New smoking restrictions in Washington. Oh boy!

[stratus_020202]

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.

[zina10]

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...

[tonkatoyman]

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.

[I<3Dreamsicles]

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.

[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.

[I<3Dreamsicles]

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.

[tonkatoyman]

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.

[kitedemon]

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.

[tonkatoyman]

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.

[I<3Dreamsicles]

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.