New smoking restrictions in Washington. Oh boy!

People in WA state receiving housing assistance can no longer smoke within 25 feet of any building entrance in any of the state's subsidized housing programs.
:rolleyes:
They said "they hope it will push people to quit smoking".
Yes, but what they don't realize is we're practically paying the state the funding they need to provide subsidized housing out of the taxes they take out of our cigarettes ALONE.
Per pack of 20 cigs they charge us $3.5 dollars or so for state taxes.
Of which, 51.6 cents goes to the state's trust account to support education enhancement, and $2.5 dollars goes to the state's general fund, which supports "most state services".
In the fiscal year '09 392.4 million was generated in tax dollars alone.
So I'm wondering, if they win and finally ban smoking in WA state, where will they make up that 392.4 million dollars, of which roughly 156.96 million dollars goes towards general state funding?
As for second hand smoking, I'm not one of the people to deny the evidence that second hand smoking is harmful. Clearly if you inhale smoke, you are at risk for cancer over a prolonged period of time; however, I'd like to see a study where someone died from second hand smoke WITHOUT working somewhere that was often full of smoke from cigarettes or cigars, etc.
Meaning, has anyone ever died just from passing by the same person smoking a cigarette everday, on the way to their car?
I doubt it.
You'd have to stand in a bar for 12 hours a day breathing in the smoke of at least 3 people smoking right next to you to inhale an amount that would noticeably increase your mortality.
For this reason I certainly don't support smoking in bars. It's just not fair to those who may work in the bar, or in a nursing home where patients can smoke openly, it's not fair to the workers there either.
But smoking outside your door? I think that would be ok. Smoking in your own apartment that you pay for? You'd think it would be ok.
Even not smoking inside your apartment, I can understand the fire hazard, and besides, kids shouldn't be around the smoke in a house, and it IS expensive to eradicate a smell (debate on this later....).
But you shouldn't have to go 25 FEET AWAY from all entrances. That's ridiculous. And it doesn't solve anything.
As for eradicating the smell, who says because of a smell they can make something illegal?
Oh, man, if this was the case all the time life would be amazing--people would be required to shower once daily because their odor is offensive if they don't, change clothes daily, no perfume or cologne that is government approved to not be offensive, and in controlled amounts as well.
Not to mention, and no offense to anyone here--obesity...Are we going to make those overweight people who may choose not to change their lifestyle, and to simply eat lots of food, suffer also? (I know that it's rare that anybody just eats food all day...) Start taxing people's food based on how much they weigh?
I heard a restaurant told a customer to leave the other day because they thought she was too obese to be eating and they suggested she get healthier food.
:O
Now, please don't take all that the wrong way--I know many of you here, and I know many people in my life, who are overweight and it ISN'T a choice. The only possible choice could be the choice to try to change your issues...I was making a point about simply restricting people's choices based on the health conditions their choices may cause.

This new ban in Washington affects medical marijuana smokers and prevents the burning of incense.
Ok, but medical marijuana smokers have a prescription to smoke what they do. Can I now make a law preventing people from taking prescribed painkillers in their apartment?
Painkillers account for a large majority of addictions nationwide, since they are mentally and physically addicting themselves.
:confused:
Just my thoughts. I didn't mean to offend anyone, and I hope I didn't. I'm just angry and concerned about where this money is going to come from...
:rolleye2:
Shellie

If people quit smoking maybe they could afford their own dwelling. Food for thought.

Regards,

B

Well, if you figure one month of rent in low income housing is $250, and cigarettes are $80 a carton here, and a heavy smoker smokes 3 cartons a month, that's only $240 per month they'd save, which isn't enough for an apartment, let alone bills and food.
But that is a good point. It's close, very close indeed.

Honestly, I smoke, and I wouldn't mind quitting. I'm just worried where the money will come from to replace the smoking tax...and of course, if we allow gov't to stick their hands here, they'll stick it there, too. :/
Guess I've got a little paranoia going on, perhaps.

I understand. I was only half serious :) I'm fully against the government getting involved any more than they already are. In fact I'm all for reducing government. Less government, less taxes! But they will find somewhere to get the taxes. Washington always does!

Regards,

B

you guys are silly. The money would be returned via taxes made by the extended life that would occur from people that quit smoking. People that dont smoke live longer, and spend less time in the hospital. This equals more working hours, spending and taxes. This would far exceed the savings that would be received from taxing the cigarettes.

But people who smoke generally draw less social security because they do not live as long and we all know that fund is broken. Just playing devils advocate I personally am all for the government butting out of peoples lives for the most part. I personally don't smoke but I have a lot of friends that do and it doesn't bother me. I know this is a hot topic pretty much all over the country and I can see both sides.

Addiction = fail.

Smokers have stupid logic.

My roommate quit smoking for a few months, then started back up, only smoking a few a day... so he says its not that bad.

Except... he was smoking 0 a day before, therefor IT IS.

Smoking is a very expensive habit, and not worth one penny of it.

and shellie, "wouldnt mind quitting".... your not going to quit thinking like that. Good job giving it somewhat of a thought though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shelliebear

Well, if you figure one month of rent in low income housing is $250, and cigarettes are $80 a carton here, and a heavy smoker smokes 3 cartons a month, that's only $240 per month they'd save, which isn't enough for an apartment, let alone bills and food.
But that is a good point. It's close, very close indeed.

---

$240 saved from smoking, plus the $250 they were already paying for rent. Do apartments really cost more than $490 a month out there? That's enough for a house in most parts of Michigan.

My brother and his fiance were getting DSHS, WIC food stamps, etc while she was pregnant and the lowest apartment they could get was $450 a month for a tiny two bedroom. :(
They're pricey.
They were both working at mickie d's too. :/

Here's an idea...don't smoke..problem solved. Its not an addiction, it's a habit, and I stand by that very truly. I smoked from the age of 16 to the age of 21 and I went up and down in the amount I smoked from a few cigs a week to a pack or two a day. At the end of my smoking career I was smoking a pack a day...finally when I paid $7.10 for a pack of camels I decided that enough was enough and it was my last pack, ever since then I have not smoked a single cigarette. Not even that bullcrap excuse of smoking when drinking.. It's not cool to smoke, it's disgusting. If you say you smoke socially then you need to figure some stuff out cuz that's the weakest excuse of them all. So here's an idea..put the cigarettes down because all you're doing is wasting money and subtracting years from your life.

Just my :twocents:

Some very good points here. The only way somebody will quit smoking is if they can find a good enough reason to stop. I wish there were no cigs even though I used to smoke. It is nasty!
Shelliebear, your family that are both living on govt. assistance and working at Mcd's would fare better if they learned a trade. 4 year college is not for everybody, but maybe they can learn something practical so they do not have to live off the bottom of the barrel and spend their only money on smokes. They can then get their own apartment, with their own money. It is always worth a shot!

They have their own apartment. :confused:

Good thing they don't live in Georgia (metro Atlanta). One bedrooms start at $650.

They have their own apartment, or is it subsidised by the government?

I am so glad I never started smoking and all of my friends and family have quit on their own.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m00kfu

$240 saved from smoking, plus the $250 they were already paying for rent. Do apartments really cost more than $490 a month out there? That's enough for a house in most parts of Michigan.

---

Am I the only one that thinks that $490 is a steal on an apartment? I guess my judgement of apartment prices is a little muddied from my jaded California living but that is an AWESOME price to me. To be completely candid, I'm paying $1125 a month plus $45 pet rent and $180 in utilities. I NEED TO MOVE.. :rage::rage:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RuthlessReptiles

Am I the only one that thinks that $490 is a steal on an apartment? I guess my judgement of apartment prices is a little muddied from my jaded California living but that is an AWESOME price to me. To be completely candid, I'm paying $1125 a month plus $45 pet rent and $180 in utilities. I NEED TO MOVE.. :rage::rage:

---

Not just you, I live near Seattle and pay about the same. :)

Sent from my HTC Vision using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MissDizzyBee

Not just you, I live near Seattle and pay about the same. :)

Sent from my HTC Vision using Tapatalk

---

x3
rent in Toronto is through the roof. you can spend 2 or even 3k a month here for a nice 1 bdrm.:mad:

I don't post much at all here - mostly just read.

I don't understand the logic of smoking at all. In essence, you are burning dollar bills every time you light up. On top of that, you take a shower, step out all clean, then smoke and smell terrible again.

I have never understood the attraction at all. That is my number one turnoff. It is just plain nasty.

My sister smokes, and a not too long ago asked me for help with her bills. I told her as soon as she quit spending money on smoking I might think about helping her, but as long as she is wasting money like that she needs to look elsewhere for a handout. She and her husband spend hundreds of dollars a month on cigarettes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by knox

I don't post much at all here - mostly just read.

I don't understand the logic of smoking at all. In essence, you are burning dollar bills every time you light up. On top of that, you take a shower, step out all clean, then smoke and smell terrible again.

I have never understood the attraction at all. That is my number one turnoff. It is just plain nasty.

My sister smokes, and a not too long ago asked me for help with her bills. I told her as soon as she quit spending money on smoking I might think about helping her, but as long as she is wasting money like that she needs to look elsewhere for a handout. She and her husband spend hundreds of dollars a month on cigarettes.

---

Most, if not all, of the people I know who do smoke got into it at the suggestion of a friend and don't stop because of the anxiety cause by trying to undo a habit. Its uncomfortable for them to not have it in their hand, to use smoke breaks for interaction, to follow in all the steps they've walked in for so many years.

Sent from my HTC Vision using Tapatalk

Anyone who stands out in the freezing cold and rain, shaking and shivering because the "need" a smoke break has more issues than just smoking.

I could never be a slave to cigarettes. And that's what they are, slaves. They HAVE to smoke - can't wait till they get the opportunity again, even if it is dead of winter and they have to huddle outside in a corner.

A very strange behavior...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Powerspythons

Here's an idea...don't smoke..problem solved. Its not an addiction, it's a habit, and I stand by that very truly.

Just my :twocents:

---

Ummm....wrong. Nicotine is a physically addicting chemical. Habituation is the secondary component that reinforces the addiction.

Most smokers won't be satisfied by simply ingesting nicotine to satisfy the addiction, because the act of smoking (or chewing) is a powerful reward mechanism in and of itself.

But the fact remains that nicotine (hence the use of tobacco products) is physically addicting.

Disclaimer: I quit in 2004 after 30 years of smoking.

Nicotine is without a doubt physically addictive. And smoking cigarettes causes a dependency that is not to be underestimated. I consider myself to be a strong stubborn person who should not be able to be controlled by any substance. In fact years ago I quite cold turkey using some of the most addictive drugs on the planet once I realized what they were doing to my life. I’m not saying it wasn’t hard but I just decided I wasn’t going to use them anymore and that was that. It’s been almost a decade since I even thought about using any of those drugs. Cigarettes on the other hand are a different matter. I’ve tried quitting and it’s hell, the thought of going without smokes scares me even more then all the health risks and wasted money that come from smoking. To all of you that can’t understand why people would choose to continue to smoke when we know how bad it is for you, awesome, count your blessings. Because you will never understand an addiction unless you suffer from that addiction, there is nothing to understand, there is no logic to it. I truly wish I could go back in time and give my young self a shake and stop myself before I ever got started smoking in the first place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shelliebear

Honestly, I smoke, and I wouldn't mind quitting. I'm just worried where the money will come from to replace the smoking tax...and of course, if we allow gov't to stick their hands here, they'll stick it there, too. :/
Guess I've got a little paranoia going on, perhaps.

---

If the government wants your money, they will get it one-way-or-another.

It seems odd to target one group like that where I live the law is no smoking within 6m (20 feet) of ANY door or window. That is everybody everywhere. The cost calculations here are that the average cigarette costs the tax payer something like 86$ per cigarette. We have government health care the figure comes from the average number of cigarettes a smoker will smoke over ten years and the average number that get a smoke related cancer and the average cost of treatment.

About ten years ago the health minister was an Oncologist with a speciality in lung cancer. He tried (almost succeeded too) to put the price of a pack of cigarettes up to 90$ a pack. He did not get enough votes but it was close.

I am sorry if I upset the smokers but it is filthy, and kills large amounts of people everyday. If I can up with a food that had as high a chance today it would never be allowed to be sold at all.

Dip all you want, chew all you want. Just don't make me smell and breathe that nasty stuff that you are sucking and blowing everywhere. That's where your rights end and mine begin.

I just want to say, KUDOS to any and all that at least try to quit or think about it. I do realize how hard it must be.

I'm very glad I've never gotten into it because I see people struggle with it, I've seen them get killed by it. I've seen them keep smoking while it was actively killing them.
Terrible thing.

So to anyone that wants to quit, tries to quit, no matter how many times they've tried and failed and try again. KUDOS ! Don't give up.

Both of my parents died from smoking. My father at 52, my mother at 63.

I wish they would raise the taxes higher and make them $20 a pack. The sad thing is that people would STILL smoke. And worse, start committing robbery and burglary to get them.

I work with many cardiologists, and the effect on the heart is as devastating as on the lungs.

I'm sorry the issue here is not money or health of smokers or nonsmokers. It isn't taxes or money saved to buy other things. If it was they would simply outlaw cigarettes. The issue is the government once again telling people what they can and cannot do. How long will it be before someone hits on something the rest of us enjoy doing. Sunbathers will be told they cannot get a tan because it is bad for your skin, or you cannot fry foods any more because it raises cholesterol. I saw on a news report the other day that said hot dogs are better for you than chicken. Does that mean we are all going to be forced to eat hot dogs by legislation. PEOPLE we need to wake up. It is time we took the Government pacifier out of our mouths and told the politicians to leave us alone. There is nothing wrong with telling people this is bad or that is bad. But government crosses the line when they pass laws that limit freedom...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tonkatoyman

I'm sorry the issue here is not money or health of smokers or nonsmokers. It isn't taxes or money saved to buy other things. If it was they would simply outlaw cigarettes. The issue is the government once again telling people what they can and cannot do. How long will it be before someone hits on something the rest of us enjoy doing. Sunbathers will be told they cannot get a tan because it is bad for your skin, or you cannot fry foods any more because it raises cholesterol. I saw on a news report the other day that said hot dogs are better for you than chicken. Does that mean we are all going to be forced to eat hot dogs by legislation. PEOPLE we need to wake up. It is time we took the Government pacifier out of our mouths and told the politicians to leave us alone. There is nothing wrong with telling people this is bad or that is bad. But government crosses the line when they pass laws that limit freedom...

---

As I said above, the rights of smokers ends where the rights of non smokers begins. We shouldn't have to breathe that crap while we are trying to eat, or walk into a building, or through a park. THAT is my biggest complaint about smoking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by knox

As I said above, the rights of smokers ends where the rights of non smokers begins. We shouldn't have to breathe that crap while we are trying to eat, or walk into a building, or through a park. THAT is my biggest complaint about smoking.

---

As a nonsmoker who has been to other countries that do not restrict smoking in public building I completely understand. I have walked into restaurants that had a blue haze hanging over the room. You could not breath. However how far is too far in limiting human behavior. Second hand smoke in a crowded room is far different than catching a whiff as you walk by entering a building. If we are going to limit behavior because of smells where do we stop. I don't like stepping in doody from other peoples dogs and smelling it, does that mean I have a right to tell people who live in a city they cannot have dogs. I don't like the smell of some foods cooking it makes me nauseous. Does that mean I have the right to limit what people cook in high rise apartments... Again how far is to far. Walk by an alley where there is rotting garbage infested with rats that are unhealthy. Do we outlaw the disposal of garbage. You do not like the smell of smoke. Neither do I. Just because you and I disapprove of a habit or dislike the smell does not give us the right to limit its behavior beyond what clearly constitutes a danger it others. Walking by a smoker in a park or in front of a building doesn't fit the criteria. Next we will be told what behaviors we can and cannot do in our homes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by knox

As I said above, the rights of smokers ends where the rights of non smokers begins. We shouldn't have to breathe that crap while we are trying to eat, or walk into a building, or through a park. THAT is my biggest complaint about smoking.

---

I agree with this.
I'm totally AGAINST the Government sticking their nose into everything, too, but the above quote is my beef as well.

I'm very sensitive to cig smoke and it seems to get worse. It makes my eyes water and my throat close up and itch. And it doesn't take much of it for that to happen.

I spent time at a friends house and she can't ever air out her living room because that window is on the side of the house where the smokers sit (there is a little courtyard with benches) and the smoke and smell will drift right into the room. It actually seems to find a way into her apartment with the window closed...

Why should non-smokers have to put up with this ? It DOES smell really bad to non-smokers, and for some (like me) it goes beyond the smell.

I'm not a raving ranting anti smoke activist at all, but I don't want to limit MY freedom, so they can have theirs smoking where they want, or have their smoke drift into others apartments. Its a smell that is extremely penetrating and hard to get rid off.

Only thing is, I doubt the government only has the best interest of the non-smokers in mind, LOL.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tonkatoyman

As a nonsmoker who has been to other countries that do not restrict smoking in public building I completely understand. I have walked into restaurants that had a blue haze hanging over the room. You could not breath. However how far is too far in limiting human behavior. Second hand smoke in a crowded room is far different than catching a whiff as you walk by entering a building. If we are going to limit behavior because of smells where do we stop. I don't like stepping in doody from other peoples dogs and smelling it, does that mean I have a right to tell people who live in a city they cannot have dogs. I don't like the smell of some foods cooking it makes me nauseous. Does that mean I have the right to limit what people cook in high rise apartments... Again how far is to far. Walk by an alley where there is rotting garbage infested with rats that are unhealthy. Do we outlaw the disposal of garbage. You do not like the smell of smoke. Neither do I. Just because you and I disapprove of a habit or dislike the smell does not give us the right to limit its behavior beyond what clearly constitutes a danger it others. Walking by a smoker in a park or in front of a building doesn't fit the criteria. Next we will be told what behaviors we can and cannot do in our homes.

---

I agree with you on everything. But, I have actually witnessed that smokers smoking near the building DOES make the smoke enter the apartments next to it. And not just a "whiff" since the smokers don't just smoke for 1 min the day.

Its actually quite the problem, the smell (smoke) does enter and it sticks. Very much so. And to a non smoker its quite bothersome. So I do understand the rule that they shouldn't smoke right by buildings doors and windows...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zina10

I agree with you on everything. But, I have actually witnessed that smokers smoking near the building DOES make the smoke enter the apartments next to it. And not just a "whiff" since the smokers don't just smoke for 1 min the day.

Its actually quite the problem, the smell (smoke) does enter and it sticks. Very much so. And to a non smoker its quite bothersome. So I do understand the rule that they shouldn't smoke right by buildings doors and windows...

---

Zina I agree with you that the smoke gets every where. I agree that there are some situations where people should be more considerate of others when it comes to putting out their foul smelling smoke. Smokers need to recognize that everyone else dislikes what they do. Reptile people face this all the time. People do not appreciate what we do, or the pets we keep, some even disapprove of raising rats to feed snakes, so we as considerate individuals usually go above and beyond to accommodate them when they are around us.
My point is NOT the foul smell or the allergic reaction some people have or how it is bad for your health. My point is that the government should be limited in what they can and cannot legislate when it comes to personal behavior because they do not know where to stop.
Take as a case in point your friend with the apartment. forget that the problem is smoking, insert any other behavior, loud music, screaming all hours of the night, dog odor, pungent food odor, etc. No one would look to the government to solve the problem. They would take the issue up with first the individual and then the apartment management. If the problem could not be resolved, they would look for another place to live that was better suited to them. But insert the word smoker (which is a perfectly legal habit) and suddenly we look to government to intervene. As a next step do we eliminate the use of perfumes because some people in crowded elevators have a problem with them....when government starts down a road they do not know where to stop.

tonkatoyman,
I see your point but people do actually live in apartment buildings on the ground floor. I used to and could not open my windows in the summer as there were smokers outside all day every day. I have no rights too? By your logic if I stood outside a door splashing a carcinogenic chemical around and you had to walk through it that is ok too right? It isn't smell that is the problem it is a carcinogen, second hand smoke IS a cancer causing agent. I am glad that I live where there are laws to protect my health and my rights!

The thing that pisses me off so much around this issue is that the smokers whom are so lazy that they have to light up just outside the door have absolutely no respect or consideration for others. They simply do not care at all, it is so self centred. Is it so much to ask that they walk away from the windows and doors of other peoples homes and offices? Would those smokers just start smoking in your home with out asking too?

Not all smokers do, many walk away from the building and don't toss butts all over the place and actually care about the rest of us, I have no beef with them. I am sorry it doesn't seem like it is such a big deal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shelliebear

I'd like to see a study where someone died from second hand smoke WITHOUT working somewhere that was often full of smoke from cigarettes or cigars, etc.

---

My brother's high school friend died from lung cancer three years ago. He was 24.

He grew up in a house where both parents smoked, but he never touched any smokables in his life.

This doesn't invalidate your point that walking past somebody smoking outside (how much more ventilated can you get than BEING OUTSIDE?) is significantly safer than being in a smoke-filled room indoors. I just wanted to give one example where it is believed that 2nd hand smoke probably contributed to the death of someone who did not WORK around smoke.

Anyhoo, I applaud smokers for smoking outdoors, but it just really sucks for the rest of the population who finds exposure to it PHYSICALLY offensive to have to walk through a cloud of smoldering tar every time they want to enter a building.

One of my hobbies is making fishing lures. To make the soft plastic fishing lures, I have to heat a product usually refered to as "plastisol" to 350 degrees, via hot plate or microwave. During this process, carcinogens in the form of vapors are produced. While dangerous, it has shown to be safer than smoking, but I still wear a vapor-protection mask and would NEVER subject my neighbors to it. I only pour outdoors, on my GF's parents' private land where THEIR nearest neighbor is about 5 miles away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kitedemon

tonkatoyman,
I see your point but people do actually live in apartment buildings on the ground floor. I used to and could not open my windows in the summer as there were smokers outside all day every day. I have no rights too? By your logic if I stood outside a door splashing a carcinogenic chemical around and you had to walk through it that is ok too right? It isn't smell that is the problem it is a carcinogen, second hand smoke IS a cancer causing agent. I am glad that I live where there are laws to protect my health and my rights!

The thing that pisses me off so much around this issue is that the smokers whom are so lazy that they have to light up just outside the door have absolutely no respect or consideration for others. They simply do not care at all, it is so self centred. Is it so much to ask that they walk away from the windows and doors of other peoples homes and offices? Would those smokers just start smoking in your home with out asking too?

Not all smokers do, many walk away from the building and don't toss butts all over the place and actually care about the rest of us, I have no beef with them. I am sorry it doesn't seem like it is such a big deal.

---

Folks, Please understand I am well aware of the dangers of smoking. I am an ex-smoker from many years ago who watched his father take breathing treatments just so he could smoke one more cig. And you are right many smokers are very inconsiderate. But lets put your comments into perspective. You said if "I were splashing carcinogen around"...that clearly falls under the danger to humans I stated earlier. Yes you have rights too. How ever you also have the responsibility to do your due diligence prior to leasing.
If cigarettes are that big a concern to you do you say the government must out law all smoking where ever I want to be. Or do you see to it you live in a building that does not allow smokers where you will be affected. If you choose the first then whats next on the I don't want that around list. If the second then the government has no business legislating this.

Seems to me the problem is with those doing the smoking.

If you want to use a drug, government sanctioned and taxed or not, some consideration of those not addicted to your poison would be considerate.

How many considerate people, considerate of strangers not their friends, do you know? Now, how many of them are smokers?

The government is getting involved because nicotine addicts are not considerate of those who do not share their problem.

I was at a restaurant recently, Sunday Morning Breakfast with my offspring. We go to a Mom and Pop place that generally has a bit of a line. We wait patiently if we must. Some yahoo a few feet back need a fix so he fires up. He's outside but not only is he upwind, meaning his smoke is blowing towards the rest of us in line, he's 'considerate' of his fellow linestanders.

Of course by 'considerate' I mean he totally ignored the looks of most of those in the line who were not smoking but irritated, annoyed and made stinky by HIS addiction. I watched this, being annoyed myself as his smoke was blowing right in the door which I was standing just inside of. I was giving this guy a good stare, and those who know me know he didn't miss it, though he pretended to.

So, I walked out there, asked him why EVERYONE in line had to smoke with him and how about he move down the sidewalk and out of the wind.

He did and several of the ACTUAL considerate folks, none of whom were smoking, thanked me for speaking up.

One guy who needed a fix discomforted at least a dozen people in line plus those inside who had to breathe his second hand smoke, which HAS been proven to cause cancer, and no one said squat because ..... well I can only assume because they figured anyone rude and inconsiderate enough to engage in such a foul smelling habit in such a densely packed area would not be receptive to those who did not share his addiction and had the gumption to ask him to stop or move.

This is not the first or second or third time I've seen this type of thing. One person with a drug addiction tossing common courtesy out the metaphorical window to get a fix.

Therein lies the problem with smokers.

You don't see Junkies shooting up whilst awaiting the breaking of their fast. You don't see caffine jockeys poisoning strangers to get their magical elixir. It's just the nicotine junkies.

Get them to have some consideration and maybe big brother wouldn't have any cause to pay attention at all.

It's easy to hate smoking, and say just to stop, when you don't smoke. Quitting is the hardest thing I've ever tried to do. Ever. I get a carton for only $20, so it's not that expensive either. There are a lot of other bad habits that are much more expensive.

I hate smoke. Lol. It's the nicotine I want. I don't smoke in public, and have a hard time smoking around nonsmokers. I don't smoke in my house. I have rules for my habit. Honestly, I don't think smoking is the worst thing I could have attached myself too. I'm not a big drinker, I've never done drugs. I wear my seat belt, and try to eat healthy.

My Grandpa never smoked a day in his life and died of lung cancer at 56. A friend from high school quit, and was hit by a bus 2 weeks later. We're all going down someday. My problem is that i have a high metabolism, fast heart rate, and terrible ADD. I'm frightened to be put on meds. Smoking, calms me down.

I'm not saying smoking is a good thing. It's not. But it's here. I don't think forcing people to quit is the right answer. $90 a pack? No, I wouldn't still buy cigs. I would have to force myself to quit. But, what's next? Are we going to ban everything that's bad for us? Soda, Fast Food, yummy whiskey? Give the smokers a place to go. Like their own building or something. Some place that offers free nicotine patches, and gum. Support trying to quit, not forcing it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tonkatoyman

the government has no business legislating this.

---

Ummmmm, who makes it a legal drug? Isn't that the government? Who benefits from the taxes? Who KNOWS the costs associated with treatment of diseases KNOWN to be caused by smoking yet continues to allow easy access?

I think that's the government.

What they have no business doing is sanctioning a known killer, highly addictive, horrifically expensive both in money and lives/families lost, drug.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wilomn

How many considerate people, considerate of strangers not their friends, do you know? Now, how many of them are smokers?

The government is getting involved because nicotine addicts are not considerate of those who do not share their problem.

---

What a load of crock. Maybe not everyone is considerate, but that doesn't mean that everyone is inconsiderate. I do not smoke in public, ever. I try really hard to control it. It's my habit, my choice. A choice that I want to be able to make. I can't quit by being forced. It will be my decision, not someone else's.

I do get the point about Government sticking its nose everywhere, and I agree thats a slippery slope.

But I feel that cig smoke IS a step above "just" offensive odor.

Dog Doo, perfume, all these smells can be offensive, no doubt. But they aren't as dangerous to the health (although gross and perfumes CAN trigger headaches). Plus they don't seem to linger like Cig smoke.

I don't know what it is about cig smoke, but it seems to be the most penetrating and long lasting stuff there is. Its like cat pee in the way that it seems impossible to get rid off unless you go to great measures like tearing out carpet, painting walls, changing fabrics.
When I get mail from smokers, it makes my eyes tear !! Its incredible how strong it is. When I had a smoker visit the house, it reeked even though she smoked outside. I had to wash the linen 3 x . No joke. Each time the wash was finished the washer reeked of it upon opening. Even after 3 washings the smell was there when opening the dryer.

And its not "just" the smell. Thats just on top of the health concern. I guess what really gets me are the smokers that have zero regards for the non-smokers.

I think compromises can be found, and NOONE should have their health and well being affected because of someone elses guilty pleasure.

I wish the government would stay out of it. But on the other hands, if so, then there would still be smoking in restaurants, and everywhere else. Because as its been said, it seems incredibly hard to quit and most people would not quit smoking in public places simply out of consideration to others, I'm afraid...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wilomn

Seems to me the problem is with those doing the smoking.

If you want to use a drug, government sanctioned and taxed or not, some consideration of those not addicted to your poison would be considerate.

How many considerate people, considerate of strangers not their friends, do you know? Now, how many of them are smokers?

The government is getting involved because nicotine addicts are not considerate of those who do not share their problem.

I was at a restaurant recently, Sunday Morning Breakfast with my offspring. We go to a Mom and Pop place that generally has a bit of a line. We wait patiently if we must. Some yahoo a few feet back need a fix so he fires up. He's outside but not only is he upwind, meaning his smoke is blowing towards the rest of us in line, he's 'considerate' of his fellow linestanders.

Of course by 'considerate' I mean he totally ignored the looks of most of those in the line who were not smoking but irritated, annoyed and made stinky by HIS addiction. I watched this, being annoyed myself as his smoke was blowing right in the door which I was standing just inside of. I was giving this guy a good stare, and those who know me know he didn't miss it, though he pretended to.

So, I walked out there, asked him why EVERYONE in line had to smoke with him and how about he move down the sidewalk and out of the wind.

He did and several of the ACTUAL considerate folks, none of whom were smoking, thanked me for speaking up.

One guy who needed a fix discomforted at least a dozen people in line plus those inside who had to breathe his second hand smoke, which HAS been proven to cause cancer, and no one said squat because ..... well I can only assume because they figured anyone rude and inconsiderate enough to engage in such a foul smelling habit in such a densely packed area would not be receptive to those who did not share his addiction and had the gumption to ask him to stop or move.

This is not the first or second or third time I've seen this type of thing. One person with a drug addiction tossing common courtesy out the metaphorical window to get a fix.

Therein lies the problem with smokers.

You don't see Junkies shooting up whilst awaiting the breaking of their fast. You don't see caffine jockeys poisoning strangers to get their magical elixir. It's just the nicotine junkies.

Get them to have some consideration and maybe big brother wouldn't have any cause to pay attention at all.

---

Wes you have made my point. You saw an inconsiderate person and took action. We will never eliminate inconsiderate people in this world. Again the smokers are not the issue. It is government inserting themselves into peoples lives. Change the subject. Those who wear perfume vs. those who are allergic...and start inserting the comments made here into that...people who are allergic to certain foods vs. restaurants that serve them...the obesity problem in this country and the cost to health care... Where do we draw the line. Please keep in mind I HATE SMOKING but I hate the lose of freedom more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kitedemon

tonkatoyman,
I see your point but people do actually live in apartment buildings on the ground floor. I used to and could not open my windows in the summer as there were smokers outside all day every day. I have no rights too? By your logic if I stood outside a door splashing a carcinogenic chemical around and you had to walk through it that is ok too right? It isn't smell that is the problem it is a carcinogen, second hand smoke IS a cancer causing agent. I am glad that I live where there are laws to protect my health and my rights!

The thing that pisses me off so much around this issue is that the smokers whom are so lazy that they have to light up just outside the door have absolutely no respect or consideration for others. They simply do not care at all, it is so self centred. Is it so much to ask that they walk away from the windows and doors of other peoples homes and offices? Would those smokers just start smoking in your home with out asking too?

Not all smokers do, many walk away from the building and don't toss butts all over the place and actually care about the rest of us, I have no beef with them. I am sorry it doesn't seem like it is such a big deal.

---

everything causes cancer. I wouldnt worry about getting a few whiffs of smoke causing you to get cancer when some people smoke packs a day and dont get cancer.

Im sure there are plenty of things in your home that can cause cancer. Cleaning products, processed foods, anything.

maybe you should try asking them to move somewhere else instead of sitting in your apartment glaring out the window at them.

While hating the loss of freedom, does the freedom to smoke in public trump the public breathing clean air?

There were more than a dozen people that were discomfitted by one inconsiderate smoker. Who speaks for them? Obviously they generally won't speak for themselves. Do they deserve to be poisoned?

I get your point, I am not pro government nosesticking. I also know that while SOME smokers may be considerate MANY are not. Why should I or anyone have to tolerate this? Wanna smoke? Cool. Go someplace where YOUR habit won't bother ANYONE.

You won't find me going into a cigar bar and telling those turdpuffers to stop, they've been, at the least and perhaps unintentionally, considerate enough to isolate themselves in places that do NOT cater to nonsmokers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wilomn

While hating the loss of freedom, does the freedom to smoke in public trump the public breathing clean air?

Who speaks for them? Obviously they generally won't speak for themselves. Do they deserve to be poisoned?

---

I guess theres no definite answer. When two freedoms interfere with each other, Id have to say that the freedom to breath clean air is more important because smoking isnt natural.

But that in itself is contradictory enough, because our air isnt clean, and realistically some second hand smoke isnt going to kill you. I think when we reference second hand smoke they mean like how it used to be in bars and such where tons of people are smoking in a room with no ventilation.

And, about the non smokers. They have freedom of speech, they could speak for themselves but your right usually they dont. Maybe its because they dont care enough to potentially have a confrontation, or an awkward situation.

They will speak for themselves when ever some new legislation is on the drawing board, and thats when it counts. Either way no matter what happens not everyone is going to be happy. But I guess thats how things work here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wilomn

While hating the loss of freedom, does the freedom to smoke in public trump the public breathing clean air?

There were more than a dozen people that were discomfitted by one inconsiderate smoker. Who speaks for them? Obviously they generally won't speak for themselves. Do they deserve to be poisoned?

I get your point, I am not pro government nosesticking. I also know that while SOME smokers may be considerate MANY are not. Why should I or anyone have to tolerate this? Wanna smoke? Cool. Go someplace where YOUR habit won't bother ANYONE.

You won't find me going into a cigar bar and telling those turdpuffers to stop, they've been, at the least and perhaps unintentionally, considerate enough to isolate themselves in places that do NOT cater to nonsmokers.

---

Wes it is always a joy to have a conversation with you. Hope you are well it has been a while.
Now back to the subject.
What I have failed to mention is what I do believe in. I believe in the power of the people. If smoking is that big of a health issue then we the people need to take the steps to eliminate it all together or limit it's use...that i do agree with. Similar to alcohol. Believe it or not we still have some counties in Mississippi that do not allow the sale of liquor. It was done by the people not the government. But telling Government to fix it, looses us our freedom.

The op stated "People in WA state receiving housing assistance can no longer smoke within 25 feet of any building entrance in any of the state's subsidized housing programs."

I assumed that it is likely there is little choice of where that person lives.

The real killer is you are arguing about 12 or 14 steps. My point is simple it you are so lazy (I tried to find something less harsh but I can't) that 12 steps (9 for me) is too far to walk to protect the people in your building and community can you be entrusted with the responsibility of caring for anything at all.

I get that your issue isn't really a smoking one but of the government telling you what you can and can't do. But I just don't see it that way. You expect that same government to not allow dangerous products to enter your home and there is an out cry when toasters short out and cause fires for them to be pulled off the market what is the difference you admit second hand smoke can kill you. You recognize that in housing complexes people live on the ground floors and that they have a right to to not smoke. Do they also not have the freedom to live where they want to as well? Is it so much to expect a government to protect their rights by telling smokers to walk 12 steps. The considerate ones already do anyway.

25 feet, 12 paces. What would you do if somebody was smoking just out side your window just off your property line all summer long sell your house and move because it was their right to blow smoke into your home? You have a right to clean air and that right is everybody's right, smokers have the right to choose what they do to their own bodies as long as it does not affect anyone else's. By smoking in front of doors and windows other peoples homes that take that away all for the sake of 12 steps. The government isn't taking people rights away just making sure EVERYONE has free choice. You can still choose to smoke... over there 12 steps away.

I am not tying to antagonize you but to be honest I simply do not see the problem with asking smokers to walk a bit, if they banned the sale of the bloody things I grudging would defend the smokers rights but asking them to walk 25 feet doesn't seem like a big issue at all, I am a Canadian, and although the two countries are very similar this is one thing that is vastly different. This might just be a cultural difference and I'll simply not understand at all. It seems to me the government has acted in good faith with its responsibilities to protect everybody's rights the solution doesn't impinge on rights, it is just a minor inconvenience to some.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kitedemon

I get that your issue isn't really a smoking one but of the government telling you what you can and can't do. But I just don't see it that way. You expect that same government to not allow dangerous products to enter your home and there is an out cry when toasters short out and cause fires for them to be pulled off the market what is the difference you admit second hand smoke can kill you. You recognize that in housing complexes people live on the ground floors and that they have a right to to not smoke. Do they also not have the freedom to live where they want to as well? Is it so much to expect a government to protect their rights by telling smokers to walk 12 steps. The considerate ones already do anyway.

25 feet, 12 paces. What would you do if somebody was smoking just out side your window just off your property line all summer long sell your house and move because it was their right to blow smoke into your home? You have a right to clean air and that right is everybody's right, smokers have the right to choose what they do to their own bodies as long as it does not affect anyone else's. By smoking in front of doors and windows other peoples homes that take that away all for the sake of 12 steps. The government isn't taking people rights away just making sure EVERYONE has free choice. You can still choose to smoke... over there 12 steps away.

I am not tying to antagonize you but to be honest I simply do not see the problem with asking smokers to walk a bit, if they banned the sale of the bloody things I grudging would defend the smokers rights but asking them to walk 25 feet doesn't seem like a big issue at all, I am a Canadian, and although the two countries are very similar this is one thing that is vastly different. This might just be a cultural difference and I'll simply not understand at all. It seems to me the government has acted in good faith with its responsibilities to protect everybody's rights the solution doesn't impinge on rights, it is just a minor inconvenience to some.

---

OOPs hit the wrong button. Two things
1. If the issue is the health of the people then eliminate smoking all together just as we eliminate the bad toasters...
2. Yes you have the right to live where ever you wish, how ever that does not include the right to alter the behavior of those around you because you live there. An extreme example...building a house next to a pig farm and then expecting the farmer to eliminate the smell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tonkatoyman

Wes it is always a joy to have a conversation with you. Hope you are well it has been a while.
Now back to the subject.
What I have failed to mention is what I do believe in. I believe in the power of the people. If smoking is that big of a health issue then we the people need to take the steps to eliminate it all together or limit it's use...that i do agree with. Similar to alcohol. Believe it or not we still have some counties in Mississippi that do not allow the sale of liquor. It was done by the people not the government. But telling Government to fix it, looses us our freedom.

---

The only problem with that is "eliminating" things doesnt eliminate them. It just makes them illegal. Which creates black markets.

The best thing that 'could' be logical would make it illegal to smoke in public if people think its that much of a hazard to their health. And smokers would have to smoke in their homes, or other places like how there are cigar clubs.

There is no way your going to get every person in the country to stop smoking, even if it was illegal.