I just realized I never actually answered the poll question here. Is it right or wrong to disobey the ban law? I wonder what Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglass would have said... he's known for this quote: . . . . . . . . "As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there's a twilight where everything remains seemingly unchanged, and it is in such twilight that we must be aware of change in the air, however slight, lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness." . . . . . . . . Something tells me he might feel such disobedience was justified. St. Augustine is known for saying "An unjust law is no law at all." - MJM
Laws that are based on lies, half-truths and slanted surveys should be struck down immediately if nor sooner
http://fightingback.homestead.com
harleyrider1978 - 14 years ago
Get out and vote this november people,we dont need laws like this or those who pass such trash..........Its up to america threw the voting box to remove these nazis from office..........You're veterans and those before us will thank you!
harleyrider1978 - 14 years ago
I am a retired navy veteran. I have a personal war against tobacco control and they're prohibition movement.
They know me and I know them.........The day they thought they could outlaw and criminalize me for doing what I have always done and even in a combat zone in gulf war one building the road to kuwait.........they have made a mortal enemy. I and 100,000s of thousands of veterans dont ask you for permission to smoke,you can ask us ! While you kiss our behinds for keeping your lousy nazi loving behinds safe at home in bed.........think about it! your freedom is no better than what we defend..........AND I WILL BE DAMNED IF YOUR GONNA GET AWAY WITH THIS PROHIBITION MOVEMENT.
harleyrider1978 - 14 years ago
OSHA permissible exposure limit(PEL),8-hour for airborne arsenic
Finally, OSHA has established a permissble exposure limit (PEL),8-hour
time-weighted average,of 10Ug/m3 for airborne arsenic in various workplaces
This is the PEL ( permissble exposure limit),below which the chemical is considered safe.
And OSHA is being very conservative.According to the Agency for Toxic Sunstances and Disease Registry,no symptons are evident below " about 100ug."
1ug is one microgram+1 millionth of a gram,1ng is one nanogram = 1 billionth of a gram.
1ug = 1,000 ng
10 ug = 10,000 ng
The average cigarette has 32ng of arsenic in all of its smoke(mainstream and side stream).
10 ug per cubic meter is all of the smoke from 312.5 cigarettes per meter, on average,continuously for an 8 hour work shift.
Consider a bar that is 30 feet by 60 feet with a 12 foot ceiling,this is about 10 meters by 20 meters by 4 meters,this equals 800 cubic meters.
The bar would have to have 800 x 312.5 cigarettes burning all the time.
This is 250,000 cigarettes burning all the time.
Remember; according to the Agency for toxic sunstances and disease registry, no symptons are evident below ''about 100 ug''.
This means you'd have to have about 2,500,000 smokers smoking continuously for 8 hours to reach the minimum level in our little bar!!!
Which is why OSHA made this statement:
Field studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)...It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded." -Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Sec'y, OSHA.
Arsenic is a poison and those TSNA's that the anti-tobacco researchers keep on about is inorganic arsenic and those are also found in everything out there in some form or fashion especially foods......those computations are just as impossible to meet as the shs/arsenic levels.
But yet tobacco control tries and claim that 3rd hand smoke is dangerous!!! when all they discovered was 1 ng per cubic yard even after increasing hono levels by 1500%......
arsenic is a poison and a carcinogen but not at any of these levels,thats why we have PEL'S.
Now you can go home and cry,while us veterans fight another war here at home,for the simple right to smoke in our own clubs.
Chad, the "general populous" is not being exposed to anything when a private club or even a privately owned bar or restaurant allows people to smoke while inside behind its closed doors. It is only when a smoking ban forces smokers out onto the sidewalks that "the general populous" is exposed.
So will you help overturn the ban and get smokers back inside where they can relax with their friends without "harming" anyone who doesn't WANT to be "harmed" ?
In terms of your "8,000 harmful chemicals," try looking around for a list of them on the 10 billion pages of the internet. I'll clue you in: there is NO SUCH LIST. Those numbers are just theorized propaganda, the same as the "3,000 lung cancer deaths from secondhand smoke." Look around for the proof and all you'll find are supposedly "authoritative statements" and "fact sheets" that come from computerized models based on studies done by advocates and slanted to produce results pleasing to those who will give grants to the researchers for future studies.
Let me take one minute to look at just ONE of those chemicals you're worried about. I'll use the one that Truth.com et al play up on their MTV ads showing a giant rat crawling up out of the subway in its death throes. The rat claims it's dying from "rat poison" (usually arsenic) in cigarette smoke.
Well, guess what? When you actually look at the emissions involved, taking figures right from the Surgeon Generals Reports themselves, and then look at an average situation in a bar or restaurant, you'd have to sit next to a smoker for ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY FIVE THOUSAND HOURS to get the *same* amount of arsenic that you'd get if you drank a large (16oz) glass of "government-approved-as-safe" tap water.
But the Antismokers tell you that you should be afraid because smokers expose you to arsenic.
Do you see how they lie?
Michael J. McFadden
Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"
Sheila - 14 years ago
Milk contains 4,000 dangerous chemicals. Coca Cola, probably closer to 5,000. Pick your poison. God Bless Freedom Lovers everywhere! The "general populace" is ONLY exposed to second hand smoke when they CHOSE to be. Make your choice. Or do you need your mommy to help your figure it out?
John - 14 years ago
Not your bar, not your club, its not your "business".
Unless you plan to frequent EVERY different type of establishment in the state, unless you are a member of EVERY private club in the state, ONLY then you may have a right to dictate or complain. Otherwise, see above.
Chad - 14 years ago
The fact is this that cigarette smoke contains 8,000 harmful chemicals that are released into the air upon burning them such as ammonia, chlorine, sulfur, cyanide, as well as hundreds of other chemicals that are hazardous to our health. My father is a life long smoker and is recently trying to quit as he realizes that these chemicals are incredibly unhealthy for any individual at any age. While each person is born with cancer growing cells in our bodies, the carcinogens can and often times do jump start the dormant cells which cause them to rapidly mutate causing the cancer of the lungs as well as other diseases.
I personally agree with the smoking ban as it helps to keep crowded areas especially (I.e. outside of hospitals, schools, etc) free of second hand smoke. If a person so chooses to destroy their body by taking in toxic chemicals and claim its ok because "It has a filter" then thats fine. However I don't think that the general populous should be exposed to such dangerous chemicals simply because a select group of individuals wish to destroy their own body.
Barney Linton - 14 years ago
I agree with the smoking ban in public places. But when it comes to private clubs and organizations, the
government should keep their nose out of it!
Steve Bentley - 14 years ago
I can't stand all the smoke in places, but I believe completely in the freedom of the individual - if I want to allow smoking in my place of business I should be able to. Customers that don't like it can go elsewhere and so can employees. I have refused to patronize certain establishments due to there heavy smoking, but I don't believe I have any right forcing that establishment to change their policies. True free captialism without govt interference self corrects - if the people don't like the smoking they will go elsewhere - enough do that then the establishment will change policies to bring back revenue. Our money will determine their policies or they will close. With all the govt interference we have people do not have conviction - they claim to hate the smoking, but still patronize those establishments. If they would follow their convictions rather than trying to impose their will through govt on the business owner then change would occur. These kind of laws are destroying our society.
Donna Breedlove - 14 years ago
I love the no smoking law. I can't breathe when I am around it. It chokes me up. People stand just outside an enterance and smoke. I have to take a deep breath and hurry inside.
I just realized I never actually answered the poll question here. Is it right or wrong to disobey the ban law? I wonder what Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglass would have said... he's known for this quote: . . . . . . . . "As nightfall does not come at once, neither does oppression. In both instances, there's a twilight where everything remains seemingly unchanged, and it is in such twilight that we must be aware of change in the air, however slight, lest we become unwitting victims of the darkness." . . . . . . . . Something tells me he might feel such disobedience was justified. St. Augustine is known for saying "An unjust law is no law at all." - MJM
Laws that are based on lies, half-truths and slanted surveys should be struck down immediately if nor sooner
http://fightingback.homestead.com
Get out and vote this november people,we dont need laws like this or those who pass such trash..........Its up to america threw the voting box to remove these nazis from office..........You're veterans and those before us will thank you!
I am a retired navy veteran. I have a personal war against tobacco control and they're prohibition movement.
They know me and I know them.........The day they thought they could outlaw and criminalize me for doing what I have always done and even in a combat zone in gulf war one building the road to kuwait.........they have made a mortal enemy. I and 100,000s of thousands of veterans dont ask you for permission to smoke,you can ask us ! While you kiss our behinds for keeping your lousy nazi loving behinds safe at home in bed.........think about it! your freedom is no better than what we defend..........AND I WILL BE DAMNED IF YOUR GONNA GET AWAY WITH THIS PROHIBITION MOVEMENT.
OSHA permissible exposure limit(PEL),8-hour for airborne arsenic
Finally, OSHA has established a permissble exposure limit (PEL),8-hour
time-weighted average,of 10Ug/m3 for airborne arsenic in various workplaces
This is the PEL ( permissble exposure limit),below which the chemical is considered safe.
And OSHA is being very conservative.According to the Agency for Toxic Sunstances and Disease Registry,no symptons are evident below " about 100ug."
1ug is one microgram+1 millionth of a gram,1ng is one nanogram = 1 billionth of a gram.
1ug = 1,000 ng
10 ug = 10,000 ng
The average cigarette has 32ng of arsenic in all of its smoke(mainstream and side stream).
10 ug per cubic meter is all of the smoke from 312.5 cigarettes per meter, on average,continuously for an 8 hour work shift.
Consider a bar that is 30 feet by 60 feet with a 12 foot ceiling,this is about 10 meters by 20 meters by 4 meters,this equals 800 cubic meters.
The bar would have to have 800 x 312.5 cigarettes burning all the time.
This is 250,000 cigarettes burning all the time.
Remember; according to the Agency for toxic sunstances and disease registry, no symptons are evident below ''about 100 ug''.
This means you'd have to have about 2,500,000 smokers smoking continuously for 8 hours to reach the minimum level in our little bar!!!
Which is why OSHA made this statement:
Field studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)...It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded." -Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Sec'y, OSHA.
Arsenic is a poison and those TSNA's that the anti-tobacco researchers keep on about is inorganic arsenic and those are also found in everything out there in some form or fashion especially foods......those computations are just as impossible to meet as the shs/arsenic levels.
But yet tobacco control tries and claim that 3rd hand smoke is dangerous!!! when all they discovered was 1 ng per cubic yard even after increasing hono levels by 1500%......
arsenic is a poison and a carcinogen but not at any of these levels,thats why we have PEL'S.
Now you can go home and cry,while us veterans fight another war here at home,for the simple right to smoke in our own clubs.
.
Chad, the "general populous" is not being exposed to anything when a private club or even a privately owned bar or restaurant allows people to smoke while inside behind its closed doors. It is only when a smoking ban forces smokers out onto the sidewalks that "the general populous" is exposed.
So will you help overturn the ban and get smokers back inside where they can relax with their friends without "harming" anyone who doesn't WANT to be "harmed" ?
In terms of your "8,000 harmful chemicals," try looking around for a list of them on the 10 billion pages of the internet. I'll clue you in: there is NO SUCH LIST. Those numbers are just theorized propaganda, the same as the "3,000 lung cancer deaths from secondhand smoke." Look around for the proof and all you'll find are supposedly "authoritative statements" and "fact sheets" that come from computerized models based on studies done by advocates and slanted to produce results pleasing to those who will give grants to the researchers for future studies.
Let me take one minute to look at just ONE of those chemicals you're worried about. I'll use the one that Truth.com et al play up on their MTV ads showing a giant rat crawling up out of the subway in its death throes. The rat claims it's dying from "rat poison" (usually arsenic) in cigarette smoke.
Well, guess what? When you actually look at the emissions involved, taking figures right from the Surgeon Generals Reports themselves, and then look at an average situation in a bar or restaurant, you'd have to sit next to a smoker for ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY FIVE THOUSAND HOURS to get the *same* amount of arsenic that you'd get if you drank a large (16oz) glass of "government-approved-as-safe" tap water.
But the Antismokers tell you that you should be afraid because smokers expose you to arsenic.
Do you see how they lie?
Michael J. McFadden
Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"
Milk contains 4,000 dangerous chemicals. Coca Cola, probably closer to 5,000. Pick your poison. God Bless Freedom Lovers everywhere! The "general populace" is ONLY exposed to second hand smoke when they CHOSE to be. Make your choice. Or do you need your mommy to help your figure it out?
Not your bar, not your club, its not your "business".
Unless you plan to frequent EVERY different type of establishment in the state, unless you are a member of EVERY private club in the state, ONLY then you may have a right to dictate or complain. Otherwise, see above.
The fact is this that cigarette smoke contains 8,000 harmful chemicals that are released into the air upon burning them such as ammonia, chlorine, sulfur, cyanide, as well as hundreds of other chemicals that are hazardous to our health. My father is a life long smoker and is recently trying to quit as he realizes that these chemicals are incredibly unhealthy for any individual at any age. While each person is born with cancer growing cells in our bodies, the carcinogens can and often times do jump start the dormant cells which cause them to rapidly mutate causing the cancer of the lungs as well as other diseases.
I personally agree with the smoking ban as it helps to keep crowded areas especially (I.e. outside of hospitals, schools, etc) free of second hand smoke. If a person so chooses to destroy their body by taking in toxic chemicals and claim its ok because "It has a filter" then thats fine. However I don't think that the general populous should be exposed to such dangerous chemicals simply because a select group of individuals wish to destroy their own body.
I agree with the smoking ban in public places. But when it comes to private clubs and organizations, the
government should keep their nose out of it!
I can't stand all the smoke in places, but I believe completely in the freedom of the individual - if I want to allow smoking in my place of business I should be able to. Customers that don't like it can go elsewhere and so can employees. I have refused to patronize certain establishments due to there heavy smoking, but I don't believe I have any right forcing that establishment to change their policies. True free captialism without govt interference self corrects - if the people don't like the smoking they will go elsewhere - enough do that then the establishment will change policies to bring back revenue. Our money will determine their policies or they will close. With all the govt interference we have people do not have conviction - they claim to hate the smoking, but still patronize those establishments. If they would follow their convictions rather than trying to impose their will through govt on the business owner then change would occur. These kind of laws are destroying our society.
I love the no smoking law. I can't breathe when I am around it. It chokes me up. People stand just outside an enterance and smoke. I have to take a deep breath and hurry inside.