Arguments against new outdoor smoking ban

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op, accept the fact that eventually there will be NO smoking. Banned in cars with children, banned at office lounge areas, banned outside office buildings, banned in any restaurant, banned in all outside spaces and eventually banned in your own home because there will be no ventilation system acceptable under whatever law they put into place to filter that smoke in a healthy way. Anti smokers don't want smoking devices to exist at all, that is the end game. Unless of course it's their marijuana, no rules on that.

and comment how is disparately impacts poc and lgbt people

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op, accept the fact that eventually there will be NO smoking. Banned in cars with children, banned at office lounge areas, banned outside office buildings, banned in any restaurant, banned in all outside spaces and eventually banned in your own home because there will be no ventilation system acceptable under whatever law they put into place to filter that smoke in a healthy way. Anti smokers don't want smoking devices to exist at all, that is the end game. Unless of course it's their marijuana, no rules on that.

Can you please post what office I am allowed to smoke weed. I need to apply.

I'm not allowed to smoke weed in the car with my kids... bummer, how will i get them to sleep at night.

[Anonymous]

The rules of an establishment are often the same as the rules in my house. If I ask you not to smoke, you don't smoke. Do you confuse somebody's business as "I can do what I want" because it seems like it's a public place?
How can law require me to allow people to smoke in my business if I don't want people to smoke in my business?
Why don't all people get arrested who leave a bar after having a drink? Are only the ones with cigarettes in hand intoxicate? Or the other ones sit around until completely sober? What are you trying to say? I've heard smoking keeps you more sober- less time to drink maybe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does everyone get to have things they hate banned or only smug self righteous progressives ?

oh. its one of you guys.

[Anonymous]

More black and Hispanics will get arrested for smoking than whites . Progressives ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:More black and Hispanics will get arrested for smoking than whites . Progressives ?

more blacks and hispanics ride bikes on the sidewalk than whites. Please go lobby to legalize sidewalk riding in more places, if this really matters to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:More black and Hispanics will get arrested for smoking than whites . Progressives ?

more blacks and hispanics ride bikes on the sidewalk than whites. Please go lobby to legalize sidewalk riding in more places, if this really matters to you.

dc legalized marijuana based upon the impact of blacks being arrested. Dc decriminalized fare evasion and eating on metro forthe same reason. Who why is montgomery county doing this ? Drunk people will violate outdoor bans

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op, accept the fact that eventually there will be NO smoking. Banned in cars with children, banned at office lounge areas, banned outside office buildings, banned in any restaurant, banned in all outside spaces and eventually banned in your own home because there will be no ventilation system acceptable under whatever law they put into place to filter that smoke in a healthy way. Anti smokers don't want smoking devices to exist at all, that is the end game. Unless of course it's their marijuana, no rules on that.

+1

F U smokers

[Anonymous]

Given the lack of arrests related to indoor smoking bans, I’m not terrible concerned about this as a consequence of an outdoor smoking ban.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does everyone get to have things they hate banned or only smug self righteous progressives ?

oh. its one of you guys.

This viewpoint is hilarious, as if only progressives are offended by cigarette smoke.

I get the Op's concern, and I myself am not worried about secondhand smoke.
But a disproportionate number of smokers are awful litterbugs--look at the streets. They throw them out of cars and on to the ground.
A public ban would be worth it if it reduces by half the number of butts in the environment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does everyone get to have things they hate banned or only smug self righteous progressives ?

oh. its one of you guys.

This viewpoint is hilarious, as if only progressives are offended by cigarette smoke.

I get the Op's concern, and I myself am not worried about secondhand smoke.
But a disproportionate number of smokers are awful litterbugs--look at the streets. They throw them out of cars and on to the ground.
A public ban would be worth it if it reduces by half the number of butts in the environment.

i don’t litter and wish people wouldn’t but butts are bio degradable unlike much of the other litter you see

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Given the lack of arrests related to indoor smoking bans, I’m not terrible concerned about this as a consequence of an outdoor smoking ban.

there are virtually no violations of indoor bans but there will be for outdoor bans . I’ve seen people call the cops on people smoking in homes sbd Outdoors. I’ve seen people call cops on people for smoking in Montgomery county parks .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op, accept the fact that eventually there will be NO smoking. Banned in cars with children, banned at office lounge areas, banned outside office buildings, banned in any restaurant, banned in all outside spaces and eventually banned in your own home because there will be no ventilation system acceptable under whatever law they put into place to filter that smoke in a healthy way. Anti smokers don't want smoking devices to exist at all, that is the end game. Unless of course it's their marijuana, no rules on that.

+1

F U smokers

my point is that this is about hatred and you prove my point. I bet you go up to people and wish them lung cancer as you smoke a joint. I have a friend who is a heavy pot smoker and wants tobacco banned . He literally thinks smoking pot doest cause cancer

[Anonymous]

This should apply to marijuana
Wish we had more bans in the district. So obnoxious.

[Anonymous]

If this is the route we are going to go, cigarettes themselves should be illegal as well as tobacco farms.