If you're closer to Fuquay-Varina, On The Snap Billiards (at Hwy 55 & Dickens Rd) has very high ceilings with a really good smoke-buster ventilation system. Plus they have nice tables with super fast felt.

3/25/2008 10:45:46 AM

Quote :

"Now, pretty much every area in Charleston with the exception of James Island has passed non-smoking bans in bars in restaurants"

thats why i kick it at IOP or Sullivan's so I can smoke and spit game at rich dames

btw this thread is hilarious

3/25/2008 11:11:04 AM

Quote :

"thats why i kick it at IOP or Sullivan's so I can smoke and spit game at rich dames"

Too bad there has been a smoking ban on Sullivan's for over a year now (where I live)...and I'm pretty sure there's one on IOP now too...although I could be wrong.

3/25/2008 11:56:41 AM

Quote :

"If you're closer to Fuquay-Varina, On The Snap Billiards (at Hwy 55 & Dickens Rd) has very high ceilings with a really good smoke-buster ventilation system. Plus they have nice tables with super fast felt."

I live close to this one. It is definitely very nice for nonsmokers... but it is in Fuquay

3/25/2008 12:08:16 PM

^^not at Poe's and the Windjammer, among other places

3/25/2008 2:04:05 PM

You can't smoke inside at Poe's. You've never been able to smoke inside at Poe's or any other of the restaurant's that those people own (I know, I pick up shifts at Poe's during the summer and work part-time at one of their bars downtown).

But you can still smoke on their porch (which the smoking ban does not cover). As for the Windjammer (which I've also worked at)...I guess IOP hasn't passed the smoking ban yet.

3/25/2008 2:06:52 PM

well yeah i guess at poe's they do have that little porch thats technically outside although its adjacent to the bar

that place is usually too packed for me to get inside anyway plus apparently everyone sitting at the tall tables likes to make sure there isnt any walking room

i dont get down there much but i was down there in february for a couple days

3/25/2008 2:10:11 PM

Quote :

"I for one can't wait for a state or city wide smoking ban"

I hate smoking too but you know what... some people hate drinkers too... how about we stop allowing bars to serve beer.

HOW ABOUT YOU LEAVE IT UP TO THE ESTABLISHMENT'S OWNER WHETHER OR NOT YOU CAN SMOKE ON HIS OR HER PROPERTY... fuckin nazi.

3/25/2008 2:14:13 PM

^ please don't do this...don't compare something that affects everyone by its very nature (unless you know how to smoke in a way in which you inhale every single bit of the smoke and keep it inside you) to something that only affects the one using it (the alcohol itself doesn't, by the nature of its composition, invade the lungs and permeate the clothing of those around it)

smoking isn't not even REMOTELY like drinking

3/25/2008 2:27:00 PM

Horrible analogy comparing banning smoking to banning drinking. Just makes you look retarded to try and compare the two.

3/25/2008 2:30:25 PM

Yeah. It's like page 1 all over again.

3/25/2008 2:35:52 PM

yep...2nd hand smoke wont pull out in front of you and ram your car into a tree without warning at 2:00am

anybody ever worked at a benihana type restaurant like Kabuto or Nakato? Talk about leaving someplace with your clothes smelling

3/25/2008 3:58:25 PM

Quote :

"yep...2nd hand smoke wont pull out in front of you and ram your car into a tree without warning at 2:00am"

i can honestly say that i have NEVER heard of a bottle of alcohol driving any sort of vehicle, let alone a car...and then, i think it's absolutely preposterous to say that said bottle of alcohol would be driving at 2am!

how much more stupid can this thread hold?

3/25/2008 4:06:56 PM

the stupid tends to correlate with the sentiments of limiting others' freedoms...whether those others be smokers, or simply law abiding entrepreneurs who want the freedom to decide what happens at their own business

btw i've never heard of a bottle of alcohol driving a car either...i've also never heard of someone getting lung cancer simply from visiting a bar too often

3/25/2008 4:11:30 PM

^ if you don't think second hand smoke contributes to lung cancer you are an idiot.

please, allow me to pwn....

Quote :

"Secondhand smoke has been classified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a known cause of cancer in humans (Group A carcinogen)"

Quote :

"Secondhand smoke causes approximately 3,400 lung cancer deaths and 46,000 heart disease deaths in adult nonsmokers in the United States each year"

Quote :

"The current Surgeon General’s Report concluded that scientific evidence indicates that there is no risk-free level of exposure to second hand smoke. Short exposures to second hand smoke can cause blood platelets to become stickier, damage the lining of blood vessels, decrease coronary flow velocity reserves, and reduce heart rate variability, potentially increasing the risk of heart attack"

http://www.lungusa.org/site/pp.asp?c=dvLUK9O0E&b=35422

3/25/2008 4:23:52 PM

looks like someone cant fucking read

Quote :

"i've also never heard of someone getting lung cancer simply from visiting a bar too often"

which of those blurbs mentioned bars/restaurants/pool halls/etc?

Quote :

"please, allow me to pwn jump to conclusions and look like a dumbass...."

3/25/2008 4:26:11 PM

Quote :

"Smoky bar triggered fatal asthma attack First case of secondhand smoke causing an immediate death"

Quote :

"a smoking ban could prevent future deaths."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23075001/

3/25/2008 4:33:40 PM

again, don't be an idiot. maybe if you go to http://www.lungusa.org/forkidsandthickheadedretards they will explain in detail that bars have smoke, second hand smoke causes lung cancer, and finally, going to smoky bars can contribute to lung cancer.

also, ^

3/25/2008 4:38:08 PM

Quote :

"I for one can't wait for a state or city wide smoking ban"

I hate smoking too but you know what... some people hate drinkers too... how about we stop allowing bars to serve beer.

HOW ABOUT YOU LEAVE IT UP TO THE ESTABLISHMENT'S OWNER WHETHER OR NOT YOU CAN SMOKE ON HIS OR HER PROPERTY... fuckin nazi.

3/25/2008 4:41:01 PM

Lets see...

We can let people smoke and have it intentionally harm people.

Or we can let people smoke outside of bars or on the patios/porches and not intentionally harm people.

I don't see the big deal?

3/25/2008 4:49:01 PM

I think there's one on Candy Mountain.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=sH9nTTsJyKg

3/25/2008 4:54:14 PM

The only second hand smoke you commie bastards should be exposed to is from the barrel of a gun.

3/25/2008 5:00:31 PM

The only reason I smoke is to intentionally harm people

I also laugh at those people if they catch lung cancer from hanging out in a bar since I've been getting a lot more exposure to smoke over the years (as a smoker) and I don't have lung cancer

Quote :

"Smoky bar triggered fatal asthma attack First case of secondhand smoke causing an immediate death"

hmm

Quote :

"the woman had asthma since age 2. Her asthma was poorly controlled...On the evening of her death, she had no inhaler with her"

If I had had asthma all my life (or at least since I was 2), and I did a poor job of keeping up with it, I'd probably keep an inhaler with me to prevent things exactly like this from happening

Don't hinder my freedoms just because you have inferior genes

3/25/2008 5:25:17 PM

Quote :

"since I've been getting a lot more exposure to smoke over the years (as a smoker) and I don't have lung cancer "

You don't know that you won't have lung cancer later on in life. I'd at least knock on wood if I were you.

And people are different. My grandmother and grandfather probably went cigarette for cigarette for 30 years. Grandfather had lung cancer that spread to his face and his brain and died five years ago. Grandmother hasn't had any cancer whatsoever.

Using yourself as a personal example holds no weight in a cancer argument.

Quote :

"Don't hinder my freedoms just because you have inferior genes "

Don't hinder my freedom to eat and drink in an environment with clean air (well as clean as it can be). Especially when you can step outside and smoke. I can't walk around the smoke to get my drinks at a bar.


(Would like to add that smoke never really bothered me that much in bars. I have noticed how nice it is now that there are smoking bans around most of Charleston...but it never killed me in the past. I'm just pointing out how dumb some of the pro-smoking arguments are)

3/25/2008 5:37:51 PM

Quote :

"Using yourself as a personal example holds no weight in a cancer argument."

neither is the case of the girl who died from the asthma complication

Quote :

"Don't hinder my freedom to eat and drink in an environment with clean air (well as clean as it can be)."

i dont have a problem with going outside to smoke if the particular bar or place calls for it...not a problem at all...my thing is who is to say you have the freedom to have clean no-smoking air at every bar you want to go to? i think it should be up to the owner...that way some owners can choose to still allow smoking...other owners can choose to ban smoking from their bar...win-win...but i don't want any statewide bans that force businesses to ban something thats legal

3/25/2008 5:43:33 PM

Quote :

"i think it should be up to the owner...that way some owners can choose to still allow smoking"

Easy for you to say that...but most owners wouldn't do that. They're scared that it will hurt their business. In some instances it would, and some it wouldn't. They might want to do it because they know it's better in general for people's health (not to mention their employees' health), but they also want to be able to stay afloat.

If a state or city government forces them to do it, then they don't have to weigh people's health with their own economic well being.

3/25/2008 5:48:40 PM

I'm against smoking bans in general (libertarian nutjob and all that...) but will go out of my way to patronize a non-smoking establishment. Obviously I am not alone in this or this thread would not exist. I understand the whole argument for a smoking ban as it points the smoking nazi finger at the government rather than the business owner, it levels the playing field (no smoking at the bar across the street either), and (anecdotal evidence here, flame on!) after an adjustment period most people I've seen interviewed like the non-smoking environment they've been forced into.

However giving the government even more power to dictate when, where and how we indulge our vices is distasteful enough that I'll happily sit in clouds of smoke rather than support a smoking ban. See you at Mitch's.

3/25/2008 6:06:07 PM

Quote :

"neither is the case of the girl who died from the asthma complication"

Would like to add that this wasn't my argument.

Evidence is pretty clear that second-hand smoke is pretty fucking bad for you. There are some people it has little-to-no effect and others who might be allergic to it. But I think its pretty harmful to the average person.

3/25/2008 6:28:03 PM

Smoking has proven time and time again to not be hazardous in second hand passive situations. Its a myth perpetuated by incorrect lab data from the 70s which has been disproven time and time again.

3/25/2008 6:30:28 PM

Your honor,

Could you explain exactly what this means:

Quote :

"second hand passive situations."

And give some evidence to your post above??

3/25/2008 6:34:11 PM

Quote :

"# Does exposure to secondhand smoke cause cancer? Yes. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP), the U.S. Surgeon General, and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) have classified secondhand smoke as a known human carcinogen (cancer-causing agent) (1, 3, 5). Inhaling secondhand smoke causes lung cancer in nonsmoking adults (4). Approximately 3,000 lung cancer deaths occur each year among adult nonsmokers in the United States as a result of exposure to secondhand smoke (2). The Surgeon General estimates that living with a smoker increases a nonsmoker’s chances of developing lung cancer by 20 to 30 percent (4). "

http://www.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Tobacco/ETS

3/25/2008 9:53:27 PM

And you believed that?

Quote :

"Its a myth perpetuated by incorrect lab data from the 70s which has been disproven time and time again."

3/25/2008 11:53:24 PM

hey Judge, here's the deal

I challenge...CHALLENGE you to search for slut's posts and find one thing that's not negative or spiteful and bitter. In fact, he posted something random just the other day and I blindly posted after it that it was probably some shit putting another user down or just generally being a bitch.

I think he has borderline personality disorder...

3/26/2008 12:01:44 AM

He does advocate a city wide smoking ban in here so he has to be somewhat evil

3/26/2008 12:10:12 AM

he's just a general douche/nuisance.

[Edited on March 26, 2008 at 12:15 AM. Reason : k]

3/26/2008 12:11:44 AM

Raleigh Might Snuff Out Smoking in Parks

Quote :

"Raleigh, N.C. — City Council members are considering asking state lawmakers for permission to ban smoking in public parks. The city's Parks, Recreation and Greenway Advisory Board last week passed a resolution calling for a smoking ban in city-owned parks, and the City Council might review that request next week."

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/2622653/

3/26/2008 4:28:11 AM

^^^^^

Quote :

"And give some evidence to your post above??"

3/26/2008 7:51:30 AM

is it wrong that i laugh at the pain that self-imposed cancer sufferers endure?

i mean, if you give yourself cancer, doesn't that mean you DESERVE what you get? or does that make me shallow and hateful, as well?

i suppose people deserve the right to kill themselves (unless you're catholic, i accede that this is a basic human right), but you have absolutely NO RIGHT WHATSOEVER to harm another (i admit a gray area exists when it comes to protecting the life of yourself or others, though)...you have to be completely brain-dead to not realize that components within cigarettes are known carcinogens, and that unless you can successfully inhale and absorb all of those chemicals into your own body, that they will be released into the atmosphere in cigarette smoke, to be dispersed or inhaled by other living things...does anyone truly disagree with this paragraph in particular? if so, please give me a reason that what i've said thus far is wrong

now, assuming you're not a completely idiot, and that you recognize the absolute truth of the paragraph above, how can you ignore the fact that your choice to smoke (something you know is harmful) harms others, as well? your choice to smoke - while a pathetic attempt to be cool, control your appetite, or as the simple fact that you're weak-willed and weak-minded and are addicted to drugs (yes, nicotine is a drug, so my statement is correct) - is a knowing and intentional harm to others...how are you NOT a douche?

now, i agree with the general consensus of "if you don't like smoke, don't go places where people smoke"...but this idea only works in certain situations...people like the OP are making a concerted effort to patronize those establishments that conform to his personal preferences (hello capitalism)...but what about places like parks? it's not like raleigh offers smoke-free parks, and even then, my taxes pay for all them, regardless of whether they're smoking or not...sure, smokers' taxes pay for them, too, but in my case, i do them no harm whatsoever through my choice not to smoke, while their choice does me harm...therefore, my right to health trumps their right to poison me

the simple fact of the matter is that my choice harms no one, while the smoker's choice harms more than just themselves...i give them the right to kill themselves (after all, who needs stupid people to live longer than necessary?), but i will forever fight the idea that they have the right to harm my body because they can't make good choices

[Edited on March 26, 2008 at 10:09 AM. Reason : .]

3/26/2008 10:07:55 AM

Quote :

"but what about places like parks? it's not like raleigh offers smoke-free parks, and even then, my taxes pay for all them, regardless of whether they're smoking or not...sure, smokers' taxes pay for them, too, but in my case, i do them no harm whatsoever through my choice not to smoke, while their choice does me harm...therefore, my right to health trumps their right to poison me"

do you honestly want to ban smoking in (outdoor) parks too? did you seriously just go there? lets ban cars while we're at it

Quote :

"your choice to smoke - while a pathetic attempt to be cool, control your appetite, or as the simple fact that you're weak-willed and weak-minded and are addicted to drugs"

as opposed to being weak-bodied and getting sick when you're exposed to cigarette smoke...

btw sucks for you that you're allergic to cigarette smoke...i bet it sucks to get a whiff of it and go into fits of allergic reaction and sneezing, simply from a tiny whiff...i bet you can never go into bars for more than a few minutes at a time since you're allergic to cigarette smoke...or maybe you're going to tell me its a really acute allergy?

3/26/2008 10:10:27 AM

Quote :

"you want to ban smoking in parks too?"

hell yes...if i had it my way, all smokers would have to smoke within phonebooth-sized units, so they could inhale ALL of their poison...after all, you like it so much, why not get as much as you can out of your cancer stick? or, are you afraid it might not be healthy?

Quote :

"lets ban cars while we're at it"

oh good, THIS pathetic defense again...if you'd like, we can start arguing the necessity of transportation versus smoking cigarettes, but i'm pretty sure you'll lose focus within first 30 seconds and, given your arguments so far, i'm quite sure you really DON'T see the difference between cars and cigarettes

Quote :

"as opposed to being weak-bodied and getting sick when you're exposed to cigarette smoke... btw sucks for you that you're allergic to cigarette smoke...i bet it sucks to get a whiff of it and go into fits of allergic reaction and sneezing, simply from a tiny whiff...i bet you can never go into bars for more than a few minutes at a time since you're allergic to cigarette smoke"

really? this is the best you've got? people who are affected by poison are weak? okay, big man, do me a favor and ingest some arsenic...a big, healthy, strong douchenozzle like you could NEVER be negatively affected by something so pathetic as poison

thanks for making me realize (yet again) how superior i really am to you

[Edited on March 26, 2008 at 10:16 AM. Reason : .]

3/26/2008 10:13:49 AM

IM FAGMIRE

LETS BAN SMOKING OUTDOORS SO I WONT FACE DARWIN'S WRATH OF SHITTY GENES

Quote :

"thanks for making me realize (yet again) how superior i really am to you"

most people superior to me break into allergic reactions from a whiff of tobacco smoke...

3/26/2008 10:14:17 AM

^ uh oh...twista's pissed! he might get upset and call me names! that's ALMOST a replacement for an educated argument...oh, wait, i found the problem..."educated" is beyond him

3/26/2008 10:16:58 AM

yeah I'M the one who is pissed

evident by all the rolly eyes and bitching in my posts

Quote :

"people who are affected by poison are weak?"

people who are allergic to cigarettes are definitely weak...if you weren't so weak you wouldn't be so adamantly opposed

3/26/2008 10:18:19 AM

shoot, what do i have to complain about? smokers are losing their ability to smoke all over the place and i'm gaining a healthier living environment

sure, it's not happening as fast as i'd like, but all-in-all, smart people are triumphing over the stupid

3/26/2008 10:19:28 AM

Quote :

"what do i have to complain about?"

the fact that smoking is still legal

and throwing in a couple smilie faces in your last post isnt going to convince anybody that you're not being anally irate about this whole situation

you're just coming across as a whiny little bitch...YES I WANT SMOKING BANNED OUTDOORS...give me a break

3/26/2008 10:20:44 AM

people who are affected by poison are weak?

3/26/2008 10:46:51 AM

people who smoke for years and don't get sick are weaker than people who get a whiff of 2nd hand smoke and go into allergic reactions? yes people affected strongly and negatively by a small dose of 2nd hand exposure to a weak poison are physically weaker than most

3/26/2008 10:50:45 AM

^ i love how you see yourself as helping to purify humanity's genes...you really are too stupid to be posting in this thread, aren't you? i pray to god you don't reproduce, but i suspect some bitch needs the money and will probably spread her legs for it

3/26/2008 10:59:05 AM

I think it should be left to the owners decision. If the majority of his customers are smokers than allow smoking. If not, then dont. If its half and half... well, make a non smoking section.




I really see no need to ban smoking. If you dislike smoke, then don't go to that place where there will be smoke. Clubs/pool halls are not public properties




stop bitching

3/26/2008 11:06:28 AM

my strong genes are not going into a girl who smells like cigarettes... bleh.

I just don't understand a person who likes smelling like ass all the time.

I more so liken cigarette smokers to people who pass gas a lot and or shit their pants, yeah it is legal to fart and everything... but when your shitty smell starts affecting me and sticking to my clothes, hair, etc... then fuck that.

[Edited on March 26, 2008 at 11:07 AM. Reason : but yeah, still should be up to the owners, smokers are still dumb though...and smell.]

3/26/2008 11:07:08 AM