Bob in STL Posted December 27, 2011 Posted December 27, 2011 (edited) Beer piss from being bombed out of your mind at a football game or just regular piss? Why are you people who are criticizing smokers and their 2nd hand smoke continuing to avoid the fact that drunk a-holes at football games are also subjecting non-drunks to their: 1) Urinating in public 2) Vomiting 3) Fighting 4) Abusive language and profanity 5) Injuring and possibly killiing other fans while driving while intoxicated to and from the stadium If we can stop bashing on smokers here for a moment, can someone please explain to me why drunks have more rights to their behavior than smokers do? I agree that the drunks are worse than smokers. My biggest issue with the drunks is having to listen to their foul language. Every other word is F'in this and F'in that. I really never have a problem with them fighting or harassing me or my friends. For a joke, I timed a trip into the bathroom at the start of the 2nd half (upper deck by the exit ramp). I counted 47 F-bombs in two minutes. Almost once in every three seconds an F-bomb was dropped. Somtimes there were rapid fire F-bombs, 6 to 8 per sentence. Every one spewed by a drunken kid in his twenties. I had a good laugh but I would not have been happy with it back in the days when my kids were young and with me. Edited December 27, 2011 by Bob in STL
The_Philster Posted December 27, 2011 Posted December 27, 2011 I really have no sympathy for smokers...my former season ticket partner quit going to games because of them designating a specified smoking area in 2006 but they supposedly weren't clear on where it was (that was his reasoning for quitting, anyway)..still owes me $2K for several years of season tix, anyway...it's a disgusting habit that harms the people around you in addition to yourself...that being said, as much as I hate smoking, I thought removing the smoking areas this year was going overboard. As far as the comparisons to drinking, one thing people haven't brought up is the fact that you can have a few beers without getting drunk or harming anyone, yourself included. Drinking in moderation harms no one....smoking, in any amount, is harmful to everyone
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted December 27, 2011 Posted December 27, 2011 This is all market-based, as it should be. Bills can sell more seats and make more money by banning smoking. If the Bills could make more money by banning alcohol consumption, they'd do that too. The OP's response is the correct one. He didn't like the policy, so he didn't renew.
IDBillzFan Posted December 27, 2011 Posted December 27, 2011 Besides, if it wasn't for smokers, who would we be able to discriminate against? Fat people.
Just Jack Posted December 27, 2011 Posted December 27, 2011 ..... The Bills don't allow ticket holders to leave and come back because one person could easily leave with more than one ticket and come back with other non-paying people..... Not with the ticket scanners they use now. If I want to leave the club area, I have to have my ticket scanned as I leave, they will then rescan it when I enter. This prevents people from allowing others to sneak in on a ticket that was already used.
SactoBillFan Posted December 27, 2011 Posted December 27, 2011 Can't believe you couldn't find a place to sneak a smoke in. Follow those people at half time that are firing up the doobies.
uncle flap Posted December 27, 2011 Posted December 27, 2011 wow some of you guys are some mr. softie pansy pussycats. "oh no, some secondhand smoke is wafting in my personal hygiene zone!!!" i bet you wear spf 150 indoors and have your mom check under your bed in your parents basement for monsters before you go to sleep. you're probably the same schmucks that ask people to sit down and not cheer so loudly. seriously tho, what was the problem with the smoking areas hidden by the gates? bills got rid of smoking for a publicity bump and prob got a grant or tax break from ny or the county. and to all those baffled about not being able to not smoke for 3-4 hours: it's not about the time, its the environment. for example, i go without smoking during a full day's work. but when i'm having a good time drinking and pigging out in a party atmosphere, i'd like to be able to smoke to complement the experience. so overpriced beer/concessions, invasive security procedures, asinine parking/traffic rules, occasional competitive football, and foul-mouthed rowdy drunks are okay, but someone's DESIRE to smoke in a designated area is offensive? lots of people dont ENJOY secondhand smoke. but i doubt exposure outdoors for a few minutes here and there is enough to cause serious detriment to your health. ill leave it to someone else to find some statistics, but i'm sure it's marginal when coupled with the exhaust fumes from tens of thousands of cars. or do you guys wear surgical masks walking thru the parking lots?
BiggieScooby Posted December 28, 2011 Posted December 28, 2011 As Ralph Wilson once said "I save money by not smoking, and thanks to ignorant people I make money owning tobacco stocks."
PromoTheRobot Posted December 28, 2011 Posted December 28, 2011 Well at least you can always get Club seats later if you want them. It's not like they are sold out. PTR
Lurker Posted December 28, 2011 Posted December 28, 2011 I think they should ban your ability to use the internet. it is called freedom. Quit stepping on it you commie. Appropriate user name...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted December 28, 2011 Posted December 28, 2011 ^^^^ this!!! Thank you!! last time I checked the first thing a doc does when you are born is establish your air way. Same for first aid. I don't remember anyone coming out of their mother with a pack in one hand and a lighter in the other. Smokers have NO rights period. It is a drug and an addiction that seriously effects the health of others. Smokers have no rights? Then why do they sell cigarettes which are taxed to the point where the tax is higher than the product? What you're trying to say is that if you ran the world, you would make sure smokers have no rights. And again, you continue to avoid the question as to why drunks in the stadium have rights but smokers don't. There shouldnt' be any smoking areas. If they can't do without their addiction for 4 hours then stay home. Yet another thing you aren't getting in your simple prejudice against smoking is that this is not an issue of addictions, habits, or anything like that. It's an issue of what freedoms people are allowed. In Ralph Wilson Stadium, drunks have freedoms but smokers don't. Perhaps you're not formed enough to understand that this is a contradiction. Yeah I get what you are saying but it comes down to this... If someone near you smokes, chances are you will be forced to inhale the smoke with them. If some one near you drinks, you will not likely be forced to drink the beer with them (peer pressure?). While alcohol does cause those behavior issues above, they are indirect BEHAVIORAL issues. You could compare those secondary effects to a secondary effect such as constantly coughing near you after one is done smoking. It's not the same as being directly affected by actually inhaling or drinking the product. Just pointing out the facts, smoking in public directly affects non smokers. Drinking in public does not directly affect non drinkers. It's very simple actually. You have the right to smoke all you want, but you don't have the right to make others smoke your cigarette with you. Yet again (for about the 5th time in this topic) I'm talking about a smoking section, NOT people smoking in their seats. So your second-hand smoke argument doesn't apply here. And again to another issue, people are not allowed to leave and return to the stadium which is absurd considering that this practice is permitted in numerous other stadiums and that the technology is already in place to allow the practice.
Jim in Anchorage Posted December 28, 2011 Posted December 28, 2011 This is all market-based, as it should be. Bills can sell more seats and make more money by banning smoking. If the Bills could make more money by banning alcohol consumption, they'd do that too. The OP's response is the correct one. He didn't like the policy, so he didn't renew. Exactly. If doesn't want to go if can't smoke, so what? It's supposed to be fun, not a willpower test.
Just Jack Posted December 28, 2011 Posted December 28, 2011 As Ralph Wilson once said "I save money by not smoking, and thanks to ignorant people I make money owning tobacco stocks." Link?
RayFinkle Posted December 28, 2011 Posted December 28, 2011 Exactly. If doesn't want to go if can't smoke, so what? It's supposed to be fun, not a willpower test. Everyone has their vices. Some folks smoke, some folks drink, some folks over eat. I guarantee a lot of the folks who are quick to criticize for smoking are probably 40lbs overweight. Can't have a smoke, but you can eat nachos which have 40 grams of fat....6 on one hand, have dozen on the other.
BRH Posted December 28, 2011 Posted December 28, 2011 Sounds like a law suit A frivolous one. The Bills can set whatever rules they like about smoking as long as they are not discriminating against a protected class. If they said only white guys under 40 could smoke, THAT would be a lawsuit.
opfball91 Posted December 28, 2011 Posted December 28, 2011 Wow, some people in here are funny. Smoking is awful for you, yes, but people have a right to smoke. They aren't second class citizens, they happen to have a bad habit. I bet all these people shunning smokers are perfect. FYI, if you drink, and shun smokers at the same time, you're a hypocrite.
RyanC883 Posted December 28, 2011 Posted December 28, 2011 I'm not a smoker, and I hope you quit because it's really terrible for your health. With all that said, you seem to understand the tremendous risks of smoking, are willing to smoke in a designated area away from non-smokers, therefore you should be allowed a place to smoke. The Ralph needs a smoking section, or should at least let you go in and out. Totally rediculous. You are only harming yourself. (assuming you are doing it in a well-ventaliated smoking section). I wish you wouldn't, but that's your choice to make, not mine. The Bills should be treating their fans like adults. Wow, some people in here are funny. Smoking is awful for you, yes, but people have a right to smoke. They aren't second class citizens, they happen to have a bad habit. I bet all these people shunning smokers are perfect. FYI, if you drink, and shun smokers at the same time, you're a hypocrite. Well, the comparison to drinking is not a real comparasion. One drink a day has no effect on your health, and some studies show it to be beneficial. But, one cigarattee a day increases your risk of cancer to some degree, and has no known health beneefits. Drinking is only dangerous to yourself and/or others when done irresponsibly. Smoking is always dangerous to yourself, and can be dangerous to others in varing degrees if done irresponsibility. Bottom line: let smokers smoke responsibly, and let those who want to drink do so, but responsibly. Bannking smoking at the Ralph is a terrible move. There is no reason they can't make a cigar bar, smoking room, or allow re-entry. Link? I thought the last part of his quote was "but thanks to ignorant people I make money by owning the Buffalo Bills." We all have a bad habit, being a Bills fan!
RealityCheck Posted December 28, 2011 Posted December 28, 2011 Wow, some people in here are funny. Smoking is awful for you, yes, but people have a right to smoke. They aren't second class citizens, they happen to have a bad habit. I bet all these people shunning smokers are perfect. FYI, if you drink, and shun smokers at the same time, you're a hypocrite. Cigarettes are a gate way drug and yes, smokers are second class citizens. Their willingness to be price gouged on a product that can cause respiratory failure is absurd. Get a real vice for Christ' sake.
Recommended Posts