Smoke Free Homes...

[Admin]

Why can't we just all live in peace?  Every darn day there is some other article to ban what we love to do...smoke our cigars.   err!

http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/05/24/smoke.freehomes.ap/index.html

 

[Headley]

I gotta say, this makes WAY more sense than the government at any level  banning smoking in PRIVATE businesses.  I can't see how any red blooded American can justify smoking bans in a business where the owner is willing to allow it.  I mean, you could go so far as to force them to make it part of the interview "are you able and willing to work in a smoking environment?" and make it part of the job requirements yet the Government still sees that as unacceptable?  What the F is happening to our society?

I think there should be bounds on decency in freedom of speech in a public forum but in a private business the owner should have the right to allow any legal activity to happen if they have the proper permits.  Prohibition is not a strategy but more of a political tactic.  We're all adults and can make a decision to patronize a business or not.

I'll take it to the extreme here and offer, how can a country that allows abortion as a form of contraception, has a death penalty but offers plea bargains in even the most heinous of crimes against other human beings that spare these bags of shit the end they deserve, then say that you can't smoke in a bar even if the owner would allow it if it was his choice?  Very selective on when and where politicians and interest groups are willing to force the moral minority into submission.

It maked my head hurt.

[Djaric]

"Utah led the nation, with people in nearly nine out of 10 homes saying smoking was never allowed. The state's large population of Mormons, who eschew tobacco, probably contributed to that statistic, the agency said."

Those silly Mormons.  Screwing up everything in Utah. 
Have a friend out there who complains about the crazy liquor prices.
I dont see why this "news" is so News worthy. 
Maybe people dont smoke in home because its stinky?  But no, this is surely a victory for all the anti-smoking probaganda.  Yea.  Thats it. [really]

I hope to have a 'smoking' room when I finally get a house, but I wont be too upset if I dont.

[Skipper the cigar aFISHinodo]

First of all the article is full of THIT!. no one "bars" smoking in their house. No one will go to jail or face fines for smoking in a private home. It is mearly the wish of one or more of the occupants. And often it is the smell or concern for the furnishings and not some natzi law.

They throw around words like "prohibited" and "barred" ... then this quote:

"That really says that people are starting to understand the hazards of secondhand smoke," said Dr. Corinne Husten, co-author of the study and chief of the epidemiology branch of the CDC's Office on Smoking and Health.

What a croc!!! Again, I know plenty of people who smoke but not in their house... Are they worried about second hand smoke? Perhaps the TV may get cancer? Besaides, once again, there is NO EVIDENCE THAT SECOND HAND SMOKE IS HARMFUL! & PLENTY OF EVIDENCE THAT IT IS A NON-EVENT!


If anything, it is people thinking there may be something to this second hand biz... and they have kids, so no one with a brain would want to take any chances with their kids.

I agree, why did CNN deem this newsworthy?
 

[Maduro_Scotty]

there is NO EVIDENCE THAT SECOND HAND SMOKE IS HARMFUL! & PLENTY OF EVIDENCE THAT IT IS A NON-EVENT!

I didn't know it, but efforts to ban smoking indoors has been prompted by a 2006 surgeon general's report.  Since the publication of the report, a flurry of legislative efforts have been undertaken to capitalize on it.  I'm not a policy wonk or anything, but I can't find anything on secondhand smoke other than the chemicals and toxins.  There is nothing about a longitudinal study of people exposed to secondhand smoke that is able to rule out other possible explanations that would influence the mortality rate of a given study group. 

[Skipper the cigar aFISHinodo]

years ago there was a report that said outright second hand smoke was not harmful. A massive study designed to claim second hand smoke would kill, turned up no evidence of any ill affects. The report was burried within weeks of it's being made public.

Now... point of fact, I do not smoke in my house. Even when I lived here alone. Did that mean I was cautious of my own second hand smoke?