CodeMonkey Posted June 16, 2011 Posted June 16, 2011 That is pretty much what my post says? Yes it does, just agreeing with you.
bills_fan Posted June 16, 2011 Posted June 16, 2011 As someone who actually had the courtesy to leave his seats and walk to the designated area (not the bathroom), this really sucks. Nobody in that area was not a smoker. Nobody was in that area except for between quarters or halftime. People who smoked in the stands or bathroom should be tossed, but I always appreciated that certain places (Rich Stadium, the Tampa airport etc.) still catered to all fans...smokers and non-smokers alike without causing the two to mix. The fact that they now need to ban it will make people smoke elsewhere in the stadium (rather than the open air designated areas) and cause more conflict. Bad idea.
Bill from NYC Posted June 16, 2011 Posted June 16, 2011 However, as far as it goes it is easier for me to see justification in banning drinking than banning smoking (yes secondhand smoke can harm others so smokers should be pretty cognizant of their habit harming others) but the potential and measurable harms of drunken driving makes it easier for me to ban drinking than ban smoking. Bill I know from your posts your posts you are a pretty reasonable and thoughtful person. Do you think that the heavy taxes and things like the ban at the Ralph even though they are incorrect in principal to lay on adults also are at least somewhat justifiable as an effort to discourage minors from smoking? Likewise, the economics of selling tobacco simply do not compare to the economic gain to be had from liquor sales. You points are well taken, here ya go..... 1) I agree with the bold. A drunk can sleep through a game, wake up, and drive his or her automobile. 2) I don't think a ban like this serves to, or even purports to stop young people from smoking. I think it was more of a situation of trying to accomodate people such as SDS, who it seems had legit problems with people smoking in seating areas, as well as anti-smoking zealots. 3) Your point about economics was what I was driving at. Going to an NFL game is not like going to a library or a health spa. How many times have you seen young people toss footballs that wind up near charcoal grills? Have you seen drunks get in fights that cause injuries? The smoking ban probably won't cost them much money. Banning alcohol would, thus the hypocrisy. Imo bbqs will be next. The grills are dangerous, the fumes are unhealthy and the sight of burning animal flesh is offensive to militant vegetarians. And, they might sell more food inside. But, alcohol will certainly be banned at some point imo, at the very least in the parking lots. People will always have vices. Searching for that utopia is a lost cause. It is also noteworthy that the policy was announced by a person who is good at making money and bad at providing the fans a winning product.
Ramius Posted June 16, 2011 Posted June 16, 2011 Boiled down to its simplest terms, drinking a beer doesn't bother/affect the person sitting next you. Smoking does.
yall Posted June 16, 2011 Posted June 16, 2011 As someone who actually had the courtesy to leave his seats and walk to the designated area (not the bathroom), this really sucks. Nobody in that area was not a smoker. Nobody was in that area except for between quarters or halftime. People who smoked in the stands or bathroom should be tossed, but I always appreciated that certain places (Rich Stadium, the Tampa airport etc.) still catered to all fans...smokers and non-smokers alike without causing the two to mix. The fact that they now need to ban it will make people smoke elsewhere in the stadium (rather than the open air designated areas) and cause more conflict. Bad idea. This. I still don't understand what the problem is with having a designated smoking area, provided it's somewhat out of the way and positioned in such a manner that it won't bother non-smokers. And for those of you who think this will somehow cut down on people who smoke in their seats, I;m betting it will have the exact opposite effect.
DC Tom Posted June 16, 2011 Posted June 16, 2011 Boiled down to its simplest terms, drinking a beer doesn't bother/affect the person sitting next you. Smoking does. Spilling it does. So maybe that's the answer: drinkers can drink as long as they don't spill their beer; smokers can smoke as long as they don't exhale their smoke.
DrDawkinstein Posted June 16, 2011 Posted June 16, 2011 What this boils down to, at it's most simplest, is that a major sponsor in the stadium is... Blue Cross/Blue Shield! Id bet this has nothing to do with "problems" in the stands or stadium, and much more to do with $$$$.
K Gun Special Posted June 16, 2011 Posted June 16, 2011 http://hosted2.ap.org/txdam/2328593e932a4d72bf7e9798dc61d072/Article_2011-06-15-FBN-Fan-Behavior/id-1e8fcc0d3673493abdd1cf4c340a62fe Interesting article on fan code of conduct.
Ramius Posted June 16, 2011 Posted June 16, 2011 Spilling it does. So maybe that's the answer: drinkers can drink as long as they don't spill their beer; smokers can smoke as long as they don't exhale their smoke. I'm fine with that rule. Don't exhale and collect your ashes in your pocket. Or put lids on beers and make people use a straw.
Guffalo Posted June 16, 2011 Posted June 16, 2011 As someone who actually had the courtesy to leave his seats and walk to the designated area (not the bathroom), this really sucks. Nobody in that area was not a smoker. Nobody was in that area except for between quarters or halftime. People who smoked in the stands or bathroom should be tossed, but I always appreciated that certain places (Rich Stadium, the Tampa airport etc.) still catered to all fans...smokers and non-smokers alike without causing the two to mix. The fact that they now need to ban it will make people smoke elsewhere in the stadium (rather than the open air designated areas) and cause more conflict. Bad idea. I always followed that rule, smoke where they have a designated area and everything is fine, I would never think of smoking in the stands or concourse since I am aware that others do not want to smell the smoke. I am sure they could have designated a faraway corner for the smokers to go at the breaks without forcing them out of the stadium.
eball Posted June 16, 2011 Posted June 16, 2011 What is it about cigarette smoking that makes otherwise sane individuals completely forget what "littering" means? When's the last time you were driving down the road and decided to crack your window and throw that empty McDonald's cup into the street? When you're at a picnic, do you finish the fried chicken and baked beans on your paper plate, drop the plate to the ground, rub it around with your foot, and then move on to your next activity?
San Jose Bills Fan Posted June 16, 2011 Posted June 16, 2011 Boiled down to its simplest terms, drinking a beer doesn't bother/affect the person sitting next you. Smoking does. That may be true in some cases but when you say "a beer" are you talking about the first one or the 12th one?
CodeMonkey Posted June 16, 2011 Posted June 16, 2011 What is it about cigarette smoking that makes otherwise sane individuals completely forget what "littering" means? When's the last time you were driving down the road and decided to crack your window and throw that empty McDonald's cup into the street? When you're at a picnic, do you finish the fried chicken and baked beans on your paper plate, drop the plate to the ground, rub it around with your foot, and then move on to your next activity? Yeah that's one of the more disgusting aspects of that addiction. I once saw someone throw one out the window of his car when he was parked and asked why he didn't use the ashtray in his car. He responded that he didn't want to get the ashtray dirty and didn't want his car to stink.
DC Tom Posted June 16, 2011 Posted June 16, 2011 What this boils down to, at it's most simplest, is that a major sponsor in the stadium is... Blue Cross/Blue Shield! Id bet this has nothing to do with "problems" in the stands or stadium, and much more to do with $$$$. I still think it's to !@#$ with the Indians...
Just Jack Posted June 17, 2011 Posted June 17, 2011 I'd like to know where this "vast majority" of fans came from. As a season ticket holder, no one called me to ask my opinion, which is keep the designated smoking areas. And enforce the, now former, policy of no smoking in the stadium. And for the record I am a non-smoker.
Lv-Bills Posted June 17, 2011 Posted June 17, 2011 Like I said before.... the biggest mess this creates is the traffic coming into the stadium. Many people arrive around 9AM as it is. Now you are bottlenecking all the people who come in between 8AM and 9AM in there as well. Abbott road is going to be gridlocked for miles. Yes indeed. This is the first thing I thought of as well. This stupid 4 hour rule is just going to create nightmarish traffic again around the Ralph. Really sucks.
thebug Posted June 17, 2011 Posted June 17, 2011 Yes indeed. This is the first thing I thought of as well. This stupid 4 hour rule is just going to create nightmarish traffic again around the Ralph. Really sucks. Go early and park at Hammer's lot.
Lv-Bills Posted June 17, 2011 Posted June 17, 2011 Go early and park at Hammer's lot. We have become good friends with someone in Orchard Park and park at their house for free. Their neighborhood also doesn't allow people to park in yards which is great, because I'm 1/4 mile from the Ralph in a peaceful neighborhood. So, I'm pretty much set. However, this rule will make a nigthmare getting around the Ralph again, unless you arrive at 6am. Seeing that I have a 10 hour drive home after games, and am over 20 years old, I can't get there and party all day at 6am anymore!!!
billsfanmiami(oh) Posted June 17, 2011 Posted June 17, 2011 I'm for public stoning for anyone who tells me your cigarette does not affect me because we are outside. There isn't a more asinine argument in the world. You don't even want to know what I propose after the stoning for those who make your second argument. Good Lord, a mind is a terrible thing to waste. Wow, classy response. I'm not even a smoker but I'm glad you immediately jumped to that conclusion. I guess I'm just not very smart because I can walk to the bathroom while catching a whiff of cigarette smoke and not really care. If you have a medical condition that would cause you hyperventilate or something of that nature, then yes I could see your "no tolerance" attitude. If not, I say tough. Like I said, I'm all for kicking out the idiots that light up in the stands. It's unacceptable. For those that are outside in a designated smoking area, I don't see a reason why you or anyone else so strongly opposed could not just avoid the area. I know there are strong and varied opinions on this subject but to puff out your chest and more or less call any smoker and or sympathizer stupid, seems like a pretty shallow argument itself.
eball Posted June 17, 2011 Posted June 17, 2011 Wow, classy response. I'm not even a smoker but I'm glad you immediately jumped to that conclusion. I guess I'm just not very smart because I can walk to the bathroom while catching a whiff of cigarette smoke and not really care. If you have a medical condition that would cause you hyperventilate or something of that nature, then yes I could see your "no tolerance" attitude. If not, I say tough. Like I said, I'm all for kicking out the idiots that light up in the stands. It's unacceptable. For those that are outside in a designated smoking area, I don't see a reason why you or anyone else so strongly opposed could not just avoid the area. I know there are strong and varied opinions on this subject but to puff out your chest and more or less call any smoker and or sympathizer stupid, seems like a pretty shallow argument itself. Isn't engaging in an activity that is absolutely, positively, 100% proven to cause permanent, irreversible damage to one's vital organs the very definition of stupidity? At best, it's blind ignorance. Look, I do lots of stupid things myself -- I may even defend my stupid actions vigorously, but it doesn't make them any less stupid.
Recommended Posts