Comments on: Take It Back, John

By: wildcard1966

wildcard1966 — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 18:53:23 +0000

Hey Nancy & John, why don’t you too debate each other on WGMD’s 9-11:30 a.m. & settle it? I’m willing to listen.

By: bucksmom

bucksmom — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 11:07:04 +0000

About the smoking thing___I hear from a friend of mone that when this smoking ban iis enforced at the certain hospital, you cannot even have a hint of smoke on your body or you will be sent home if you are an employee!!! You are allowed to take a long walk down the street if you can be out of the hospital for your break or lunch time. You are also allowed to smoke when you take your walk, but you better had not smell like you have had a smoke when you take your stroll!!! I guess there will be people hired to “sniff out” the working people and make sure we are not offending anybody…I do agree that butts should be placed in an ashtray, and not thrown out the window. I enjoyed John’s segment that morning, very controversial and interesting.

By: Pat Patterson

Pat Patterson — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 11:41:39 +0000

One thing (frequently overlooked) with throwing a still-burning cigarette out a car window is this…

Certain vehicles (I’ll drop the Saturn logo) have polymer-made body parts (hoods, fenders, etc.). A burning cigarette will put a melt mark on these parts…and it is not fixable other than by replacement. They put those parts on for fuel economy, but there is that one “little” downside.

In Ohio, we are smoke-free. When we Ohioans went to the polls to vote on this, we were led to believe that there would be exceptions - private clubs like VFW and Eagles Halls, private bars, etc. - but that is not the case at all. EVERY building in the state has a sticker or sign on it, stating that it is smoke-free and provides a number to call for violations.

I am an ex-smoker - the worst kind of non-smoker. I voted “no” for the smoking ban because I believe it is not the right of government to tell a private businessperson what he or she can or cannot do or have their patrons do or not do, so long as the action is within the law (for example, smoking tobacco is “theoretically” legal in Ohio).

By: Nancy Cleveland

Nancy Cleveland — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 01:36:14 +0000

John, I didn’t ask you to take back your opinions on smoke or smoking annoyances…but that you don’t generalize and stereotype. I’m sorry but, you said yourself “in my estimation”, in mine you’re being rather chintzy with the numbers of “considerate smokers”. Hey, I could have offered my opinion on beer (or other alcoholic beverage drinkers), said all drinkers were obnoxious…among other things…but my opinion is only that and why call every drinker obnoxious when I know full well they aren’t? Mind you, it has to be said that a drinker who drives under the influence and causes an accident, injures or kills someone makes the paper somewhere, almost every day but I’ve yet to read a headline stating “Man drops dead from diner’s smoke” or “The three car accident is believed to be smoking-related”. (And I would put a smiley here if it weren’t that DUI accidents are nothing to even joke about).
But…I say again…there are many more considerate smokers out here than you propose and I’m sorry you’ve never met at least one.

By: John Mixon

John Mixon — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 23:17:58 +0000

Take it back?
I’m in Pasadena, Maryland as I type this overseeing a brand new Team Trivia event in a little restaurant/bar called Fibber McGee’s.

Smoke abounds. Smokers without a care in the world are puffing and huffing all around me as well as men, women and children who came out to enjoy some food, drink and TRIVIA.

Do the smokers care that non-smokers are actually annoyed or bothered by their habit? NAAAAAHHHHH! “Dude,” they say emphatically, “You’re in a bar!” Well, ya have me there, Einstein! Absolutely, since I’m in a bar I must give up the desire for clean, fresh air while you enjoy your habit.

If smokers were truly considerate, they wouldn’t smoke indoors in public places, but they are not. They are not bothered by their smoke, hence there is no reason for ANYONE to be bothered. All this behavior did was cause the government (which can certainly stink in it’s own way) to step in a create a police state concerning the desire for clean air in bars and restaurants.

There are some (less than 10% in my estimation) “semi-considerate” smokers who do not smoke in friend’s homes or blow smoke in children’s faces. But if that many smokers were truly considerate, they may have been able to influence the inconsiderate smokers over the past 200 or so years, but they have not.

Back in the day, I couldn’t even begin to count how many times I was walking in a mall and strolled smack into a freshly exhaled cloud of carcinogens from the ‘gentleman’ or ‘lady’ walking in front of me. Beautiful, huh?

So I am forced to go home and change shirts, and perhaps wash my hair in the sink because of your RIGHT????? PLEASE!

Smoke is a residual effect of your (smokers) enjoyment (cigarettes). I also have an enjoyment,…. beer. How would you like it if I jumped up on a table an loaded your hair, clothes and mouth with the residual effect of my enjoyment? (Think about it.)

You wouldn’t. That’s why beer drinkers are far more considerate than smokers when it comes to the residual effect of our enjoyment. Smoke gets all over the clothes, chairs, walls, carpet, glasses and every other surface in a restaurant including the patrons nearby. Whiz gets flushed, purified and benefits society in many ways.

No, Nancy, I will not retract my statements. As much as I acknowledge your right to smoke cigarettes in this country, I am also acutely aware that if someone (much less a large corporation) was to introduce this as a new product today, anyone with an ounce of reason would vote against it. Therefore the onus is on smokers to become more considerate or they may cause their own enjoyment to become banned outright.