Seriously, I have no problem if people want to kill themselves slowly and piss their money down the toilet. But don't make me have to inhale your toxic smoke!!

Smokers are inconsiderate. They obviously don't care about themselves, so why would we expect them to care about anyone else? That's why the law needs to step in.

Reply

Smoker's rights is an oxymoron! The damage they do to themselves and others takes them out of the rights game completely!

Reply

Smokers still have plenty of rights. They have the right to smoke on their own property and they have the right to kill themselves slowly and painfully. They have the right to ignore mountains of scientific evidence and common sense. They have the right to smell terrible and look twice their age.
They do NOT have the right to impose these things on innocent bystanders. Secondhand smoke is deadly, and we as American citizens should be protected from it. I really don't give a crap about how inconvenient it is to have to go outside; in fact, it should be illegal to smoke on any public sidewalk as well- you are still exposing people to carcinogens. Smoke outside your own house, but not inside it. Here's the kicker: smoking around kids, even your own, should be considered child abuse. It is one of the worst things you can do for their physical health, but people get away with it every day. How about the rights of smokers' children? Why aren't we talking about that?

Reply

1. Sorry, but I am totally disagree with the allegation that smokers are losing their rights (after all, did anyone other than drug dealers complain about “loss of rights” when pot opium, methamphetamine, marijuana, et cetera were outlawed?). It is about time for the government to start cracking down on public smoking, a practice that jeopardizes the health of non-smoking citizens through second hand smoke. Even "non-smoking sections" of restaurants were never entirely effective; quite often, either the stench of smoke would end up wafting over to non-smoking areas where my family was seated, or the restrooms would be oh so inconveniently located so that one would need to cross through clouds of smoke in order to reach them. Smokers--and tobacco companies-- should be thankful that cigarettes and other tobacco forms are legal and can thus be used at all. After all, if someone still wishes to smoke despite the numerous proven health risks associated with the practice, they can do so in the comfort of their own home (or for that matter, any unenclosed area... such as the local park or street corner.) Beyond that, I do not see how the movie industry's regulations regarding smoking in films affects smokers' rights at all... smoking is unhealthy and the movie industry is taking a positive step forward to avoid portraying the habit as otherwise, but never the less, smokers' rights are not being harmed through the industry's actions. I sincerely hope that our nation continues to fight against smoking, and that silly internet articles cease complaining about smokers’ lack of rights.

Reply

People's "right" to smoke should have never been allowed to interfere with other people's right to life. Unfortunately, the irony and hypocrisy is that several of our founding fathers owned tobacco plantations and put smokers' pursuit of happiness (although, does smoking really make anybody happy?) over other people's pursuit of life. From my point of view, the government has finally started coming out from under the clutches of the previously all-powerful tobacco industry and started doing its duty by protecting the innocent bystanders' right to life.

What you're saying about the movie industry, however, sounds just weird and arbitrary, to the point that I question whether you're representing the situation properly. The movie industry has never been squeamish about making material that isn't appropriate for younger audiences, but they do tag things like sex and violence with warnings and age ratings. It doesn't prevent the material from being made as long as it's tagged appropriately.

Reply

It's ok, it just starts with smoking (which, I can't stand, plus it makes my asthma kick into gear, just so you know where I am coming from), moves onto the next thing such as fats in foods, alcohol, etc. Pretty soon, but gradual enough so that we really don't "notice", you won't be able to read certain things, look at certain websites, say certain things. But, it's ok, it's all in the name of being healthy. My two cents, the thing that I did before all the bans... Just go where there isn't smoke.

Reply

actually what you have missed in your great desire to clean the world is your rights are gone because of this.

In Flordia a local goverment and a business have the following rule: "They will drug test there workers for smoke. If they have been smoking OFF the job, their SPOUSE smokes, or if they went to a smoking AREA, they will be fired."

This is the great drive to lower health care cost, so what will it be next:

"They will drug test there workers for perfume. If they have been wearing perfume OFF the job, their SPOUSE wears perfume, or if they went to a perfume wearing AREA, they will be fired."

and to be fair most of you are so full of it. If you hated smoke so bad, then you should have spent your money in non-smoking businesses, instead you slam a drink and didn't care.

Reply