Big Drop in Heart Attacks after Smoking Bans, Studies Say

[UNI88]

Appa, you have a point when talking about people being able to choose to go in or stay out but I'm not sure a person's "right" to smoke is that simple. My kids have ashma and second hand smoke is a physical assault on them. Should I have to avoid taking my kids to a restaurant because some azzhole has a right to pollute the air inside? In a public place, a person has just as much of a right to pollute the air that someone else is breathing as I have the right to punch them in the face.

Ok, but we are discussing private property not public.

First, a restaurant while private property is a still a quasi public place.

Second (and more importantly), second hand smoke is still a physical assault on another person's body. Should a bar owner have the ability to say that it is ok to beat the crap out of someone in their establishment? It's their property, can they suspend the laws against assault & battery on their property?

[Appaholic]

Ok, but we are discussing private property not public.

First, a restaurant while private property is a still a quasi public place.

Second (and more importantly), second hand smoke is still a physical assault on another person's body. Should a bar owner have the ability to say that it is ok to beat the crap out of someone in their establishment? It's their property, can they suspend the laws against assault & battery on their property?

And a kid's screaming is an assault on my ears....so who's rights trump whose? Sorry, but loud noise causes stress (which is not good for anyone) and that is essentially an assault based upon your definition...what next? Where do you draw the line with government intervention? No one's FORCING a person to patronize nor work in the facility on private property....

[citdog]

First, a restaurant while private property is a still a quasi public place.

Second (and more importantly), second hand smoke is still a physical assault on another person's body. Should a bar owner have the ability to say that it is ok to beat the crap out of someone in their establishment? It's their property, can they suspend the laws against assault & battery on their property?

And a kid's screaming is an assault on my ears....so who's rights trump whose? Sorry, but loud noise causes stress (which is not good for anyone) and that is essentially an assault based upon your definition...what next? Where do you draw the line with government intervention? No one's FORCING a person to patronize nor work in the facility on private property....

I HAVE THE RIGHT TO EAT A MEAL WITHOUT SOMEBODIES BRATS SCREAMING AND ACTING UP. MAKES ME WANT TO SMOKE A CIGAR IN THE NON-SMOKING SECTION.

[UNI88]

First, a restaurant while private property is a still a quasi public place.

Second (and more importantly), second hand smoke is still a physical assault on another person's body. Should a bar owner have the ability to say that it is ok to beat the crap out of someone in their establishment? It's their property, can they suspend the laws against assault & battery on their property?

And a kid's screaming is an assault on my ears....so who's rights trump whose? Sorry, but loud noise causes stress (which is not good for anyone) and that is essentially an assault based upon your definition...what next? Where do you draw the line with government intervention? No one's FORCING a person to patronize nor work in the facility on private property....

I seriously doubt that a kids screaming reaches the decibel level necessary to cause physical damage to the ears while second hand smoke does cause physical damage to the lungs.

Why does something have to be next? The if they take away this what are they going to take away next argument is used by both liberals (pro-choice - if they require a 14 year old to get a parents permission ...) and conservatives (NRA - if they take away assault rifles ...) is a scare tactic.

[citdog]

And a kid's screaming is an assault on my ears....so who's rights trump whose? Sorry, but loud noise causes stress (which is not good for anyone) and that is essentially an assault based upon your definition...what next? Where do you draw the line with government intervention? No one's FORCING a person to patronize nor work in the facility on private property....

I seriously doubt that a kids screaming reaches the decibel level necessary to cause physical damage to the ears while second hand smoke does cause physical damage to the lungs.

Why does something have to be next? The if they take away this what are they going to take away next argument is used by both liberals (pro-choice - if they require a 14 year old to get a parents permission ...) and conservatives (NRA - if they take away assault rifles ...) is a scare tactic.

perhaps 88 should have been sterilized to make sure he had no kids with genetic defects.....solves the whole problem.

[bobbythekidd]

TTBF look at the demographics for the average smoker. They tend to be lesser educated and by extention; lower wage earners. Did it ever dawn on you that the workers are probably smokers in the first place?

[UNI88]

I seriously doubt that a kids screaming reaches the decibel level necessary to cause physical damage to the ears while second hand smoke does cause physical damage to the lungs.

Why does something have to be next? The if they take away this what are they going to take away next argument is used by both liberals (pro-choice - if they require a 14 year old to get a parents permission ...) and conservatives (NRA - if they take away assault rifles ...) is a scare tactic.

perhaps 88 should have been sterilized to make sure he had no kids with genetic defects.....solves the whole problem.

Neither my wife or I have asthma, my guess is that my kids got it because 3 of their 4 grandparents smoked. So maybe we should sterilize smokers.

[Appaholic]

And a kid's screaming is an assault on my ears....so who's rights trump whose? Sorry, but loud noise causes stress (which is not good for anyone) and that is essentially an assault based upon your definition...what next? Where do you draw the line with government intervention? No one's FORCING a person to patronize nor work in the facility on private property....

I seriously doubt that a kids screaming reaches the decibel level necessary to cause physical damage to the ears while second hand smoke does cause physical damage to the lungs.

Why does something have to be next? The if they take away this what are they going to take away next argument is used by both liberals (pro-choice - if they require a 14 year old to get a parents permission ...) and conservatives (NRA - if they take away assault rifles ...) is a scare tactic.

Decibel levels notwithstanding, sudden loud,piercing noises would be harmful for someone like my father who has suffered a heart attack and shouldn't be startled inthis manner. So, can we ban children & loud music & glass mugs (...you know, in case we drop on the floor and it shatters) so my father and people like him don't have to fear for his safety when dining out? Sure it's a scare tactic....and implementing laws such as this on private business owners is removing the burden of making a decision in one's best interest by the public at large....

[TwinTownBisonFan]

TTBF look at the demographics for the average smoker. They tend to be lesser educated and by extention; lower wage earners. Did it ever dawn on you that the workers are probably smokers in the first place?

i'm fully aware of that - however many aren't. the question i have is, how is exposure to copious amounts of secondhand smoke - which is proven to cause lung cancer among other things... any different to a miner being exposed to asbestos and it's resultant mesothelioma?

[citdog]

TTBF look at the demographics for the average smoker. They tend to be lesser educated and by extention; lower wage earners. Did it ever dawn on you that the workers are probably smokers in the first place?

we should ask your liberal friend tod from ags.....he works in a mine. perhaps these folks should have paid attention in school and they wouldn't have to have these jobs. but then your despicable political party would have no one to manipulate.

[Appaholic]

TTBF look at the demographics for the average smoker. They tend to be lesser educated and by extention; lower wage earners. Did it ever dawn on you that the workers are probably smokers in the first place?

i'm fully aware of that - however many aren't. the question i have is, how is exposure to copious amounts of secondhand smoke - which is proven to cause lung cancer among other things... any different to a miner being exposed to asbestos and it's resultant mesothelioma?

....or working the pits at NASCAR? or tarring a roof? or working in a shipyard? or having to pour a bag of concrete into a mixer? or........

[TwinTownBisonFan]

i'm fully aware of that - however many aren't. the question i have is, how is exposure to copious amounts of secondhand smoke - which is proven to cause lung cancer among other things... any different to a miner being exposed to asbestos and it's resultant mesothelioma?

....or working the pits at NASCAR? or tarring a roof? or working in a shipyard? or having to pour a bag of concrete into a mixer? or........

and all of those occupations have safety regs to mitigate their exposure to the risks inherent to their jobs... not so in smoking environments...

[Appaholic]

....or working the pits at NASCAR? or tarring a roof? or working in a shipyard? or having to pour a bag of concrete into a mixer? or........

and all of those occupations have safety regs to mitigate their exposure to the risks inherent to their jobs... not so in smoking environments...

Not with lifting....you either can lift a minimum amount or you do not qualify for the job...perfectly legal to discriminate against those people....a tavern owner could require all workers to be smokers due to the environment without banning the activity entirely with no recourse on behalf of the tavern owner. Hell he could require his workers to wear an oxygen mask (like chemical workers)...there's alternatives to outright banning an activity in the name of public safety....

[TwinTownBisonFan]

and all of those occupations have safety regs to mitigate their exposure to the risks inherent to their jobs... not so in smoking environments...

Not with lifting....you either can lift a minimum amount or you do not qualify for the job...perfectly legal to discriminate against those people....a tavern owner could require all workers to be smokers due to the environment without banning the activity entirely with no recourse on behalf of the tavern owner. Hell he could require his workers to wear an oxygen mask (like chemical workers)...there's alternatives to outright banning an activity in the name of public safety....

secondhand smoke is not the same, and is scientifically proven more dangerous than firsthand... it's not the same in the eyes of the law.

[clenz]

CF has had a ban for over a year and I love it. I don't go to bars a lot, but when I go to sports bars it's nice to be able to breathe.

[Appaholic]

Not with lifting....you either can lift a minimum amount or you do not qualify for the job...perfectly legal to discriminate against those people....a tavern owner could require all workers to be smokers due to the environment without banning the activity entirely with no recourse on behalf of the tavern owner. Hell he could require his workers to wear an oxygen mask (like chemical workers)...there's alternatives to outright banning an activity in the name of public safety....

secondhand smoke is not the same, and is scientifically proven more dangerous than firsthand... it's not the same in the eyes of the law.

BS...it's an activity that could prove harmful if precautions aren't taken like the others I listed...it's not an automatic death sentence to be around 2nd hand smoke anymore than it is to breath exhaust fumes...not everyone smokes...it's a dwindling population, so banning the activity outright on private property is overkill....

[Appaholic]

CF has had a ban for over a year and I love it. I don't go to bars a lot, but when I go to sports bars it's nice to be able to breathe.

...& Citdog loved the separate drinking fountains & banning of all things gay. But making you feel better is no more justification for a law than forbidding gay relations nor separate but equal bathrooms is justification because it makes Citdog happy......

[TheDancinMonarch]

What no one has mentioned here is that now that fewer are droping dead from heart attacks, they are living longer and eventually slipping into Alzheimer's disease and becoming a burden to themselves, their families and soon, God forbid, the government. One end of the seesaw goes down; the other end goes up.

[Appaholic]

What no one has mentioned here is that now that fewer are droping dead from heart attacks, they are living longer and eventually slipping into Alzheimer's disease and becoming a burden to themselves, their families and soon, God forbid, the government. One end of the seesaw goes down; the other end goes up.

Yep. Aluminum ingested has been linked to Ahlzheimer's, so let's ban spicy foods so no one needs Rolaids...

[Grizalltheway]

What no one has mentioned here is that now that fewer are droping dead from heart attacks, they are living longer and eventually slipping into Alzheimer's disease and becoming a burden to themselves, their families and soon, God forbid, the government. One end of the seesaw goes down; the other end goes up.

Good thing Obama has a plan in the works to eliminate the oldies...

[UNI88]

CF has had a ban for over a year and I love it. I don't go to bars a lot, but when I go to sports bars it's nice to be able to breathe.

...& Citdog loved the separate drinking fountains & banning of all things gay. But making you feel better is no more justification for a law than forbidding gay relations nor separate but equal bathrooms is justification because it makes Citdog happy......

Appa, I get your arguments and in general agree with them. I am biased but I do think that second hand smoke is assault on a different level than noice or other nuisances.

In all likelihood, smoking bans are just bringing about the premature demise of smoking in some locations. The marketplace would have eventually fixed the problem as insurance companies would have charged more and/or required certain safety precautions (gas masks for workers) in order to prevent/minimize lawsuits and work comp claims.

[Chizzang]

What no one has mentioned here is that now that fewer are droping dead from heart attacks, they are living longer and eventually slipping into Alzheimer's disease and becoming a burden to themselves, their families and soon, God forbid, the government. One end of the seesaw goes down; the other end goes up.

This is complete jibberish (above) and nonsense and unfounded and not based in actual medical costs associated with 100 years of documented evidence about smoking...

but anyway: I believe NO smoking in public places is appropriate but in private businesses you should be able to do whatever you want regarding smoking...

BUT: When I say No smoking in public places I mean: The park The Sidewalk The Parking lot... and it should be enforced and ticketed as a violation of public health $50.00

But again: In a private business knock yourself out - smoke away

[Appaholic]

What no one has mentioned here is that now that fewer are droping dead from heart attacks, they are living longer and eventually slipping into Alzheimer's disease and becoming a burden to themselves, their families and soon, God forbid, the government. One end of the seesaw goes down; the other end goes up.

This is complete jibberish (above) and nonsense and unfounded and not based in actual medical costs associated with 100 years of documented evidence about smoking...

but anyway: I believe NO smoking in public places is appropriate but in private businesses you should be able to do whatever you want regarding smoking...

BUT: When I say No smoking in public places I mean: The park The Sidewalk The Parking lot... and it should be enforced and ticketed as a violation of public health $50.00

But again: In a private business knock yourself out - smoke away

Surprisingly, that is exactly what I believe should happen as well. A government unwilling to ban an activity in the common property has no business banning an activity on private property....

[Appaholic]

...& Citdog loved the separate drinking fountains & banning of all things gay. But making you feel better is no more justification for a law than forbidding gay relations nor separate but equal bathrooms is justification because it makes Citdog happy......

Appa, I get your arguments and in general agree with them. I am biased but I do think that second hand smoke is assault on a different level than noice or other nuisances.

So do I, but who the he!! am I to tell the owner of a for profit business on private property what to do with regard to my safety when the simple act of not entering the establishment will eliminate the threat....speak with your wallet....

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

[Chizzang]

Surprisingly, that is exactly what I believe should happen as well. A government unwilling to ban an activity in the common property has no business banning an activity on private property....

Yeah..!!
(That's what I was trying to say) thank you