|
|
| |
| |
There sure are a lot of prohibitions, restrictions
and humiliations being foisted upon these jerk
smokers. It must be paypack for all the insult
and harm they have done to others.
And another bit of news that should make nonsmokers happy. Every
restaurant in Europe must either ban smoking or provide (if it's big
enough) a smoke-free zone.
Full article:
http://www.ajc.com/news/content/travel/content/0204a/22going.html
|
| |
| |
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 21:13:08 -0700, "- DefaultUser" <root@dev.nul>
wrote in <u5f_b.235$884.67940@news.uswest.net>:
There sure are a lot of prohibitions, restrictions
and humiliations being foisted upon these jerk
smokers. It must be paypack for all the insult
and harm they have done to others.
The prohibitions and restrictions are on smoke, not on smokers -- have
you ever once seen a smoker denied entrance to anywhere that's "non
smoking only?" There are a few exceptions (life insurance and such)
but not many.
As far as humiliations... that's purely in the eye of the beholder.
Personally I never once felt humiliated in the 23 years I smoked (I
quit last October/November).
-----
Next up: A disturbing new study finds that studies are disturbing...
|
| |
| |
The prohibitions and restrictions are on smoke, not on smokers -- have
you ever once seen a smoker denied entrance to anywhere that's "non
smoking only?" There are a few exceptions (life insurance and such)
but not many.
I have heard of certain employers who had (mid-1970's when
I heard about it) a rather extreme no-smoking-materials policy
(although oil refineries do have a legitimate reason to worry
about fire):
- No cigarettes on company property, penalty for first violation
was instant dismissal. This included things like cigarettes in
the car you drove into the parking lot, anyone in your carpool
smoking, or the driver of a city-operated bus (if it drove onto
company property, which apparently some did) smoking on a bus you
rode in to work. As a matter of practicality, if you kept the
cigarettes out of sight you'd probably get away with it but don't
do something stupid like drop your cigarettes while getting your
car keys out of your pocket, or leaving your ashtrays open in
your car. More than one parent was fired because his teenager
left a butt in the back seat in clear view.
- Anyone (even non-employees) on company property with a lit cigarette
or who appeared about ready to light one was treated to a thorough
drenching with a fire house. More than one city bus got washed
on the inside (including passengers going elsewhere) because of this.
(They probably lost a few lawsuits over hosing down people on
public bus lines who happened to be sitting near smokers.) If the gates
were open, the guards were ready with the fire hoses.
- Anyone who talked about going for a "smoke break" or about "quitting"
where management could hear about it wouldn't last long at the
company. They didn't actually have a "NO SMOKERS" policy but they
sure made it unfriendly for them.
- They didn't actually do surprise employee home searches, break
into employee cars in the company parking lot looking for cigarettes
(but they would peer into car windows), or get hold of medical
X-rays to determine if the person smoked, although it was apparently
official policy to tell everyone they did.
- Nobody really ever believed the shoot-on-sight policy of anyone
inside the plant with a lit cigarette, although arguably it could
be justified as self-defense in certain hazardous areas of the plant.
If I were to light a match while standing next to an open vat of
gasoline, would you (who are within range of the explosion about
to happen) be justified in shooting me, hoping the match didn't
fall into the gasoline?
Gordon L. Burditt
|
| |
| |
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004, Moi wrote:
The prohibitions and restrictions are on smoke, not on smokers
Exactly right. Smokers can go anywhere they please...it's just that in a
large and growing number of public places, they're not allowed to smoke.
And that's as it should be.
|
| |
| |
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 21:13:08 -0700, "- DefaultUser" <root@dev.nul>
wrote:
There sure are a lot of prohibitions, restrictions
and humiliations being foisted upon these jerk
smokers. It must be paypack for all the insult
and harm they have done to others.
Insult and harm to others? What the hell are you
talking about?
|
| |
| |
stan-LEE 98 wrote:
On Sun, 22 Feb 2004 21:13:08 -0700, "- DefaultUser" <root@dev.nul>
wrote:
Insult and harm to others? What the hell are you
talking about?
You don't have a clue, stan-LEE.
--
Bob Broughton
http://broughton.ca/
Vancouver, BC, Canada
"Watch your mouth, if you ever want to cross the border. Bad things
can happen to Canadians who use foul language in the US."
mailto:stanlee_98@yahoo.com , Nov. 30, 2003
|
| |
| |
On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 09:51:38 -0800, Robert Broughton
<rbronews@brou8ghton.ca> wrote:
stan-LEE 98 wrote:
You don't have a clue, stan-LEE.
You don't have an intelligent answer, Bobo.
|
| |
| |
On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 09:51:38 -0800, Robert Broughton
<rbronews@brou8ghton.ca> wrote:
stan-LEE 98 wrote:
You don't have a clue, stan-LEE.
Very observant there Bobby! How ever did you figure that out?
|
| |
| |
|
