Finally!

MadeInNewJersey

nursing my wounds
Apr 15, 2002
17,334
3
38
The Ridge
www.discogs.com
About 1 hour ago, New Jersey state assemblymen voted overwhelmingly in favor of passing the Smoking Ban, which would outlaw smoking in all public buildings, bars & restaurants.

I smoke regularly, and I say, it's about fucking time.

Should be put into effect 90 days after it's ratified, which should be in the next few days or so.
 
Unfortunately, NJ is the furthest south this'll ever get, and probably the furthest west it'll ever get, because a) the south is where the tobacco industry is and even Maryland will never pass this, and b) because Pennsylvania is full of gun-toting hicks. ;)
 
MadeInNewJersey said:
Unfortunately, NJ is the furthest south this'll ever get, and probably the furthest west it'll ever get, because a) the south is where the tobacco industry is and even Maryland will never pass this, and b) because Pennsylvania is full of gun-toting hicks. ;)

California has had that ban since like the 70's. That's further west than Maryland, you know.

Also, Kansas is one of the more "hick" states in the country, and there are several cities here that have that ban. It will hopefully pass in the entire state in a year or two.
 
I wasn't counting the west coast, since it's just a slightly more liberal and warmer version of the east coast. Yes, Cali has had the ban since the early '90s, and I believe Washington State recently passed it as well.

Boulder has been non-smoking forever-and-a-day as well. Cities can & will pass it (i.e. I could see Chicago passing such a ban), but entire states in the midwest? Schyeah, right.
 
I guess my opinion is invalid since I don't live in a "city" where you actually have to be close to people and are thereby effected by smoking, but I was going to say that people seem like a bunch of big crybabies on the matter. It doesn't really bother me when people smoke, but I guess if I had to ride the subway with them everyday or some shit then it probably would.

Oh well, fuck it, we have this thing called open spaces here, so I'm not going to worry about it.:D
 
It's got nothing to do with being in a city, or close proximity to people, and everything to do with not being allowed to smoke inside any building where people work (i.e. office buildings, movie theaters, bars, restaurants, etc.).
 
Whatever happened to smoking/non-smoking sections? People just can't be content with anything I guess.:tickled: I don't think it's "endangering" workers if they have to breathe a little smoke, but I'm just a hippy who thinks the entire world has a stick up its collective ass.
 
Well, since people smarter than both you & I have in fact determined that 2ndhand smoke kills oh, a few 100,000 people every year, I'm guessing that yeah, "endangering" is actually putting it mildly.

Again, I smoke, and am 1,000% in favor of these laws.
 
Banning smoking in bars, where minors aren't even allowed, people getting wasted beyond recognition, and going home to contract an STD from Buttfuck Brenda is completely fucking retarded.
 
Doomcifer said:
Banning smoking in bars, where minors aren't even allowed, people getting wasted beyond recognition, and going home to contract an STD from Buttfuck Brenda is completely fucking retarded.
I kinda concur

I didn't much mind people smoking in bars and if there is anytime I want to smoke it's when I'm out drinking beer. Which is not all that often (so I won't die from 2nd hand smoke,) but yeah.

Bartenders and beer wenches be damned. If they don't want lung cancer, sux2bethem, they should have gotten an education and a better job
 
MadeInNewJersey said:
I smoke regularly, and I say, it's about fucking time.
You think the government telling a private businesses how to operate is a good thing? You think the government telling people what they can and can't put into their bodies is a good thing?

For starters, the law is completely hypocritical. It allows smoking in casinos. Why? Simple, deep pockets. If our govenrment is so concerned with our well-being, why allow it anywhere?

Second, all of this anti-smoking sentiment is based on the idea that second-hand smoke causes cancer. The facts are, the only study ever done that concluded such, was thrown out of court by a judge as being results biased. When that happened, the World Health Organization set out to prove second-hand smoke causes cancer. They failed. As of today, no study exists. Yet the anti-smoking lobby acts as if it's a well documented, scientific fact. It isn't.

Finally, I'm an x-smoker. Haven't had a cigarette in 10 years. That said, I support the right of private business to determine how they will run themselves. My favorite restaurant is a place in Trenton called Pete Lorenzo's Cafe. It's been there since the 30s. They allow cigar smoking at every table in the restaurant. They will most likely go under because of this ban. If you don't want to be exposed to second-hand smoke, don't go.

All of this makes no sense. Let the free market do its thing. If people in this state want the state smoke-free, then the market will bear that out.

One more thing, the fact that an unelected official, that assumed office based on our governor's resignation, is signing this legislation on his last day at the post, is criminal.

Zod
 
Great post Zod. That has been my biggest argument with this entire thing but I completely failed to mention it on my post for some reason. The ban has been in effect here for a couple years now.
 
unhinged said:
so can you moke in the street?
I believe so.

The whole thing is ludicrous. NJ is the cancer capital of the U.S. because of all the industry pollution, and because the state is so densely populated. Banning smoking in NJ bars and restaurants is akin to banning space heaters in hell. If they were really concerned about the health of Jersians, they would work to enact tougher emmissions standards, cut down on corporate pollution, etc. Make no mistake, this legislation is about personal agendas and the power of the anti-smoking lobby (a beast which is fed by a lie-based fear capaign).

Zod
 
General Zod said:
Second, all of this anti-smoking sentiment is based on the idea that second-hand smoke causes cancer. The facts are, the only study ever done that concluded such, was thrown out of court by a judge as being results biased. When that happened, the World Health Organization set out to prove second-hand smoke causes cancer. They failed. As of today, no study exists. Yet the anti-smoking lobby acts as if it's a well documented, scientific fact. It isn't.

THANK YOU. Im an ex-smoker myself to, and it is damn near impossible to convince people that most of the rhetoric surrounding second hand smoke is a myth.