Self-satisfied be-gortexed motherfuckers!
So, I'm well over a year without cigarettes, except for a drunken puff last New Year's Eve. I never thought it would happen, but I can go for days on end without thinking about smoking. The pangs still hit every once in awhile, but they're short-lived, and I can get through them with little or no fuss.
I never thought I'd say it, but I also can't stand the smell of cigarette smoke. In a bar, it's just about all I notice, and I hate the way the smell clings to me after I leave. Too much time in a bar, and my head feels like it's splitting open. And now after a night in a bar I always shower before I hit the sheets, just like a fussy little housewife, or a metrosexual.
That said, I'm fucking appalled that Initiative 901, the Goddamn smoking ban, passed in Seattle. The success of 901 says a hell of a lot about Seattle, and its smug, self-righteous addle-pated inhabitants.
Lots of people like to smoke when they drink, even if they don't normally smoke. From sorority girls to drunken secretaries to boomers out for a night on the town, many, many people like to have a smoke when they're getting their drink on. As for the folks hitting the bars every night, 95% of them are regular, full-time smokers. Smoking is part of bar life. Ipso facto, a smoky bar without cigarette smoke is not a smoky bar.
Despite all that, I could almost see my way to a ban on smoking in bars. Almost. But what makes 901 truly fucking ridiculous is the 25-foot exclusion zone it mandates for all public buildings. In order for smokers in downtown Seattle to be in legal compliance on their smoke breaks, they'd have to stand in the middle of the street. Needless to say that's also illegal, and foolish to boot. Presumably, a smoker who could levitate could legally smoke. Otherwise, they're out of luck.
Granted, passers by are excepted from 901. But exactly how can you tell the difference between a 'passer by' and a 'stander at?' Is a walking smoker who stops to tie his shoe in violation of the law? Can a fellow on a smoke break stay legal by walking around the block? Is there a required speed for a passer by? Are beat cops now going to monitor smoking pedestrian's rates of progress?
But what really makes me angry is the tone of my co-workers, all of whom apparently support 901. Most of them are active, outdoorsy kind of people. Many ride bicycles, or run, or play on amateur athletic teams. They're almost stereotypical Seattlites. Were I to shout down the hallway, asking where the gps counter at REI is, or what Sierra Trading Post had on sale in their last spam, I'd have an answer before my lips stopped flapping.
Today, they all look like the proud parents of a newborn baby. They've gone around congratulating each other on 901's passage. Now they can go to bars, they say. Now they won't have to walk past the smokers on their way into the building, they crow. Why it's the dawn of a Goddamn new era of drinking alcohol in crisp, fresh air, they prattle. One softball player in particular keeps on gloating about how he gets to take the awning at the back of the building away from the smokers.
Weird thing is, they're also all defense attorneys. These are people who should be at the front lines of keeping the government out of your business. Inventors of technicalities, pourers-over of fine print, these defense attorneys are supposed to see to it that goverment's role in our life is narrow, limited, and reasonable.
Despite that, they've all embraced 901 with passionate zeal. Their eyes glaze over and they quit listening when I yap about the 25-foot exclusion zone. Some have gone so far as to say they don't care, they just hate cigarette smoke. In the eyes of defense attorneys, it seems your right to be free from government interference is in direct relation to the amount of gortex you wear. They're blind to the rights of smokers, because it's a habit that is miles away from their active, self-righteous lifestyles.
I don't like smoking anymore. I don't like to be around people who smoke. But I believe people have the right to smoke if they want to. I can't condone any effort that effectively outlaws smoking in any public area. The goverment has more important things to do than hassle smokers.
By passing 901, Seattle has proven itself to be the epicenter of a new era of chickenshit. In a few years, perhaps we'll pass legally-mandated dress codes. A few years after that, perhaps we'll mandate aerobic exercise. For now, all I do know is that I am ashamed of my city.
I never thought I'd say it, but I also can't stand the smell of cigarette smoke. In a bar, it's just about all I notice, and I hate the way the smell clings to me after I leave. Too much time in a bar, and my head feels like it's splitting open. And now after a night in a bar I always shower before I hit the sheets, just like a fussy little housewife, or a metrosexual.
That said, I'm fucking appalled that Initiative 901, the Goddamn smoking ban, passed in Seattle. The success of 901 says a hell of a lot about Seattle, and its smug, self-righteous addle-pated inhabitants.
Lots of people like to smoke when they drink, even if they don't normally smoke. From sorority girls to drunken secretaries to boomers out for a night on the town, many, many people like to have a smoke when they're getting their drink on. As for the folks hitting the bars every night, 95% of them are regular, full-time smokers. Smoking is part of bar life. Ipso facto, a smoky bar without cigarette smoke is not a smoky bar.
Despite all that, I could almost see my way to a ban on smoking in bars. Almost. But what makes 901 truly fucking ridiculous is the 25-foot exclusion zone it mandates for all public buildings. In order for smokers in downtown Seattle to be in legal compliance on their smoke breaks, they'd have to stand in the middle of the street. Needless to say that's also illegal, and foolish to boot. Presumably, a smoker who could levitate could legally smoke. Otherwise, they're out of luck.
Granted, passers by are excepted from 901. But exactly how can you tell the difference between a 'passer by' and a 'stander at?' Is a walking smoker who stops to tie his shoe in violation of the law? Can a fellow on a smoke break stay legal by walking around the block? Is there a required speed for a passer by? Are beat cops now going to monitor smoking pedestrian's rates of progress?
But what really makes me angry is the tone of my co-workers, all of whom apparently support 901. Most of them are active, outdoorsy kind of people. Many ride bicycles, or run, or play on amateur athletic teams. They're almost stereotypical Seattlites. Were I to shout down the hallway, asking where the gps counter at REI is, or what Sierra Trading Post had on sale in their last spam, I'd have an answer before my lips stopped flapping.
Today, they all look like the proud parents of a newborn baby. They've gone around congratulating each other on 901's passage. Now they can go to bars, they say. Now they won't have to walk past the smokers on their way into the building, they crow. Why it's the dawn of a Goddamn new era of drinking alcohol in crisp, fresh air, they prattle. One softball player in particular keeps on gloating about how he gets to take the awning at the back of the building away from the smokers.
Weird thing is, they're also all defense attorneys. These are people who should be at the front lines of keeping the government out of your business. Inventors of technicalities, pourers-over of fine print, these defense attorneys are supposed to see to it that goverment's role in our life is narrow, limited, and reasonable.
Despite that, they've all embraced 901 with passionate zeal. Their eyes glaze over and they quit listening when I yap about the 25-foot exclusion zone. Some have gone so far as to say they don't care, they just hate cigarette smoke. In the eyes of defense attorneys, it seems your right to be free from government interference is in direct relation to the amount of gortex you wear. They're blind to the rights of smokers, because it's a habit that is miles away from their active, self-righteous lifestyles.
I don't like smoking anymore. I don't like to be around people who smoke. But I believe people have the right to smoke if they want to. I can't condone any effort that effectively outlaws smoking in any public area. The goverment has more important things to do than hassle smokers.
By passing 901, Seattle has proven itself to be the epicenter of a new era of chickenshit. In a few years, perhaps we'll pass legally-mandated dress codes. A few years after that, perhaps we'll mandate aerobic exercise. For now, all I do know is that I am ashamed of my city.
posted by DirtyBird at 10:07
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home