Are non-smokers getting the short end of the deal?

Question

http://www.medsocial.com/blog.aspx?blogaction=viewblog&show=267

decide after you read this.

Answer 1

Smokers already pay more for health insurance. In Ohio, smokers are now confined pretty much to their home or car in order to smoke, (or at least 30 feet from the entrance of any public building.) What more do you want? If you want to make it illegal, talk to your congressman.

Answer 2

I don't smoke first and foremost. I think while the idea is sound, i am not sure that non-smokers are getting the short end of the stick. Many communitites such as mine are doing things to limit the rights of the people that do smoke. For instance Smokers are not allowed to smoke in any public place, ie. restaurants, bars, and hotels. Another thing that the article refers to, the butts that are found on many city streets. In our city it is considered littering when throwing the out. So no I do not think that we are getting the raw deal. Communities, mine in particular is making huge strives to limit what we as non-smokers have to put up with.

Answer 3

Smokers usually do pay more for health insurance. I've met some conscientous, considerate smokers that don't want to impose on anyone's clean air but it's pretty much close to impossible to do. I think we are moving in the right direction. Protect public places and children (can't smoke with kids in the car in some states). There are NO advantages to smoking.

Answer 4

I had decided even before I read it. It sucks being a nonsmoker. Why should I have to breathe the air that other people pollute just because a tiny little cigarette has complete control over them? It stinks, it's nasty and disgusting. I don't care if they are harming themselves, but they are bothering others. If secondhand smoke is not harmful, it is still a smelly nusance, therefore not appreciated by people who do not smoke. I veiw smokers as weak, selfish, thoughtless people who care not who they offend with their disgusting habit.
I don't see how the government can ban cigarettes seeing as how much they make off the sale of tobacco products.

Answer 5

No...I think the no smoking in public laws that are being passed right now are discriminatory and unconstitutional.
Hell, with all the amendments that have been added since the original constitution it's not even the same document it was originally...it's like the Queen of England in that it's something american politicians can hold out in front for the world to see but it has no authority whatsoever.

Answer 6

Damn right they are, Americans should be capabel of making a choice wether to go to a restuarant where smoking is allowed or not.
Now the government is saying eating trans fat foods are bad and that's another right to choose that is becoming extinct.
Wander what would happen if they baned cell phones in public places?

Answer 7

this what i think
leave the smokers alone
this crap about 2nd hand smoke is there proof real proof
all this other crap about smoking
for you younger ones out there that think you are so smart
are you aware that for illnesses in the 40's and 50's they used to tell people to smoke
why is it that no other life form will touch marijuana except humans but it is ok to smoke it
those people should be slapped in the head and asked if they thought when they were born they thought they said trains and said my dad will get me a set when i am down there
for you people who didnt figure that out it was brains they said

Answer 8

Yeah thats it!! Give it a rest dude. And yes i am a non smoker.

Answer 9

ummm. how does your cedit score determone if you're a smoker? I don't get it....personally, i'm not a smoker a lot of my friends are...its their life, they can do what they want

Answer 10

We always have.

Smokers should have the right to smoke in their own homes but the air outside belongs to everyone.

I am not even sure how you can logically argue against that.