»
Topic: Clemson trustees won't vote on tobacco ban
Replies: 61   Last Post: Jul 24, 2014 6:33 PM by: gville76
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.


[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
Replies: 61  

Clemson trustees won't vote on tobacco ban


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 6:29 PM
 

http://www.newsdaily.com/business/f8f5126a4e7913fa477bbadfdea5444c/clemson-trustees-wont-vote-on-tobacco-ban

2019 purple level member

Re:This crap has gone far enough. We have enough

[9]
Posted: Jul 19, 2014 6:39 PM
 

restrictions as it is. Many people with tobacco interests have contributed to
Clemson. Folks, I am tired of being told what I can smoke, eat and drink. The same with seats belts and helmet laws. If you drive or ride with out them then that is your problem.


Amen - it is absolutely ridiculous.***

[2]
Posted: Jul 19, 2014 6:54 PM
 



2019 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
- H. L. Mencken


I don't care about chew,

[4]
Posted: Jul 19, 2014 7:04 PM
 

but I'm all for banning cigs any place that is public.


I respect your opinion, but why in the world would you

[2]
Posted: Jul 19, 2014 8:16 PM
 

object to it if it were restricted to places that couldn't possibly harm people who choose not to smoke?

2019 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
- H. L. Mencken


Because this country is full of ...

[4]
Posted: Jul 19, 2014 8:48 PM
 

Nose-led PC ninnies. Don't be such shallow nazis!! 30 years ago would anyone have said shyatt about someone smoking in a tailgating parking lot? Nope. Buncha PC weaklings.

Ninnies.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Because no matter how much room

[1]
Posted: Jul 20, 2014 10:51 AM
 

You give the non smokers they'll always be offended. They'll want to be where the smokers are. As my mother says(she's a nonsmoker) "the smokers are usually more fun"

Had someone call me out last year when smokimg on an ecig.... They said "NO SMOKIMG HERE!" I politely asked them if they smelled anything? I told them it was an ecig.They said no and quickly realized they were duped. They saw smoke and just wanted to be offended.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

We do Chicken right...it's not just for frying anymore!


Re: Because no matter how much room

[2]
Posted: Jul 20, 2014 10:55 AM
 

Mack, we're now the United States of the Offended. This nanny state direction we've been headed toward for the last 40 yrs is disgusting imho.


No doubt - it's simply how people have been conditioned to

[3]
Posted: Jul 20, 2014 11:16 AM
 

think and act. There was a time, many years ago, where people smoked everywhere (Mad Men) and the only time anybody complained was if some jerk blew smoke directly into their face. In no way am I suggesting we go back to those days, but people now have been conditioned to be uncomfortable or offended if they so much as get a whiff of smoke and then proceed to over react. It's a reaction that is not based on any real threat or danger, but instead on current popular trends. just because smoking, in general, is very unhealthy, it doesn't mean that getting an occasional whiff of someone else's smoke is going to hurt you.

2019 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
- H. L. Mencken


laws like seat belts/helmets/etc keep

[1]
Posted: Jul 19, 2014 8:29 PM
 

dumb people on earth far too long.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

You seem to have forgotten we live in the land of the free..

[1]
Posted: Jul 19, 2014 10:01 PM
 

Hey, peanut, is that an incandescent light you're using?

Prepare to be SWATted in 3.....2.....1..


Agreed. Lung Cancer, Diabetes, Liver Failure & Brain Damage

[1]
Posted: Jul 19, 2014 10:48 PM
 

are your right to enjoy thanks to the Bill of Rights ! Go out there and enjoy yourself ! The wife and kids will find a replacement for you.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Agreed, along with obesity, diabetes, heart disease, high


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 11:05 PM
 

blood pressure, and other maladies that result from the thousands of lifestyle choices we make as free people, including the foods we eat and drink, the kinds and amounts of exercise in which we engage, our jobs, where we live, how we entertain ourselves, how we think, and on and on.

2019 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
- H. L. Mencken


Re: Clemson trustees won't vote on tobacco ban

[1]
Posted: Jul 19, 2014 7:14 PM
 

chairs in the Clemson Pee Dee REC auditorium still have ash trays.


Re: Clemson trustees won't vote on tobacco ban

[2]
Posted: Jul 19, 2014 8:54 PM
 

I don't care what people do In their own lives but when it harms others, then I'm all for stopping it . Smoking in public places should be banned, no question.


Re: Clemson trustees won't vote on tobacco ban

[3]
Posted: Jul 19, 2014 9:10 PM
 

So when does car exhaust get banned? Enough with the bans to make people feel good about themselves by thinking they are helping others while infringing on their freedoms.....


Re: Clemson trustees won't vote on tobacco ban


Posted: Jul 20, 2014 8:59 AM
 

After all vehicles change from crude oil to compressed natural gas, electric, solar,hydrogen,etc. powered engines.


It would be very easy and simple to have public smoking

[3]
Posted: Jul 19, 2014 9:37 PM
 

areas that would not be harmful to people who don't smoke.
Fuurthermore, there is no way in #### that some people smoking in a wide open space like a tailgate parking lot could possibly harm non-smokers who may be passing by or tailgating nearby. It's total bunk, and it's pathetic how people have bought into it.

Sure, if you are subjected to second-hand smoke day after day in an enclosed space like a restaurant or office, then yes, it very well could be harmful, and people have a right not to be subjected to that. That doesn't mean that people who don't smoke have the right to never, ever get a whiff of smoke or be exposed to anything they have chosen or just been conditioned not to like.

2019 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
- H. L. Mencken


Re: Clemson trustees won't vote on tobacco ban

[2]
Posted: Jul 20, 2014 1:36 AM
 

Orangerivers, to put it nicely, that was a very idiotic statement...If you were confined in a small room with 5 smokers you MAY get some 2nd hand smoke damage...Second smoke hasn't even been proven "definitively" to even be harmful....Maybe annoying, sure...

But outside, really? Seriously? For real? I'm not a big fan of alot of cursing, to me it shows a lack of intelligence, and just general ignorance when overly done, and sometimes it offends me...We should ban that too....Oh, and those sexy sundresses, with sexy high heels, and tight tank/halter tops on those beautiful Clemson students/ladies....Let's ban those too while we're at it! You know it could "offend" some women who are out of shape....

Seriously, grow a pair! Of milkers or testiculars....It's your choice ;)

For relaxing times, make it Suntory time


Re: Clemson trustees won't vote on tobacco ban


Posted: Jul 20, 2014 3:40 PM
 

My statement was not idiotic and saying that it was is all I need to know about your reasoning. That's why I stopped reading your post.


Re: Clemson trustees won't vote on tobacco ban


Posted: Jul 24, 2014 6:33 PM
 

Glad we see eye to eye on this matter ;)

For relaxing times, make it Suntory time


Don't really care for smoking and can't really figure why

[3]
Posted: Jul 19, 2014 9:46 PM
 

anyone would ever start...just a nasty habit.

But if there are designated areas for smokers, then I wouldn't care. I certainly wouldn't want to have to be forced to smell smoke if I had the option. I think areas that designated for smoking is a good median.

As far as seat belts...never have understood why it is no problem for young children not to wear them on buses (last I was on them, they didn't have them) and yet we grown adults are forced to wear them.

Meanwhile, in NY, you can't have a super sized soda......


Re: Don't really care for smoking and can't really figure why

[2]
Posted: Jul 19, 2014 9:56 PM
 

or big hamburgers...that's where all this ban this ban that to make ourselves feel good is headed...right into Bloombergville...


Re: Don't really care for smoking and can't really figure why


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 9:56 PM
 

Do you drive a bus to work?


Why, what's that got to do with anything? Are they not


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 9:59 PM
 

sharing the same road? Subject to the same dangers?


Or how you can be forced to wear a seat belt in a car, yet

[3]
Posted: Jul 19, 2014 10:07 PM
 

be allowed to ride a motorcycle.

2019 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
- H. L. Mencken


Re: Or how you can be forced to wear a seat belt in a car, yet

[1]
Posted: Jul 19, 2014 10:15 PM
 

Seatbelt laws are designed to protect in the majority of automobile accidents. 4 wheel vehicle hitting a 4 wheel vehicle. A seat belt wouldn't help a motorcycle rider in a high speed collision and in fact one of the safest things a motorcycle rider can do in certain situations is to lay his bike down and get off of it. If you've ever picked a teenagers brains out of the woods because they weren't wearing a seatbelt in a survivable collision because their dad doesn't or they don't think it is cool, you would probably understand a little better.


I think you completely missed my point.

[3]
Posted: Jul 19, 2014 10:29 PM
 

Here it is:

Riding in a car, without a seat belt, is far safer than riding on a motorcycle, period. Yet we can't ride in a car without a seat belt, because it is unsafe. It makes no sense that we are not able to travel in one fashion because it is unsafe, yet it is perfectly fine to travel in another fashion which is much less safe. If the powers that be were consistent in their logic, motorcycles would be banned (which I do NOT favor, for the record).

Also for the record, I understand completely about the benefits of wearing seat belts. I wear them, and my children wear them.

2019 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
- H. L. Mencken


Re: I think you completely missed my point.


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 10:36 PM
 

I must have missed your point because now I don't understand what it is. Is it to remove seatbelt a from cars, motorcycles from the road or just point out an inconsistency for little purpose.


I'm pointing out the inconsistency.***

[1]
Posted: Jul 19, 2014 10:51 PM
 



2019 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
- H. L. Mencken


Re: I'm pointing out the inconsistency.***


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 10:55 PM
 

Ok well since motorcycles make up a fraction of a percentage of daily commuters don't let their safety keep you up at night. Keep wearing seatbelts while encouraging other to do so as well.


I think it is the fact of the matter, not a debate on

[1]
Posted: Jul 19, 2014 11:22 PM
 

percentages of death, or who is more likely to die in which ever vehicle.

The fact remains, if you wreck in a car vs. a wreck in motorcycle, who do you think is more likely to sustain more serious injuries?


Thank you.***


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 11:24 PM
 



2019 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
- H. L. Mencken


Re: I think it is the fact of the matter, not a debate on


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 11:29 PM
 

I didn't say it was consistent. I wanted to know what the point was. Why do you care that motorcycles are on the road and clearly dangerous. Are you looking for an out when it comes to seatbelts or are you genuinely concerned for their safety?


Because it's a double standard. I believe it shouldn't be

[1]
Posted: Jul 19, 2014 11:35 PM
 

law. Let me ask you, are you a proponent of it being a legal obligation to wear a seat belt, where if you don't, you are charged hefty fines?


Re: Because it's a double standard. I believe it shouldn't be


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 11:43 PM
 

I would prefer it wasn't a law but I would also prefer everyone wear one. Because the law doesn't effect me I don't really care that it exists. Seatbelts save an estimated 15k lives and 50 billion annually. If you want to risk your life on the road do it on two wheels and an engine. Maybe that's why the motorcycle inconsistency exists. So people can still have the freedom to not wear a seatbelt if they so choose.


I completely agree...it's the right to choose that bothers


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 11:55 PM
 

me. I myself wear one and it is wise to do so. It's also wise not to smoke but completely legal...based on the premise of safety alone, it makes sense for that to be illegal too.


Re: I completely agree...it's the right to choose that bothers


Posted: Jul 20, 2014 12:05 AM
 

You start with awareness then move towards more firm methods.

The campaign against smoking has made everyone aware of the risks and seen it fall from something all the cool kids did to being a bad habit.

Despite knowing the risks of not wearing a seatbelt thousands of people did and still do die every year because of simple negligence. When something as simple as a click can save the life of you or a loved one it had to be taken seriously. Maybe they should have started a multi-million dollar campaign against it and show footage of car accidents and clean-up of ejected passengers. For all the things government does that are BS or done completely in self-interest, this law is done only to help people.


We actually watched a very gruesome video in middle school


Posted: Jul 20, 2014 12:13 AM
 

about wearing seat belts. I'm talking videos of ejected passengers, severed bodies and what not. That definitely made me aware of the dangers and potential outcome of not wearing one. But there are still times when I may forget after leaving my driveway and driving a mile or two up the road. As soon as I remember, I click it. If a cop saw me before doing so, I'd be penalized for forgetting, though no harm may have ever come from that particular drive. That bothers me...I don't need a ticket to remind me that it is dangerous...


Re: We actually watched a very gruesome video in middle school


Posted: Jul 20, 2014 12:22 AM
 

Yeah that sucks. I haven't been fined yet so maybe my attitude could change. But if a threat of a fine is what keeps a few more mothers, fathers, sons and daughters from a premature death then I guess that is a burden we responsible citizens must bear.


Re: We actually watched a very gruesome video in middle school

[1]
Posted: Jul 20, 2014 12:34 AM
 

I agree, Tall Tiger. I think it's foolish not wearing a seat belt but I do not like the government telling me I MUST. What's next.....a law forbidding fried foods?


Re: We actually watched a very gruesome video in middle school


Posted: Jul 20, 2014 12:44 AM
 

I'm not a fan of big government and some of the ridiculous proposals that have been voted into law, but I'm with the seatbelt law. It's been proven that even low speed collisions can knock drivers from behind the wheel. If that happens you no longer have control of the vehicle, or the ability to avoid collisions after initial contact. It's really better for everyone. Dirt roads excluded. ?? and let smokers smoke outside. It's all they have left anyway.


The point is that when making laws, the government should be

[2]
Posted: Jul 19, 2014 11:46 PM
 

consistent when applying the reasons for having the laws in the first place. If they force people to wear seat belts because not wearing them is not safe, then they should apply the same logic to motorcycles, and force people to stop riding them since they are even less safe than cars.

2019 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
- H. L. Mencken


Re: The point is that when making laws, the government should be

[1]
Posted: Jul 19, 2014 11:48 PM
 

Ok let's do that then.


Point for you sir!***


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 11:53 PM
 



2019 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
- H. L. Mencken


It doesn't make sense to wear a seat belt


Posted: Jul 20, 2014 10:07 AM
 

When you're on a motorcycle.

Are you seriously arguing the government should be illogical?

badge-donor-05yr.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg

"Smelley, Garcia, and Beecher are going to lead you to 4-8." - york_tiger


Re: I think you completely missed my point.

[1]
Posted: Jul 19, 2014 10:57 PM
 

I believe the point is that people in this country are tired of being told what they can and cannot do.....regardless of the dangers. I can understand people not wanting to breathe cigarette smoke but, unless I am spitting in their drink, I cannot imagine how my chewing tobacco could affect them in any way.


Re: I think you completely missed my point.


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 11:24 PM
 

Sorry, I was completely campaigning for seatbelts. I could are less about chewers.


I am totally with you on seat belts. I think they save lots

[1]
Posted: Jul 19, 2014 11:31 PM
 

of lives, and as I said, I use them myself. I also think that eating healthy and avoiding certain foods, getting regular exercise, and avoiding stress would save millions of lives as well, but I don't believe that you and me have the right to force other people to do those things.

2019 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
- H. L. Mencken


Well said, I believe there are a lot of lifestyle options we

[1]
Posted: Jul 19, 2014 11:41 PM
 

choose that are unhealthy and contribute to all kinds of diseases. If we believe anything unsafe should be banned, then let's do like NY and cut out large sized colas and eliminate the idea of choice in this country.


Re:Right.***


Posted: Jul 20, 2014 8:38 AM
 




In their wallets


Posted: Jul 20, 2014 10:03 AM
 

When Medicare is paying for your cancer treatments.

badge-donor-05yr.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg

"Smelley, Garcia, and Beecher are going to lead you to 4-8." - york_tiger


Re: In their wallets

[2]
Posted: Jul 20, 2014 10:09 AM
 

Too much of anything causes cancer. Potato Chips, sugars, candies, fried foods, baked foods, grilled foods and on and on.

Lets regulate all of those items on the same scale.

It's all about control and tobacco is just an easy target right now.

I don't smoke and I can certainly agree with people not smoking in restaurants etc but there is absolutely no way I agree with telling people that they can't smoke OUTDOORS at a tailgate or wherever

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

A very reasonable post, by the way.***


Posted: Jul 19, 2014 10:08 PM
 



2019 purple level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpg

"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
- H. L. Mencken


Thanks, I've thought about that issue a lot. The only

[2]
Posted: Jul 19, 2014 10:15 PM
 

reasonable explanation as to why it should be law is that if there are others in the car, your unbelted body could cause serious injury/death to passengers. But still, if I'm alone, I see no reason why it should be mandatory...just my two cents...


Hmm,


Posted: Jul 20, 2014 8:57 AM
 

politics. Can I add religion to the conversation? Well maybe not. My church of St. Mattress, denomination of InnerSprings, faith may not appreciate my airing its dirty laundry.


clemson politics that concerns fan experience at games?***


Posted: Jul 20, 2014 9:00 AM
 



2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg


Re: Clemson trustees won't vote on tobacco ban


Posted: Jul 20, 2014 11:45 AM
 

> http://www.newsdaily.com/business/f8f5126a4e7913fa477b
> badfdea5444c/clemson-trustees-wont-vote-on-tobacco-ban


Re: Clemson trustees won't vote on tobacco ban


Posted: Jul 20, 2014 12:21 PM
 

So, to sum it up.... motorcycles should have seatbelts.


what's bull is motorcycle riders don't have to wear a helmet


Posted: Jul 20, 2014 12:26 PM
 

yet, i am surrounded by metal and have to wear a seatbelt. this is totally messed up , and i do wear a seatbelt, i am like the other posters, i just don't like it being a law.

military_donation.jpg

Re: what's bull is motorcycle riders don't have to wear a helmet


Posted: Jul 20, 2014 2:00 PM
 

Sgt, soon the social engineers and the government they have bought will mandate how many calories we're allowed to take in daily. Bloomberg got out in front of that one....


I thought it was banned on the outside also***


Posted: Jul 20, 2014 12:31 PM
 



badge-donor-05yr.jpg

Replies: 61  

TIGER TICKETS

FB GAME: Season Tickets
FOR SALE: Great seats under cover. Sec UQ Row Z 30 & 32. Concrete wall provides great/cool seat backs and if ...

Buy or Sell CU Tickets and More in Tiger Tickets!

[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
5210 people have read this post