|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
LDJS
Joined: 22 Aug 2010
Location: Earth
|
 Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 9:56 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| northway wrote: |
| NYC_Gal wrote: |
| There are smoking bars in NYC. Because their purpose is smoking (cigars and hookahs, for the most part), it's perfectly legal. |
There are also bars that are simply bars that allow smoking, as they've installed air filtration systems that meet city guidelines to allow cigarette smoking. Is that tolerable, despite the business not being geared towards smoking? |
Great.
Now this is the sort of thing I'm all for. We're not bothering non smokers (I always ask if it's ok at a restaurant with a meal for example and if one person says no, I'll hapilly go outside) and we still get the freedom to smoke in bars.
Everyone's a winner Rodders.
But the absurd hard-line neo facist direction Fox and friends want to take democratic countries down scares the hell out of me!
Churchill and the men of his generation did not fight WW2 so people could tell them that they cannnot have a cig and a pint inside a pub! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
northway
Joined: 05 Jul 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 10:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LDJS wrote: |
| northway wrote: |
| NYC_Gal wrote: |
| There are smoking bars in NYC. Because their purpose is smoking (cigars and hookahs, for the most part), it's perfectly legal. |
There are also bars that are simply bars that allow smoking, as they've installed air filtration systems that meet city guidelines to allow cigarette smoking. Is that tolerable, despite the business not being geared towards smoking? |
Great.
Now this is the sort of thing I'm all for. We're not bothering non smokers (I always ask if it's ok at a restaurant with a meal for example and if one person says no, I'll hapilly go outside) and we still get the freedom to smoke in bars.
Everyone's a winner Rodders.
But the absurd hard-line neo facist direction Fox and friends want to take democratic countries down scares the hell out of me!
Churchill and the men of his generation did not fight WW2 so people could tell them that they cannnot have a cig and a pint inside a pub! |
http://gonyc.about.com/gi/o.htm?zi=1/XJ&zTi=1&sdn=gonyc&cdn=travel&tm=18&f=10&su=p284.9.336.ip_p531.51.336.ip_&tt=2&bt=0&bts=1&zu=http://www.karmanyc.com/
Technically a hookah bar, but there's no hookah requirement and you can smoke butts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 10:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LDJS wrote: |
| So how would you feel if establishments that were given the 'smoking liscence' also sold alcohol, that is, bars for smokers essentially. |
So long as smoking is part of the fundamental purpose of an establishment, I don't care what else you do in there. For example, bar that makes 80% of its sales in alcohol and 0% in smoking-related products clearly isn't fundamentally based on smoking, so I wouldn't condone it. A hookah bar that makes 70% of its sales in hookah rental and products, and 20% of its sales in alcohol on the other hand could be said to be fundamentally based on smoking.
Places centered around smoking are fine, so long as they are genuinely centered around smoking, not just places where one is merely permitted to smoke. As experience demonstrates, such places will always be a tiny minority.
| LDJS wrote: |
| You know most of the smokers would all go there (Instead of other bars) and then there would be smokers bars and no smokers bars. |
The reality of smoking bans is that most smokers comply with the rules and continue to patronize non-smoking establishments, even when rare smoking-focused alternatives are available. This isn't speculation, it's first hand experience. All these lame threats about the "cool, attractive, interesting smokers" abandoning smoke-free establishments if a ban gets put into place are empty nonsense. Most smokers simply aren't as addicted as you seem to be. Most smokers can make it through a meal without a smoke.
| LDJS wrote: |
| Basically if there is enough of us to form a group to be recognised, we can claim the right to have private establishments where we can smoke or drink. |
That's true. Unfortunately for you, there really aren't enough of you to be recognized. Most smokers simply don't care, because they aren't so completely addicted to their cigarettes that they can't last an entire meal without one. You're simply not going to get a serious political presence composed entirely of the sort of extreme addicts you're talking about.
| LDJS wrote: |
| If not, I'm off to Saudi Arabia as even that sounds more fun than the neo nazi, anti freedom of choice Boring New World you guys envision. |
Comparing public smoking bans to Nazisim -- much less the society described in Brave New World -- is borderline retarded. Again, this kind of irrationality is exactly why we have to resort to legislation to solve this problem. People like yourself simply cannot be trusted to use good judgment.
| LDJS wrote: |
| Going to a bar where I can't smoke whilst I drink my beer, play pool, darts and chat up hotties is like a pizza with no cheese on it or a hot chick that when you take her clothes of she has a beep. |
You're really bad at making analogies. You're also really bad at argumentation; all you're doing is reinforcing in my mind the idea that the reason smokers oppose such bans are petty, juvenille, and frankly, quite stupid.
| LDJS wrote: |
| If the govt does not allow bars that sell both lisenced booze and has a 'smoking liscence' democracy fails. |
Smoking bans are an example of a democratic success, not a failure; a means of the public protecting itself from your social irresponsibility. I'm sorry you aren't man enough to simply accept that your behavior disgusts and harms us, and that the socially responsible thing to do is to avoid smoking in public places. Because you refuse to accept it, however, legislation is required.
| LDJS wrote: |
| You are FASCISTS - Acknowlege it. |
Local smoking bans aren't fascist. Do you even know what fascism is? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
broken76
Joined: 27 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 10:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
People who argue for or against smoking regulations tend to forget that there is a bigger picture involved. The main issue really is should the government have the power to remove one's right to choose what they want to do.
Personally I think that it is the right of individual business owner to choose what policies that they wish to enforce and then the individuals get to choose whether the service provided is worth following those policies. The government has the right to choose the policies of their buildings as well.
Overall there does seem to be a strong sentiment towards nonsmoking in bars and restaurants and in many cases businesses that choose to have nonsmoking tend to do okay. I believe that in most cases a nonsmoking bar would do well since there seems to be a large number of people who are seeking that.
Yet there are a number of smokers who would prefer a smoking bar and a large majority doesn't really consider the smoking thing an issue as long as the bar is what they want. In all situations each individual has the right to choose what they want to do as well as what they are capable of tolerating.
Many countries are slowly going down a path that is removing the freedom of choice in individuals lives and in most cases it's being done because of a vocal minority. In most cases I think that most people really don't care enough to either defend or oppose the issue.
Regulating smoking will eventually lead to the regulation of other aspects of our lives from what we eat and drink to what we do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 10:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LDJS wrote: |
| But the absurd hard-line neo facist direction Fox and friends want to take democratic countries down scares the hell out of me! |
Democratic countries engaging in democracy on a local level scares the Hell out of you?
| LDJS wrote: |
| Churchill and the men of his generation did not fight WW2 so people could tell them that they cannnot have a cig and a pint inside a pub! |
I'm pretty sure local smoking bans weren't a big part of the reason the British fought World War 2, kiddo. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 10:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| broken76 wrote: |
| People who argue for or against smoking regulations tend to forget that there is a bigger picture involved. The main issue really is should the government have the power to remove one's right to choose what they want to do. |
Legislative precedent clearly shows the government has the right to regulate publically traversed spaces. You can talk about your hypothetical society where the government has nearly no power all you like, but in reality, local bans on smoking in public space is completely within the government's powers.
If you think the government shouldn't have this power, you're wasting your time talking about local smoking bans. You'd need to alter the entire constitutional structure of the nation to render the government unable to do such a thing. Obviously, that's beyond the scope of this discussion.
| broken76 wrote: |
| Personally I think that it is the right of individual business owner to choose what policies that they wish to enforce and then the individuals get to choose whether the service provided is worth following those policies. |
When it comes to the actual law, business owners have no such right. If you think they should have said right, then that's fine. Saying you think they do have that right, however, simply makes you wrong.
We aren't living in a Libertarian society, and most people really don't want to. As such, while arguments such as yours might be interesting thought experiments, they're completely uncompelling, as they rely on a social model that we simply don't practice.
| broken76 wrote: |
| Many countries are slowly going down a path that is removing the freedom of choice in individuals lives and in most cases it's being done because of a vocal minority. |
Every restriction of freedom must be considered on an individual basis. Restricting one's freedom to express their mind obviously has many potential dangers and poses problems for society. Restricting one's freedom to murder other citizens, on the other hand, is clearly correct and good social policy. People who talk about restrictions on freedom being a bad thing in a generic sense are in an incredibly weak intellectual position, and while it's an idea that might play well to certain constituencies, it's not an idea that can withstand any real measure of intellectual scrutiny. How good or bad the restriction of any given freedom is is based purely on what the results of restricting that freedom would be.
In the case of smoking in public places, restriction of the freedom in question amounts to an unmitigated good for most of society, and a minor annoyance to the rest.
| broken76 wrote: |
| Regulating smoking will eventually lead to the regulation of other aspects of our lives from what we eat and drink to what we do. |
Slippery slope arguments are weak.
Last edited by Fox on Wed Aug 25, 2010 10:25 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
luckysharms
Joined: 15 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 10:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LDJS wrote: |
| northway wrote: |
| NYC_Gal wrote: |
| There are smoking bars in NYC. Because their purpose is smoking (cigars and hookahs, for the most part), it's perfectly legal. |
There are also bars that are simply bars that allow smoking, as they've installed air filtration systems that meet city guidelines to allow cigarette smoking. Is that tolerable, despite the business not being geared towards smoking? |
Great.
Now this is the sort of thing I'm all for. We're not bothering non smokers (I always ask if it's ok at a restaurant with a meal for example and if one person says no, I'll hapilly go outside) and we still get the freedom to smoke in bars.
Everyone's a winner Rodders.
But the absurd hard-line neo facist direction Fox and friends want to take democratic countries down scares the hell out of me!
Churchill and the men of his generation did not fight WW2 so people could tell them that they cannnot have a cig and a pint inside a pub! |
So... Enforcing a law that tells people not to do something is apparently being fascist now?
"Sir, you weren't wearing your seatbelt."
"!@#$ YOU FACIST!"
Really? They want to "...take democratic countries down..."? We're talking about the government enforcing 'No smoking' policies - the government, which was chosen by the majority of the people. I'm pretty sure that isn't fascism.
Also, I'm going to go ahead and hope that you're not serious about comparing countries that have the "no smoking" ban to Saudi Arabia. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NYC_Gal
Joined: 08 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 10:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LDJS wrote: |
Not that you non smkers opinions are any more valid than those of us smokers but -
Fox, NYG, TUM et al -
So how would you feel if establishments that were given the 'smoking liscence' also sold alcohol, that is, bars for smokers essentially.
You know most of the smokers would all go there (Instead of other bars) and then there would be smokers bars and no smokers bars.
Kind of wierd but hey if you guys think smokers are not going to revolt if Big GOVT says we can oonly smoke in our own homes....
Basically if there is enough of us to form a group to be recognised, we can claim the right to have private establishments where we can smoke or drink.
If not, I'm off to Saudi Arabia as even that sounds more fun than the neo nazi, anti freedom of choice Boring New World you guys envision.
Going to a bar where I can't smoke whilst I drink my beer, play pool, darts and chat up hotties is like a pizza with no cheese on it or a hot chick that when you take her clothes of she has a beep.
If the govt does not allow bars that sell both lisenced booze and has a 'smoking liscence' democracy fails.
John Wayne, Bogie and the Rat Pack would be spinning in their graves faster than the rate of expansion.
Why do you want these people to be unhappy in their graves?
Ya ya - Lol, big hearted you allowing us to smoke in our cars and outside strip malls.
You are FASCISTS - Acknowlege it. |
Cigar/hookah bars in NYC serve alcohol. Most smokers STILL go to regular, non-smoking bars. Go to any regular bar or club in NYC and you'll see the smokers outside, be it on the rooftop or a bit away from the entrance. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
luckysharms
Joined: 15 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 10:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| northway wrote: |
| NYC_Gal wrote: |
| There are smoking bars in NYC. Because their purpose is smoking (cigars and hookahs, for the most part), it's perfectly legal. |
There are also bars that are simply bars that allow smoking, as they've installed air filtration systems that meet city guidelines to allow cigarette smoking. Is that tolerable, despite the business not being geared towards smoking? |
According to the 2006 US Surgeon General's report:
"The only way to fully protect non-smokers from exposure to secondhand smoke indoors is to prevent all smoking in that indoor space or building. Separating smokers from non-smokers, cleaning the air, and ventilating buildings cannot keep non-smokers from being exposed to secondhand smoke." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 10:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LDJS wrote: |
N
Basically if there is enough of us to form a group to be recognised, we can claim the right to have private establishments where we can smoke or drink.
If not, I'm off to Saudi Arabia as even that sounds more fun than the neo nazi, anti freedom of choice Boring New World you guys envision.
If the govt does not allow bars that sell both lisenced booze and has a 'smoking liscence' democracy fails.
J |
Saudi Arabia has even more draconian laws regarding alcohol than anyone here has proposed for tobacco. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 11:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| broken76 wrote: |
People who argue for or against smoking regulations tend to forget that there is a bigger picture involved. The main issue really is should the government have the power to remove one's right to choose what they want to do.
. |
If voters give government that power then yes...that's called democracy. If a majority of people support a smoking ban then politicians will propose it sooner or later. If a majority object to it then sooner or later it will be repealed by politicians who wish to be elected. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LDJS
Joined: 22 Aug 2010
Location: Earth
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 11:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Fox, fox Fox.
I could construct a well written debate if I wanted to. But this is just Dave's and I write my posts quickly to get the general point accross, it being a GENeRAL DISCUSSION FORUM and all.
Quit your grandstanding and patronising and asumptions, internet tough guy.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 11:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As to smokers' rights vs non-smokers rights.
Smoking is optional. Breathing is not.
The non-smokers rights therefore are paramount. And sooner or later the rest of the civilized world will follow suit behind the nations that have already imposed smoking bans. It might take another 5-10 years but Korea will head there as well as smokers are a minority here as in most other places.
Last edited by TheUrbanMyth on Wed Aug 25, 2010 11:06 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yaya
Joined: 25 Feb 2003
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 11:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
As to smokers' right vs non-smokers rights.
Smoking is optional. Breathing is not. The non-smokers rights therefore are paramount. And sooner or later the rest of the civilized world will follow suit behind the nations that have already imposed smoking bans. It might take another 5-10 years but Korea will head there as well as smokers are a minority here as in most other places. |
A universal smoking ban in all indoor facilities is something I wish the Koreans would do "bballi bballi." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2010 11:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LDJS wrote: |
Fox, fox Fox.
I could construct a well written debate if I wanted to. |
I don't believe you.
| LDJS wrote: |
| But this is just Dave's and I write my posts quickly to get the general point accross, it being a GENeRAL DISCUSSION FORUM and all. |
And this kind of statement is the reason why I don't believe you. You don't even understand what the "general" in "general discussion" means.
| LDJS wrote: |
| Quit your grandstanding and patronising and asumptions, internet tough guy. |
Are you accusing me of picking on you? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
