Smoking?
Quote: Dalex64Something is dangerous. Therefore, we shouldn't bother with preventing anyone from doing anything dangerous.
Why bother having any laws? Especially if people are just going to break them.
Do you really think that owning a chimp is more dangerous than driving?
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceThis has nothing to do with the rights of the smoker. The smoker is not the one who decides to allow or not allow smoking in the casino.
There was a ceo of a large company in maryland that built a heliport on his 10 acre spread, and every morning at 7 am a company helecoptor arrived to pick him up.
The neighbors complained, but there was no law that prohibited that. The ceo said this is what I want....ME ME ME. Yes noise polutuion is annoying and can cause health issues when people dont get enough sleep, awakened by the thunder of the helecoptor noises. If the neighbors dont like it...they can move. The town allows this type of noise polution, and if they wanted to get a new law to outlaw it...well the ceo has enough money to make sure the law doesnt go through. The township allows helecoptors and the ceo took advantage of it being allowed. No one is forcing him to do it. He can choose to drive to a heleport somewhere else and be a good neighbor....but he didnt.
Same with smokers. There is no law against smoking in the casino. And they can be just like the ceo and say screw the other people...I am gonna smoke and pollute the air because thats what I want. Screw the others Its about ME ME ME. People can be a good neighbor and choose not to release carcinogens into the indoor air. They can feed their nicotine needs with nicotine gum, or smokeless electronic nicotine cigarrettes. They have alternatives just as the ceo had. But in the end they choose to smoke.
Just because its legal doesnt mean people HAVE to exhibit the behavior or smoking, or helecoptor transport in a quet neighborhood.
Its legal to pick your nose in public, the scratch your ass, scratch your crotch, hack up some phlegm and spit it on the street....and none of those directly affect your health like smoke.or noise polution.
It is totally not prohibited for smokers to enter a casino, and as you know its totally legal for pompous a-holes to enter the casino.
However once they enter they can decide what their actions will be going forward.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceDo you really think that owning a chimp is more dangerous than driving?
prescription drugs have been taken off the market when a few dozen people die in a year from a side effect. And your logic is that...thousands of people die each year in cars and we dont take them off the market....so why take the drug off the market
in 2012 61 percent of dog bite fatalities was caused by pitt bulls even though they make up 5 percent of the dog population.....but thousands of people were killed in cars...so thats ok.
In fact if your daughter was killed by a neighborhood pet chimp, and the owner said...well thats sad but I noticed you drive a car and that is a lethal weapon as well..so we are both amigos....thats soud logic.
In the end people use cars to make a living, its a neccessity....where there are ample pets that can sub for a chimp or pitt bull or python for the good of society.
My understanding of the primary definition of second hand smoke agrees with that held by the Center for Disese Control and Prevention (CDC) as stated in their Secondhand Smoke (SHS) Facts web page. That said, I don't dispute at all that the nasty residue clinging to the walls, drapes, carpet and furniture where others have smoked is bad, too. However, the CDC also states on their Ventilation Does Not Effectively Protect Nonsmokers from Secondhand Smoke web page that the only risk-free environment is a 100% smoke free environment. I would agree that state-of-the-art ventilation systems minimizes the risk, but I strongly disagree that the risk is inconsequential as I infer from your statement.Quote: SonuvabishQuote: BleedingChipsSlowlyIn the case of smoking that is a limited right, trumped by the right of others to not inhale cancer-casing fumes. Public places we must use have pretty much adopted that stance. In several towns in my area you can no longer legally smoke on the street or in a public park. If you walk into a casino, that's your choice, an option you don't have to take. Unless, of course, we have some inherent right to gamble...Quote: LarrySboth [smoking and farting] are legal and a right we all have.
I think you are one of those people who misunderstands the definition of second-hand smoke. Second-hand smoke is dangerous because if you smoke in the house, it sticks to everything. Eventually, you're breathing pollution 24/7. This does not apply to the guy who inhales a little smoke once and awhile in casino with a state of the art ventilation system. No one has shown this to be a significant health hazard. Additionally, your right to be in a smoke-free casino environment is nonexistent, and therefore trumps nothing. Wouldn't you be annoyed if people came up to you and started asserting rights they do not have, but obviously think they deserve at your detriment? Like hey cop, I know my rights, 2nd Amendment says I don't need to explain the reason I am walking down the street with a pistol in my hand.
My quoted response to LarryS was in the context of his claim that smoking is legal right we have. My rebuttal was that the right is usually tempered by the effect smoking will have on others. Gone are the days when you could smoke in elevators, hospital rooms and buses. You are correct that I don't have the right to a smoke-free environment in a casino. And you don'the the right to smoke where you damn well please, either. Let me guess: you smoke.
Well, my quote which you addressed lost context by not including the post I was addressing, but yes I agree with you. Smokers and non-smokers don't decide what will be allowed in a casino or anywhere else.Quote: AxiomOfChoiceThis has nothing to do with the rights of the smoker. The smoker is not the one who decides to allow or not allow smoking in the casino.
Quote: BleedingChipsSlowlyWell, my quote which you addressed lost context by not including the post I was addressing, but yes I agree with you. Smokers and non-smokers don't decide what will be allowed in a casino or anywhere else.[/q. In Colorado the voters decides I imagine the same is true in both e estates ?
Shed not for her the bitter tear Nor give the heart to vain regret Tis but the casket that lies here, The gem that filled it Sparkles yet
Quote: BleedingChipsSlowlyWell, my quote which you addressed lost context by not including the post I was addressing, but yes I agree with you. Smokers and non-smokers don't decide what will be allowed in a casino or anywhere else.
My point here is, I am not saying that I have some god-given right to smoke. I am saying that I am in an establishment where the owner has decided to allow smoking. A non-smoker asking me not to light up is about as reasonable as smoker going into an establishment where smoking is not allowed and deciding to smoke.
BTW, is anyone else going to go to Big Smoke at the Mirage later this year? I'm guessing that we won't see Larry there, but, anyone else? (I will be there, and I will be smoking)
Clarification: Individuals, smokers or non-smokers, don't get to set the rules. Yes, by democratic vote Massachusetts towns can decide what smoking ordinances they will have. As I mentioned previously, a neighboring town voted to ban smoking anywhere in public - streets, parks, public land.Quote: BuzzardIn Colorado the voters decides I imagine the same is true in both e estates ?Quote: BleedingChipsSlowlyWell, my quote which you addressed lost context by not including the post I was addressing, but yes I agree with you. Smokers and non-smokers don't decide what will be allowed in a casino or anywhere else.
Quote: HunterhillI wish they would make all casino's nonsmoking, but I don't see that happening for along time. I always request the table to be non smoking. If they won't do that I have my own non smoking sign that I put on the table. If someone comes up that is smoking I point to the sign. Sometimes it works sometimes the floor will catch it.
Revel did this. All the smokers bitched and it became a total disaster. It still is, but they now allow smoking except in any of the rooms.
I agree that what an establishment allows should be the deciding factor. Hey, I used to smoke. Even when I was in situations where it was customary to smoke, say at a restaurant table after the meal, I would always ask permission to light up: especially if ladies were present. This was before smoking was declared a health hazard. It was common courtesy. Now that smoking is a known health hazard I don't agree the reasonableness of your statements are near equivalent. Someone asking that you not smoke is now is a request that you do not put them at risk, even though you may be permitted to do so. Putting someone at risk when you are not permitted to do so would be much different.Quote: AxiomOfChoiceMy point here is, I am not saying that I have some god-given right to smoke. I am saying that I am in an establishment where the owner has decided to allow smoking. A non-smoker asking me not to light up is about as reasonable as smoker going into an establishment where smoking is not allowed and deciding to smoke.
BTW, is anyone else going to go to Big Smoke at the Mirage later this year? I'm guessing that we won't see Larry there, but, anyone else? (I will be there, and I will be smoking)
Enjoy the Big Smoke. A fine cigar and a snifter of cognac are to be enjoyed with reverence.
Quote: BleedingChipsSlowlyI agree that what an establishment allows should be the deciding factor. Hey, I used to smoke. Even when I was in situations where it was customary to smoke, say at a restaurant table after the meal, I would always ask permission to light up: especially if ladies were present. This was before smoking was declared a health hazard. It was common courtesy. Now that smoking is a known health hazard I don't agree the reasonableness of your statements are near equivalent. Someone asking that you not smoke is now is a request that you do not put them at risk, even though you may be permitted to do so. Putting someone at risk when you are not permitted to do so would be much different.
I'd argue that they put themselves at risk when they decided to go somewhere where they knew that smoking was not only permitted, but commonplace.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceMy point here is, I am not saying that I have some god-given right to smoke. I am saying that I am in an establishment where the owner has decided to allow smoking. A non-smoker asking me not to light up is about as reasonable as smoker going into an establishment where smoking is not allowed and deciding to smoke.
BTW, is anyone else going to go to Big Smoke at the Mirage later this year? I'm guessing that we won't see Larry there, but, anyone else? (I will be there, and I will be smoking)
there is no rule against me from picking my nose at my table in a restaurant
there is no ruke that excluded me from scratching my crotch walking down the aisle of the supermarket
there is no rule against me of spitting on the grass periodically during the graduation ceremoies
there is no rule preventing me from putting in a heliport next to your home
there is no rule the stops me from producing smoke inches from your face that no sophisticated air system can capture before you breathe it.
There is no rule that you cant be a pompous a-hole in public or private
Its all totally legal and I was raised not to do any of the above....even if there is no specific rule excluding the above behavior.....I still dont engage in it.
Others like axiom were raised differently .......liberals call it diversity in upbringing....I call it a lack of consideration for fellow man. I call it the ME sector of every generation.
Quote: LarryS
Others like axiom were raised differently...I call it a lack of consideration for fellow man. I call it the ME sector of every generation.
Personal Insult & Trolling, it looks like July was the last Suspension, so I'll not invoke the Martingale and go with the same one week as last time.
Quote: Mission146Personal Insult & Trolling, it looks like July was the last Suspension, so I'll not invoke the Martingale and go with the same one week as last time.
I would say larry was being trolled on page 4 of this thread but i guess if your on the wrong side of an issue you get suspended.
Quote: kracker21I would say larry was being trolled on page 4 of this thread but i guess if your on the wrong side of an issue you get suspended.
It's more the Personal Insult than the Trolling, he basically brought Axiom's upbringing into it. I would say that Axiom's Page 4 post, while certainly sarcastic, was more satirical than anything...not to mention the fact that LarryS has specifically mentioned that he does believe in some of those 'Commandments.'
Quote: LarryS
there is no rule preventing me from putting in a heliport next to your home
.
there probably is a rule against this.
For whatever reasons, valid or invalid, smoking is allowed in casinos, but most of them do offer some sort of accommodation to those who are bothered by smoking such as: Bans on Cigars, No Smoking tables (dedicated or adhoc) in recognition that the 'social graces' generally compel some sort of concern for non-smokers. The severity of the rules and the degree of their enforcement probably depends heavily on the colors involved. Not the color of the people, but the color of their chips.
I wonder about Cigar bars: Do people there ask smokers to put out cigarettes because the odors are so "cheap and offensively gauche"?
Although some non-smoking casinos exist, most casinos permit smoking and have a belief that it is economically burdensome to ban smoking. There may indeed by a genetic link to smoking and all forms of risk taking behavior, including gambling. There have been a number of such studies, few of them robust enough to settle the issue.
Mostly casinos allow smoking and put up with the various confrontations about excessive or retaliatory smoking. Many hotels and office buildings went non-smoking prior to legislation about it and they did this solely for economic reasons. It may be that casinos will delve into the economics more intently and ban smoking solely for economic reasons, but right now smoking is considered legal and socially acceptable. Not necessarily desirable, but acceptable.
Just as in hard times prostitution is more openly tolerated in Vegas, so too does tobacco acceptance seem to fluctuate with the economics of the day.
Quote: Lemieux66Revel did this. All the smokers bitched and it became a total disaster. It still is, but they now allow smoking except in any of the rooms.
Except half the rooms have a odor of smoke to them because people don't follow the rules.
Yes, I think that anti-smoking legislation is acceptable to voters partly because of inconsiderate smokers. By the way I opposed our local ordinance banning smoking in bars and restaurants on principle. However, I do enjoy the clean air.Quote: SonuvabishYou think the government is punishing smokers for being rude by taking away their right to smoke in public places?
Quote: sodawaterthere probably is a rule against this.
LOL I was gonna say that about building a heliport
Quote: HunterhillI wish they would make all casino's nonsmoking, but I don't see that happening for along time. I always request the table to be non smoking. If they won't do that I have my own non smoking sign that I put on the table. If someone comes up that is smoking I point to the sign. Sometimes it works sometimes the floor will catch it.
I don't mean to insult you, but that is nuts. If I saw you do that and was with people, I would come harass you without mercy. If I was alone, I would still come harass you, just a little less overtly. Why don't you just put up a sign that asks people to harass you?
Quote: BleedingChipsSlowlyMy understanding of the primary definition of second hand smoke agrees with that held by the Center for Disese Control and Prevention (CDC) as stated in their Secondhand Smoke (SHS) Facts web page. That said, I don't dispute at all that the nasty residue clinging to the walls, drapes, carpet and furniture where others have smoked is bad, too. However, the CDC also states on their Ventilation Does Not Effectively Protect Nonsmokers from Secondhand Smoke web page that the only risk-free environment is a 100% smoke free environment. I would agree that state-of-the-art ventilation systems minimizes the risk, but I strongly disagree that the risk is inconsequential as I infer from your statement.Quote: SonuvabishQuote: BleedingChipsSlowlyIn the case of smoking that is a limited right, trumped by the right of others to not inhale cancer-casing fumes. Public places we must use have pretty much adopted that stance. In several towns in my area you can no longer legally smoke on the street or in a public park. If you walk into a casino, that's your choice, an option you don't have to take. Unless, of course, we have some inherent right to gamble...Quote: LarrySboth [smoking and farting] are legal and a right we all have.
I think you are one of those people who misunderstands the definition of second-hand smoke. Second-hand smoke is dangerous because if you smoke in the house, it sticks to everything. Eventually, you're breathing pollution 24/7. This does not apply to the guy who inhales a little smoke once and awhile in casino with a state of the art ventilation system. No one has shown this to be a significant health hazard. Additionally, your right to be in a smoke-free casino environment is nonexistent, and therefore trumps nothing. Wouldn't you be annoyed if people came up to you and started asserting rights they do not have, but obviously think they deserve at your detriment? Like hey cop, I know my rights, 2nd Amendment says I don't need to explain the reason I am walking down the street with a pistol in my hand.
My quoted response to LarryS was in the context of his claim that smoking is legal right we have. My rebuttal was that the right is usually tempered by the effect smoking will have on others. Gone are the days when you could smoke in elevators, hospital rooms and buses. You are correct that I don't have the right to a smoke-free environment in a casino. And you don'the the right to smoke where you damn well please, either. Let me guess: you smoke.
The propaganda is that second-hand smoke is more dangerous than the primary smoke. You have to recognize one as false: that tagline, or your definition. It doesn't really matter which one, so long as you don't believe they are always both true. Nothing is 100% risk free. If you are unsatisfied with 99.9999999999999999% risk-free, then perhaps you should live inside a nuclear fallout shelter.
Quote: FleaStiff
Although some non-smoking casinos exist, most casinos permit smoking and have a belief that it is economically burdensome to ban smoking. There may indeed by a genetic link to smoking and all forms of risk taking behavior, including gambling. There have been a number of such studies, few of them robust enough to settle the issue.
At the very least, if smoking is allowed at the table, you don't have to leave the table to smoke. That alone makes it worth it to the casino.
Quote: kracker21I would say larry was being trolled on page 4 of this thread but i guess if your on the wrong side of an issue you get suspended.
Yeah I was hazing him, I didn't mean anything malicious by it. I have been honestly laughing at the chimp thing at work when it comes to mind. But why did he pick on AOC? I was the worst one of out everyone; maybe he didn't like the commandments, I don't know. Plus, Larry wasn't exactly poking fun like we were, more like angrily stabbing. I didn't see anything obviously suspension worthy as a singular statement, but I do notice the minimal insight and lack of meaningful contribution he makes. I am 100% sure his suspension has nothing to do with being on the non-smoking side of the issue. Just my 2 cents.
Quote: FleaStiffI wonder about Cigar bars: Do people there ask smokers to put out cigarettes because the odors are so "cheap and offensively gauche"?
I am a regular at a cigar bar. They don't allow flavored cigars. I haven't ever seen anyone smoking a cigarette in there. I agree though, cigarettes are kind of gross.
Quote: SonuvabishI don't mean to insult you, but that is nuts. If I saw you do that and was with people, I would come harass you without mercy. If I was alone, I would still come harass you, just a little less overtly. Why don't you just put up a sign that asks people to harass you?
I actually think that this is hilarious.
Quote: SonuvabishYeah I was hazing him, I didn't mean anything malicious by it. I have been honestly laughing at the chimp thing at work when it comes to mind. But why did he pick on AOC? I was the worst one of out everyone; maybe he didn't like the commandments, I don't know. Plus, Larry wasn't exactly poking fun like we were, more like angrily stabbing. I didn't see anything obviously suspension worthy as a singular statement, but I do notice the minimal insight and lack of meaningful contribution he makes. I am 100% sure his suspension has nothing to do with being on the non-smoking side of the issue. Just my 2 cents.
Larry doesn't like me. I don't like him.
As for the issue, of course, you are right. There are many, many people on the anti-smoking side of this one, and only one of them got suspended.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceLarry doesn't like me. I don't like him.
As for the issue, of course, you are right. There are many, many people on the anti-smoking side of this one, and only one of them got suspended.
Wait a minute. Are you implying somebody else likes Larry? I wouldn't speculate about something like that if you want to be taken seriously on this forum ;).
LOL..... Cigars are better because they cost more? Most if not all cigars smell terrible and often make people nauseous. I think you have tricked yourself into believing Cigars are somehow distinguished... something the most interesting man in the World would be doing. "I don't smoke often, but when I do......Quote: AxiomOfChoiceI am a regular at a cigar bar. They don't allow flavored cigars. I haven't ever seen anyone smoking a cigarette in there. I agree though, cigarettes are kind of gross.
Remind me next time you are in town, I have a bunch of them $20/$40 cigars.
Quote: AxelWolfLOL..... Cigars are better because they cost more?
No, cigars cost more because they are better.
Don't get me wrong -- there are crappy cigars. Some of them are even expensive. And of course there is a lot of personal taste involved. But, in general, cigarettes are made of shredded tobacco leaves of the lowest possible quality, with tons of chemicals pumped in there, machine rolled, wrapped in paper, etc. Uniform, cheap, and crappy.
Comparing a hand-made good quality cigar to a cigarette is like comparing a Wagyu filet mignon to a big mac. They are both made of beef, but that's where the similarities end.
Quote:Most if not all cigars smell terrible and often make people nauseous. I think you have tricked yourself into believing Cigars are somehow distinguished... something the most interesting man in the World would be doing. "I don't smoke often, but when I do......
No, good tobacco just tastes really, really good. I think that you have tricked yourself into thinking that all tobacco is the same as the garbage that they put into cigarettes.
Cheap cigars, however, are terrible. You don't want that quantity of bad tobacco burning all at once.
Quote:Remind me next time you are in town, I have a bunch of them $20/$40 cigars.
Sounds good to me. Are you taking care of them though? Once a cigar dries out it is pretty much worthless. You can re-humidify but it is a pain in the ass (you need to do it slowly, or the cigar will swell up and split open like a hot dog) and the flavor is never the same
Quote: SonuvabishWait a minute. Are you implying somebody else likes Larry? I wouldn't speculate about something like that if you want to be taken seriously on this forum ;).
I am pretty sure I never implied that.
they are sealed in tubes im not sure how or what you need to do if that's the case. How long do they last in tubes?Quote: AxiomOfChoiceNo, cigars cost more because they are better.
Don't get me wrong -- there are crappy cigars. Some of them are even expensive. And of course there is a lot of personal taste involved. But, in general, cigarettes are made of shredded tobacco leaves of the lowest possible quality, with tons of chemicals pumped in there, machine rolled, wrapped in paper, etc. Uniform, cheap, and crappy.
Comparing a hand-made good quality cigar to a cigarette is like comparing a Wagyu filet mignon to a big mac. They are both made of beef, but that's where the similarities end.
No, good tobacco just tastes really, really good. I think that you have tricked yourself into thinking that all tobacco is the same as the garbage that they put into cigarettes.
Cheap cigars, however, are terrible. You don't want that quantity of bad tobacco burning all at once.
Sounds good to me. Are you taking care of them though? Once a cigar dries out it is pretty much worthless. You can re-humidify but it is a pain in the ass (you need to do it slowly, or the cigar will swell up and split open like a hot dog) and the flavor is never the same
Quote: rudeboyoiI smoke cigarettes. Cigars gross me out.
I rarely hear good comments about tobacco smoke, except sometimes pipe smoke. I smoked cigarettes for 10 years.
No its like comparing cat Sh*t to Tiger Sh*t. In the end, its all the same, one just seems more exotic.Quote: AxiomOfChoice
Comparing a hand-made good quality cigar to a cigarette is like comparing a Wagyu filet mignon to a big mac. They are both made of beef, but that's where the similarities end.
Quote: AxiomOfChoiceI am pretty sure I never implied that.
I miss him already. No one here is going to say outrageous things that make no sense, honestly believe them, and defend them...all at the same time. I mean sure, someone might say something like my betting system can beat slot machines, I wrote a book. But that's not particularly funny. I wanna read more about the chimpanzee apocalypse.
Quote: AxelWolfthey are sealed in tubes im not sure how or what you need to do if that's the case. How long do they last in tubes?
I just put everything in my humidor. I have a big end-table one so I can put whole boxes, etc in without opening anything. Ever since I got that thing, my cigars have always been in great shape -- much better than when I used to use small box humidors (I also got a very good humidifier with a fan for that thing, which, I'm sure, helps a lot)
How long they last depends on how well they are sealed. If they are perfectly sealed they will last forever, but nothing is perfectly sealed. If the box or tube is shrink-wrapped in plastic they will last quite a while -- months if not years. If they are in tubes that you could open without breaking a seal they might last a week if you are lucky (especially in Vegas -- it is really hard to take care of cigars with air that dry). If they were sitting out on your table they would probably be dry within a few hours (since you are in the desert)
On the other hand if you live somewhere tropical where it's always 70% or higher humidity you can just leave anywhere and they will be fine. Cigars get better with age (the oils from the tobaccos blend and "marry", making them smoother) so as long as they are kept in a good environment, they last forever.
Do you know what brands they are?
Quote: rxwineI rarely hear good comments about tobacco smoke, except sometimes pipe smoke. I smoked cigarettes for 10 years.
Most people smoke cheap cigars. Cheap cigars are worse than cigarettes.
I love the smell of pipe smoke, but I'm not sure that that's a road I want to go down. I'd have to get one of those funny hats and start talking with an English accent...
I've never had cigar smoke blown at me but I can assure you it's a when and not an if issue if I'm on a must hit by. The closest I felt somebody was being rude to me was when they could stand right over me while I was playing a machine, and I knew that he was trying to vulture it.
Of course, what really shocked me was when we went into one of the casino restaurants and were asked "Smoking or non-smoking?" Smoking in restaurants has been banned in Ohio since 2006, and even in Vegas, we didn't have to worry about smoking except in the casino areas.
It's glorious =)
Quote: AxiomOfChoice(I will be there, and I will be smoking)
Lol.
About the monkeys, haven't you guys seen monkey shines?
Quote: FaceHere in NY, where smoking is illegal almost everywhere including areas out of doors and occasionally in your own car, we still have a few bars that allow it. 100% of the time, it's some backwoods dive and smokers will toss money into the smoker's jar. If The Man happens to bust in and fine the place, the smoker's fund pays the fine.
It's glorious =)
That's a good idea.
I can see my inquiry should have been more specific. Let me guess: you smoke tobacco. In the next three hours 845 people in the United States will die. Good news, only 152 of those deaths will be attributable to smoking! And even better for me, only one person in that group will take a dirt nap due to secondary smoke. Close enough to 99.9999999999999999% risk-free that I may dare again to step foot in a casino. If you save the pack linings from you cigarettes you can cobble together a tinfoil hat that should block that nasty propaganda. You don't want to let the space rays from that nut job into your head - next you'll hear whispers about can't-lose craps systems. Nice tactic of misstating the opposing argument and then discrediting it by presenting unsubstantiated whacko opinions. When research and logic fail to support your beliefs that's the way to go. Why present facts? They're terribly confusing when your mind is already made up.Quote: SonuvabishQuote: BleedingChipsSlowlyMy understanding of the primary definition of second hand smoke agrees with that held by the Center for Disese Control and Prevention (CDC) as stated in their Secondhand Smoke (SHS) Facts web page. That said, I don't dispute at all that the nasty residue clinging to the walls, drapes, carpet and furniture where others have smoked is bad, too. However, the CDC also states on their Ventilation Does Not Effectively Protect Nonsmokers from Secondhand Smoke web page that the only risk-free environment is a 100% smoke free environment. I would agree that state-of-the-art ventilation systems minimizes the risk, but I strongly disagree that the risk is inconsequential as I infer from your statement.Quote: SonuvabishQuote: BleedingChipsSlowlyIn the case of smoking that is a limited right, trumped by the right of others to not inhale cancer-casing fumes. Public places we must use have pretty much adopted that stance. In several towns in my area you can no longer legally smoke on the street or in a public park. If you walk into a casino, that's your choice, an option you don't have to take. Unless, of course, we have some inherent right to gamble...Quote: LarrySboth [smoking and farting] are legal and a right we all have.
I think you are one of those people who misunderstands the definition of second-hand smoke. Second-hand smoke is dangerous because if you smoke in the house, it sticks to everything. Eventually, you're breathing pollution 24/7. This does not apply to the guy who inhales a little smoke once and awhile in casino with a state of the art ventilation system. No one has shown this to be a significant health hazard. Additionally, your right to be in a smoke-free casino environment is nonexistent, and therefore trumps nothing. Wouldn't you be annoyed if people came up to you and started asserting rights they do not have, but obviously think they deserve at your detriment? Like hey cop, I know my rights, 2nd Amendment says I don't need to explain the reason I am walking down the street with a pistol in my hand.
My quoted response to LarryS was in the context of his claim that smoking is legal right we have. My rebuttal was that the right is usually tempered by the effect smoking will have on others. Gone are the days when you could smoke in elevators, hospital rooms and buses. You are correct that I don't have the right to a smoke-free environment in a casino. And you don'the the right to smoke where you damn well please, either. Let me guess: you smoke.
The propaganda is that second-hand smoke is more dangerous than the primary smoke. You have to recognize one as false: that tagline, or your definition. It doesn't really matter which one, so long as you don't believe they are always both true. Nothing is 100% risk free. If you are unsatisfied with 99.9999999999999999% risk-free, then perhaps you should live inside a nuclear fallout shelter.
Quote: BleedingChipsSlowlyI can see my inquiry should have been more specific. Let me guess: you smoke tobacco. In the next three hours 845 people in the United States will die. Good news, only 152 of those deaths will be attributable to smoking! And even better for me, only one person in that group will take a dirt nap due to secondary smoke. Close enough to 99.9999999999999999% risk-free that I may dare again to step foot in a casino. If you save the pack linings from you cigarettes you can cobble together a tinfoil hat that should block that nasty propaganda. You don't want to let the space rays from that nut job into your head - next you'll hear whispers about can't-lose craps systems. Nice tactic of misstating the opposing argument and then discrediting it by presenting unsubstantiated whacko opinions. When research and logic fail to support your beliefs that's the way to go. Why present facts? They're terribly confusing when your mind is already made up.Quote: SonuvabishQuote: BleedingChipsSlowlyMy understanding of the primary definition of second hand smoke agrees with that held by the Center for Disese Control and Prevention (CDC) as stated in their Secondhand Smoke (SHS) Facts web page. That said, I don't dispute at all that the nasty residue clinging to the walls, drapes, carpet and furniture where others have smoked is bad, too. However, the CDC also states on their Ventilation Does Not Effectively Protect Nonsmokers from Secondhand Smoke web page that the only risk-free environment is a 100% smoke free environment. I would agree that state-of-the-art ventilation systems minimizes the risk, but I strongly disagree that the risk is inconsequential as I infer from your statement.Quote: SonuvabishQuote: BleedingChipsSlowlyIn the case of smoking that is a limited right, trumped by the right of others to not inhale cancer-casing fumes. Public places we must use have pretty much adopted that stance. In several towns in my area you can no longer legally smoke on the street or in a public park. If you walk into a casino, that's your choice, an option you don't have to take. Unless, of course, we have some inherent right to gamble...Quote: LarrySboth [smoking and farting] are legal and a right we all have.
I think you are one of those people who misunderstands the definition of second-hand smoke. Second-hand smoke is dangerous because if you smoke in the house, it sticks to everything. Eventually, you're breathing pollution 24/7. This does not apply to the guy who inhales a little smoke once and awhile in casino with a state of the art ventilation system. No one has shown this to be a significant health hazard. Additionally, your right to be in a smoke-free casino environment is nonexistent, and therefore trumps nothing. Wouldn't you be annoyed if people came up to you and started asserting rights they do not have, but obviously think they deserve at your detriment? Like hey cop, I know my rights, 2nd Amendment says I don't need to explain the reason I am walking down the street with a pistol in my hand.
My quoted response to LarryS was in the context of his claim that smoking is legal right we have. My rebuttal was that the right is usually tempered by the effect smoking will have on others. Gone are the days when you could smoke in elevators, hospital rooms and buses. You are correct that I don't have the right to a smoke-free environment in a casino. And you don'the the right to smoke where you damn well please, either. Let me guess: you smoke.
The propaganda is that second-hand smoke is more dangerous than the primary smoke. You have to recognize one as false: that tagline, or your definition. It doesn't really matter which one, so long as you don't believe they are always both true. Nothing is 100% risk free. If you are unsatisfied with 99.9999999999999999% risk-free, then perhaps you should live inside a nuclear fallout shelter.
That one death won't be from the type of second-hand smoke you are afraid of, it will of the variety I described. Why not continue to imagine you are in perilous danger? Reality checks cause you to spaz out when your mind is already made up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLm3HMG8IhMQuote: HunterhillI wish they would make all casino's nonsmoking, but I don't see that happening for along time. I always request the table to be non smoking. If they won't do that I have my own non smoking sign that I put on the table. If someone comes up that is smoking I point to the sign. Sometimes it works sometimes the floor will catch it.
Signs signs everywhere a Sign
So I got me a pen and a paper and I made up my own little sign
