Smoking banned at US Cellular

[mmmmmbeeer]

If they really wanted to get serious about reducing lung disease by improving air quality they'd place a filtered biodome over the park. This is nothing more than a political move by the city. There's not a doctor in this nation who can prove that brief brush with secondhand smoke in an open place, ie. concourse, is anymore harmful to someone's health than the toxins already floating around in the air. The argument is absolutely ludicrous. So, in all actuality, it really does come down to stopping a simple annoyance, much like declaring that farting in the park is not allowed except on ramps 2,5,6,7.

[mmmmmbeeer]

I live in a town where smoking is now illegal in the bars.  It is something that I'm really happy about.  I can now go out and not have to air out my jacket for a day until I wear it again.

 

case in point....stopping an annoyance.

[whitesoxfan101]

Haha here comes the "oh there's no proof 2nd hand smoke is harmful" people apparently!! You guys *waves to mmmmbeer* and your lack of knowledge make me laugh every time.

[Steff]

If they really wanted to get serious about reducing lung disease by improving air quality they'd place a filtered biodome over the park.  This is nothing more than a political move by the city.  There's not a doctor in this nation who can prove that brief brush with secondhand smoke in an open place, ie. concourse, is anymore harmful to someone's health than the toxins already floating around in the air.  The argument is absolutely ludicrous.  So, in all actuality, it really does come down to stopping a simple annoyance, much like declaring that farting in the park is not allowed except on ramps 2,5,6,7.

 

 

 

^^ It's true.

[Steff]

Haha here comes the "oh there's no proof 2nd hand smoke is harmful" people apparently!!  You guys *waves to mmmmbeer* and your lack of knowledge make me laugh every time.

 

 

 

Is there evidence that it causes lung cancer... or only that is possibly contributes to it.

[mmmmmbeeer]

Haha here comes the "oh there's no proof 2nd hand smoke is harmful" people apparently!!  You guys *waves to mmmmbeer* and your lack of knowledge make me laugh every time.

 

a smoker who smokes a pack per day for 10 years and then quits only has a SLIGHTLY higher chance of lung cancer/disease than a non-smoker. So you wanna explain to me how exactly a brush with second hand smoke on the concourse is a "risk to your health"?

[zach61]

Because as bad as it is - it's still legal. I quit about a year and a half ago. I never realized how bad smoke smelled until now. Wow! I don't like this. Smokers have a legal right to smoke, in my opinion. Just like I have a right to drink, eat a brat with extra onions that stinks to high hell, or burp and fart. I just have a problem with this constant war against people doing a perfectly legal thing.

 

Addiction is a disease, right? AIDS is a disease. Diabetes is a disease. Why is it OK to humiliate smokers, but feel sympathy for people with other diseases? Where's the ACLU for smokers? Can smokers use the Americans with Disabilities Act?

 

Just my $0.02

 

And drinking is legal too, but there are parks and forest preserves where you can't have liquor. And I don't think you can just walk down a city street with an open beer. I could be wrong, but just because something is legal doesn't always mean you can do it wherever you please. I'm also against the smoking in public places to avoid some idiot throwing a lit cigarette into a trash can and starting a fire.

[NorthSideSox72]

Yes smokers have a legal right to smoke and this legislation is a law that mandates where smokers can exercise that right. 

 

My drivers lisence gives me a legal right to drive but if I drive on the sidewalk I  get in trouble. 

 

It's all about the public good.

Actually, to be clear, there is no such thing as a right to drive. Driving is a legal priviledge, subject to government conditions. Smoking as an activity is not per se regulated the same way driving is, but there are definitely laws conditioning the activity, so I am not sure about that being a right either - kind of a grey area.

[SHAFTR]

case in point....stopping an annoyance.

 

Summary of debate:

http://www.bupa.co.uk/health_information/h...70503smoke.html

[Dick Allen]

Because as bad as it is - it's still legal. I quit about a year and a half ago. I never realized how bad smoke smelled until now. Wow! I don't like this. Smokers have a legal right to smoke, in my opinion. Just like I have a right to drink, eat a brat with extra onions that stinks to high hell, or burp and fart. I just have a problem with this constant war against people doing a perfectly legal thing.

 

Addiction is a disease, right? AIDS is a disease. Diabetes is a disease. Why is it OK to humiliate smokers, but feel sympathy for people with other diseases? Where's the ACLU for smokers? Can smokers use the Americans with Disabilities Act?

 

Just my $0.02

There was an ordinance passed in the City of Chicago a couple of years ago that required cab drivers to not stink. As far as I know it is not illegal to not use deodorant. It is also not against any law to go several days without showering. Smokers should have been outraged that government was taking cab drivers rights to stink in their cabs away from them, but smokers agreed with the ordinance. I don't want to smell cigarettes when I'm watching a game, and don't want to stink like an ashtray went I get home. The overwhelming majority of people in the park don't want to either. Smokers can still smoke, just in the designated areas. Your right to smoke is in no way being violated.

[Guest JimH]

Actually, to be clear, there is no such thing as a right to drive.  Driving is a legal priviledge, subject to government conditions.  Smoking as an activity is not per se regulated the same way driving is, but there are definitely laws conditioning the activity, so I am not sure about that being a right either - kind of a grey area.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Ok, legal privilege. If I smoked I'd have the legal privilege to smoke. But just like driving, there are certain places I can't do it. Inside the ballpark, for instance.

[LVSoxFan]

Let me chip in here as a person who smoked up until months ago and smoked at every game I went to at the Cell.

 

First, I would never smoke in the seats. That's just rude. And against the rules. People who do that should be called out.

 

Second, I'm not quite sure what the harm is, though, in smoking on the outfield concourse--that's where I stood literally every game in '04 and '05, with my buddies, some who smoke and some who do not. Part of standing there was habit (I just like standing) and part of it was that we could smoke. But that smoke was hardly bothering anybody else. So that I don't get.

 

But let me tell you, as somebody who has been to the park in K.C. and in Detroit (both of which I will be at in the next two weeks), this is how they do it. You can't just smoke on the concourse there like it used to be at the Cell--they stick in you in designated areas, usually an entrance well away from the seats and the concourse. Detroit does have a little TV there for everybody.

 

So while if I still smoked I'd be bummed, this is the trend around the league as I can tell--not just Chicago. God knows what they make you do in California.

 

Bottom line: I think it may be a little bit overkill, but this is what everybody does now. I wonder if they include the Bullpen Bar--now THAT would suck if you're watching the game there and a smoker.

 

Just my 2 cents. I don't have to worry about it anymore, which is good, but I do know what smokers go through.

[NorthSideSox72]

Ok, legal privilege.  If I smoked I'd have the legal privilege to smoke.  But just like driving, there are certain places I can't do it.  Inside the ballpark, for instance.

Yes, I suppose driving inside the park would be problematic.

[ptatc]

Yes, I suppose driving inside the park would be problematic.  

 

You mean you can't park in the infield like racing events!!!!

Edited March 30, 2006 by ptatc

[The Critic]

So, in all actuality, it really does come down to stopping a simple annoyance, much like declaring that farting in the park is not allowed except on ramps 2,5,6,7.

 

Dude, don't make me HAVE to take ramps 2,5,6,and 7.

And as everyone knows, farting on the way down the ramps helps acceleration.

Also, farting on the way UP the ramps improves traction - it's much like 4-wheel drive in that regard.

[LosMediasBlancas]

I think sections 506, 507, 557 and 558 should be designated smoking sections. Wanna be able to smoke in your seat and not miss the action? Go right ahead.

[Guest JimH]

Let me chip in here as a person who smoked up until months ago and smoked at every game I went to at the Cell.

 

First, I would never smoke in the seats.  That's just rude.  And against the rules.  People who do that should be called out.

 

Second, I'm not quite sure what the harm is, though, in smoking on the outfield concourse--that's where I stood literally every game in '04 and '05, with my buddies, some who smoke and some who do not.  Part of standing there was habit (I just like standing) and part of it was that we could smoke.  But that smoke was hardly bothering anybody else.  So that I don't get.

 

But let me tell you, as somebody who has been to the park in K.C. and in Detroit (both of which I will be at in the next two weeks), this is how they do it.  You can't just smoke on the concourse there like it used to be at the Cell--they stick in you in designated areas, usually an entrance well away from the seats and the concourse.  Detroit does have a little TV there for everybody.

 

So while if I still smoked I'd be bummed, this is the trend around the league as I can tell--not just Chicago.  God knows what they make you do in California.

 

Bottom line: I think it may be a little bit overkill, but this is what everybody does now.  I wonder if they include the Bullpen Bar--now THAT would suck if you're watching the game there and a smoker.

 

Just my 2 cents.  I don't have to worry about it anymore, which is good, but I do know what smokers go through.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yours is a good post, very fair and balanced IMO.

 

I too like to stand up on the OF concourse, did it all the time when I had bleacher seats. One time I was standing at the top of 162 and four guys wandered up next to me and they all lit up. It bothered me, I started to move. Before I moved, an elderly guy and his wife were sitting in the last row of 162 and they asked politely if these four guys could put out the smokes. One of them said "we can smoke here if we want". And they were right. But to say the smoke was hardly bothering anyone else ... I don't agree with that.

 

I don't follow politics much but this Act was signed into law, and this whole smoking/non smoking thing is a lightning rod issue, to say the least. If this Act withstood lobbyist pressure, legal challenges, etc. and still went on the books, in my somewhat uneducated opinion there must be some irrefutable documented studies by competent unbiased experts that 2nd hand smoke causes health problems.

 

To me this is well past the "does it make sense or not" stage, this Act took a long time to become reality as I understand it and now it applies to the ballpark. So be it IMO. I do think the White Sox security personnel will have their hands full enforcing it though. Some smokers will simply not be aware, while others will intentionally defy the ordinance. I just hope there aren't confrontations in the stands but unfortunately I suspect there will be.

[Guest JimH]

By the way I love the Bullpen Bar and I wonder how they'll handle it. From the way I read it, no smoking down there either ... just on the ramps and nowhere else I guess?

[whitesoxfan101]

a smoker who smokes a pack per day for 10 years and then quits only has a SLIGHTLY higher chance of lung cancer/disease than a non-smoker.  So you wanna explain to me how exactly a brush with second hand smoke on the concourse is a "risk to your health"?

 

That I cannot prove. But there is a big difference between smoking on the concourse and a bar/restaurant full of smoke. But then again, there is a big difference between choosing which restaurants you go to and Sox games, so your argument does hold merit. I am just saying I don't want this to go into the "second hand smoke doesn't exist, people should just smoke anywhere anytime" direction.

[Steff]

By the way I love the Bullpen Bar and I wonder how they'll handle it.  From the way I read it, no smoking down there either ... just on the ramps and nowhere else I guess?

 

 

 

From what I've heard they have not made a decision on the bar, nor the fan deck seating closest to the bar. At this point I believe the law reads that if you are within 15 feet of the bar you can smoke? (someone please correct me if I'm wrong on that as I have not read the details first hand).

[southsideirish71]

Addiction is a disease, right? AIDS is a disease. Diabetes is a disease. Why is it OK to humiliate smokers, but feel sympathy for people with other diseases? Where's the ACLU for smokers? Can smokers use the Americans with Disabilities Act?

 

Just my $0.02

 

I hate this comparison.

 

I am a person who runs 5 or more miles a day, am in excellent shape. However I am also a diabetic. I am not an overweight person who triggered this in myself.. I am a person with a large family history of this disease and happened to have the right genetic cocktail. Smoking and all other forms of addiction start with someone making a choice. Its not like 10 people hold someone down, and then force them to drink, smoke, or do whatever other items are addictive. Maybe they have a genetic precursor that will allow for addiction to happen quicker, or that its harder for them to quit. But Its not like anyone on the planet doesnt know that smoking is addictive and has been linked to other diseases. Most smokers that I know hate the habit, hate the expense, and wish they never started in the first place. I hope that all the soxtalkers who smoke try to quit for themselves, and for their families more than anything.

[zach61]

a smoker who smokes a pack per day for 10 years and then quits only has a SLIGHTLY higher chance of lung cancer/disease than a non-smoker.  So you wanna explain to me how exactly a brush with second hand smoke on the concourse is a "risk to your health"?

 

 

That is an interesting point becuase there are studies from both sides about second hand smoke. Here's something interesting to consider too. If someone urinates on you, you wouldn't like it, but it wouldn't harm you. Urinating is legal, but you can't urinate in public places. They have designated places for that. So would you swim in a pool that has a urinating section and a non-urinating section that is divided by a net so the swimmers can't get into the other section? I always ask the person in the restaurant that asks if I want smoking or non-smoking if there is really a difference if I'm in the same room. That would be like being in a pool with a urinating section.

[Controlled Chaos]

This reminds me of a comedian I once heard...

 

I can't stand my friends who smoke...I meet them for dinner and first thing they do is light up

 

So how was your day??

 

Well ya know I have a habit of spitting, so I'm like

 

Pretty good how about yours???

[LVSoxFan]

Yours is a good post, very fair and balanced IMO.

 

I too like to stand up on the OF concourse, did it all the time when I had bleacher seats.  One time I was standing at the top of 162 and four guys wandered up next to me and they all lit up.  It bothered me, I started to move.  Before I moved, an elderly guy and his wife were sitting in the last row of 162 and they asked politely if these four guys could put out the smokes.  One of them said "we can smoke here if we want".  And they were right.  But to say the smoke was hardly bothering anyone else ... I don't agree with that.

 

I don't follow politics much but this Act was signed into law, and this whole smoking/non smoking thing is a lightning rod issue, to say the least.  If this Act withstood lobbyist pressure, legal challenges, etc. and still went on the books, in my somewhat uneducated opinion there must be some irrefutable documented studies by competent unbiased experts that 2nd hand smoke causes health problems.

 

To me this is well past the "does it make sense or not" stage, this Act took a long time to become reality as I understand it and now it applies to the ballpark.  So be it IMO.  I do think the White Sox security personnel will have their hands full enforcing it though.  Some smokers will simply not be aware, while others will intentionally defy the ordinance.  I just hope there aren't confrontations in the stands but unfortunately I suspect there will be.

 

If anybody ever told me that I was bothering them I would put it out or move. That was rude of those guys. For God's sake, just move a few feet away so they don't have to breathe it. How hard can that be?

 

Having said all this, I wonder what Wrigley is doing. Not that I go to more than two games there a year (both for work, ugh), but there you could, if I'm not mistaken, only smoke against the Sheffield Ave. fence in the bleachers (meaning: all the way back) or on the ramps against the fence on the Addison/Clark sides (and maybe on the outdoor patio up top at Clark/Addison side.

 

I wonder if they've gotten tighter, too.

 

But to reiterate: this is what they do at other parks, what the Sox are doing. I think it's inevitable. And just one more reason to quit!

 

[Steff]

Having said all this, I wonder what Wrigley is doing.  Not that I go to more than two games there a year (both for work, ugh), but there you could, if I'm not mistaken, only smoke against the Sheffield Ave. fence in the bleachers (meaning: all the way back) or on the ramps against the fence on the Addison/Clark sides (and maybe on the outdoor patio up top at Clark/Addison side.

 

I wonder if they've gotten tighter, too.

 

 

 

Back when I was an ignorant b****... (have at it peanut gallery ) I smoked walking on the concourse there and waiting in lines for beers with the rest of the smoking lepers.