They dont give a shit about their unborn child or their own health to go take a smoke.  We had a lady with a baby that did not look too good on the monitor.  But she signed out AMA because we wouldnt let her go smoke.  She didnt care that the baby may die or be brain damaged, it was just important to get her fix.

I just had to do an emergency c-section to get the kid out and she had abrupted.   The kid was a little distressed but looks ok. She wants to know when she go light one.  She said she wasnt going to listen because doctors are never right.

I am sure she would be more then happy to sue me though if anything is wrong with the baby even though she did what she wanted against medical advice.

That's child neglect as far as I'm concerned, and should be a punishable offense.

My husband passed away in 2001 from a brain tumor, and I used to drive him to all his appointments.  His chemo doctor in Atlanta of course saw all kinds of cancer patients.
There was one gentleman in there who used to come in to see the doctor, and he seemed to be on the same schedule as we were.  Half of his nasal area was eaten away by cancer, and he was still smoking!  Just blew me away.

that's fucked up.  i assume that she smoked during the pregnancy?  she'll be lucky if that kid grows up healthy.

i hate how smokers seem to think they have the RIGHT to smoke.  don't get me wrong.  if you're at YOUR house or in YOUR car, or at YOUR _(insert location)___ go ahead and smoke em if you got em, but you do NOT have a RIGHT to smoke in a public place.

you stink
you are YELLOW!
even when you're done with your cigarette YOU STINK

That's unfortunate, indeed.

On the other hand, my brother in law is one of 6 children born of a 3 pack a day smoker. All are fine. My wife smoked those ultra light things now and then while she was pregnant. My daughter is fine. Like most things, somewhere between "You're going to kill your baby if you're around smoke" and "Smoke all you want, nothing bad will happen" lies the truth.

Cigarettes are certainly quite addicting though, as evidenced by this woman's actions.

Document, document, document.

I once arrested a 17 year old girl.  Eight months pregnant.  When I asked when the last time she smoked pot she asked me right back, "What time is it now?

You don't say....

Quoted: Document, document, document. I once arrested a 17 year old girl.  Eight months pregnant.  When I asked when the last time she smoked pot she asked me right back, "What time is it now?

No kidding.  I have written a novel on her.  The only good side is that she wants her tubes tied.  I would do this for free!

Smokers are drug addicts.

With the prices of cigs in Michigan I dont understand how they could even afford to smoke!  

She has smoked 1 pack a day for God knows how long.

Quoted: Smokers are drug addicts.

Yep they are nicotene addicts.

Doc, smokers ARE drug addicts.

Quoted: i hate how smokers seem to think they have the RIGHT to smoke.

What country do you live in?

The Surgeon General ignores the cold hard fact that millions of non-smokers die every year.

Quoted: Quoted: i hate how smokers seem to think they have the RIGHT to smoke.   What country do you live in? img86.imageshack.us/img86/7638/dunno1fs.gif

The USA, where smokers have a RIGHT to smoke on THEIR PROPERTY, and I have a right to NOT BREATHE SMOKE on PUBLIC property.

Quoted: Quoted: i hate how smokers seem to think they have the RIGHT to smoke.   What country do you live in? img86.imageshack.us/img86/7638/dunno1fs.gif

Thats one law in California that I actually like.  No smoking in bars or resturants.  I went to the bar and no one was smoking.  Took me a while to figure out what was missing.  But its nice not having to cough your lung out while having a beer.

Quoted: Quoted: i hate how smokers seem to think they have the RIGHT to smoke.   What country do you live in? img86.imageshack.us/img86/7638/dunno1fs.gif

I hate how some people believe that rights not enumerated cannot be held by the people.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: i hate how smokers seem to think they have the RIGHT to smoke.   What country do you live in? img86.imageshack.us/img86/7638/dunno1fs.gif The USA, where smokers have a RIGHT to smoke on THEIR PROPERTY, and I have a right to NOT BREATHE SMOKE on PUBLIC property.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: i hate how smokers seem to think they have the RIGHT to smoke.   What country do you live in? img86.imageshack.us/img86/7638/dunno1fs.gif Thats one law in California that I actually like.  No smoking in bars or resturants.  I went to the bar and no one was smoking.  Took me a while to figure out what was missing.  But its nice not having to cough your lung out while having a beer.

it's nice to be able to TASTE your food and beer without it tasting like it is being served in an ash tray

Quoted: The Surgeon General ignores the cold hard fact that millions of non-smokers die every year.

Despite our best efforts, death continues to be our nation's number one killer.

Quoted: Quoted: The Surgeon General ignores the cold hard fact that millions of non-smokers die every year. Despite our best efforts, death continues to be our nation's number one killer.

Yup!

Quoted: They dont give a shit about their unborn child or their own health to go take a smoke.  We had a lady with a baby that did not look too good on the monitor.  But she signed out AMA because we wouldnt let her go smoke.  She didnt care that the baby may die or be brain damaged, it was just important to get her fix. I just had to do an emergency c-section to get the kid out and she had abrupted.   The kid was a little distressed but looks ok. She wants to know when she go light one.  She said she wasnt going to listen because doctors are never right. I am sure she would be more then happy to sue me though if anything is wrong with the baby even though she did what she wanted against medical advice.

Fixed your title:

Smokers are worse than drug addicts

 

I used to smoke/use snuff. Did it for about 5 years before I quit, but the snuff was MUCH harder to quit than smoking because you can do it all the time, and way bigger dose of nicotine per hit.

It is substance abuse, no doubt about it.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: i hate how smokers seem to think they have the RIGHT to smoke.   What country do you live in? img86.imageshack.us/img86/7638/dunno1fs.gif The USA, where smokers have a RIGHT to smoke on THEIR PROPERTY, and I have a right to NOT BREATHE SMOKE on PUBLIC property.

Since bars and restaruants are privately held properties, can I assume that you would oppose  legislation that counters a property owner's decision to allow smoking in his establishment?

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: i hate how smokers seem to think they have the RIGHT to smoke.   What country do you live in? img86.imageshack.us/img86/7638/dunno1fs.gif Thats one law in California that I actually like.  No smoking in bars or resturants.  I went to the bar and no one was smoking.  Took me a while to figure out what was missing.  But its nice not having to cough your lung out while having a beer. it's nice to be able to TASTE your food and beer without it tasting like it is being served in an ash tray

As a non-smoker, the smoke in bars never bothered me much.  I just hated going home smelling like a smoker.

Quoted: The USA, where smokers have a RIGHT to smoke on THEIR PROPERTY, and I have a right to NOT BREATHE SMOKE on PUBLIC property.

I agree.

I want everyone to stop operating combustion engines on public property so that I don't have to smell it and breath it.

I'm a patriot, so they can drive on their privately owned land, up and down their own driveway or whatever, but their traveling around stinking up the place and polluting my air has got to stop.
The whole trucking and rail industries had better grind to a fucking halt right God-Damned now or my panties will get all sorts of wadded.

Quoted: Smokers are drug addicts.

Of the worst kind!!!!!!!!!

Ever leave a casino and smell you clothes after you get home?  Much worse then a bar.

Quoted: Since bars and restaruants are privately held properties, can I assume that you would oppose  legislation that counters a property owner's decision to allow smoking in his establishment?

Very true, BUT, i would also not frequent those establishments.  Since FL has banned smoking in places that get 51% of their revenue from food, i have been going out more, and enjoying myself a LOT more.  The ban has been quite a boon for resturaunts.  The law borders on necessary to keep smokers from trampling on MY rights.  

Look it like this: resturaunts are private property.  What if the proprietor decided to put in speed bumps every 5 feet in his establishment.  Would you side with the property owner, or wheelchair bound people who are greatly inconvienced by the speed bumps?

Sometimes gov't regulation is necessary to keep people's rights INTACT

Quoted: Ever leave a casino and smell you clothes after you get home?  Much worse then a bar.

I got one better for ya. I was at a retirement party held at an American Legion hall. I'm a smoker, and I had to step outside. My eyes were on fire, and I couldn't breathe. Those Legioneers smoke like something I've never seen.

I swear to God, you couldn't see clearly from one end of the hall to the other.

Good to see such a willingness by Afrcommers to deny people freedom of choice. Granted, smoking is a stupid thing to do, but it's legal.

Y'all should thank me for all the taxes I pay as a smoker. Incidently, I haven't ever stolen anything or done anything illegal to 'get my fix'.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: i hate how smokers seem to think they have the RIGHT to smoke.   What country do you live in? img86.imageshack.us/img86/7638/dunno1fs.gif I hate how some people believe that rights not enumerated cannot be held by the people.

I agree, especially on a gun board.

Do I have the RIGHT to not breathe the air out of somebody's ASS, couldn't that be classified under the same respects, it's a noxious gas also.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: i hate how smokers seem to think they have the RIGHT to smoke.   What country do you live in? img86.imageshack.us/img86/7638/dunno1fs.gif The USA, where smokers have a RIGHT to smoke on THEIR PROPERTY, and I have a right to NOT BREATHE SMOKE on PUBLIC property.

At 78.31 posts per day, how do you find time to go to public places and get offended?

Quoted: Quoted: The USA, where smokers have a RIGHT to smoke on THEIR PROPERTY, and I have a right to NOT BREATHE SMOKE on PUBLIC property. I agree. I want everyone to stop operating combustion engines on public property so that I don't have to smell it and breath it. I'm a patriot, so they can drive on their privately owned land, up and down their own driveway or whatever, but their traveling around stinking up the place and polluting my air has got to stop. The whole trucking and rail industries had better grind to a fucking halt right God-Damned now or my panties will get all sorts of wadded.

1) Smoking has no benefits whatsoever, so comparing it to transportation is pretty fricking stupid.

2) Second-hand smoke has been documented to kill people. I'm allergic to tobacco and go into a major asthma attack and break out in hives any time I walk through the cluster of smokers always standing around the door to every building in town. Your right to swing your fist ends where my nose starts. You've got every right to own and shoot a gun, right? Do you have a right to walk around in the middle of town and just pop off shots whenever you feel like it?

Stop ruining your lungs and giving yourself cancer. More importantly, stop being a self-righteous dick about it.

Quoted: Good to see such a willingness by Afrcommers to deny people freedom of choice. Granted, smoking is a stupid thing to do, but it's legal.

Quoted: 1) Smoking has no benefits whatsoever, so comparing it to transportation is pretty fricking stupid.

What benefits are there from cars polluting the air we breathe, how's that any different, besides driving is a priviledge?

Is smoking a RIGHT or PRIVILEDGE?


ETA: I'm not trying to start a fight or poop storm, just curious how gun owners can deny others of Freedom of Choice, that's all. Yes, smokers are drug addicts.

Quoted: 2) Second-hand smoke has been documented to kill people. I'm allergic to tobacco and go into a major asthma attack and break out in hives any time I walk through the cluster of smokers always standing around the door to every building in town. Your right to swing your fist ends where my nose starts. You've got every right to own and shoot a gun, right? Do you have a right to walk around in the middle of town and just pop off shots whenever you feel like it? Stop ruining your lungs and giving yourself cancer. More importantly, stop being a self-righteous dick about it.

Some people react that way to peanuts, why not just throw away peanut and peanut butter as well?

I'll admit to being addicted to coffee.

Quoted: Quoted: Since bars and restaruants are privately held properties, can I assume that you would oppose  legislation that counters a property owner's decision to allow smoking in his establishment? Very true, BUT, i would also not frequent those establishments.

Cool. I always see it like this: You don't have a right to eat in a smoke-free establishment, and I don't have a right to smoke in one. To me, it's a property rights issue. If the owner feels allowing smoking is detrimental to his business, he is free to ban it. If he feels that it helps, he is free to allow it. I'm free to choose where I'd like to eat. Simple.

Since FL has banned smoking in places that get 51% of their revenue from food, i have been going out more, and enjoying myself a LOT more.  The ban has been quite a boon for resturaunts.  The law borders on necessary to keep smokers from trampling on MY rights.

Again, you have no right to eat in a smoke-free environment, just as I have no right to smoke in one. If you are concerned about the health effects of environmental tobacco smoke, take heart in knowing that the oft cited EPA study that started this whole thing has long since been discredited.

Look it like this: resturaunts are private property.  What if the proprietor decided to put in speed bumps every 5 feet in his establishment.  Would you side with the property owner, or wheelchair bound people who are greatly inconvienced by the speed bumps?

Normally I'd refrain from responding to a blatant red-herring fallacy, but in this case I'll go right ahead. In your extreme and unlikely example, I'd call the property owner an asshole, refuse to frequent his establishement and leave it at that. I would not support any governemnt intervention on behalf of those negatively affected by his decision. If nothing else, I'm consistent.

Sometimes gov't regulation is necessary to keep people's rights INTACT

I agree 100%. The problem is you and I define rights differently. To you, being voluntarily subjected to smoke in a restaruant or bar is a rights violation. To me, telling a property owner that his decision to allow smoking in his establishement is illegal and subject to penalty is a rights violation.

I completely understand that most people hate the way cigarette smoke smells. I appreciate that people don't want to be subjected to something they dislike. I just want them to know that enacting legislation to correct what amounts a minor nuisance is a terrible thing to do, and is intellectually dishonest - particuarly when subjection is voluntary.

Fair enough?

double post

Quoted: I'll admit to being addicted to coffee.

The smell of your coffee bothers me, would you please go elsewhere I'm allergic to it!

Quoted: Quoted: 2) Second-hand smoke has been documented to kill people. I'm allergic to tobacco and go into a major asthma attack and break out in hives any time I walk through the cluster of smokers always standing around the door to every building in town. Your right to swing your fist ends where my nose starts. You've got every right to own and shoot a gun, right? Do you have a right to walk around in the middle of town and just pop off shots whenever you feel like it? Stop ruining your lungs and giving yourself cancer. More importantly, stop being a self-righteous dick about it. Some people react that way to peanuts, why not just throw away peanut and peanut butter as well?

Do you see people being force fed peanuts in bars and restaurants?

Really fellas, one more example of why the government should decide what is good for you.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 2) Second-hand smoke has been documented to kill people. I'm allergic to tobacco and go into a major asthma attack and break out in hives any time I walk through the cluster of smokers always standing around the door to every building in town. Your right to swing your fist ends where my nose starts. You've got every right to own and shoot a gun, right? Do you have a right to walk around in the middle of town and just pop off shots whenever you feel like it? Stop ruining your lungs and giving yourself cancer. More importantly, stop being a self-righteous dick about it. Some people react that way to peanuts, why not just throw away peanut and peanut butter as well? Do you see people being force fed peanuts in bars and restaurants?

No. Do you see people being forcefully seated in smoke-filled establishements?

You aren't "force fed" smoke in a restarant you choose to eat at.

And they treat the world as their ashtray.

Quoted: Quoted: I'll admit to being addicted to coffee. The smell of your coffee bothers me, would you please go elsewhere I'm allergic to it!

Quoted: The Surgeon General ignores the cold hard fact that millions of non-smokers die (of cancer) every year.

Fixed it for ya.

"Here's an article written for this topic from my pro gun friend, Walter Williams":

The largest losers of America's anti-tobacco crusade aren't tobacco companies and smokers; it's the American people who are incrementally giving up private property rights. You say, "Hold it, Williams, I agree that people have the right to smoke and harm themselves, but they don't have the right to harm others with those noxious tobacco fumes!" Let's look at it, because harm is a two-way street. If you're allergic to tobacco smoke or just find its odor unpleasant, and I smoke in your presence, I harm and annoy you. However, if I'm prohibited from smoking a cigarette in your presence, I'm harmed because of a denial of what I find a pleasurable experience.

There's an obvious conflict. One of us is harmed. How can it be resolved? There are several ways. You might consider the harm I suffer trivial compared to yours. You could organize a sufficiently large number of people and lobby lawmakers to enact smoking bans in bars, restaurants and workplaces. Alternatively, I might consider the harm you suffer trivial, and organize a bunch of people and lobby lawmakers to mandate that smoking be permitted in bars, restaurants and workplaces.

Let's think about this for a moment. If you owned a restaurant and did not allow smoking, wouldn't you find it offensive if a law were enacted requiring you to permit smoking? I'm guessing you'd deem such a law tyranny. After all, you'd probably conclude, it's your restaurant, and if you don't want smoking it's your right. Similarly, I'd deem it just as offensive if smoking were allowed in my restaurant and a law were enacted banning smoking in restaurants.

The totalitarian method to resolve the conflict is through political power and guns. In other words, the group with the greatest power to organize government's brute force decides whether there'll be smoking or no smoking in restaurants. Totalitarians might justify their actions by claiming that bars, restaurants and workplaces deal with the public, and thus the public should decide how they'll be used. That's nonsense. Just because an establishment deals with the public doesn't make it public property.

The liberty-oriented method to resolve conflict is through the institution of private property. In fact, conflict resolution is one of the primary functions of private property, namely it decides who gets to decide how what property is used in what way. Put another way: Who may harm whom in what ways? In a nutshell, private property rights have to do with rights held by an owner to keep, acquire and use property in ways so long as he doesn't interfere with similar rights held by another. Private property rights also include the right to exclude others from use of property.

Under the liberty-oriented method of private property, as a means to conflict resolution, we'd ask the question of ownership. If the owner wishes his restaurant to be smoke-free, it is his right. Whether a smoker is harmed or inconvenienced by not being allowed to smoke in his restaurant is irrelevant. Similarly, if a restaurant owner wishes to permit smoking, it is his right, and whether a nonsmoker is harmed or annoyed is also irrelevant. In the interest of minimizing possible harm either way, it might be appropriate for restaurant owners, by way of a sign or other notice, to inform prospective customers of their respective smoking policy. That way, customers can decide whether to enter upon the premises.

In today's America, the successful anti-tobacco campaign has become a template for conflict resolution through the forceful imposition of wills through the political system. It's part of a continuing trend of attacks on private property rights. Private property rights are the bulwark for liberty and should be jealously guarded and not be sacrificed for the sake of expediency.      

"Still think you have a right to petition the state to tell others how to behave on someone else's private property, you totalitarians? You don't have that right, only state controlled powers!"  (IllinoisGun)

Quoted: Quoted: Do you see people being force fed peanuts in bars and restaurants? No. Do you see people being forcefully seated in smoke-filled establishements?

Not in New England...no smoking ANYWHERE!!!!

I've smoked most of my adult life. I say 'most' because I did not smoke while pregnant or while nursing (nearly 2 years with baby#2)

Ardoc, I dunno if this will help YOUR patients to quit, but my doc (whom I'd known for YEARS and who KNEW I smoked) told me I was pregnant then asked in the next breath, "Please tell me you're gonna quit while pregnant/nursing!"
I said, "Of course!"
He said, "Good. Because every time you want to light up a cigarette, I want to picture your baby sleeping in its crib. Then picture yourself holding a pillow over his head for 5 minutes. Not enough to suffocate him, just enough to cut down his air supply by approximately 1/2. Because every time a pregnant woman lights up, that is in effect what she is doing to her baby."

He then told me to go ahead and smoke one more and throw the pack away.

I never had that last one before throwing that pack away.
And I think he KNEW that's exactly how it would play out!

Quoted: that's fucked up.  i assume that she smoked during the pregnancy?  she'll be lucky if that kid grows up healthy. i hate how smokers seem to think they have the RIGHT to smoke.  don't get me wrong.  if you're at YOUR house or in YOUR car, or at YOUR _(insert location)___ go ahead and smoke em if you got em, but you do NOT have a RIGHT to smoke in a public place. you stink you are YELLOW! even when you're done with your cigarette YOU STINK

Your girlfriend likes it when I light one up after we have sex.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The USA, where smokers have a RIGHT to smoke on THEIR PROPERTY, and I have a right to NOT BREATHE SMOKE on PUBLIC property. I agree. I want everyone to stop operating combustion engines on public property so that I don't have to smell it and breath it. I'm a patriot, so they can drive on their privately owned land, up and down their own driveway or whatever, but their traveling around stinking up the place and polluting my air has got to stop. The whole trucking and rail industries had better grind to a fucking halt right God-Damned now or my panties will get all sorts of wadded.

1) Smoking has no benefits whatsoever, so comparing it to transportation is pretty fricking stupid.

2) Second-hand smoke has been documented to kill people. I'm allergic to tobacco and go into a major asthma attack and break out in hives any time I walk through the cluster of smokers always standing around the door to every building in town. Your right to swing your fist ends where my nose starts. You've got every right to own and shoot a gun, right? Do you have a right to walk around in the middle of town and just pop off shots whenever you feel like it?

Stop ruining your lungs and giving yourself cancer. More importantly, stop being a self-righteous dick about it.[/quote]


Who is being the 'holier than thou" self righteous prick here? Wow.

Quoted: And they treat the world as their ashtray.

+1 inconsiderate pukes.



Smoking is a disgusting waste of money