Gamingforce Interactive Forums
85239 35211

Go Back   Exploding Garrmondo Weiner Interactive Swiss Army Penis > Garrmondo Network > General Discussion

Notices

Welcome to the Exploding Garrmondo Weiner Interactive Swiss Army Penis.
GFF is a community of gaming and music enthusiasts. We have a team of dedicated moderators, constant member-organized activities, and plenty of custom features, including our unique journal system. If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ or our GFWiki. You will have to register before you can post. Membership is completely free (and gets rid of the pesky advertisement unit underneath this message).


Cigarette ヽ(#`Д´)凸
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Janus X
Stupid Frog


Member 31258

Level 6.95

Jul 2008


Reply With Quote
Old Jan 14, 2009, 11:02 AM Local time: Jan 14, 2009, 10:02 AM #1 of 126
Cigarette ヽ(#`Д´)凸

CTV.ca | N.S. town moves to ban smoking in downtown district

Although I am part of the smoke Ghestappo, I have to wonder if cigarette banning hasn't gone too far. I rejoiced when cigarettes were banned from bars and restaurants; according to popular bars and restaurants in Quebec City, there are even more people!

Now, not only are cigarettes hidden behind opaque panels (over which some are advertizing beer), but now we are told that THIRD-hand smoke (that sticks to clothes) is toxic

Cigarette a legal product sold (usually) to consenting adults for consciously know it's killing them.

How is ban on cigarette where you live? Is it enough? too much?

Jam it back in, in the dark.
Sousuke
...it was not.


Member 1133

Level 33.80

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Jan 14, 2009, 12:54 PM #2 of 126
Here in Ontario [I'm not sure if the law is federal, or provincial, or even regional], smoking in public places outside is allowed, so long as you're 30 feet/10meters away from building entrances. There's usually designated smoking areas; but as long as you're far enough away from the doors, you're okay.

Inside public buildings [that is to say--a building that isn't somebody's home, or say, an apartment building's hallway] is not allowed. This includes things like taxis or work vehicles [like snowplows and such].

I noticed they started putting the opaque panels over the cigarettes in stores about a year ago, but I never understood why. People still know there's smokes behind them--except now, behind the counter you see ugly white steel panels instead of the colourful array of cigarette packaging.

There's nowhere I can't reach.
chocojournal | rate! 1 2 3 4 5
twtr // g+ // dA // bklg // l.fm // XBL // tmblr
Janus X
Stupid Frog


Member 31258

Level 6.95

Jul 2008


Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2009, 11:02 AM Local time: Jan 22, 2009, 10:02 AM #3 of 126

I noticed they started putting the opaque panels over the cigarettes in stores about a year ago, but I never understood why.
To protect children's innoncent eyes


CTV.ca | Rights group blasts 'non-smoker' stipulation for job

And I thought language discrimination in Quebec was the worst thing...

Would you keep an employee away if he smoked?

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.
The unmovable stubborn
(Feeling Inspired)


Member 1512

Level 62.24

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2009, 11:10 AM #4 of 126
Well, I can't argue the legality of it but it seems kind of predictable that an anti-smoking group wouldn't want to hire smokers. I mean, you wouldn't expect the AA to hire a bartender.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?
Misogynyst Gynecologist
In A Way, He Died In Every War


Member 389

Level 49.28

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Jan 22, 2009, 11:14 AM #5 of 126
My problem with the nonsmoking laws around here is more the fact that theres no stipulations for some kind of smoke-friendly bars. All of the places I use to haunt suffered greatly when people decided to stay home after the smoking laws were put into affect.

I was speaking idiomatically.
psilophone
/arr/


Member 32789

Level 1.02

Jan 2009


Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2009, 11:11 PM #6 of 126
Here in Ontario...
I heard they also recently made a law in Ontario that bans smoking in a vehicle if anyone under 16 is present. Very good law imo.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?
lord-of-shadow
Never pet a burning dog.


Member 38

Level 16.30

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2009, 11:19 PM 9 #7 of 126
I'm all for anti-smoking laws. Of every kind. I'm the guy who would ban all sale of cigarette everywhere, and ban smoking... everywhere.

Quote:
Would you keep an employee away if he smoked?
I'd avoid my own brother if he smoked. If you smoke, you reek. If you reek, you're unpleasant to be around. That's without even getting into any possible health considerations of second or third hand smoke, and the detrimental effect on the mood and image of a place that's staffed by employees that are always outside being an eyesore with their cigs.

FELIPE NO
The unmovable stubborn
(Feeling Inspired)


Member 1512

Level 62.24

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2009, 11:22 PM 1 #8 of 126
I'm all for anti-smoking laws. Of every kind. I'm the guy who would ban all sale of cigarette everywhere, and ban smoking... everywhere.
How's the war against Eurasia coming along, Big Brother?

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Last edited by The unmovable stubborn; Jan 24, 2009 at 11:25 PM. Reason: I like these threads, because they help us to identify the cunts among us
Misogynyst Gynecologist
In A Way, He Died In Every War


Member 389

Level 49.28

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2009, 11:41 PM #9 of 126
Quote:
If you smoke, you reek. If you reek, you're unpleasant to be around.
I assume you smoke - your post stinks.

Jam it back in, in the dark.
Sarag
Fuck yea dinosaurs


Member 748

Level 53.85

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2009, 12:29 AM 1 #10 of 126
I'd avoid my own brother if he smoked. If you smoke, you reek. If you reek, you're unpleasant to be around. That's without even getting into any possible health considerations of second or third hand smoke
Oh that's cute, you read the newspaper like a grownup. Health concerns based on the smell of someone's clothing. In a world powered by petroleum, I call shennanigans.

Actually, you know what, I take that back. It must be frustrating when you go in the bathroom at school and it's full of smoke. It's been so long since I've been in high school that I nearly forgot how frustrating it is when you only have five minutes to take a leak and you have to deal with that shit.

There's nowhere I can't reach.
lord-of-shadow
Never pet a burning dog.


Member 38

Level 16.30

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2009, 12:32 AM 4 #11 of 126
Well, although all smokers stink, not all people who stink... smoke.

Really, there is no legitimate reason for allowing smoking, at least not while so many less harmful things are banned. There is a definite double-standard here. A society that bans things like weed but allows tobacco?

The only reason that smoking is still around is because it's embedded in the country economically, and because so many people are hooked on killing themselves and those around them that to try to ban it is more or less out of the question. I for one think that forcing everyone to go cold turkey, and ruining a few small convenience store businesses, would be a worthwhile price to pay. It'd be over soon.

Of course, that's not feasible and probably never will be, so I content myself with being very happy with the laws banning it in public places.

EDIT:

Quote:
Oh that's cute, you read the newspaper like a grownup. Health concerns based on the smell of someone's clothing. In a world powered by petroleum, I call shennanigans.
I only brought up the third-hand smoke because a poster before me did. It never even occurred to me to worry about it before that, and I haven't done enough research on the subject to judge whether it's a legitimate concern or not.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.
Sarag
Fuck yea dinosaurs


Member 748

Level 53.85

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2009, 12:42 AM #12 of 126
I only brought up the third-hand smoke because a poster before me did. It never even occurred to me to worry about it before that, and I haven't done enough research on the subject to judge whether it's a legitimate concern or not.
Oh, my bad. I don't tend to read Janus' posts.

t Janus: you can bitch about third hand smoke when we're running purely off of solar panels, windmills and the power of Jesus' love. Be more concerned about relaxed environmental regulation that results in salmonella in your God-damned peanut butter.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?
The unmovable stubborn
(Feeling Inspired)


Member 1512

Level 62.24

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2009, 12:47 AM #13 of 126
The only reason that smoking is still around is because it's embedded in the country economically
Are you even faintly serious?

Yes, nobody outside the United States has ever touched a cigarette in their lives.

Yes, banning an addictive drug would, in fact, actually force people to stop taking it. That always works. A black market definitely wouldn't spring up.

Yes, you can resolve a double standard by curtailing liberty even further.

Come on, man. Think. The whole notion that something should be banned because you can hurt yourself by doing it is absurdist. How the hell do you think the automobile industry stays in business?

I was speaking idiomatically.
Grail
Wonderful Chocobo


Member 2483

Level 21.21

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2009, 01:18 AM Local time: Jan 25, 2009, 01:18 AM 1 1 #14 of 126
Really, there is no legitimate reason for allowing smoking, at least not while so many less harmful things are banned. There is a definite double-standard here. A society that bans things like weed but allows tobacco?
To be fair, I don't particularly like cigarettes or weed. But if I had my choice between somebody that just smelled like tobacco, or somebody that smelled like weed and ACTED LIKE A COMPLETE FUCKING RETARD WHILE DOING SO.

I'd have to take the cigs on this one buddy.

Not to derail, but the argument above is completely and utterly stupid that you provide Shadow. Any dumbfuck pot smoker (I'm looking at you) who says that weed is 'less harmful' could be right in the sense that it does not do much harm to oneself, but I'm pretty sure weed has been responsible for as many injuries or fatalities as oh, let's say drunk driving.

And, if knowing you are a piss ant pot head like I think you are, you undoubtedly also drink. So therefore, if you want smoking banned because it makes your nose go 'ew' you can rightly take your fist and shove it up your ass buddy. You're a god damn hypocrite.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?
Bernard Black
I don't mean this in a bad way, but genetically you are a cul-de-sac


Member 518

Level 32.84

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2009, 01:31 AM Local time: Jan 25, 2009, 06:31 AM #15 of 126
My problem with the nonsmoking laws around here is more the fact that theres no stipulations for some kind of smoke-friendly bars. All of the places I use to haunt suffered greatly when people decided to stay home after the smoking laws were put into affect.
My favourite pub went out of business simply because of this. My friends and I have always stipulated since the 07 ban on smoking in enclosed public places that they should segregate non-smoking and smoking pubs. Far too many places have suffered from the ban for my liking.

I heard about a pub in Eire where they allow smoking inside but only if you pay £1 (or the euro equivalent) to cover the cost of the fine.

FELIPE NO
Gechmir
Did you see anything last night?


Member 629

Level 46.64

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2009, 01:56 AM Local time: Jan 25, 2009, 01:56 AM #16 of 126
My town(s) (B/CS, TX) just recently passed a smoking ban that kicks in Feb 1st I believe. No smoking in bars, restaurants, etc. What I find really silly is that this should be left up to the owners of the god damned establishments.

I'm not a smoker, but I really don't like how folk are curb-stomping smokers so crazily. Then again, I'm biased; I actually LIKE the smell of cigarette smoke

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?
Hey, maybe you should try that thing Chie was talking about.

Vemp
fuuuuuu


Member 929

Level 33.83

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2009, 02:03 AM Local time: Jan 25, 2009, 03:03 PM #17 of 126
My country did ban smoking ads, and I'm hearing that them politicians are trying to put an anti-smoking law. There are anti-smoking areas, usually public places, but for the most part people are pretty much smoking here and there. I guess being a 3rd world country, laws such as this don't apply, especially in rural areas and places outside the city.

Jam it back in, in the dark.
The unmovable stubborn
(Feeling Inspired)


Member 1512

Level 62.24

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2009, 02:07 AM 3 #18 of 126
Then again, I'm biased; I actually LIKE the smell of cigarette smoke
Well, for one thing, it's not a single universal smell. It comes down to the quality and the brand and all that. If the smokers you know are all rockin' cheapshit Kools they got down at the bodega then yeah, that's not so pleasant. "Smokers" don't smell bad, stupid people pinching their pennies smell bad. And they do that without any help from their cigarettes, because they've been wearing the same suit 6 days in a row to save on dry-cleaning.

It's just like beer, really; people who don't know much about it will say oh, I don't drink beer, it tastes awful. Yeah, because you're drinking awful beer!

There's nowhere I can't reach.
lord-of-shadow
Never pet a burning dog.


Member 38

Level 16.30

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2009, 02:28 AM #19 of 126
To be fair, I don't particularly like cigarettes or weed. But if I had my choice between somebody that just smelled like tobacco, or somebody that smelled like weed and ACTED LIKE A COMPLETE FUCKING RETARD WHILE DOING SO.
It's not a matter of which one I'd rather be around, it's a matter of which one makes more sense to illegalize. Sad as it is, people acting like dumbfucks can't be regulated. Weed does tend to attract that sort. But unlike tobacco, weed doesn't directly impact the user's health.

And no, I don't touch weed with a ten foot pole. It may not have any long-term health risks (although I'm not entirely sold on that point either), but everyone I've ever been around who smokes it is a fucking retard. Regardless if that has anything to do with the weed or not, I'd rather not be associated with that crowd.

As for the drinking, I don't drink much or often. I brought up weed to contrast tobacco with an example of something that IS prosecuted and illegalized in the US for far less reason. Try to contain your need to run off with baseless assumptions and judgments in the future.

How ya doing, buddy?
Ceres
Now promoted to 'Dwarf Planet' status


Member 3240

Level 19.81

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2009, 02:49 AM #20 of 126
One of the new regulations that we have at the daycare center that I work at is that when ever anyone goes out for a cigarette, they need to either change their shirt or wear a smock. When this was brought up at our big meeting in September, it stirred things up quite a bit among the smokers present as it just sounded like a nuisance. Luckily it doesn't really affect the center that I work at since none of us smoke (we have five centers in our area).

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?
Meth
I'm not entirely joking.


Member 565

Level 26.04

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2009, 05:00 AM Local time: Jan 25, 2009, 04:00 AM #21 of 126
My town(s) (B/CS, TX) just recently passed a smoking ban that kicks in Feb 1st I believe. No smoking in bars, restaurants, etc. What I find really silly is that this should be left up to the owners of the god damned establishments.

Oink oink there you capitalist pig. Geeze, why should buisness owners have any say in the way they run their establisments? It's up to the state to come in and save us from ourselves...and corporations, and greed, and oil, and we need to find another bandwagon to jump on and, and, and...Somone should make some "organic" cigarettes that smelled like burt's bees and sell them at wild oats so we wouldn't have an issue.


I have plenty of friends that smoke who I wish would quit, but ultimately, it's a vice/pleasure that they choose. Business owners used to be able to choose if they allowed smoking at their place of business, but now they can't. The decision has been made for them for the sake of the "greater good." The result: a bunch of anxiety ridden folks who need a smoke who will live forver who can't even set the rules at their own bar.

-10 freedom points

How ya doing, buddy?
Franky Mikey
Bonkler


Member 6

Level 39.27

Feb 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2009, 05:17 AM Local time: Jan 25, 2009, 11:17 AM #22 of 126
Quote:
Business owners used to be able to choose if they allowed smoking at their place of business
Did they really have a choice, though? Commercially speaking, banning smoking in your bar when all the other bars in town allowed it would have been disastrous. Nobody ever did that around here before the universal ban was passed. There's no real freedom of choice when one of the two options means one-way trip to bankrupcy, is there?

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

[ recordings |videos| blog ]
[ 18:14:09 ] [ +Garr ] Setting up form unreal troanmetn
Aardark
Combustion or something and so on, fuck it


Member 10

Level 40.02

Feb 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2009, 05:57 AM Local time: Jan 25, 2009, 12:57 PM #23 of 126
Did they really have a choice, though? Commercially speaking, banning smoking in your bar when all the other bars in town allowed it would have been disastrous. Nobody ever did that around here before the universal ban was passed.
I can't believe there's no market for at least a single smoke-free bar in town. You say nobody ever did that, but did anyone actually go out of business while attempting to do it? I dunno. Most people don't smoke, so why would they choose to boycott a bar where they don't have to breathe in other people's fumes?

FELIPE NO
Nothing wrong with not being strong
Nothing says we need to beat what's wrong
Nothing manmade remains made long
That's a debt we can't back out of
Bradylama
Banned


Member 18

Level 51.14

Feb 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2009, 06:25 AM Local time: Jan 25, 2009, 06:25 AM #24 of 126
Bars never went non-smoking because nobody cares. Surprise surprise, people who frequent bars don't consider their health a priority.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?
Sousuke
...it was not.


Member 1133

Level 33.80

Mar 2006


Reply With Quote
Old Jan 25, 2009, 06:53 AM #25 of 126
I heard they also recently made a law in Ontario that bans smoking in a vehicle if anyone under 16 is present. Very good law imo.
I just heard about this for the first time the other day. I think it actually was JUST started within the past few weeks or so.

Soon they're going to be placing laws that say you can't even smoke in your own home.

Jam it back in, in the dark.
chocojournal | rate! 1 2 3 4 5
twtr // g+ // dA // bklg // l.fm // XBL // tmblr
Reply

Thread Tools

Exploding Garrmondo Weiner Interactive Swiss Army Penis > Garrmondo Network > General Discussion > Cigarette ヽ(#`Д´)凸

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Proper way to smoke a cigarette? rocketdog General Discussion 15 Jan 6, 2007 11:43 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.