New York poised to ban smoking in Central Park, Times Square - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Contag;27868174]How do you manage when you walk through a garage or traffic? [editline]5th February 2011[/editline] I'd rather tobacco than cannabis.[/QUOTE] I don't walk through traffic nor a garage.

[QUOTE=Ridge;27877556][img_thumb]http://www.impactguns.com/store/media/ruger/ruger_1022rb.jpg[/img_thumb][/QUOTE] The idiocy of this post aside (since nobody here is talking about guns) Guns can easily be a threat to other people. You'd need to constantly inhale second hand smoke for 50 years before developing health issues; however being shot intentionally or accidentally is an immediate health concern for obvious reasons.

[QUOTE=hypno-toad;27868307]Or for fucks sake. You're not having a reaction, you're simply neurotic. Hoenstly, I can't stand people like you who go into these stilted, obnoxious coughing fits every time a wisp of smoke goes by them.[/QUOTE] So just because you don't have that happening to you, no one does? I'm not neurotic, I simply have those effects. It's not like I cough for a show, it's not fun and somewhat painful and very irritating after a while. I don't care about the act of smoking. I'm just being biased because of my reactions. I don't enjoy the coughing and wheezing, and if that didn't happen, I wouldn't care at all who smoked what and where.

so many ignorant non smokers with sandy vaginas in here.

[QUOTE=Badunkadunk;27886563]Everyone of my friends who smokes constantly tries to quit, they hate it. I don't get why people do it, stress relief's the only reasoning I get, and you can do plenty of things to relieve stress, not like smoking actually relieves stress for a lot of people. I always see mothers pissed off at their kids sucking up a cigarette in a minute or two, and still they're just as pissed off as they were before. It's annoying to me because I never smoked, never had the desire to, and never saw reason in doing it. It's an alien concept and I'll never understand the joys of inhaling smoke.[/QUOTE] I enjoy smoking a lot. The taste is usually enjoyable. You can get Cloves which are really cool because they are minty and numb your mouth. A lot of people enjoy the head rush. Most of all I just liking inhaling and exhaling smoke because I find it fun. You're coming from the point of view that smoking is absolutely terrible and the only perk you can understand (relaxation) probably isn't as effective as alternative methods. Another flaw with your view is that your judgment is solely based off addicts. Granted that they are addictive and are used in moderation like so many other addictive substances. I'm someone who will smoke in moderation. I'm not going to say that being addicted to cigs is fun because being addicted to anything, especially something that costs a lot and has negative effects on your health when used long term is bad. But can you comprehend how some people like me get joy out of smoking?

[QUOTE=Zeke129;27864926][b]I DON'T LIKE THE THING YOU DO SO I FULLY SUPPORT THE GOVERNMENT BANNING YOU FROM DOING IT EVEN WHEN IT POSES NO THREAT TO Me[/b][/QUOTE] Second hand smoke kills, restating for principle inb4 "open area"

If smokers can pollute the air with their habit, I should be able to walk around playing really loud, annoying music all the time.

[QUOTE=PyromanDan;27887807]Second hand smoke kills dipshit, restating for principle inb4 "open area"[/QUOTE] No it doesn't. It's a total myth sensationalized by the media and every anti-drug/tobacco organization. I can give you pleanty of sources, but I don't you'd be willing to read them so I will just make a quick argument. In 60% of the studies conducted on second hand smoke there is found to be no impact on overall health. In 40% of the studies, they found some impact, but not enough to be statistically relevant. This means that it would be a rather large stretch to say that second hand smoke did had a negative impact on your long term health. Saying that someone died as a result of second hand smoke? That's far more than a stretch, that is a complete leap of the imagination. Now you're saying that something that has been shown by the majority of studies to have no negative impact on your health... Can kill you. Why would all these big organization lie about the dangers of second hand smoke? To further their anti-tobacco agenda. Just in case you do happen to be interested, here is a good article to get you started. It cites a lot of studies. [URL]http://yourdoctorsorders.com/2009/01/the-myth-of-second-hand-smoke/[/URL] And yes, second hand smoke has a negative impact on babies and small children like I said in one of my earlier posts, but you and everyone else saying that second hand smoke kills is obviously not limiting your argument to just that group, you're saying it can kill anyone.

what would spike do. [img]http://img423.imageshack.us/img423/5175/1be4.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=PyromanDan;27887807]Second hand smoke kills dipshit, restating for principle inb4 "open area"[/QUOTE] No. It. Doesn't. You can't fucking prove it. Can you isolate it against every other variable in someones life? no. You can't. You can't say that for sure. The study you base this off of, was even proven false.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;27888992]No. It. Doesn't. You can't fucking prove it. Can you isolate it against every other variable in someones life? no. You can't. You can't say that for sure. The study you base this off of, was even proven false.[/QUOTE] I never sourced or implied a study, I could be spouting for all you know. you dont have to isolate every variable in a car accident to know the guy with his skull cracked open is dead. [QUOTE=Pepin;27888103]No it doesn't. It's a total myth sensationalized by the media and every anti-drug/tobacco organization. I can give you pleanty of sources, but I don't you'd be willing to read them so I will just make a quick argument. In 60% of the studies conducted on second hand smoke there is found to be no impact on overall health. In 40% of the studies, they found some impact, but not enough to be statistically relevant. This means that it would be a rather large stretch to say that second hand smoke did had a negative impact on your long term health. Saying that someone died as a result of second hand smoke? That's far more than a stretch, that is a complete leap of the imagination. Now you're saying that something that has been shown by the majority of studies to have no negative impact on your health... Can kill you. Why would all these big organization lie about the dangers of second hand smoke? To further their anti-tobacco agenda. Just in case you do happen to be interested, here is a good article to get you started. It cites a lot of studies. [URL]http://yourdoctorsorders.com/2009/01/the-myth-of-second-hand-smoke/[/URL] And yes, second hand smoke has a negative impact on babies and small children like I said in one of my earlier posts, but you and everyone else saying that second hand smoke kills is obviously not limiting your argument to just that group, you're saying it can kill anyone.[/QUOTE] A well structured post, but here comes me being tired again. a child riding in a car with his mother who is a smoker, while she puffs one off. he rides in the car with her to school and back every school day for however long he is in school. the same smoke that she breaths in, he breaths in, in lower quantities obviously. also, slightly stupid, but I'd like to point out I've seen tons of sites like that on [b]either side of an issue[/b] tossing out "legit study and proven facts", ie [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspartame[/url] [QUOTE=Zeke129;27889081]Yeah, it's extremely easy to take readings for adequate ventilation so it could become part of routine health inspections that restaurant's ventilation systems are working properly and removing the smoke from the building. Then I wouldn't have a problem. There is actually substantial evidence that shows continued exposure to second-hand smoke is dangerous, especially for those with asthma A quick trip to Wikipedia would reveal: which cites [url=http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol83/index.php]this[/url]. To say that it is all propaganda and that second-hand smoke isn't dangerous at all is absolutely contrary to scientific evidence but this thread refers to outdoor locations so it doesn't matter in this case[/QUOTE] this, I never refered to the situation of this threads article, in which it is an outdoors location, where the ppm of any toxic smoke from cigarettes is going to be very slim.

[QUOTE=Zeke129;27864926][b]I DON'T LIKE THE THING YOU DO SO I FULLY SUPPORT THE GOVERNMENT BANNING YOU FROM DOING IT EVEN WHEN IT POSES NO THREAT TO Me[/b][/QUOTE] Sometimes I love you, WHY DO YOU TOY WITH MY EMOTIONS ZEKE

[QUOTE=Billiam;27886647]Smoking and nonsmoking sections in restaurants were pretty cool.[/QUOTE] Yeah, it's extremely easy to take readings for adequate ventilation so it could become part of routine health inspections that restaurant's ventilation systems are working properly and removing the smoke from the building. Then I wouldn't have a problem. [QUOTE=Pepin;27888103]No it doesn't. It's a total myth sensationalized by the media and every anti-drug/tobacco organization. I can give you pleanty of sources, but I don't you'd be willing to read them so I will just make a quick argument. In 60% of the studies conducted on second hand smoke there is found to be no impact on overall health. In 40% of the studies, they found some impact, but not enough to be statistically relevant. This means that it would be a rather large stretch to say that second hand smoke did had a negative impact on your long term health. Saying that someone died as a result of second hand smoke? That's far more than a stretch, that is a complete leap of the imagination. Now you're saying that something that has been shown by the majority of studies to have no negative impact on your health... Can kill you. Why would all these big organization lie about the dangers of second hand smoke? To further their anti-tobacco agenda. Just in case you do happen to be interested, here is a good article to get you started. It cites a lot of studies. [URL]http://yourdoctorsorders.com/2009/01/the-myth-of-second-hand-smoke/[/URL] And yes, second hand smoke has a negative impact on babies and small children like I said in one of my earlier posts, but you and everyone else saying that second hand smoke kills is obviously not limiting your argument to just that group, you're saying it can kill anyone.[/QUOTE] There is actually substantial evidence that shows continued exposure to second-hand smoke is dangerous, especially for those with asthma A quick trip to Wikipedia would reveal: [quote]In 2004, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) of the World Health Organization (WHO) reviewed all significant published evidence related to tobacco smoking and cancer. It concluded: These meta-analyses show that there is a statistically significant and consistent association between lung cancer risk in spouses of smokers and exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke from the spouse who smokes. The excess risk is of the order of 20% for women and 30% for men and remains after controlling for some potential sources of bias and confounding.[/quote] which cites [url=http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol83/index.php]this[/url]. To say that it is all propaganda and that second-hand smoke isn't dangerous at all is absolutely contrary to scientific evidence but this thread refers to outdoor locations so it doesn't matter in this case

This thread is full of self righteous assholes.

[QUOTE=PyromanDan;27889010]I never sourced or implied a study, I could be spouting for all you know. you dont have to isolate every variable in a car accident to know the guy with his skull cracked open is dead. A well structured post, but here comes me being tired again. a child riding in a car with his mother who is a smoker, while she puffs one off. he rides in the car with her to school and back every school day for however long he is in school. the same smoke that she breaths in, he breaths in, in lower quantities obviously. also, slightly stupid, but I'd like to point out I've seen tons of sites like that on [b]either side of an issue[/b] tossing out "legit study and proven facts", ie [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspartame[/url] this, I never refered to the situation of this threads article, in which it is an outdoors location, where the ppm of any toxic smoke from cigarettes is going to be very slim.[/QUOTE] Uhm, I lived in that situation for 18 years. I inhaled second hand smoke my whole life, after I was probably 3 or 4 and I smoke myself and neither I or my father have any sort of cancer, nor my mother who once smoked and who is surrounded by smokers. The second hand smoke in massive quantities may do something, especially when prolonged for years at an early age, but it's not certain too.

you shouldnt smoke so i think that the government should make you not smoke for your own good where is my welfare check, has anyone seen my welfare check?

[QUOTE=Zeke129;27886590]I agree with everything except the bar argument, I don't think that smoking should be permitted at public indoor locations simply because that's the one scenario where second-hand smoke is actually dangerous - especially for the employees.[/QUOTE] Toughen up princess.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;27887622]so many ignorant non smokers with sandy vaginas in here.[/QUOTE] And over-defensive smokers.

Non-smoker here. I hate smoking bans in private establishments. It's their damn property, they should be able to make their rules about what you can do there. That being said, I [I]do[/I] support a smoking ban in parks. It's public property, and smoking is a nuisance to everyone around you. It would be like if they banned loud music in the park. It makes sense.

[QUOTE=Pepin;27885588]Second hand smoke has no likely hood of causing danger. The golden case that is often quoted to show that second hand smoke is dangerous was so badly conducted that it got thrown out by the Supreme court. It is of course still quoted because it is the only study to make any kind of argument that second hand smoke is dangerous. The exceptions to this are babies and small children, there are a lot of studies that show second hand smoke does have a bad impact on their health. Because of this, it would make sense to ban smoking in places where children are very likely to be, like playgrounds and schools (smoking is usually banned there anyway). In a previous thread I provided a lot of links to show this. If you're skeptical about what I'm saying, do a bit of research and you should find the same thing.[/QUOTE] Hey look a junkie pulling something out of his ass because of his chemical addiction. Here's a 200 page report telling you why you are wrong: [URL="http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol83/mono83.pdf"]http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol83/mono83-7.pdf[/URL] I don't mind smoking do it if you want just don't be shocked when people who don't like it tell you to fuck off when you light up in public. The one time I was in a bar to play pool when smoking was still legal in bars I came out smelling like shit, couldn't breathe properly for the rest of the day, and had a constant wheeze.

[QUOTE=fenwick;27889500]Non-smoker here. I hate smoking bans in private establishments. It's their damn property, they should be able to make their rules about what you can do there. That being said, I [I]do[/I] support a smoking ban in parks. It's public property, and smoking is a nuisance to everyone around you. It would be like if they banned loud music in the park. It makes sense.[/QUOTE] Couldn't agree more.

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;27885013]Why do people give a fuck? Before you say the following: - It smells bad ! [b] Industrial Size usually takes quality out of the product. Homegrown Tabaco, in my honest opinion has a wonderful smell. Musky, but tender. [/b[ - It can kill you :( ! [b] Here do me a favor... I want you, and some friends too go into a small garage. I want one of you too smoke a cigarette. Alright. Now one of you [i] might [/i] get cancer. Now I want you to take a car or moderate sized SUV, and rev it up for the same time it took you to smoke that cigarette. If you guys aren't dead you most likely have blacked out from the fumes. Please tell me, who's the real killer based around smoke/fumes? [/b].[/QUOTE] There's actually a study that says three cigarettes are worse than an idling diesel engine. [url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1747905/?tool=pmcentrez[/url] hahahahaha

[QUOTE=Badunkadunk;27889373]And over-defensive smokers.[/QUOTE] People treat smokers like shit, what do you expect?

[QUOTE=Habsburg;27864913]They probably know that and it's their bloody choice to smoke. [editline]4th February 2011[/editline] None of the smokers I've met act like that.[/QUOTE] Smokers can say that it's their choice that their smoking but in reality it's their brain's addiction to nicotine deciding their "choice".

[QUOTE=Billiam;27889749]People treat smokers like shit, what do you expect?[/QUOTE] Probably because they let off shit smelling smoke that contributes to a wide variety of disease. [editline]6th February 2011[/editline] [quote] There is widespread [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus"]scientific consensus[/URL] that exposure to secondhand smoke is harmful.[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondhand_smoke#cite_note-kessler-5"][6][/URL] The link between passive smoking and health risks is accepted by every major medical and scientific organization, including: [LIST] [*]The [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Health_Organization"]World Health Organization[/URL][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondhand_smoke#cite_note-IARC2004-3"][4][/URL]: The governments of 168 nations have signed and currently 170 have [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratification"]ratified[/URL] the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Health_Organization_Framework_Convention_on_Tobacco_Control"]World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control[/URL], which states that "Parties recognize that scientific evidence has unequivocally established that exposure to tobacco smoke causes death, disease and disability."[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondhand_smoke#cite_note-framework-treaty-0"][1][/URL] [*]The U.S. [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Institutes_of_Health"]National Institutes of Health[/URL][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondhand_smoke#cite_note-87"][88][/URL] [*]The [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centers_for_Disease_Control"]Centers for Disease Control[/URL][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondhand_smoke#cite_note-88"][89][/URL] [*]The [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Surgeon_General"]United States Surgeon General[/URL][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondhand_smoke#cite_note-sg-report-1"][2][/URL] [*]The U.S. [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Cancer_Institute"]National Cancer Institute[/URL][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondhand_smoke#cite_note-89"][90][/URL] [*]The [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Environmental_Protection_Agency"]United States Environmental Protection Agency[/URL][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondhand_smoke#cite_note-90"][91][/URL] [*]The [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Environmental_Protection_Agency"]California Environmental Protection Agency[/URL][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondhand_smoke#cite_note-calepa2005-2"][3][/URL] [*]The [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Heart_Association"]American Heart Association[/URL],[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondhand_smoke#cite_note-91"][92][/URL] [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Lung_Association"]American Lung Association[/URL],[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondhand_smoke#cite_note-92"][93][/URL] and [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Cancer_Society"]American Cancer Society[/URL][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondhand_smoke#cite_note-93"][94][/URL] [*]The [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Medical_Association"]American Medical Association[/URL][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondhand_smoke#cite_note-94"][95][/URL] [*]The [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Academy_of_Pediatrics"]American Academy of Pediatrics[/URL][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondhand_smoke#cite_note-95"][96][/URL] [*]The Australian [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Health_and_Medical_Research_Council"]National Health and Medical Research Council[/URL][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondhand_smoke#cite_note-nphp-96"][97][/URL] [*]The [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom"]United Kingdom[/URL] Scientific Committee on Tobacco and Health[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondhand_smoke#cite_note-97"][98][/URL] [/LIST] [/quote]It's all biased bullshit research right? [editline]6th February 2011[/editline] This is too, right? [url]http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/full/120/14/1373[/url] [editline]6th February 2011[/editline] My mom was kind enough to smoke when I was a child. Now I have asthma and spend several hundred dollars a month for advair and albuterol. If I'm off the advair for three days I won't stop weezing and can die. It's difficult to run without wheezing and my VO2 max is complete shit. Of course it's okay to smoke when other people are around. They're just assholes if they can't respect you smoking.

[QUOTE=RBM11;27889758]Probably because they let off shit smelling smoke that contributes to a wide variety of disease.[/QUOTE] A smoker smoking outside is relatively harmless compared to car exhaust. The sheer volume of vehicles in Time Square combined with the default PM in NYC air at any time is gigantic.

[QUOTE=Raiskauskone V2;27872711]people get a lot more health issues from car exhausts than smokes, but seemingly Talon has issues with people who smoke, probably bullied by them or something.[/QUOTE] Because I can't walk into Wal Mart to get some food without 3 or 4 people standing right outside the sliding doors sucking one down, and then I have to breathe in that nasty shit It's not just the smell either. I live across the bay from the barrier islands on the Florida Panhandle, with our sugar white sandy beaches, and you can't take 3 steps without stepping on cigarette buts. They treat the whole world like its their ash tray. You think all those wild fires in California are started because of the sun and dry weather? Fuck no, it's some dumb smoker tossing his shit out the window

HumanAbyss loves science, except when it applies to the damaging effects of his smoking on others.

[QUOTE=RBM11;27889747]There's actually a study that says three cigarettes are worse than an idling diesel engine. [url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1747905/?tool=pmcentrez[/url] hahahahaha[/QUOTE] I said, "Rev Up" for a very valid reason.

[QUOTE=PyromanDan;27889010] A well structured post, but here comes me being tired again. a child riding in a car with his mother who is a smoker, while she puffs one off. he rides in the car with her to school and back every school day for however long he is in school. the same smoke that she breaths in, he breaths in, in lower quantities obviously. also, slightly stupid, but I'd like to point out I've seen tons of sites like that on [B]either side of an issue[/B] tossing out "legit study and proven facts", ie [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspartame[/URL][/QUOTE] Yes, children are at risk, I actually said that in my post. I'm not sure about where you live, but they've banned smoking in cars when there are people less than 16 present. I'm feel rather confident in throwing out any claim that second hand smoke can kill. Not counting the study where they pumped second hand smoke into a room for of moneys in an unventilated room, there is no evidence to make it definitive that second hand smoke will cause long term damage. There is some evidence that suggest it would increase your chance of getting heart disease, but as of right now there isn't any strong evidence to really make that claim. Am I eager to throw out legit studies that show there is a risk? No, I'm just likely to average them with all the other studies. Really, my opinion based on the research should be "second hand smoke has a very small likely hood of causing long term damage", but it isn't because of my own disregard for such a weak link. [editline]6th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Zeke129;27889081]There is actually substantial evidence that shows continued exposure to second-hand smoke is dangerous, especially for those with asthma which cites [URL="http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol83/index.php"]this[/URL]. To say that it is all propaganda and that second-hand smoke isn't dangerous at all is absolutely contrary to scientific evidence but this thread refers to outdoor locations so it doesn't matter in this case[/QUOTE] Actually I remember when I was researching this stuff that I came across a link questioning the validity of that study because it doesn't take into account a variety of factors, such as if the spouse used to smoke but I'll still accept some of its validity. To clarify, I'm not saying that any study that shows a link is all a bunch of crap. What I am claiming to be so unfounded in reality is any study that claims there is death from second hand smoke and anyone claiming that you risk permanent damage by spending a day a tobacco lounge. It's understandable if I see to be claiming that there is no potential risk of second hand smoke. I'm not including long term exposure in my assessments because most of the claims deal with short or very short term exposures. I'm not going to argue about longer term exposure. [editline]6th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=winsanity;27889750]Tobacco addicts can say that it's their choice that their smoking, but in reality it's their brain's addiction which makes it less of a choice.[/QUOTE] I rephrased it.