Killing through drink-driving is indirect. My point was that nobody is harmed simply from a person drinking (i.e. the action of tipping the beverage down your throat), whereas people are harmed from second-hand smoke.

I agree with you on the campaigns thing. Promoting the dangers of smoking should be the aim of the campaign, not to smear the people who decide to endanger their lives; that is their liberty.

If you watch Penn & Teller's bullshit, they have an episode on smoking. It's one of their more controversial episodes because they try to make a case that second hand smoking is not that bad. I don't agree with their argument and research has come out since then that effectively disproves their premise, but I do agree with one aspect of their argument. If a privately owned restaurant wants to offer a smoking facility, they should be allowed to do so. Maybe through a similarly regulated alcohol license.

Penn & Teller said at TAM! 3 that there was new evidence suggesting second-hand smoking was dangerous: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit!#Secondhand_smoke

Anyway, I disagree with your argument that privately owned restaurants should be able to offer smoking facilities. A restaurant is there to provide food. If it allows smoking then it is impeding on the liberties of the non-smoking public. Which is the better outcome? That smokers are told to go outside (or even to a separate room), or non-smokers are told to go find another restaurant? Smoking isn't the norm, and it is quite clear that smoking is a choice that affects personal liberties of other people. Putting a dangerous choice above that of the default non-smoking position is simply ludicrous when it comes to restaurants.

Now I would agree on some kind of smoking establishment, but in all honesty I think most would prefer to step outside for a smoke rather than go to somewhere like that.

I wouldn't mind smokers being 25 feet away from buildings. I'm sick of inhaling it every time I pass the Bingo -_-

I personally prefer smoking outside. I'm saying if a privately owned bar or restaurant had patronage consisting primarily of smokers who collectively want a smoking establishment, they should be allowed to petition for a smoking license and become a smoking establishment. Just as smokers would have to go somewhere else for a smoking establishement, so would non-smokers. That seems relatively fair to me.

This is where I think there was some serious money to be made for restaurant owners when I was like 10 - 12 years old. If a restaurant owner decided to open a restaurant targetting specifically customers who are asthmatic or otherwise allergic to smoke, they would have made a killing, and no one would have felt their rights violated. It is acknowledging that not every can sit in a regular bar or restaurant for truthful reasons giving them a good place to eat and drink, but not threading on the rights of the (back then) majority of smokers.

(June 29, 2009 at 1:24 pm)Eilonnwy Wrote: I personally prefer smoking outside. I'm saying if a privately owned bar or restaurant had patronage consisting primarily of smokers who collectively want a smoking establishment, they should be allowed to petition for a smoking license and become a smoking establishment. Just as smokers would have to go somewhere else for a smoking establishement, so would non-smokers. That seems relatively fair to me.

I fully agree.

Personally I wish smoking were outlawed completely for a number of reasons (and these are just some of them).

• You often get pressured into doing it by peers.
  
• It's fucking expensive ... try giving up for a period and then realise what you can buy with it!
  
• It is a burden on the the health service (yes I know it generates taxes but does that money really go to the health service?)
  
• It's extremely painful for the affected and distressing for friends and relatives to see people they know dying of related illnesses (my father died of lung cancer and he did so in a fairly horrifying manner).
  
• It's a complete bastard to give up ... even though I've "given up" for nearly 5 years I still sneak the occasional freeman's OP.
  
• It's dirty ... I so love the fact that I come back from the pub and none of my clothes smell of the shit other people want to indulge in.
  
• It's ugly ... it stains your skin, your teeth, it ages you prematurely.
  
• You taste like a fucking ash tray.

Let's not fool ourselves people ... this isn't a question of rights, it's an issue of addiction, exploitation, stupidity, filth and how to kill yourself painfully and not look cool doing it.

Kyu

(June 29, 2009 at 4:07 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: Personally I wish smoking were outlawed completely for a number of reasons (and these are just some of them).
[...]
Kyu

I may be completely off the mark with this one, but didn't they try that in the USA with alcohol and suddenly crime rates sky-rocketed? Prohibition or something. I could imagine quite a similar reaction with cigarettes. The business would relocate from the store fronts to the back alleys.

The only thing that prohibition solves is...wait, scratch that...prohibition solves nothing. It creates the illusion that something has been solved but in reality everything is exactly the same.