FDA & Federal Government Out Of Control On Tobacco Regulation

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The problem with tobacco is over-exaggerated big time. ESPECIALLY on the lines of second-hand smoke.

As an opponent of the federal and supporter of local government, you better make your case against the states and localities that actually put into place smoking bans. It ain't the FDA and it ain't Uncle Sam. The map below makes that pretty clear...

State Rights FTW.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

A "private restaurant" would be the dining room of your home or apartment, where you ARE allowed to smoke. You can invite your friends to come eat with you, too, and they can smoke.

But if a restaurant is open to the public, and allows members of the public to come in off the street, and accepts money from members of the public in exchange for its food/services, then it's a public accomodation, even if it may be privately owned. There are lots of rules about health and sanitation that apply to public restaurants which don't apply to private residences. There are rules about having lighted exit signs, fire extinguishers, stainless steel food prep surfaces, handwashing sinks, and a bunch of other rules established for the public health and safety. If you don't like the idea that restaurants open to the public can be regulated for the public health, you're free to move to a jurisdiction that doesn't have or enforce such rules.

I'll be the first to tell you that each and every one of those rules is bullshit in a privately owned facility in which people have a choice to patron or not to patron.

[Niels Bohr 72]

I hate smokers. Will never go near them, to their homes, etc...I am a massive hater to smokers. So annoying.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

You are surprised? wait until we have nationalized health care and the government actually has an interest in health issues. You ain't seen nothing yet!

I recently quit. Though I did it for health reasons I consider it a tax protest...it gave me more incentive. Alla has been staching the money I used to spend on Cigs (about 80% of it tax) and we already have enough to pay for two of our plane tickets to Europe this summer. Not only do I feel better, I am having fun with the tax savings at the governments expense

But, as always, I am a pro-choice person and think all adults have the right to smoke themselves to death if they want.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

I'll be the first to tell you that each and every one of those rules is bullshit in a privately owned facility in which people have a choice to patron or not to patron.

I agree with you. The government has no business telling a private property owner what to do on their private property, state, local or federal.

I CHOOSE to cheat the government out of money by quitting smoking, but no one should be forced by law to quit or banned from using tobacco on private property.

[CDAgirlMI 51]

Ontario, Canada banned smoking inside all public areas. Best darn thing they ever did.

I hated coming home reeeeeeking of smoke. Not to mention all the ####### I had to breathe in.

Yes, it was a CHOICE for me to go to an area that allowed people to smoke, but given the studies on second-hand smoke, it should be against the law.

....now I can't wait for Michigan to do the same thing.....

that could take a while.

[Texanadian 10]

Or the third option - support children's health care and make smokers like you pay for it.

I think people with Ronald McDonald avatars should pay more tax to support kids.

So, what we're saying here is that Toyota was perfectly within their rights to sell cars that accelerate as they wish and happen to have failing steering and breaking systems. Ain't the governments god damn problem what Toyota sells as perfectly safe vehicles, is it?

As a privately owned company, it's within Toyota's best interests to sell vehicles that are safe. Hence why they're opening dealerships 24/7 top fix the problems. If Toyota simply did nothing, they would/will lose future sales. Just as people expect that Marlboro and Winston will sell cigarettes that aren't laced with broken glass, motor oil, cyanide etc. In fact that's one of the primary reasons people are for legalizing drugs. That it would lead to safer drug use due to standards being involved. Nobody is afraid of buying Tylenol. But you'd think twice before buying a homemade pill from somebody's vehicle trunk that is supposed to get rid of a headache.

This thread has taken multiple different arguments. As far as the topic of smokers causing costs to healthcare, there are already solutions at hand. Smokers pay higher health insurance premiums and higher life insurance premiums already. High taxes on cigarettes exist *supposedly) to pay for future health care costs. Smoke 1 pack a year? You pay a small amount in taxes. Smoke 2 or 3 packs a day. You pay more in taxes. But smokers have no more business paying for children's health care than immigrants should if the government decided to raise green card fees to $5,000 in order to pay for children's health care. Heaven forbid that we actually put the responsibility towards the parent for paying for their children's health insurance.

Plenty of things in society cause others's to pay for costs. A 16 year old is more likely to get in a car accident (thus causing other's to pay through insurance) than a 40 year old person is. People who drink wine or beer or eat ice cream or drink anything other than water are more likely to be unhealthier. But the food vs smoking vs drinking debate is for another topic. If you have 8 brothers and 5 sisters, your family is causing a greater burden on society to pay for their schooling.

The absurdity of not being allowed to smoke outside in certain sections always amazes me. Whether it's the 25 ft rule outside a door or whether it's not being allowed to smoke outside at a restaurant. Take the restaurant example. First they say you can't smoke inside. So the smokers go outside. Then the non-smokers complain because all the nice outside seats on the deck or street areas are taken by the smokers. Quit being greedy! I'm more annoyed by the smell of diesel buses and the stench of gridlocked traffic than I am somebody sitting outside smoking a cigarette.

[TBoneTX 45,303]

But if a restaurant is open to the public, and allows members of the public to come in off the street, and accepts money from members of the public in exchange for its food/services, then it's a public accomodation, even if it may be privately owned.

Hence the oft-posted "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone" signs in restaurants that are conspicuously absent in truly public facilities, such as post offices and the DMV?

[Nagishkaw 510]

[Danno 1,228]

Ontario, Canada banned smoking inside all public areas. Best darn thing they ever did.

I hated coming home reeeeeeking of smoke. Not to mention all the ####### I had to breathe in.

Yes, it was a CHOICE for me to go to an area that allowed people to smoke, but given the studies on second-hand smoke, it should be against the law.

....now I can't wait for Michigan to do the same thing.....

that could take a while.

[Danno 1,228]

You are surprised? wait until we have nationalized health care and the government actually has an interest in health issues. You ain't seen nothing yet!

Truer words never spoken.

First they use every means to herd us into collectives in one form or another, then they implement controls over everyone under the reasoning that "it effects me".

Edited March 20, 2010 by Danno

[Nagishkaw 510]

....now I can't wait for Michigan to do the same thing.....

that could take a while.

Read much? May 1, 2010 you'll get your wish.

[JimandChristy 1,689]

Ann Coulter?