiple-women-laughing-with-salad.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8417887 >he's still going >he actually does believe this tripe

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 18:20:37 2016 No.8417901 >>8417891 The guy is memeing.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 18:22:30 2016 No.8417904 >>8417891 Professors at my school would come to student parties occasionally, and occasionally invited students to bring alcohol to class. In both cases intellectual discussion was had; that was just the kind of school I went to.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 18:24:30 2016 No.8417909 >>8416076 no it's fucking not and even if it was, who gives an actual fuck. if you don't like it don't go to bars. or go to the nonsmoking bars. for however long they stay in business. either way, fuck you.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 18:24:37 2016 No.8417910

>>8417843
>>8417851

Then why was I in a bar that allowed smoking not two weeks ago?

Because:

> section 25-14-205 states that a "tobacco bar" may allow indoor smoking
> Colorado Clean Indoor Air Act defines "tobacco bar" as: bar where 5% or $50,000 of revenue is tobacco sales, primarily alcohol sales, food is secondary to alcohol

Read the law if you're gonna quote it. Double REKT, you two absolute buffoons.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 18:25:34 2016 No.8417911

>>8417868
You make a good point. Smokers tend to be iconoclasts, with a unique perspective. Although I don't smoke, other than cigars, some of the most interesting conversations I've ever had happened in smoke filled rooms. There was probably a great deal of truth in the Native American tobacco pipe when discussing important matters.

Tobacco has it's place, among other mind altering substances, to help people reach a different level.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 18:26:04 2016 No.8417912 File: 12 KB, 480x360, pw.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8417904 >invited students to bring alcohol to class

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 18:27:06 2016 No.8417916 >>8417904 Clown College?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 18:31:00 2016 No.8417933 >>8417916 No. The faculty just treated the student body with respect, and as adults who were responsible for themselves.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 18:33:51 2016 No.8417941 >>8417933 Where was this magical school that promoted drinking alcohol during class time?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 18:36:51 2016 No.8417948 >>8417941 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/27/education/27reed.html

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 18:38:23 2016 No.8417952 >>8417948 That was on my short list, I went somewhere else because I was bamboozled by the rankings. In retrospect it could have been interesting.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 18:38:35 2016 No.8417953 >>8417948 >portland Explains a lot.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 18:40:47 2016 No.8417966
File: 37 KB, 1024x668, lung-cancer.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>8417042
>>8417045
Get a fucking lung cancer you stupid cigarette smoking fuck and the sooner you die in pain from it the better for the rest of us.
One more asshole less on this Planet.

Apparently dying from lung cancer is a very painful so enjoy your agony you stupid arrogant shithead.
Take a look how your lungs look when you smoke cigarettes and get lung cancer.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 18:44:55 2016 No.8417979 >>8416556 >pushover faggots make up about 90% of the population Must include you since you let them ban smoking :^)

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 18:49:38 2016 No.8417998
File: 171 KB, 650x522, fatal-lung-cancer.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Besides getting lung cancer male cigarette smokers are known to have significant erectile disfunction's (your dick is not getting up)
so enjoy your poison you assholes
except if you smoking in public places remember that every time we the non-smokers are passing by you and have to breath that poison we do curse you
that you die ASAP from lung cancer so we can have fresh air to breathe.

Remember that every time you acting like a big arrogant asshole smoking in others peoples faces that they are cursing you to die ASAP.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 18:51:44 2016 No.8418004 >>8417998 This is true to be honest. I've been out with a few smokers and they their penises are never quite as hard as guys who don't smoke.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 19:02:04 2016 No.8418030
File: 40 KB, 800x499, Cigarettes cause lung cancer.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>8418004
it's a simple thing,
lungs carry air/oxygen into your blood and as we know when the dick gets hard it's not some mysterious bone that grows from inside males body and makes it hard ,
it's the blood that enters the dick that makes it hard and if the lungs are not performing properly the blood circulation is very restricted,
simple as fucking as that.

So keep smoking you stupid assholes and feel great about yourselves, besides dying from lung cancer your dicks are not performing as they should, hahaha

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 19:16:20 2016 No.8418063

>>8417998
>>8418004
>>8418030
How obnoxious are you about what other poeple do to their bodies?

You have to be a heavy smoker, consuming over a pack per day to have any significant increase of cancer risk or other health issues. Most people just smoke a couple a day, maybe more on weekends or while drinking.

I do not like that smoking numbs my taste, so its harder to cook. But if it keeps me away from the vaginal jew that's a plus.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 19:18:57 2016 No.8418073 >>8418063 >Most people just smoke a couple a day That is a barefaced lie. And not getting laid because you're a smoker is a bad thing.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 19:21:04 2016 No.8418078 >>8416336 >you are bound contractually to promise not to harm them directly or indirectly. kek what jew told you this shit 1L?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 19:21:29 2016 No.8418079 >>8418063 >You have to be a heavy smoker, consuming over a pack per day to have any significant increase of cancer risk or other health issues Holy fuck, just how stupid are you?

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 19:23:23 2016 No.8418086
File: 60 KB, 600x399, women-laughing-and-having-fun.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>8418063
>You have to be a heavy smoker, consuming over a pack per day to have any significant increase of cancer risk or other health issues
This delusion again?!

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 19:25:10 2016 No.8418091
File: 96 KB, 800x586, Lung-Cancer.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>8418063
I'm very OK with the way I throw in their faces about their disgusting habit,
especially that what they are doing affects others who are exposed to the second hand smoking especially children.
So all of you cigarettes smokers die ASAP so we can have fresh air and don't have to smell your stinking cloths and breaths when you are walking around.

Every time I hear about somebody dying from lung cancer I have a nice happy grim on my face, one asshole less.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 20:38:39 2016 No.8418298 >>8416072 Welcome to the Libertarian party

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 20:40:34 2016 No.8418302

>>8418079

he's right.

EVEN IF YOU SMOKE A PACK OF DAY

you basically only stand a 15% chance of losing 5-10 years off of your life.

smoking is almost harmless.

and anyone who is against smoking can get fucked, they're just enjoying being a sanctimonious asshole.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 20:41:36 2016 No.8418306 >>8418091 fuck you. second hand smoke does fucking nothing and i wouldn't care if it did. suck it up, faggot.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 20:45:16 2016 No.8418321

>>8418306
>second hand smoke does nothing.
Care to prove that?
>my father's house is fucking filthy, his carpets are yellow, there's tarry dust stuck to his ceiling fan and on the fan blades inside his computer
And you're telling me it does nothing if I'm breathing that shit in, instead? You're fucking delusional.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 20:49:11 2016 No.8418330

>>8418321

i don't need to prove shit, you moron. if you choose to enter rooms full of smoke, breath the fucking smoke and stop being such a fragile pussy. if you choose not to, fuck off and don't talk to me. i give zero fucks about you and i don't have to, that's why i moved to america, to get away from literal fucking woman-minded men like you.

sit and spin you fucking bitch

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 21:00:46 2016 No.8418357 >>8418306 die of lung cancer ASAP you massive asshole

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 21:02:48 2016 No.8418361 >>8418330 I hope you die soon from lung cancer in great pain you fucking selfish ignorant immigrant

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 21:30:46 2016 No.8418421 >>8416072 Sorry, but people don't want to breath in your cancerous fumes, you filthy denigrate

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 21:35:41 2016 No.8418431 I agree OP. I hate smokefags but there's really no reason the government should or should be able to regulate a private business allowing a legal activity inside of it. There's really no argument.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 21:39:37 2016 No.8418439

>hanging out with friends in this small building I bought
>serve them alcohol and have fun, smoke some cigs
>ask them to chip in some cash
>eventually word gets around about this place, a few more people come around and we all hang out smoking and shooting the shit
>i dont care as long as they pay for what they drink
>decide to apply for a business license to open a bar
>none of us can smoke anymore

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 21:48:41 2016 No.8418454

>>8418439
so now go and kill yourselves
>if you looking so sympathy you will get zero here you fuckhead
>cry me a river
>fuck you
and fuck off you hard drugs dealer scum and fuck your building the crack cocaine joint you set it up in it.
I hope it burns down and you get no insurance money for it

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 21:51:00 2016 No.8418459 >>8418454 This didn't actually happen you autistic fuck. It's illustrating that banning smoking in a private business is retarded.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 21:54:59 2016 No.8418465 >>8418459 fucking liar >of course it did happen >stop acting innocent in the eyes of the law now

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 22:32:19 2016 No.8418530

>>8418330
>woman-minded men like you

Well, it was a mistake to move to 'murrica. This is the country of modern emasculation. You'll find many more women-men here than anywhere else in the world. Why do you think we haven't won a war since WWII? The US is a country of sissy mcchicken bois.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 22:51:23 2016 No.8418569

>>8416157
>private club
And a number of states allow smoking in private clubs but not at bars open to the general public. The American Legion and VFW halls here in town are officially private clubs and therefore not subject to Kansas' ban on smoking in bars.

Utah at least used to be the same way with drinking. You couldn't just have a bar, it had to be a private club. I think there was a push to change that for the Salt Lake winter Olympics, though, because of tourism. But before then, a "private club" could sell you a short-term membership, which basically acted as a cover charge.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 23:05:31 2016 No.8418590 >>8417514 >We've seen that kind of health care attempted by various methods, and we've seen that it doesn't work very well. Empirically. I'd take a system like Canada's over the US system in a heartbeat.

Anonymous Fri Dec 30 23:12:53 2016 No.8418604

>>8417469
That's a distant second aim of legislation like this. The reason we can't smoke in bars today is because enough people are annoyed enough at smelling smoke while they drink that they would approve of dialing back property rights for the sake of their own comfort.

The "secondhand smoke" public safety argument filling up 3/4 of this thread is a distraction. Let's cut through the bullshit. If enough people are grossed out by the smell of fish, is it right to enact an ordinance banning fish in restaurants? Never mind the fact that people who hate fish can go to a restaurant that doesn't serve it anyways. Absurd, eh?

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 23:13:33 2016 No.8418608 >>8416072 And this is why you're assuming.

>>	Anonymous Fri Dec 30 23:30:44 2016 No.8418664 ITT: Statist cucks

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 00:12:29 2016 No.8418746 >>8416217 kill yourself faggot

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 00:18:34 2016 No.8418759 >>8418746 I hope you will die from lung cancer in pain and agony ASAP

Anonymous Sat Dec 31 01:39:39 2016 No.8418918

I absolutely do not care what other people do with their bodies. Smoking is fucking disgusting, but if it's a bar that allows customers to smoke, why would I care since I won't be in there? Everyone complaining about the second hand smoking shit is being a whiny faggot, since it would be the customers choice to enter the bar. They are the ones choosing to expose themselves to secondhand smoke.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 01:48:26 2016 No.8418937 >>8418918 you making so fucking easy and simple what about employees breathing this poison 8-10 hours every fucking day wish you used more brains and less shit from your ass to do the thinking for you

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 03:01:50 2016 No.8419054 >>8418937 You don't have to work there, plain and simple. There are jobs where you have to work in the blistering heat, and for that reason I will never take a construction job. Nobody is forcing you to do anything.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 03:05:30 2016 No.8419060 >>8419054 door knobs have more commons sense than you go and die from your cigarette induced lung cancer, it will be one idiot less on this Planet stupid turd

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 03:08:05 2016 No.8419068 >>8419060 Someone doesn't know how to read. I don't smoke. I hate smoking. Cigarettes are disgusting. I just don't give a shit if other people do it, as long as they aren't near me.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 03:11:28 2016 No.8419074 >>8419054 >You don't have to work there, plain and simple. >>8419068 it's not always that plain an simple you know shit about reality of life in that case

Anonymous Sat Dec 31 03:23:09 2016 No.8419080
File: 9 KB, 299x293, 1385396430503.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>8419074
I don't understand your argument at all. Are you trying to say that there might be a situation where you would be forced to work there because it's the only job available? Because that really isn't likely. Jobs can be hard to come by but what are the odds of only that one bar being available to get a job at within your town? It's just extremely unlikely.

I've struggled to find jobs during the last recession we had, but I've never been forced to take a job with morals I didn't agree with. There's always something out there, and when there wasn't I was forced to move to areas with more available jobs. It was tough, but not impossible. And if you're struggling to make a living, about to live on the streets or whatever, is some second hand smoke really that big of a concern at that point?

Anonymous Sat Dec 31 03:31:58 2016 No.8419083

In what third world country do you live in where most bars don't allow smoking?

Its not a real bar if you have SJWs in it. Nearly 80% of the bars in the U.S. allow smoking, especially if they have an outside/open deck attached. You're going to the wrong places if it really cuts into your addiction that much.

Anonymous Sat Dec 31 03:37:50 2016 No.8419092

>>8419083

>nearly 80% of the bars in the U.S. allow smoking

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

No, leave your village some time.

>especially if they have an outside/open deck attached

That's considered smoking OUTSIDE. The question was smoking Inside of bars, which is illegal in the vast majority of the States, except in tobacco states, and in rare instances like tobacco/cigar bars/gentleman's clubs, which are definitely not the norm.

Anonymous Sat Dec 31 03:41:57 2016 No.8419095

>>8419092
I live outside Orlando and we go out downtown nearly every weekend. Almost all of the bars allow smoking. And even the ones that don't allow it, don't have the "smoking prohibited" signs. You can light up nearly anywhere and you may get one sly look, but thats about it. Never been told to put one out.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 03:45:28 2016 No.8419098 >>8419083 This is a huge fucking lie btw

Anonymous Sat Dec 31 03:47:25 2016 No.8419100
File: 28 KB, 643x212, fumer.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>8419095

>you're going to the wrong places if you can't light up inside

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHA

He doesn't even live in a state where it's legal, which would already have meant that he lives in a shithole; he actually just lives in the ghetto.

Anonymous Sat Dec 31 03:50:16 2016 No.8419106

>>8419100
>Statewide smoking ban excluding bars: On July 1, 2003, smoking was banned statewide in all enclosed workplaces in Florida, exempting private residences, retail tobacco shops, designated smoking rooms in hotels/motels, stand-alone bars with no more than 10% of revenue from food sales, rooms used for quit-smoking programs and medical research, and designated smoking areas in customs transit areas under the authority of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.[82] Local governments are preempted from regulating smoking.

All the bars downtown don't serve food. It's legal as fuck. Learn to read retard.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 03:55:29 2016 No.8419114 >>8419100 >he lives in a shithole; he actually just lives in the ghetto. great shot anon lol

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 04:03:03 2016 No.8419120 >>8419114 He'll claim he was trolling here in a sec

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 04:10:34 2016 No.8419136 >>8419120 Nah, pretty sure he was serious when he said he lived outside Orlando.

Anonymous Sat Dec 31 04:14:44 2016 No.8419140

You should be grateful you're allowed to smoke in public at all, dirty lungs. Don't worry, soon we'll make it illegal to smoke anywhere but your own home (unless there are non smokers, adult or children present). Smoking is literally the most retarded addiction, you're risking death to feel slightly relaxed.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 04:16:32 2016 No.8419143 >>8419140 good post.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 04:19:29 2016 No.8419150 >>8417966 >>8419140 >you're risking death to feel slightly relaxed. to back you up >>8417998 >>8418030 >>8418091

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 04:35:09 2016 No.8419179 >>8419140 >smoking is literally the most retarded addiction Far less retarded than sugar water aka soda aka pop aka beetus juice.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 04:36:36 2016 No.8419181 >>8416076 and alcoholism isn't? funny how they don't ban drinking in bars.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 04:47:05 2016 No.8419194 >>8419179 There's actually a safe level of consumption for those. There's no safe amount of smoking.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 04:52:01 2016 No.8419201 File: 26 KB, 353x400, 4604791[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8419194

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 04:56:48 2016 No.8419210 >>8419194 Except there is, next to the fact that smoking in small quantities seems to have positive effects on several chronic ailments, such as parkinsons.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 05:00:37 2016 No.8419215 I don't get the universal ban for it, they should let the bars pick whether smoking is allowed or not and have them put a sign up, just like they have the smoking not allowed ones. Maybe even have "smoking licenses" for bars.

Anonymous Sat Dec 31 05:05:45 2016 No.8419217

>>8419215
This, it would be a much saner approach. Just banning it everywhere only moves the smoking issue around, while it harms those businesses.

But the thing is, it's propaganda. Because the government decided "hurr durr smokins bad mkay" and they feel the need to force it down everyone's throats.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 05:05:56 2016 No.8419218 >>8419210 That's nicotine, you don't need to actually smoke.

Anonymous Sat Dec 31 05:07:10 2016 No.8419220

>>8419179
>>8419181
>>8419194
but when you drink alcohol or eat shitty foods you are not affecting others around you, but when smoking you blow your fucking smoke in the air
and others have to breath that shit poison
can't you grasp that simple difference

FUCK !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
PEOPLE USE BRAINS THEY ARE THERE FOR A REASON

Anonymous Sat Dec 31 05:12:23 2016 No.8419226

>>8419220

Read the thread, retard.

Smoking bans mean people are smoking on the sidewalks where everyone is getting second hand smoke, whereas smoking designated bars would mean that only adults who consent to enter those establishments would be affected.

Plus shitty foods are marketed to the ignorant masses and children, who often have few other choices and aren't even aware of them. Soda and junk food are responsible for far more health issues and deaths than tobacco at this point, and that's everybody's burden.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 05:18:08 2016 No.8419235 >>8416072 It's for your health goyim. Now drink 6 shots of whiskey and drive home

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 05:21:02 2016 No.8419238 >>8419226 I'm reading and following this thread from the very first post you uneducated pussy. you are dumber than the cigarette butt with your stupid reasoning.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 05:22:34 2016 No.8419239 >>8419238 >b-b-but i read the entire thread >proceeds to completely ignore all argument to the contrary and resort to ad hoc

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 05:25:48 2016 No.8419243 File: 11 KB, 228x216, 1475822005373.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8419238

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 05:26:01 2016 No.8419244 >>8419239 >>8419238 >you are dumber than the cigarette butt with your stupid reasoning read this again it's about you

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 05:28:24 2016 No.8419246 >>8419243 I think I hit the sensitive spot and the homos are fuming now. ha ha ha read again, >>8419238 >you are dumber than the cigarette butt with your stupid reasoning.

Anonymous Sat Dec 31 05:35:32 2016 No.8419255
File: 24 KB, 244x244, 1450999205757.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>8419246
Nah, just pointing out you're a faggot for ignoring every valid point made in this thread and trying to steamroll over it all with ad hoc insults.

Some in here might be as stupid as a cigarette butt, but you're about as intelligent as a donkey's butt.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 05:38:42 2016 No.8419262 >>8419210 WHAT A FUCKING RETARD

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 05:40:37 2016 No.8419264 >>8416466 No, it's true.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 05:46:13 2016 No.8419271 >>8419255 homo retard detected

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 06:39:50 2016 No.8419331 >>8419271 >>8419262 >>8419238 >>8419220 >being THIS triggered over cigs i thought i was on /ck/ most chefs and line cooks smoke, didn't know this board was full of spergie retards

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 08:22:17 2016 No.8419413 >>8419264 Its true like global warming is fake. The only people that believe it cling to discredited information because it directly benefits them to ignore the mountains of evidences against them

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 08:44:16 2016 No.8419435 >>8416108 >Everyone going to a restaurant expects clean dishes and >healthy ventilation yeah, hence the smoking ban

Anonymous Sat Dec 31 10:31:50 2016 No.8419554

>>8419238
Fuck off cunt. Either post a single article from a respected journal claiming there is irrefutable evidence that second hand smoking is a heath risk for non smokers or shut the fuck up.

Why do ignorant people hold so strong opinions on topics they don't know shit about?

Anonymous Sat Dec 31 13:40:44 2016 No.8419889

>>8418604
>The "secondhand smoke" public safety argument filling up 3/4 of this thread is a distraction.
Not really. It may just be a minor health risk, but once it could be proven to be a real one there was some actual footing for legislation beyond mere nuisance.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 19:05:09 2016 No.8420510 >>8419554 here homo shit I'm going to provide you with a tool so you can find all the scientific research on second hand smoking GOOGLE

Anonymous Sat Dec 31 19:19:06 2016 No.8420541

>>8416072

The ban on indoor smoking was the best thing to ever happen to bars because it enabled anyone who hates second-hand smoke to enjoy those establishments.

Bitch about "muh freedoms" all you want, but if you were a bar owner, then you'd want to attract and keep as many customers as possible by keeping the place smelling clean and fresh.

Smokers are really fucking whiny.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 19:32:49 2016 No.8420563 >>8420541 >but if you were a bar owner, then you'd want to attract and keep as many customers as possible Stop projecting. You can't speak for every bar owner like you know what their mindset and history is.

Anonymous Sat Dec 31 19:36:18 2016 No.8420572

>>8416336
>CONSENT to enter a smoky bar
>did not consent to arsenic being put in my food

You are severely retarded for using that analogy. You can easily deduce that people are smoking in a bar, you can not easily deduce if your food is poisoned. Kill yourself.

Anonymous Sat Dec 31 19:51:52 2016 No.8420600

>>8420541
>Smokers are really fucking whiny.
Anon your whole post is exxxcellent
but this line is the best summation of smokers I ever read.

Thank you.

BTW if any of the "fucking whiners smokers" can post list of bars that closed down because their business went down because of smoking ban.
Get to work you fucking whiners, search the bankruptcy data

Anonymous Sat Dec 31 19:52:21 2016 No.8420601

>>8420572
Except when its legal bar owners assume everyone wants to participate in all the debauchery even though only a few people actually want to smoke people withstand it because they want to club or drink. When its illegal you have a minority that bitch but all the other people are happy about it. It was the same problem in Japan, smoking is on the decline but they haven't yet made it illegal

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 19:55:42 2016 No.8420613 REMINDER that lot's of the smokers whiners posting here are actually shills for the BIG Tobacco. That's a fact.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 20:00:01 2016 No.8420620 >>8420601 >people withstand it because they want to club or drink So mentally healthy adults consented to being around smoke when they were fully aware of the situation.

Anonymous Sat Dec 31 20:03:39 2016 No.8420627

>>8420541
Oh yeah, you really smell clean and fresh. You showered in a chemical bath of soap and shampoo that marketing told you would attract men and then spritzed on some alphanumeric, celebrity of the day, perfume.

Jeez, you're about as attractive as a Mississippi dump site.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 20:05:39 2016 No.8420630 >>8420541 >but if you were a bar owner, then you'd want to attract and keep as many customers as possible by keeping the place smelling clean and fresh. Then ban smokers as the bar owner. You're well within your rights to do that and you should be.

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 20:06:02 2016 No.8420631 >>8420627 homo turd detected

>>	Anonymous Sat Dec 31 20:17:49 2016 No.8420660 File: 318 KB, 1024x546, Man with a hole in his throat due to cancer .jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>8416072 Woman Who Smoked thru Hole on Throat, Smoking Commercial: Debi Austin Dies at 62. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_p-V8Dp7n4Q

>>	Anonymous Sun Jan 1 01:50:34 2017 No.8421342 >>8416072 >tfw your state has exemptions for indoor cigar parlors and private bars Feels good man

>>	Anonymous Sun Jan 1 11:45:58 2017 No.8421966 REMINDER that lot's of the authoritarian whiners posting here are actually shills for the BIG Government

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]