Are smokers rights being violated?
with all the laws being passed to protect non-smokers, are our rights as smokers being violated? i mean pretty soon they are going to tell us we can not even smoke in our own housee, or so it seems to me. what's your opinion?
Answers:
The point everyone is missing here is this: today it's my cigarettes, tomorrow it's your McDonald's hamburger. There is a large political movement in this country that is working very hard at limiting your freedoms. One of the ways they do it is to remove what they sell as is a 'public health risk'. This isn't about public safety. It's about control. Our government will not rest until they have removed every perceived 'risk factor' from our lives. And by doing so, they'll take away every ounce of freedom.
There is no such thing as "Smoker's Rights". You have NO right to smoke. It's a priviledge outside of your own home.
signed,
two packs a day
What right? I don't recall the Constitution saying you have the right to fill the air around you, your kids, and your community with pollutants for no good reason.
no,we don't have a right to smoke. business owners should be allowed to run their business as they see fit though. there were non smoking restaurants before the ban. smokers chose whether to go there or not.
They will never tell you that you cannot smoke in your home or your private vehicle for that matter. You have too big a lobby backing you on this topic (me included and I'm a ex smoker).
Why would you think you would not be able to smoke in your own house? That is exactly where you should be smoking.
I don't chose to smoke so I shouldn't have to breathe smoke of cigarettes. Smokers can smoke all they like as long as they aren't making me breathe their smoke too.
You smoke in your own house? i don't believe it!..Wouldn't you rather smoke in public places and tick us all off. Smokers are evil doers with no rights. except to end up in a hospice
What rights are those?
Really and honestly, what rights are you speaking of? Please spell them out for me if you wish to debate the topic.
Additional: Like so many smokers tend to do, Faye Prudence below takes the "other things create pollution, too, so what about those" track.
Cars, factories and whatnot do not create pollution as their main function. This is a secondary effect if that. Cigarettes, cigars and smoking tobacco have as their main and only function that of creating smoke. That's it. Not to provide transportation or to make products or anything else. Simply and only to make smoke. Therefore, there is no comparing them to cars and factories and anything else. People smoke only to make smoke and for the pleasure of making it.
ADDITIONAL: You are both wrong, Scott and Mike.
First, the people who aren't smoking aren't committing any action which is infringing upon another person, but the smoker is. Saying that the non-smoker can go elsewhere because of the actions of another is therefore wrong.
If I were to stand next to someone and flail my arms about simply because it pleased me to do so, do you honestly feel that if they didn't like being hit then they should move? Or should I be restricted from flailing my arms around them and others? If I had a can of insecticide and was spraying it all about around people, do you think they should have to leave? Or should I be stopped from spraying the insecticide around them? If I want to drive on the sidewalk then the pedestrians should go elsewhere, right? It shouldn't be that I shouldn't drive on the sidewalk. Oh, no. Who in their right mind would think that?
You don't have the right to inflict unnecessary harm on others, especially when doing so is the direct outcome of an action designed solely to please yourself. Your McDonald's hamburger analogy is crap, Mike, because unlike smoking cigarettes around others you aren't making anyone else around you have to eat your hamburger. When you take that hamburger and shove it in their face and down their throat, then that is a different matter.
Smoking around others is assault, clear and simple. And since it invades their body, then it is also akin to rape.
Engaging in an action wherein you force others to be participants is illegal, which smoking around others does. Engaging in an action which unnecessarily places others at risk or harm is illegal, which smoking around others does. If you can keep your actions private and not involving any non-consensual people of legal age, then what you do is basically your own business. But once you make them public or forcibly involve others, then they are no longer simply your business.
There are very few actual rights that a person has, and smoking isn't one of them. Being allowed to smoke, like being allowed to drive, is a privileged which has been granted and isn't a right. I suggest you learn the differences before spouting on about your non-existent rights.
No but for years the non-smokers were being thrust into smoke-filled rooms (cough). Would you allow a teen with a blaring radio to play his music in a restaurant for all to hear? Same goes with smoke for all to breathe.it should be done when others are not forced to be part of their personal habit of enjoyment. :)
No, they aren't.
Non-smokers should have the right not to have to be around smokers. Some people are allergic to cigarette smoke and should be able to go to restaurants/ public places to smoke.
You can always smoke on your own land, which will probably never be outlawed; The government makes a lot of money off of smokers. (Cigarettes are so expensive due to the high takes on them.) They wouldn't want to lose money by outlawing smoking completely.
I'm a pretty heavy cigarette smoker and I'm a little bummed out about how we are getting to be perceived as even more creepy than we used ot be.
But I can't deny anyone's right to breathe clean air, so I support the no smoking in the workplace laws.
We just have to face it; smoking is a dying art. And it's probably a good thing.
for those who asked, there are a couple of municipalities which have outlawed smoking in cars that have children in them. If this is allowed to stand, then it is only a matter of time before they outlaw smoking in homes with children in them.
I will just take a lighter and a pack of cigarettes when I die. I have the right to do that.
I smoke occasionally myself but I think causing someone else to smell and breathe smoke with out there will is just wrong.. I dont like people who smoke in restaurants, i think it is rude. So i guess out doors is the only option.
as much as i think humans should be given free reign to do as they please, smoking is just one of those things so vile and reprehensible that the greater good is served by outlawing it altogether or restricting tobacco use to the privacy of one's own home. it should NOT be allowed in any public situation whatsoever, not even in your car. and i am an ex-smoker.
No, I don't think smokers rights are being violated. I don't think people should have the right to do anything that harms other people. If your smoking only poisoned yourself, I wouldn't really care if you did it, its your choice. I wish smoking was illegal, it's really not fair to a small baby (or anybody for that matter) who lives in a house with their smoking parent to be exposed to this. I think it's really sad how people who used to work in bars got cancer. People should have the right to work anywhere without having to be harmed.
You need to look at it from the non-smokers point of view. I mean, we (as non-smokers) have the right to breathe clean air. Why should we have to be put at risk for cancer or other various sicknesses because someone feels they need to light up. I know non-smokers could go else where but that also applies to smokers as a general courtesy. And why should smokers get upset anyway? It's a nasty habit and the bans are just helping their health out.
I agree with you...we are paying more in taxes than any other group, and we have less freedoms to enjoy smoking. I just heard that somewhere (I really wish I could remember where) they want to pass a law banning smoking in your personal vehicle. (This may be Jersey, or I may be wrong) We get seated in the worst areas of restaurants (when we're allowed to sit inside at all!), and most hotels will not give you a nice room if you say you're a smoker.
Sorry but your rights as a smoker should not inflict us with your smoke. I literally can't breathe when I am around smokers. This is NOT an exaggeration.
I don't think you shouldn't be allowed to smoke in your home. However, outside around people, there should be restrictions. I have a right to breathe!
First of all I AM A SMOKER. Second, Sweetpea is incorrect. The state of Indiana just passed a law that you cannot smoke in your car if you have children under the age of 13 in the car with you. As for our rights being violated, no, I don't believe so but I do believe that the non-smokers have overstepped the "rights" issue. For all those non-smokers who are complaining, what about exhaust fumes, do they car pool?, what about the factories that pollute the air like here in Gary and Hammond, Indiana?
I don't support any "rights" violated because once you take away a right it makes it easier for other rights to follow. but please understand your rights end where someone else's begins. I have the right not to breathe in YOUR smoke. Yes you have the right to smoke but it should be in your own home where otheres do not have to be exposed to it. Now I do support even that right being revoked if you have children in your home. Because as a parent it is your job to protect them from the things that could hurt them and smoking studies have proven how detrimental it is to inhale second hand smoke.
What about the rights of people to breathe clean air?
Every person who smokes knows exactly how bad and dangerous it is, they just don't care or don't care enough to quit. And that's ok, kill yourself with cancer sticks if you want to, but leave the rest of us out of it.
We shouldn't have to pay for your bad habit.
The answers post by the user, for information only, FreeLawAnswer.com does not guarantee the right.
Answer question:
More Law Questions and Answers: