Tobacco products on golf course

[DwightC]

Interesting how times change.  As a young boy in the 1950s I remember getting chocolate cigarettes in my Christmas stocking.  Eight pages ago a guy in Charlotte N.C. started this thread about a ban on smoking on a public golf course in North Carolina, of all places.  I remember when Big Tobacco more or less owned North Carolina.  Times change.  And, in the course of this thread, weed somehow entered the picture.  Times really change.

Personally, I'm not a smoker.  Maybe a cigar once or twice a year, in a social context.  I don't like litter on the golf course, and that included cigarette butts.  But I'm not particularly sensitive to second hand smoke, so I can't get real excited about other people smoking outdoors.  And I certainly don't have an ideological axe to grind.  Smokers' 'rights' strike me as kinda dumb.  Guess what, we live in an organized society with lots of rules.  I remember registering for the draft.  That was a long time ago.  When I get on the road, I just hope everyone in oncoming traffic obeys the rule that we drive on the right and doesn't exercise his/her 'right' to use all the pavement. That's today.  If I were in Britain, I'd be hoping everyone would drive on the left, of course, but they have a National Health Service.  Beats a Selective Service.  So much for smokers rights.

[tefunk]

For me its about being a necessary evil. As of right now I need a car that runs on gas. I do not, and people do not need cigarettes. If I was able to get around with just an electric car with all I wanted to do, then yes I would be doing that.

You don't "need" a car that runs on gas, or any car for that matter... You choose to drive one to make your life easier. Are you inconsiderate because you pollute? Or is it OK in your situation because it's justifiable by your standards? If you have the right to tell one to stop smoking cigars on the golf course, then they have just as much right to tell you to stop driving a car.

[Golfingdad]

You don't "need" ... any car for that matter...

You obviously don't live in Southern California. ;)

[saevel25]

You don't "need" a car that runs on gas, or any car for that matter... You choose to drive one to make your life easier. Are you inconsiderate because you pollute? Or is it OK in your situation because it's justifiable by your standards? If you have the right to tell one to stop smoking cigars on the golf course, then they have just as much right to tell you to stop driving a car.

Obviously you must live right down the street from your work, or don't live 200 miles from your family. Right now with the American infrastructure, people need cars. You do not need tobacco.

[tefunk]

You obviously don't live in Southern California. ;)

I believe people were living and surviving in So Cal long before cars existed

[tefunk]

Obviously you must live right down the street from your work, or don't live 200 miles from your family. Right now with the American infrastructure, people need cars. You do not need tobacco.

Would you die if you didn't have a car? I highly doubt it... Which means you don't need it. You're just justifying it because it's convenient. And I live 10 miles from work... I could ride a bike, but choose a car because it's convenient. And my family lives 2,000 miles away. There are very few "needs" to survive. A car is not a need, just like smoking a cigar isn't. How about this... You are not allowed to drive a car anywhere near a golf course, and then no one can smoke at a golf course. That would be fair

[Fourputt]

This discussion has gone stupid.  Of course one needs a car in much of the world in the 21st century.  To think otherwise is ridiculous.  Some areas have good access to public transportation.  The town I'm moving to in little over a month does not.  The nearest grocery store is 20 miles away.  There is no food available in town except a small restaurant which is only open 4 days a week.

The place I'm living right now has no other way to get around.  Once again, the nearest grocery store is more than 10 miles away, and even then it's pretty basic.  To get to a supermarket, I'd have to drive 30 minutes to the airport, then catch a plane to Nassau, where they actually do have cabs, and I believe a bus, on which I could get to the market.

Nobody is going to convince me that the automobile is an unnecessary luxury.  It's absolutely essential if one wants to maintain any quality of life in the world today.

Tobacco products, however, do not hold that distinction.

[ditchparrot19]

This discussion has gone stupid.  Of course one needs a car in much of the world in the 21st century.  To think otherwise is ridiculous.  Some areas have good access to public transportation.  The town I'm moving to in little over a month does not.  The nearest grocery store is 20 miles away.  There is no food available in town except a small restaurant which is only open 4 days a week.  Nobody is going to convince me that a car is an unnecessary luxury.

It went stupid long before the first automobile reference. As soon as people started talking about getting cancer and/or other diseases from smelling secondhand smoke outdoors, it was off the rails of logic.

[tefunk]

This discussion has gone stupid.... ...essential if one wants to maintain any quality of life in the world today.

Stupid, yes. The entire discussion of people saying they have a right to deny other people what they believe is a quality of life... Is stupid. To some, tobacco is part of their quality of life... And you have no right to deny them that. And people don't "need" cars, they are not essential... But no one really has a right to deny that quality of one's life who choose to have a car. So hopefully you get the point... Neither are good for everyone's health. To each their own... Get over it

[Golfingdad]

This discussion has gone stupid.  Of course one needs a car in much of the world in the 21st century.

It went stupid

Stupid, yes.

Nonsense, it's not stupid at all.  Thanks to this discussion, first thing Monday morning, I'm going to inquire at my office about replacing one of the parking spaces with a hitching post.

[isukgolf]

One can not fix stupid ... And I think this thread highlights that ... Never thought I'd hear quality of life and tobacco in the sentence ... But hey that's just me, I have seen first hand how that ride ends ... And it ain't pretty

[Hammer 4]

I'd like to add one thing. Some folks think smoking cigarettes are bad, which they are, yet some of the same people think smoking a cigar is fine, well you can get cancer from either one. Unsubscribed.

[Lihu]

Nonsense, it's not stupid at all.  Thanks to this discussion, first thing Monday morning, I'm going to inquire at my office about replacing one of the parking spaces with a hitching post.

I rode a bike 110 miles a day for three years.

Actually, I rode the bike to the subway line and took the metro and rode to my work about a mile from the train station. Took almost 2 and half hours each way each day. I pretty much lived on the public transportation system, and found a safe way to ride the bicycle 75 miles (55 on the freeway) to get home on days the train "breaks down". Lucky for me it's an electric bicycle, it goes about 50 miles between charges, and is a heck of a lot harder to pedal when that charge runs out. That last 25 miles was quite a workout.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fourputt

This discussion has gone stupid....

...essential if one wants to maintain any quality of life in the world today.

Stupid, yes. The entire discussion of people saying they have a right to deny other people what they believe is a quality of life... Is stupid.

To some, tobacco is part of their quality of life... And you have no right to deny them that.

And people don't "need" cars, they are not essential... But no one really has a right to deny that quality of one's life who choose to have a car.

So hopefully you get the point... Neither are good for everyone's health.

To each their own... Get over it

You still didn't get it - I'm not agreeing with you.  I'm opposed to tobacco because tobacco is simply bad for users and for those around them, offers no actual benefit to the user except to relieve the symptoms of the addiction that tobacco causes in the first place, and it degrades quality of life, never, ever enhances it.

A vehicle of one kind or another provides enhancements to ones life in many ways, beyond simple convenience.  You are way, way out in left field to say that a motorized vehicle is not a necessity of modern life in most of the world.

As an ex smoker, I'm against smoking and chewing for all of the right reasons, and I know what I speak of since I've been there.  I would not support a total ban on tobacco (particularly for outdoor use), but I would also not oppose the implementation of any measure which encourages addicts to modify, or even better, to end their dependence it.

[tefunk]

Fourputt... I get it. You're a hypocrite, and you also believe you have a clue what brings quality of life to everyone. Pollution causes cancer too... If you pollute, you're part of the problem. Everyone is capable of deciding what brings quality to their own lives... Whether it brings quality to yours or not.

[saevel25]

Fourputt... I get it. You're a hypocrite, and you also believe you have a clue what brings quality of life to everyone.

Pollution causes cancer too... If you pollute, you're part of the problem.

Everyone is capable of deciding what brings quality to their own lives... Whether it brings quality to yours or not.

It's called being a realist, not an idealist.

It isn't being a hypocrite because of the circumstances of living in the world we live in. Smoking has no place in the world except to keep people addicted to a product that does the harm to the body. Cars are required due to the dynamics of society. There are a lot of needs that required vehicles. There are no needs for smoking, except for the selfish addiction people refuse to quit. You just can't say it is a black/white scenario.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tefunk

Fourputt... I get it. You're a hypocrite, and you also believe you have a clue what brings quality of life to everyone.

Pollution causes cancer too... If you pollute, you're part of the problem.

Everyone is capable of deciding what brings quality to their own lives... Whether it brings quality to yours or not.

It's called being a realist, not an idealist.

It isn't being a hypocrite because of the circumstances of living in the world we live in. Smoking has no place in the world except to keep people addicted to a product that does the harm to the body. Cars are required due to the dynamics of society. There are a lot of needs that required vehicles. There are no needs for smoking, except for the selfish addiction people refuse to quit. You just can't say it is a black/white scenario.

I guess he'd rather revert to the stone age.  He's the sort who would have been in a hippie commune 40 years ago.

[Lihu]

I guess he'd rather revert to the stone age.  He's the sort who would have been in a hippie commune 40 years ago.

Even ox carts and farm animals pollute. We pollute, even if we don't smoke. Cars are really efficient, and will continue to trend that way. Things we need/want always become more efficient.