?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Quick update

So yeah... I must agree with like, everyone in the world, that the new Neil Diamond is fucking good. I'm not ashamed to admit that. Neil is awesome and he could kick the shit out of Barry Manilow any day.

I must disagree with quite a lot of people and say right fucking on to the smoking ban in Washington. I honestly don't understand how sane people could be against the ban. Most people don't enjoy smelling like that. Most people don't enjoy involuntarily smoking. Most people don't give a fuck what you choose to do to yourself, provided you can actually KEEP IT TO YOURSELF.

I have to say that after living down here for a few months, both of the times I've returned to Seattle, I've found it really hard to be out in a bar. Spend a few months smoke-free and then go in to a bar full of smokers and you'll get just how toxic and nasty that shit really is. It's kinda scary to think of how "used to it" I must have been.

So, in summary:
Neil: good
Smoke: bad

Comments

( 15 comments — Leave a comment )
rockstarbob
Nov. 10th, 2005 11:54 pm (UTC)
I must disagree with quite a lot of people and say right fucking on to the smoking ban in Washington. I honestly don't understand how sane people could be against the ban. Most people don't enjoy smelling like that. Most people don't enjoy involuntarily smoking. Most people don't give a fuck what you choose to do to yourself, provided you can actually KEEP IT TO YOURSELF.

A-fucking-men!

I was always shocked that some hippie town like Seattle couldn't get a smoke ban going, even when places like NYC knew what was up.
nikoel
Nov. 10th, 2005 11:58 pm (UTC)
I agree with you on both counts. I just quit smoking about a week ago and already I get a little nauseous when someone walks by me on the street with a cigarette. It really is just disgusting and I feel bad that I used to be one of those people. I wonder how many passers-by were grossed out by me.
azulskies
Nov. 11th, 2005 12:03 am (UTC)
amen!
rzr_grl
Nov. 11th, 2005 12:48 am (UTC)
I could live in Seattle again! Hooray!

I totally never go out with my coworkers here, not because I hate them, but because I don't want to smell vile.

After two hours of driving around Chicago at 11 pm looking for a hotel room, I tried - and failed - the one room I could find becuase it was a smoking room. Within five minutes my eyes were stinging and my throat was closing up. I said, no thanks, I'll sleep in the car.

And I grew up with someone who smoked! In the house, in the car! It's like that made me extra sensitive or something.

God it's gross. I really really don't understand people who are all militant about their right to smoke in public. I don't give a fuck what people do to themselves, as long as I don't have to do it too. How can people think that's ok?
(Anonymous)
Nov. 11th, 2005 02:04 am (UTC)
Neo-con
How would you feel if environmentally concerned SF were to ban motor bikes of all types because of the pollution they create? Not a smoker, but polluting my body is my god-given right. stay out of it.
rockstarbob
Nov. 11th, 2005 02:35 am (UTC)
Re: Neo-con
Your "neo-con" comment got me thinking about which is worse--damage from pollution caused by cars or (second-hand) smoke from cigarettes.

On the one hand, air pollution caused by nitrogen oxides and lead in car and motorbike exhaust are unpleasant and have also been shown to affect male fertility by weakening sperm. The finding from the linked study was that "Men exposed to car fumes didn't have fewer sperm. But their sperm were weak, short lived, and unable to swim properly. In short, they were damaged."

On the other hand, I would argue that the damage done by smoking is far worse: the American Cancer Society tells us that smoking is the #1 carcinogen and accounts for at least 30% of all cancer deaths. What's more, about 87% of lung cancer deaths are caused by smoking. Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death among both men and women, and is one of the most difficult cancers to treat. The 1982 Surgeon General's Report stated that "Cigarette smoking is the major single cause of cancer mortality in the United States." This statement is as true today as it was in 1982. Because cigarette smoking and tobacco use is an acquired behavior, one that the individual chooses to do, smoking is the most preventable cause of premature death in our society.

Seems like something that's that much a cause of death ought to be regulated so that people who don't want to be exposed to it don't have to be. And I'm pretty sure that was the point of the post--to say that you can do whatever you want to your own body so long as you're not harming anyone else. Cancer? No, thanks!
vespa59
Nov. 11th, 2005 03:05 am (UTC)
Re: Neo-con
As I've said, numerous times, I don't give a good fuck what you do to your body. Hell, I'm the LAST person you'll ever hear supporting a ban on people poisoning themselves and on that day you can call me a hypocrite. I'm more concerned with what you do to MY body. Hence, I support the ban of smoking in public places, not the ban of smoking in your own house. Reading comprehension: work on it.

Now then... on the off chance that San Francisco were to ban motorbikes because of the pollution, and assuming that this was done because of the overwhelming evidence that people were suffering physical damage because of motorbikes, I guess I wouldn't be in a position to complain, now would I? Fortunately for me, my bike's pollution isn't offensive enough that a majority of voters would ban it, so that will never happen. If it did, then I'd be forced to choose between living here or going somewhere else where bikes aren't banned.

All that aside, if you're trying to draw some similarity between the effects of the pollution caused by a small subset of vehicles that are known to be a benefit to the city and the serious harm cigarette smoke does with virtually no benefit to the public, then please put me in contact with whomever sold you your last pack because those things are obviously laced with the good shit. Put simply for you: Motorcycle very good for society; very little damage to others. Cigarette no benefit to society at all; lots of damage to others.
labelme
Nov. 11th, 2005 05:52 am (UTC)
i am a social smoker and i can appreciate a smoke free club or bar.
sure it can be a hassle sometimes if the place doeset have a smoking patio,but it is so nice to come home and not completely reek like an ashtray.
vanilla_christ
Nov. 11th, 2005 01:56 pm (UTC)
When they first started smoking bans here a number of years back I was, as a smoker, annoyed by the sudden "Now I can smoke here, now I cannot" that started occuring. Can't smoke in the break room at work, can't smoke in the pool hall, can't smoke at the restaurant, can't smoke on planes or busses, can't smoke at the bars... it's a regular addiction, meaning I need to feed the monster every couple of hours, and there's no discreet way to do it, and there's no way of saying "I guess today I'll be a non-smoker because it's inconvenient to be a smoker today."

Then after the initial "You're not allowed, scumbag!" shock wore off it made sense to me. Considering that I'm a longtime smoker who voluntarily made his apartment a semi-smoke-free zone (only room in my house where I smoke is my personal bedroom), I can understand why other people would not want to be surrounded by my smoke and the smoke of others. I don't even like being surrounded by my smoke! In a domestic situation it just creates more need to clean all the time. The stuff gets on everything and leaves this awful brown dust. I have to keep my white shirts in a closet off the kitchen. Why the hell would someone who ISN'T a smoker want to be subjected to that? The initial segregation after a lifetime of "Yes you can" pissed me off, but then common-sense won out over those feelings.

Such an awful drug, it was such a part of the culture when I was a kid, was an easy thing to get into because it was everywhere and it was cheap and it carried a certain image with it (plus it was a means by which to say you have control over something in your life when you're constantly reminded as a kid that everything you have and everything you are belongs to someone else). Now that I'm a grownup, it is so damned difficult to break the habit. You try, you do well for awhile, then you fall back in. Nothing to do but keep trying. Ironic that the one thing that made me feel as a teenager that I had some control, became the one thing in life I cannot seem to control.
(Anonymous)
Nov. 11th, 2005 06:37 pm (UTC)
surreal neil
are you kidding...neil, aging white no soul cracklin' rosie neil...no i've heard everything...my ears burn just thinking about it...as far as bans go, any ban is bad..it's censorhip in it's worst form...that's how hitler came into power...first he banned books and burned them, then he banned certain groups of people and burned them too...as far as i'm concerned, ban the idiots doing the banning...

neil: yuck!
bans: bad
vespa59
Nov. 11th, 2005 06:53 pm (UTC)
Re: surreal neil
So, by that logic, you're ok with child molesters, rapists, and murderers, right? Fuck yeah! Lift all that shit. Let all the evil fucks in the world do whatever they want!!

Dipshit.
(Deleted comment)
vespa59
Nov. 11th, 2005 09:01 pm (UTC)
Re: surreal neil
Believe it or not, I think one or two of them might be blood relatives.
(Anonymous)
Nov. 14th, 2005 04:17 pm (UTC)
Re: surreal neil
Not the one in Arizona...

(Anonymous)
Nov. 11th, 2005 11:31 pm (UTC)
whoa...
by my logic, and of course for me it's the only logic that's logical, bans are very different from condoning criminal activity....even a raging liberal such as myself is not that out of touch with reality...to wit...banning certain design teachings in schools, banning certain books from libraries, cities that ban movies from being shown in their local theatres, stores that ban certain types of music and movies, hell in the 60's it was ban the war and your bra...bans, in their simplest form, take away one's right to choose and to think for themselves...censorship, my dear, is not a license to kill...peace..
vespa59
Nov. 12th, 2005 12:37 am (UTC)
Re: whoa...
You're totally not making any sense. First off, anything that's banned IS criminal activity. You can't say, "I'm against all bans, except for stuff that's already been banned." If you need that kind of similarity, then ask yourself if you'd fight to protect the right of a guy to fuck a horse in a bar in Washington. It's perfectly legal for a guy to fuck a horse at home in Washington, so why can't the guy bring his horse down to the bar and fuck it there? Hell, THAT'S less harmful to the health of the other bar patrons so you'd think that if people are ok with smoke in bars, then certainly they'd be cool with some good old sweaty horse fucking, right?

WHO'S WITH ME? HORSE-FUCKING IN BARS! NOW!

Second, this isn't about censorship. Nobody's being told they can't express themselves. Nobody's being told they can't smoke and the point of the ban isn't to get people to stop smoking. The point is to stop the smoker from harming anyone other than theirself. This isn't a bra-burning, draft-dodging, protest-the-war issue. It's a "I don't give a fuck what you do to yourself as long as you don't get any one me" issue and it's way overdue. The way I figure, you're either my mom or my dad (sorry I called you dipshit) and you know pretty fucking what my views are on censorship. They haven't changed. This isn't a censorship issue.

I feel like I'm arguing with Walter from the Big Lebowski.
( 15 comments — Leave a comment )