Violating A Hotel's No Smoking Policy Could Cost You $250

Hotels are starting to to hit smokers with hefty fines for violating their no smoking policies. Take Dan Cole. He didn’t light up in his non-smoking Marriott room, honest. Those butts in his garbage can? Um, he smoked them somewhere else and threw them out in the room?

It costs Marriott over $1,000 to scrub the smoke-stink off a room, a charge they happily offset by smacking smokers like Dan with a $250 fine.

Some hotels seek out actual physical evidence before they levy a fine. The New York Marriott Downtown first started charging people $250 for simply leaving the smell of smoke in their rooms after the brand went 100% nonsmoking in Sept. 2006. Within a few weeks, they realized they had too many complaints, says Anna Cervenyak, the hotel’s office manager. Security started taking pictures of butts or ashes when housekeeping found them. Though they still make “plenty” of refunds, they now show people physical evidence, which usually is enough to draw a confession, Ms. Cervenyak says.

Physical evidence also plays a role when a guest tries to protest against the charge through a credit-card company. Sam Patel, who owns the Quality Inn Brick Town in Oklahoma City, says, “A lot of times you have to argue with the credit-card company” to have a smoking charge accepted. “If you don’t find a cigarette,” he says, the charge will not go through, and “we lose money.” he says.

At least one hotel gives employees an incentive to catch illicit smokers: Swissotel Chicago awards housekeepers a $10 bonus for every smoker they catch.

Lingering smoke-stench can cause a nasty unwanted sore throat for sensitive folks like us—not a perk you want when paying for a room. We’d be glad to see no smoking violators strapped to plane wings and sent through hail storms, but we’ve been told to work on our sensitivity issues. We’re willing to accept that select others might think differently, which is why we have comments.

Where were we?
Right, smoking in hotel rooms.

Please don’t.

Now at Hotels: The $250 Cigarette [WSJ]
(Photo: Getty)

Comments

Edit Your Comment

  1. Buran says:

    I know people who are very very adverse to cigarette smoke to the point that it physically affects them and stops them from being able to breathe. I don’t have that kind of problem but I really hate the stink.

    I have no sympathy for those who can’t read the signs or don’t know what a circle-slash through something means. If you are THAT dead-set on smoking, rent a smoking room. If the hotel doesn’t have any, go to another hotel.

    I have nothing against individual smokers (I work with one who’s very polite and goes out of her way to not intrude on anyone or let the smell get near anyone who doesn’t like it) but if it takes hefty fines to stop people from acting like they’re special, then hit ‘em in the wallet where it actually hurts.

  2. snoop-blog says:

    do roaches count as cigarettes buts?

  3. bdgbill says:

    OK, I always request non-smoking rooms and I always smoke in them.

    This is probably the worst thing I do as far as being a jerk goes. Hotels have been making me sign off on smoking fees as high as $300.00 for years now but I have never been charged.

    First I do a C.S.I. style cleanup of my room before I check out. All butts are flushed down the toilet, no cigarette packages are left anywhere in the room (not even in the trash can). If I have been in the room for several days and it obviously smells like smoke, I will leave a $10.00 tip for the maid. I stay in hotels as much as 200 nights a year and I have never been caught.

    Why don’t I just ask for smoking rooms? Many hotels no longer have them. At the hotels that do have them, they are always the worst rooms they have available. At the Ramada in Manchester NH, the smoking rooms are actually underground with a little slit window high in the wall. These rooms do not get renovated and often have smaller TV’s etc. They also stink real bad.

    Also, I really can’t stand people who think the smell of a cigarette from 500 yards away is going to kill them. Usually the most “sensitive” of these people are ex-smokers themselves.

  4. Steve Trachsel, Ace says:

    I had an issue with this in NJ last year. I was in a friends wedding and we all smoked a couple cigars on the patio during the reception. I also hit a bar after with a couple of the bridesmaids.

    Suffice it to say I reeked of smoke by the end of the night. Came back to the hotel, put the tux in the rental bag and went to sleep. I checked out early the next morning. A couple weeks later a smoking charge showed up on my CC. It took me weeks to fight it because they said the room smelled of smoke, which was enough to justify the charge.

    I love the idea of non-smoking rooms, as I am not a regular smoker and prefer to avoid that stale smoke smell, but sometimes even non-smokers can acquire the scent of smoke without smoking in the room. They need to tweek the rule

  5. DeltaPurser says:

    @bdgbill: You are a very, VERY bad man!

  6. PinkBox says:

    @Tracy Ham and Eggs: Ugh, I agree. Any time I’m stuck around smokers, I take a shower immediately when I get home. I don’t even wear my nicest clothes when I visit my parents because they smoke heavily.

    Sorry, but the smell is completely disgusting, and I’d rather not have other people mistake ME for being a smoker myself. Such a nasty, nasty habit.

    Can you tell I’m very against smoking? :)

  7. laserjobs says:

    Laura Bush is a smoker so how can it be bad for you?

  8. snoop-blog says:

    i always ask for a smoking room, but if all they have available is non-smoking, i still smoke in it. as someone who use to work at a hotel, i can tell you EVERY room has been smoked in. hotels have a industrial strength fabreeze type stuff that they spray to remove the smell. there’s no way it costs $250 to do that.

  9. flamincheney says:

    Ultimately how than they actually prove you smoked in the room short of surveilance(sp). It seems one of these charges is fighting to be reversed in small claims.

    That said I don’t smoke, but I have stayed in rooms that stunk before I even got into the room. What would stop them from just arbitrarily billing me for the stench???

  10. timsgm1418 says:

    I am a smoker, so naturally I don’t have a problem with smoking, and I do follow no-smoking signs. However I do have a problem with the “no smoking outside” or “no smoking on the property” rules, it’s outside people! I’ve also rented smoking rooms that were a little too rank for even a smoker to take, so much so that I’ve made them bring Febreeze to the room. If it’s a non-smoking room, you shouldn’t smoke in it. But I have huge allergy problems with a lot of perfumes, so much so that my throat closes up and I need an inhaler. In my opinion that is just as life threatening as smoke is to the people that don’t like smoke. When do I get to request “no perfume” rooms, or restaraunts or airplanes or elevators? Seriously if you need to douse yourself in perfume to stop from smelling like BO, take a shower.

  11. snoop-blog says:

    i’m going to start defacating in the trash cans to deter them from snooping in my trash. and i’ll leave their $5 tip at the bottom this time.

    seriously though, tip your housekeepers. i’ve never had them narc on me for anything. another tip i got from working at a hotel.

  12. jpx72x says:

    Can somebody explain to me how these fines are legit? I mean $250 sounds reasonable, but what their policy levied a $2500 fine? Shouldn’t hotels be required to base their fines in reality i.e. the damage to the room caused by 1 cigarette smoked outside with the butt thrown away inside is much smaller than the damage caused by 50 cigars smoked inside?

    (And preemptively, even if you sign upfront agreeing to damages punishing you for breaking their smoking policy, it doesn’t mean that the damages are valid. IANAL, YMMV, etc., etc.)

  13. jfischer says:

    So the choices here are smoking-cessation drugs that appear to cause suicide, as mentioned in this prior post [consumerist.com] or “fines” without any sort of due process for the accused?

    Where does it stop? Does it stop before such policies include your cheap aftershave or perfume on the 6 train at rush hour? What about your mp3 player playing so loud that those walking nearby can sing along if they happen to know the words, and share your preference for Norwegian Death Metal? And what about the sense of entitlement that allows you to bang me repeatedly with your stroller or demand that I make way for you, the whole “I have a child” thing?

    I don’t smoke, but smokers never bother as much as any of the other types of anti-social behavior I listed.

    Why is this practice by hotels not condemned as a bogus charge just like the ones listed in this post [consumerist.com] ?

    Gee, what if they applied the same logic to your filthy, nasty, dirty Starbucks habit? I bet coffee stains are a major problem for the hotel chains. Maybe they should declare themselves “coffee free”! :)

  14. alexiso says:

    I work at a Westin where the smoking fee is called “The Renewal Fee”. In order to charge the guest with smoking they need to have “evidence”. They take pictures of the cigarettes left in the room. It was originally $150 but I think they bumped it up to $250.

  15. CharlieSeattle says:

    Hey Hotels, hope you enjoy small claims court. Time to start taking pictures of your room before you leave. Sound like another excuse to charge you more for no reason.

  16. snoop-blog says:

    i think a $50 fee is more than reasonable. i know for a fact it doesn’t even cost $5 more to get rid of the smell. this is just plain discrimination of smokers to insult them with a $250 fine.

    i’m an ex-smoker, though not one of the holier than thou ones, i let people smoke in my house and in my car. and though i think smokers have a bum deal, with the health risks and all, i think it will be extremely horrible if they somehow make it illegal, which is the direction this is all heading. something in me says that politicians need the tobacco money too badly, but then again it’s an issue that can be used as a hot button in politics. if they can take that freedom away from us in the name of a healthier living, what will be next?

  17. jpmoney says:

    @jfischer: All of those situations you describe are very different from smoking because they do not affect ME or YOU directly. They do not subject others to multi-hour headaches or a much higher risk of various cancers.

    Yes it is a “free” country (let not take that too far), but your freedom isnt more important than my freedom and visa versa. Leave your cigarettes to your own property and at least a dozen feet away from a building that is asking you to not smoke.

    Yes there should be due process, but people like bdgbill deserve the karma they get back. I’d almost go as far as to say you deserve a special circle in hell for doing that.

  18. sketchy says:

    @jfischer: You got it.

    It’s getting ridiculous. I have had to endure bawling children, baby puke and dirty diapers but I can’t ask for a ‘child free’ anything. I’d much rather fly next to a smoker than a parent with a child.

  19. Xkeeper says:

    @snoop-blog: Try to also remember that second-hand smoking isn’t something that a lot of people, including myself, like.

    Smoking cigarettes brings no health benefits at all and is just addictive. It’s a mess and I wouldn’t be against it being removed.

  20. MMD says:

    @bdgbill: So *you’re* the reason I had an allergic reaction in the last “non-smoking” hotel room I stayed in. Thanks.

  21. sketchy says:

    @jpmoney: Another anti-smoking zombie. If you can find any unbiased research (it’s not easy) you’ll see that there is no correlation between smoking and any cancer except for lung cancer IN SMOKERS. SHS is a terror tactic being used by the sanctimonious to justify their awful behavior.

    What’s more antisocial, enjoying a legal cigarette or exiling a portion of society for it? Lobby the Government to ban cigarettes, leave the smokers be.

    I would not smoke in a non-smoking room, but I also never request one, I don’t really care – I’ve never noticed a worse smell than the chemically ‘clean’ smell you get at most hotels anyways. I am not a smoker.

  22. forgottenpassword says:

    Meh… just smoke & then get rid of the evidence. WHat are they going to do? Have a hotel detective sniffng under your door & then bust in during mid-puff?

    When I first read the title… I assumed that this was just another way for hotels to screw people out of their money…. I imagined hotels just automatically saying that you smoked & charging you (which is not beyond the capabilities of nickel & diming hotels).

    I dont smoke (never have), but smoking in your own hotel room is not something I’d consider unreasonable. However, I’d probably demand another room if the one I just overpaid for reeked of smoke.

  23. Buran says:

    @bdgbill: I am not an ex-smoker nor are any of the people I know who are adversely affected by it. It is a health hazard and a known carcinogen. Looks like you care more about yourself than other people… smoke outside if you want but your blatant disregard for other peoples’ health and well-being is disgusting.

    And no I am not an “antismoking zombie”, sketchy, and there’s tons of peer-reviewed scientific research proving that secondhand smoke IS a danger, much as smokers don’t like the fact and try to spread FUD so they can keep puffing away.

  24. KJones says:

    People do not have a right to smoke, they have an addiction to it.

    Putting aside any thoughts I have toward smokers (i.e. lighter fluid and immolation, fire extinguishers, etc.), this is a good idea. People are paying to have a hotel room that does not reek of smoke and it costs the hotel money to clean them. This is not about any silliness of “smoker’s rights”, this is about the hotel’s ability to generate revenue.

    Put it this way: If a hotel had a convention one year and some of its conventioneers were drunk and vomited or urinated in the rooms and hallways on carpets, would the hotel be out of line for demanding a damage deposit or fine for any conventioneers this year to pay for potential damages?

    If your answer is no, then why would you object to them punishing smokers for smoking in a non-smoking room?

  25. KJones says:

    @jpmoney: Yes it is a “free” country (let not take that too far), but your freedom isnt more important than my freedom and visa versa. Leave your cigarettes to your own property and at least a dozen feet away from a building that is asking you to not smoke.

    Exactly.

    Just like the old missive, “Your ability to throw a punch ends at the tip of my nose,” so does any butthead’s – sorry, smoker’s – right to smoke end at the air you or I breathe.

  26. snoop-blog says:

    the fact is, there are more carcinogens in the outside air we breathe due to pollution. the government is using tobacco as a scape goat to avoid the real environmental problems. sure blame the non-smokers lung cancer on the smokers. it has nothing to do with genetics or the coal burning power plants, or any polluting factory for that matter. you can’t convince me all the smokers put together on this earth pollute more than even 1/4th of all the factories put together.

  27. snoop-blog says:

    you all feel so strong about the air quality you breathe, but do you do anything about the factories who pollute? do you even go on environmental websites with this same propaganda?

  28. snoop-blog says:

    next thing your going to jump onboard with is a group that says we should outlaw alcohol because drunk drivers kill sober passengers. a very similar arguement to your “you can’t smoke because you are indirectly killing people”.

  29. snoop-blog says:

    not to mention automobile exhaust. yeah that’s far better than second hand smoke. i’d rather sit next to a tail pipe of a vehicle than next to a smoker, NOT! how many non-smokers crying about air quality drive a v-6, or v-8?

    ok i’m done now, unless otherwise provoked.

  30. forgottenpassword says:

    I just find it sad that they are now using the staff to snoop on you in order to get more money off you. I guess they have a special space on the cleaning cart for a camera.

    I am suprised that they dont use a UV light to look for urine & semen stains so they could charge you for that!

  31. Katorok says:

    @snoop-blog: WOW your stupid..

  32. snoop-blog says:

    @Katorok: coming from a kotaku commenter i’m offended. i’ve read your comments just now and you have changed my life, i am now follwing you!

  33. harumph says:

    the sense of entitlement smokers have still surprises me. we non-smokers aren’t nazi’s bent on taking away your precious cigarettes just because we feel like exercising power over you. most people find it truly disgusting, not to mention unhealthy. i work at an art school and for some reason 18 year olds still think it is way edgy to take up smoking once they enter art school. on a daily basis i have to run the gauntlet of smokers crowded in front of the building i work in. this despite the fact that there are numerous signs that say no smoking within 25 feet of the building. don’t even get me started on the expanse of discarded cigarette butts that people think will magically clean themselves off the ground.

  34. sketchy says:

    @Buran: SHS is a sham. If you can find unbiased research you will see that there is no correlation between any kind of illness and SHS.

    Don’t just throw back ‘there’s lots of research’ because I have research showing otherwise. It’s out there, but why read something which doesn’t agree with your prejudice, right?

  35. KyleOrton says:

    @snoop-blog: There’s a reason I don’t start my car in the garage. I’ve never specifically been told not to manufacture tires in a Mariott, but I hope most people have the common sense not to try that either.

  36. CharlieSeattle says:

    @jpmoney: So a business shouldn’t have the right to cater to whom they want?

  37. CharlieSeattle says:

    @harumph: Ya but is it OK to take a businesses right away to cater whom they want? That’s pretty nazi like.

  38. nequam says:

    @bdgbill: I would love to leave a stinky turd in your vicinity. I mean, it’s not going to kill you, right?

  39. nequam says:

    @sketchy: Link to the research you have.

  40. snoop-blog says:

    @KyleOrton: sorry i got half-way off topic (but it was about smoking) and it was really a knee jerk reaction to the non-smoking nazi’s. (and as a non smoker, i realize not all non smokers are nazi’s about it.

    i still say lesson here is: TIP YOUR HOUSEKEEPERS. i bet they wouldn’t bother looking into your trash then, or just stay somewhere else.

    but it’s only a smell that some are basing the charges on. what next, will i be charged for cutting a stinky fart, because someone else may be offended?

  41. CMU_Bueller says:

    @Katorok: I’m sure he knows the difference between you’re and your though.

  42. V-effekt says:

    I have adverse reactions to perfumes as well, but cant expect a perfume free room. Charging a fee is OK if you find butts, but if it only faintly smells of smoke, that could be for numerous reasons. If you are hyper sensitive or believe that you are, inspect the room when you walk in. If it smells of smoke, request a new room. Often this will get you an upgrade. If it smells of perfume, request a new room. If it is dirty, request a new room. Dont’ blame the cigarettes or the perfume or the dirt. It does happen. Make the hotel clean better by simply requesting a new room. If they dont have any new rooms, request a discount.
    Sorry for the rant..

  43. edwardso says:

    @Katorok: you’re. If you are going to call someone stupid use the correct spelling

  44. KyleOrton says:

    @snoop-blog: Let’s keep stinky farts out of this…

    I don’t like the smell of smoke and I’ll raise holy hell if I get shoved in a smoke-smelling, non-smoking room. Taking that out on the person who stunk it up makes perfect sense to me.

    I always tip my housekeeper, but not because I trash the place. I’m in and out quickly on business a lot and frequently leave a shoe or book in my room. $10 and my business card means that I always get a call and never have my stuff thrown out.

  45. sketchy says:

    To put this whole thing in perspective – should a hotel be allowed to retroactively charge for behavior which may or may not have happened while you stayed there.

    It is perfectly acceptable that a Hotel refuse to allow smoking in a room, but what does the law say?

    Some jurisdictions allow for a rented property to be considered a ‘domicile’ and thus can not prevent any legal activity from occurring there, i.e. you might be bound by law in the hallways and common areas not to smoke, but you can’t be prevented from doing it in your room.

  46. jeffjohnvol says:

    They should triple the fee in my opinion.

  47. jpmoney says:

    @CharlieSeattle: Businesses have the right to do what they want (within the law). If the room is “Non Smoking” and the hotel is “Smoke Free” then someone who willfully smokes should pay the price. Where did I say that businesses shouldn’t cater to whomever they want?

    @Sketchy

    Nope, I’m not a zombie. Smoking smells like arse and gives me a huge headache. I don’t like it. I don’t need to show a study that says so. Can you link your *non-biased* studies?

    I’d rather not stay at a non-smoking hotel, and since this is the Consumerist, I’d say that I vote with my dollar.

    I’m not alone and the fact that many businesses ask for there to be not smoking shows it.

    It stinks and most people don’t want it to affect their lives or their weekend. You’re welcome to smoke all you want when it doesn’t affect me *or* the business that is asking you to not do so.

    To the rant on “environment”,etc – we’re not talking about that. Lets not be Bill-O and change the subject enough that we lose what we’re *really* talking about.

  48. TheUncleBob says:

    Smokers have a right to smoke. On their own property, or the private property of those who permit it.

    Smokers do not have a right to smoke on private property where they are clearly told “No Smoking”. Period.

    Why is this even a debate??

  49. TechnoDestructo says:

    @sketchy: You know you can make a baby shut up without saying a word or laying a finger on them, right?

    This doesn’t work on kids younger than maybe 8-10 months, and I don’t think it would work on kids more than about 4 years old.

    If you’ve got a kid who’s crying and crying and will not shut up, just whirl around and STARE at them. Look as pissed off as you can, and look them right in the eyes.

    Every older infant/toddler I’ve done this to immediately shuts up, and stays shut up for at LEAST a few minutes after I stop staring. (Sometimes for an entire flight) And it doesn’t only work on planes.

    And I find that exasperated parents usually think it’s hilarious.

  50. sketchy says:
  51. Chief Wahoo says:

    @Katorok: You have to be a complete moron to call someone else stupid while using incorrect grammar in the post.

  52. sketchy says:

    @jpmoney: Can you link some non-biased studies?

  53. ninabi says:

    When we’ve moved cross country I’ve always tracked down
    Pets Welcome hotel rooms.

    We have never tried to sneak cats into hotels that don’t allow pets. I know people with allergies and while the room can be mopped and vacuumed after us, there’s still a trace left that could set off a reaction in the next guest.

    Same thing with sneaking a ciggie in a no smoking room. It lets the world know that its Me First,Baby.

  54. cde says:

    @Tracy Ham and Eggs: @NameGoesHere: Same thing with my friends house.

    And another thing to consider. It’s the maids that have to completely scrub out the room and walls when you smoke in them. I have maid friends -_-

    But:

    At least one hotel gives employees an incentive to catch illicit smokers: Swissotel Chicago awards housekeepers a $10 bonus for every smoker they catch.

    What’s to say the maid won’t throw a cig in there for the extra 10 bucks :/

  55. sketchy says:

    @TechnoDestructo: I shouldn’t have to.

    It’s moot anyway. This discussion is about charging people extra fees without proving they are justified. If I was (and I wouldn’t, I don’t smoke) charged extra without the hotel having some more compelling proof than a Polaroid of a fag-end in some nondescript room I would immediately initiate a charge back and notify the company of my intention to retain counsel. Problem Solved.

  56. cde says:

    @TechnoDestructo: And that is why you have a comfy chair in hell with your name on it. You Monster. :P

  57. kelrod says:

    @sketchy: Why are you asking jpmoney to link non-biased studies? YOU are the one who claims the majority of studies out there are biased and that SHS is a sham. The burden of proof is on YOU to show us a valid study that supports your claim.

  58. doctor_cos wants you to remain calm says:

    So if I was still smoking, I couldn’t smoke around most of you, because I’m “polluting your air?”
    Then you need to quit fucking driving and buying anything that is manufactured in a way that causes emissions, and unless you are using solar, shut your computer off as well.

    The perfumes and eau de whatever people like to apparently bathe in make me far more ill than any wisp of smoke from a random cigarette.

    Don’t forget, your personal liberties then have to stop when they interfere with mine.

    But smoking is BAAAD for you. So is breathing. Lighten up.

  59. Benny Gesserit says:

    If the hotels REALLY wanted the rooms to stay non-smoking, they’d install airplane-like smoke detectors in all the rooms. (I’m thinking a button on the wall marked “Yes, I did it.” which not only turns off the triggered alarm, but does the credit card charge at the same time.)

  60. snoop-blog says:

    @ninabi: well cigarettes are addictive, and i’ll argue pets are not. so it’s not a “me” complex as much as it is a reflex.

    @TheUncleBob: what makes it a debate is that if you notice when you are on the main page the very top of you screen says “shoppers bite back.”

    so weather or not they are right or wrong makes no difference. this is a place where we stand up for consumer rights, not hte rights of some corporate a-hole.

  61. kelrod says:

    @sketchy: OK, I didn’t see the link you posted before I made my original post. But there are links to other studies on that same page that question the validity and methods of the study by Enstrom and Kabat.

  62. SarcasticDwarf says:

    @Jim (The Canuck One): People rip apart the smoke detectors in hotel rooms ALL THE TIME. It is a larger problem in the cheaper hotels, but you can see it in every hotel you visit. Take a look at that smoke detector in the room the next time you stay at a hotel. See how there are all those marks on it? That is from people who rip them apart to stop them from going off when they smoke in the room (though all of them I have ever seem are configured not to go off anyway).

  63. cde says:

    @doctor_cos: No, you smoking is stinking up my clothes. And my hair. And skin. Fag.

  64. snoop-blog says:

    @SarcasticDwarf: yeah those smoke dectectors don’t detect cigarette smoke (a lot of people do not know that). i have blown smoke directly into one. when i worked at a hotel i found out they can detect various types of smoke, but not cigarette smoke. (nor marijuana smoke for that matter :)

  65. @harumph: I had a class of 20 where 18 of them were smokers. It was a 3-hour class, and one day, when they went outside to smoke during the break, they brought so much smoke back in with them that it triggered so major an asthma attack I had to stop teaching and eventually release the class because I simply couldn’t breathe. Of course all the windows on the building were sealed so I couldn’t even air the room out.

    Carcinogen or not, some people are sensitive to smoke. I’m not all THAT sensitive and just being in a closed little room with 18 smokers was enough to make it impossible for me to do my job.

    (The other thing I absolutely hate is student papers that have been just BATHED in smoke and leave my briefcase reeking of it. Mostly you just get a little whiff of tobacco off papers from smokers, which isn’t unpleasant (unless they smoke cheap shit), but now and then you get one that you actually have to air out before you can grade it.)

  66. kelrod says:

    @SarcasticDwarf: I work for a company that installs fire alarm systems. Any decent, newer hotel will have an intelligent system that will notify the front desk or maintenance when a smoke detector is pulled off the wall or ceiling. Of course, for older or nastier hotels this isn’t the case.

  67. m4nea says:

    @doctor_cos: Your justification makes it sound like you’re five years old…

  68. snoop-blog says:

    @cde: ok can we refrain from using prejudice slurs? there are a lot of gays on consumerist, besides that’s just uncool. reminds me of a high school student. see, see how i tactfully called you a high schooler without actually calling you one?

  69. snoop-blog says:

    @m4nea: his analogy made perfect sense. off topic maybe, but it’s a strong argument.

  70. timsgm1418 says:

    amen…I also have to agree with whoever said that for $10 a maid might plant a cig in a room…I would think that would be a great way to supplement income. If the policy is no smoking, than finding a cig butt in no way proves it was smoked in the room. kinda like finding a dead body in my backyard does not prove I killed them (really I wouldn’t do that, you need more proof than that, unless they are seen smoking in the room I don’t see how the hotel can claim it was smoked in the room. The policy doesn’t say “no butts in the trash can, or smoky clothes in the closet. I would defintely sue them to prove it was actually smoked in the room. Perhaps you smoked the cigarette outside and didn’t want to litter the property so brought it to your room to dispose of, is that also illegal?@doctor_cos:

  71. cde says:

    @snoop-blog: You know, fag = cigarette. I just called him a cancer stick. Cause of the discussion.

    And about the “gays”. I’m pretty sure calling them “one of the gays” is pretty insulting. It’s like if I pointed out you were one of those hypocrites, which I won’t, since I’m better then that.

  72. The Cynical Librarian says:

    First of all; this is a tangent/rant post; skip if you like. I’d like to say to those actually talking about the subject, kudos. I’m not doing that, because I feel I have to defend myself as a human being because I smoke the dreaded tobacco cigarettes.

    Why don’t we let the free-market decide instead of legislating morality? Vote with your dollars people.

    Seriously, you’re complaining because you hate the way your clothes smell when you leave X bar?
    THEN DON’T GO TO THAT BAR!

    Seriously; you guys suck if your solution is ban it everywhere, they’ll slowly give up. No one is under the assumption that they’re not addicted. If they are, they’re probably thirteen (if you’re thirteen, reading this, and are a smoker, welcome! we need your numbers*)

    To quote someone up above: “are your freedom’s more important than mine?”

    Welcome to the nanny-state, where adults are powerless to choose for themselves.

    Oh; and let’s be honest, smoking will never be illegal, how will we pay for health-care for the less fortunate?

    ugh, sorry for the rant

    *totally joking; kids shouldn’t smoke. Until they’re 18, and then it’s the choice of each person.

  73. cde says:

    @timsgm1418: Actually, they don’t need to prove you killed them, just that you wanted to/had motive to. Remember that 5 bucks they owed you?

  74. timsgm1418 says:

    so should there be a law that if you have a non-smoking teacher the students can’t smoke either? I still say it’s no worse than some of the cheap perfume people wear, that causes an allergic reaction in me but nobody stands up for my rights. just because I won’t get cancer from their perfume, I believe if I can’t breathe because my throat closes up, I’ll be just as dead as someone that has an allergic reaction to smoke. @Eyebrows McGee:

  75. cde says:

    @timsgm1418: What law? This is about a policy in a private establishment.

  76. timsgm1418 says:

    @gyroball: thank you for the laugh, good one…reminds me of a gag gift my sister got me called “smoking baby” it had a disclaimer on the package that said “real babies shouldn’t smoke” still makes me laugh. oddly enough all the taxes that our glorious state have levied on cigarettes for health care yet my adult daughter still doesn’t have healthcare. If their mission it to make people stop smoking by taxing it to death, how are they going to pay for all the healthcare when they reach their goal? Smoking isn’t the only thing that requires healthcare…Just ask my urologist who just performed my 7th kidney surgery in the last 2 years, I hope he enjoys his new yacht…I always jokingly tell my dentist that I should be invited on the yacht he bought doing all the work on my teeth.

  77. timsgm1418 says:

    @cde: does it matter? you’re being fined for a policy, I was using the term law loosely and inacurately

  78. timsgm1418 says:

    um I thought that was a secret loan, didn’t realize anyone else knew about that…chances are I would want to and have motive to smoke in a room, but I still wouldn’t if it was a non smoking room, however I would throw the butts in the can so as not to litter the property..and have been known to pick up other inconsiderate peoples butts@cde:

  79. CMU_Bueller says:

    @cde: Way to cover your ass. Everyone here knows what you meant by “fag”. You probably didn’t even know it meant cigarette until you had to cover your ass.

  80. pillow_fight_girl says:

    I’m not a smoker, nor do I particularly care for cigarette smoke, but I get really tired of the wild eyed crazies who go batshit insane when someone smokes near them. My mother is probably the biggest anti smoking nazi out there, but guess what? She USED TO SMOKE. (Why are they always the nuttiest?)

    If you are in a non-smoking room, then you shouldn’t smoke. End of story. But, companies and lawyers don’t own the air outside, so I don’t see why people can’t smoke outside or on a balcony.

  81. picshereplz says:

    @gyroball:

    Let’s also get rid of all the other health codes and let the market sort it out. Rotten meats and vermin ahoy!

  82. timsgm1418 says:

    have to say regardless of what he meant to say by fag, it’s just a word isn’t it? I’ve called myself that when I’ve done something stupid…I’m not gay. Honestly I’ve heard the term fag for a cigarette since the 1960’s so it’s not like it’s a new term that cde wouldn’t know about. I’ve heard a lot of terms for people of different races that I use but not knowing they meant something, but then again, they’re just words, you know free speech and all

  83. dapuddle says:

    The best thing about smokers is that if they piss you off just wait, they’ll be dead soon enough.

    It’s like an IQ test, if you smoke….you failed.

  84. SpaceCat85 says:

    One of the few times I agree with the hotels’ side of things…tobacco smoke really does like to permeate everything, so it must be a real pain to get that smell out of furniture and other parts of the room that can’t just be run through the wash. My clothes have to be washed to get the smell of cigarette smoke out when I’ve just spent <1 hour in a restaurant stuck near heavy smokers, never mind an entire night or several nights.

    And, as far as the second-hand smoking hubub goes, inhaling particulate matter for extended periods generally isn’t that great of an idea.

  85. pillow_fight_girl says:

    Oh, and the hotel that pays the maids a measly $10 to rat out the smoker is a joke. If they charge $250 – they should at least get $100. I tip the maid $5 every day I’m there anyway – so what’s the incentive for the maid?

    Cheapasses.

  86. Osi says:

    Dan got off easy. Smoking around other people (hotel rooms count) is the same as attempted murder. He should be sent to trial and place in prison for a determined amount of time ..

    Can’t believe he got off so easily.

  87. timsgm1418 says:

    @pillow_fight_girl: my dad is the same way, he smoked for 30 years, now gets on my butt to quit all the time. I keep telling him there has never been a study that proved b*tching at someone all the time made them quit…I believe Parade even had an article a few years ago that said it has the opposite effect. Actually had a nurse tell me “you know smoking is bad for you right?” with a completely straight face I said “yes, I have read the box they come in”
    I completely agree with the outside thing, I do agree it shouldn’t be right in front of a door that people must walk through. The place where I work doesn’t allow smoking on the property, (even in your car) a policy I completely ignore everyday. I have an ashtray in my car and I don’t even throw the ashes on the ground, so screw em. When I was a kid you could smoke in the grocery stores, the only place I ever remember being non-smoking was Baskin Robbins because they said the smell got in the ice cream. People do have to go to grocery stores so I think you shouldn’t smoke there, but still I think it’s up to each individual business to decide smoking policy, not the governments…that said Marriott did make that policy, and should have the right to enforce it, however not based on after the fact evidence, that may not be evidence at all.

  88. timsgm1418 says:

    @dapuddle: tell that to my 86 year old uncle that has been chain smoking since he was 11…looked pretty healthy the last time I saw him.

  89. cde says:

    @CMU_Bueller: Right, because years of tv and watching BBC hadn’t in any way give me a pop-notion account of fag=cigarette in British slang. Oh, and listening to old Ramones and euro-punk retro music and films didn’t help either. *roll eyes*

  90. timsgm1418 says:

    give me a break, prove that 100% of the people exposed to second hand smoke will die from cancer as a direct result of the 2nd hand smoke. ok prove that 50% will…other environmental hazards are involved as well as genetics So I guess I can accuse parents of attempted murder when I see them feeding their children fat laced super size happy meals? Heart disease kills too.@Jinx:

  91. cde says:

    @timsgm1418: Looked? But how did he sound? :P

  92. cde says:

    @timsgm1418: If it was 100 or even 50%, smoking would be banned outright. Nothing gives you a 50% chance of cancer.

  93. Osi says:

    timsgm1418:

    It’s weird how you assume and make up crap. Read my post, I never said anything about cancer.

  94. timsgm1418 says:

    for being 40 years older than me, he could run circles around me, has no health issues at all, walks 2 miles a day .Hell if I live to 86 as a smoker, that’s good enough I don’t want to be 100 anyway by that time chocolate will probably be outlawed cuz it’s addicting and in that case I’d rather be dead anyway…lol .@cde:

  95. timsgm1418 says:

    @Jinx: please explain how it’s attempted murder

  96. Buran says:

    @sketchy: Fine, show me research, peer-reviewed, proving that what I and what repeated studies have shown to be true is wrong. Show me enough to upset years of work.

  97. booticon says:

    @Jinx: …what?

  98. Osi says:

    @Buran:

    And make sure it is NOT government funded!

  99. @timsgm1418: Uh … I didn’t say anything about a LAW to keep my students from smoking. I was just commenting that regardless of the health dangers (or lack thereof) of secondhand smoke, it still can cause dramatic reactions in people sensitive to it.

    And frankly if one of my students was coming to class reeking of perfume that triggered an asthma attack for me, I wouldn’t feel one bit bad about telling her she needed to skip it on the days she had my class.

    My point was merely that secondhand smoke made it impossible for me to do my job, and they weren’t even smoking near me. However, since you bring it up, the point at which students’ personal life choices, such as smoking of wearing perfume, makes it impossible for me to do my job and impacts not only their ability to receive the education for which they are paying but their classmates’ ability to do so as well — that is the point at which their life choices need to be restricted, or they need to remove themselves. They’re costing other people money and, since it’s a state school, they’re costing taxpayers money as well.

    I’ve never had it get to that point, though. After the asthma attack, my students in that class were much more diligent about staying upwind of their own smoke and airing themselves out a minute or two before coming back to class. It’s not like they were TRYING to incapacitate me. (But if I had a student who refused to modify his or her behavior and that behavior was disruptive to my ability to teach, I’d absolutely toss them out of my class and have student services deal with them. Doesn’t matter if they’re wearing so much perfume my throat is swelling shut or if they’re dancing naked in the middle of lecture. They’re still disrupting.)

  100. “Swissotel Chicago awards housekeepers a $10 bonus for every smoker they catch.”

    Anyone else see this as ripe for corruption?

  101. Buran says:

    @Jinx: NIH-funded studies aren’t controlled by the government beyond granting funding to the initial proposal. The study gets funded and published no matter what the end results are. Sorry.

    Secondhand Smoke Is A Health Threat To Pets

    NEWS: Secondhand smoke danger shown in study

    “Fact Sheet: Respiratory Health Effects of Passive Smoking” | Smoke-free Homes Program | Indoor Air Quality | Air | US EPA (“The report concludes that exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) — commonly known as secondhand smoke — is responsible for approximately 3,000 lung cancer deaths each year in nonsmoking adults and impairs the respiratory health of hundreds of thousands of children.”)

    Environmental Tobacco Smoke

    Other Studies Support EPA on Secondhand Smoke

    CancerNetwork:

    ACS :: Secondhand Smoke

    Second Hand Smoke Fact Sheet

    Study confirms the risk of exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke at sidewalk cafes and other outdoor settings

    Secondhand Smoke: Displaced Enthusiasm?

    I could go on but the point is made.

  102. forgottenpassword says:

    @Jim (The Canuck One):

    lol dont worry, i am sure they will get around to it.

  103. @snoop-blog: Oh, Snoop-blog, you’re my hero. I mean, half of the chemicals in air fresheners have been banned in the EU due to possibly being carcinogens. We spray fruits and vegis with stuff that fucks up our digestive system. That smelly lotion from Bath and Body works people love so much? Contains chemicals that, if used over time, has been known to alter hormones.

    @jfischer: Dead on too. The world is an annoying, stinky place. Get over it, and start thinking about all the annoying things you’re probably doing as well.

  104. PølάrβǽЯ says:

    @bdgbill: If I told you what I thought of you right now, I’d be banned from the Gawker sites forever.

  105. timsgm1418 says:

    I apologize for assuming what you meant…IN agreement though, seriously if someone told me the smell was causing them an asthma attack I also would do the standing upwind etc. I used to have a boss that would wear perfume that would cause my throat to close up, and actually make jokes about “oh I can’t wear this perfume around her, it makes her sick” nice…@Eyebrows McGee:

  106. LilyWhiteTrash says:

    ummm – dont all these rooms look the same. I think that the taking a picture of a trash can with cigarette butts in it is a pretty poor basis for the claim.

  107. Chief Wahoo says:

    @Eyebrows McGee: So, you’re not all that sensitive, yet the smell of smoke on your students was enough to send you into some sort of life-threatening attack? I’d say you are actually a tad on the delicate side my friend.

  108. ColoradoShark says:

    @bdgbill: Mmm, no good way to put this, but you’re a jerk for doing this. You are clueless about people with allergies. Also the people who sneak their cats and dogs into no pets rooms are jerks.

    Go find a hotel that still has smoking rooms. Go smoke outside.

  109. AlphaUltima says:

    they should’ve charged him the whole bill

  110. parad0x360 says:

    @Buran: Understandable that some can be affected by the smoke but people who say nothing more then the smell affects them are full of themselves and need their heads checked.

    Anyways, im a smoker and I had one of these charges one time. I forget what hotel I was staying at but I got a non smoking room out of respect for my non smoking girlfriend.

    I would go outside to smoke, we had a slider door that lead to the back of the hotel. When I was done I would put it out on the dirt beside the room, go inside and wrap it in a damp paper towel and throw it in the trash. Never once did I smoke inside or with the door open, never once did any smoke get into the room as I smoked a few feet away and waited about 30 seconds before i opened the door.

    They told me they found evidence in the trash and I told them what I typed here. After about 20 min back and forth I got the charge taken off.

    I find it silly that you can be charged for finding a butt in the trash even if the room has no hint of smoke in it. I guess im suppose to walk out to my car and smoke in the middle of the night.

    I get it that lots of people dont like smoke but there are plenty of things non smokers do that piss us off just as much and they do these things in public places and we dont piss and moan and yes some of these things are a danger to others around them.

  111. Osi says:

    @Chief Wahoo:

    Since death is considered minor to you, which branch of the military are you in?

  112. dlayphoto says:

    Good. If they make the stupid decision to smoke in a non-smoking room, then they deserve to be charged.

  113. Imaginary_Friend says:

    @Eyebrows McGee: That must truly suck. You should make those students .pdf their papers and email them to you.

  114. outsdr says:

    I work at a hotel. On our registration sheet, there is large bold type (36 point) in all caps that says “I understand that this is a smoke-free, pet-free hotel” and the guest must initial that sentence. This is before the paragraph that states hotel policies, including the additional $100 charge for smoking in a room or bringing pets into a room, which the guest (should) read and sign.

    There are some people who try to claim the room already smelled of smoke when they arrived; as a previous poster stated, this is something that the front desk should be made aware of immediately, or there is no reason to believe the guest.

    When a room is found to have been smoked in, it is verified by at least three people on staff. There is no monetary incentives for “catching” a smoker.

    Up until two years ago, our hotel had smoking rooms as well as pet rooms, but there was so much damage and abuse that we eliminated both. Cigarette scorch marks on a fiberglass tub or other furniture are not easy (near impossible) to remove, not are pet mistakes from a carpet, depending on the severity. Sometimes, it does cost more than $100 to fix the damage.

    Very rarely do people try to argue the fines. The last gentleman to try to do so seemed to have forgotten that he had walked out of his room smoking a cigarette and had a conversation with myself and the hotel manager, while continuing to smoke.

  115. NVSmythe says:

    This is the first time I have been pissed off enough to post here. To those of you who get non smoking rooms and smoke in them, May lung cancer put you out of your misery before you infect anyone else. Now I know that 1 or 2 cigarette’s smoked in a room before I’m there isn’t going to kill me… but it will make me sick. Trust me I can tell immediately upon entering the room. Not to mention you bastards are taking up all the non smoking rooms, I have had to spend the night in a smoking room before and its made me physically ill, the thought of some jerk off happily smoking in a non smoking room while I’m suffering pisses me off to no end.

    Take some responsibility for your actions, if you want to kill yourself fine but there are faster and easier ways of doing that wont effect innocent people around you

  116. kimsama says:

    There is something else those of you who think it’s ok to smoke in a non-smoking hotel are missing. Hotels that have gone non-smoking aren’t doing so solely because it’s what many customers are demanding, it’s also because insurance costs on non-smoking hotels are much lower.

    When you don’t have to insure against the high probability of accidental fire and the damage and cleaning bills, you pay a lot less. That makes hotels happy.

    And if they don’t want to go back to paying a lot, they have to make sure to enforce their non-smoking policy.

    I don’t know why anyone would think it’s ok to do, but then again, I am pretty misanthropic because I also don’t see why people can’t use reusable grocery bags, ride bikes more, not litter, stop with the road rage, act like they aren’t entitled to everything, and otherwise not be complete douchebags to each other and the rest of the world. But I guess that’s too much to expect, hence the fines.

  117. SnotFare says:

    fine the fuck out of the smokers, ugh why the hell should anyone be apologetic, smoking is a filthy disgusting habit, if anyone wants to smoke that’s their business but there are consequences, end of story.

  118. JennifARGH says:

    As a housekeeper, please don’t smoke in a non-smoking room.

    It’s that simple.

  119. jfischer says:

    @jpmoney: “All of those situations you from smoking because they do not affect ME or YOU directly.”

    Oh, they certainly do affect me and you directly!
    I have been banged by baby carriages so often, I fear that my shins and ankles will never be bruise free. The irony here is that the cow that bangs me with her stroller has the affrontry to say “EXCUSE ME” as she does it, in a tone that makes it clear that she resents my daring to walk on the same sidewalk, and she honestly expects everyone to “make way” for her procession.

    The mp3 players also affect you and me directly – they drive us slowly insane.

    The perfume/cologne makes me gag on occasion, but it has a more direct effect on those who are allergic.

    It all has to do with your control over your personal space and mine over mine. I want to control mine, and you want to control yours.

    The good news is that I am exceedingly polite, very well-dressed, and always heavily-armed. :)

  120. Osi says:

    @jfischer:

    The cow who did that needs to be fined and pay for your doctor bill and recovery bill, etc. We have cows who do that where I live, I usually yell at them to learn how to use a stroller ..

    As for myself, we always have a “baby back pack”, no strollers for us.

  121. Morticia says:

    Let’s face it. Anyone who has taken up smoking in the past thirty years did so for image. They wanted to look cool and sophisticated, and now the pendulum has swung to smokers looking like common try-hards they can’t hack it.

    The dedication some people have to shortening their lives is almost laughable.

    And I would say to the person who has the 86 year old uncle still going strong, I’m sure that he is the exception rather than the rule.

  122. timsgm1418 says:

    yea but if you smoked in your car your clothes would smell and they’d still charge you…@parad0x360:

  123. timsgm1418 says:

    @kimsama: then they should also make sure you can’t have candles in the room or incense either as those are potential fire hazards

  124. rjhiggins says:

    @jfischer: Now you’re just being ridiculous. The annoyances you mention are far different from having to sleep in a room where the air, bedspreads, rugs, curtains, etc., absolutely reek of your disgusting stale cigarette smoke.

    Nobody’s persecuting you for your gross habit; we just don’t think we should have to put up with it after you’re gone. And the cost of cleaning it up should be assigned to you, not all the other guests. If you insist on smoking in a non-smoking room you should be willing to pay for it.

  125. timsgm1418 says:

    regardless if he is the exception the fact remains not all smokers die from smoke related disease, and he has already beaten the statistics just by being 86, but even exceptions to the rule have to be part of the statistics. And even if he does die from cancer, good gosh he made it to 86 years old. To make a statement like “don’t worry all the smokers will die early anyway”, is crap and is not supported by anything. The fact is yes, some do die from smoke, however I’m not really sure they can prove 100% that it was only the smoking and not that smoking only contributed. How would they even test that? A lot of the chemicals in cigarettes are found in other things too. Prove to me that even 70% of all smokers will in fact, without a doubt, die from smoking alone and I’ll shut up. But nobody has ever proven that, have they? Same thing with people saying living with a smoker will cause the non-smoker to die from smoke related illness may not be true either. What about a woman (not saying it’s always the husband that smokes, just generalizing here) who lives with a smoking husband, ok yeah she’s probably being exposed to bad stuff but let’s say she goes with her husband to his lodge (or whatever) where there are dozens or hundreds of smokers every week. Well prove that it was just her husband smoking that did her in, you can’t. I’m definitely not saying smoking is good for you, personally I dont’ smoke in the house when my grandson is here, for that very reason. However I don’t think it’s an evil satanic thing that a lot of the anti-smokers make it out to be. I used to have a boyfriend that gave me crap for smoking all the time, yet smoked pot damned near all the time, kept a bong by his bed so he could have a hit first thing in the morning…um that’s still smoking. I’m sure if I had died during my last kidney surgery, somewhere on the death certificate it would say I was a smoker, even if my doctor cut a major artery or something. Still I agree with a hotels right to be non-smoking and I don’t smoke in non-smoking rooms. I just think they should have to prove that you actually smoked in the room rather than throwing a butt in the trashcan or having smoky clothes @Morticia:

  126. cde says:

    @rjhiggins: What if you didn’t smoke in it? What if you came back to the hotel from a club or meeting or friends house and reek of smoke because of them?

  127. nardo218 says:

    I don’t think I’m going to get cancer from a whiff of second hand smoke. I do get a headache from it, but that’s not the point. The point is that cigarette smoke disgusts me. You, smokers, disgust me. You stink. You stink like you were just running around in 100 degree heat in Louisiana in a fur coat with slabs of bacon shoved down your shorts. You’re disgusting and I don’t want your filth anywhere near me.

  128. camille_javal says:

    @gyroball: On second-hand smoke and smoking bans.

    Seriously, you’re complaining because you hate the way your clothes smell when you leave X bar?
    THEN DON’T GO TO THAT BAR!

    The people who pushed smoking bans originally weren’t patrons – they were employees. They were flight attendants, then bartenders and servers, who had developed problems ranging from asthma to cancer because of their exposure.

    And, on the SHS causes cancer/SHS doesn’t cause cancer argument – if you’re occasionally exposed to a cigarette – or even if you stand next to someone outside who is smoking for ten minutes every day for the rest of your life – you’re probably not going to get cancer. SHS affects workers like those above, and people who live with smokers – it’s much more prolonged, and at higher levels of concentration.

    I used to smoke every once in a while (drinking or during exams), but my family’s tendency towards adult-onset asthma has kicked in, and now I can’t be in a car or room where someone has been smoking (but after the fact) without an attack. It blows in a number of respects.

    That said, please don’t smoke in a non-smoking room. I don’t care if you’re very careful, clean up, etc. – if a bunch of people do that, the room’s going to smell like smoke.

  129. derobert says:

    @timsgm1418: “…prove 100% that…”

    <rant>

    Sure. But first please prove 100% that the tube of chap stick I am holding, should I let go of it, would fall. I mean, I haven’t even tried dropping this tube in the past – maybe gravity doesn’t apply to it. And even if I had tried it in the past, maybe gravity only effects it on Fridays? How can we be 100% sure?

    In science, conclusions are tentative; the are the best explanations we have for the evidence available. They are subject to change upon new evidence or analysis. There is nothing that is 100% proven.

    </rant>

    To address the question more directly, the best available evidence shows very strongly that smoking greatly increases the average person’s risk of various diseases. I’m not sure, without looking it up, what percentage of smokers will die of smoking-related illnesses.

  130. target38 says:

    I am the operations manager for a Fire, Smoke, and Water damage mitigation and restoration company. The cost to actually deoderize a 500 sq ft hotel room is next to nothing. The hotels charging $250/pop are making at least $200 per charge for the actual cleaning/deoderization that goes into it. I know for a fact they do not hire an outside company to deodorize the rooms so that means they essentially have the maids clean more thoroughly and then spray some smell good junk here or there.

    The number one easiest way to remove odor is to remove the source – linens/porous materials.
    We know they don’t change out the chairs etc in a room after a smoker has been there – much too costly.
    They likely do not own an Ozone machine – the best product out there to neutralize those odors. They do not want to seal off the room, ozone it, ventilate it, etc taking 12-24 hours. they want the fastest turnaround on the rooms – I would contact airport hotels and see what their methodology is.

  131. Michael Belisle says:

    “Civil Lights” (Video), a classic moment in Daily Show history-

    Steven Colbert: Why shouldn’t smokers be able to smoke where they want?
    Prof. John Banzhof: Why shouldn’t masturbators be allowed to masturbate where they want?

    @nequam: I second the stinky turd.
    @snoop-blog: I’m not sure if you’ve heard about a new movement, called the “Green” movement. It’s pretty low-key, just some hippies with signs outside Wal-Mart. Al Gore didn’t get a Nobel Prize. Major corporations are not “greening” themselves, nor is anyone talking about it online. Nobody is putting pressure on automobile standards to reduce emissions. And California is not is not being cockblocked by Bush’s EPA.

    Everyone’s too busy sticking to the poor smoking man.

  132. cheviot says:

    I’ve never understood this righteous indignation smokers get when you tell them they can’t smoke somewhere. Imagine if I came into a restaurant or hotel’s smoking area and lit a little pile of maple leaves.

    Every smoker in the area would be complaining up a storm. Why? Because the smoke smells like crap.. and they’d be right… because ALL smoke smells like crap, be it from tobacco or some other random leaves.

    Just as there is no excuse for leaving the smell of smoke from burning wood in a hotel room there’s no excuse for leaving the smell of tobacco smoke their either.

    If you want to stink a place up, do it at home.

  133. nardo218 says:

    No, non smokers should not have to leave an establishment because we are not the ones causing a problem.

    The odor of smoke is offensive. Society as a whole is not appreciative of things that smell bad. In the summers, I go hiking in a nature preserve and emerge stinking to high hell. I get in my car, go home, and shower. I do not stop in a public establishment and share my reekage with others because this is against social mores. It is absurd to me that smokers think others should have no problem with them filling a public establishment with their offensive odors.

  134. outsdr says:

    @target38:

    The hotel I work _does_ have ozone machines, and we _do_ close a room for 24 hours while they are in use. So at least some places do more than spray around some “smell good junk”.

    Closing a room for 24 hours = lost revenue. Also, one of the reasons we clearly state how much a person will be charged for smoking in the room is the hope that they will think twice about the charge before doing something to earn the charge… it’s a lot easier to accept being charged $50 for smoking in a room than it is $250.

  135. jonworld says:

    I happen to always get a non-smoking room that someone has smoked in. And most of the time, it’s at a Marriott. Last year I was staying at Marriott Marquis in Times Square and the room reeked of Smoke. I wanted to ask for another room, but I takes 20 damn minutes to go the lobby and reach someone at the check-in desk.

  136. DrTweeker says:

    I’m the front desk manager at a property that went smoke-free several months ago. We verbally indicate the policy to all guests checking in, and they initial the policy on their registration card right above where they sign to authorize charges on their card. It’s $150 charge if we find that you smoked in your room. Sometimes it’s disputed and we just fax the CC company the signed/initialed registration card by the guest, and haven’t lost a single one yet. I’ve seen a few folks go to other hotels, but it’s generally well received.

    the only bad part of the policy is that 90% of the ‘offenders’ are cash paying guests with no valid credit card, so we have to way no charge them after the fact, and it isn’t feasible to check every room as they’re checking out, so they just get added to a DNR(Do Not RENT) list at the front desk.

  137. Osi says:

    Here in Juneau, AK, the city council turned retarted and banned smoking in bars. Can you believe that? The bar owner should be allowed to allow smoking or not in the bar. It is their business, not the city’s.

    While I am against smoking, businesses should be allow to determine whether smoking is allowed or not in their buildings. ..

  138. outsdr says:

    @DrTweeker:

    We have the same problem; guests who pay cash need to have a credit card on file or a $100 cash deposit on file; unfortunately, we’re not always able to check the rooms when they check out, and we get stung. I sometimes wish we’d no longer accept cash at all; unfortunately, we already don’t accept debit cards (due to the pre-auth being carried by the banks for so long), and probably 25% of our guests don’t use credit cards.

  139. smoothtom says:

    I bought a house that had been smoked in for decades. It took me about eight months of scrubbing, painting, sanding, and so on to remove the smell. It was in everything–the carpet, the plaster, the woodwork. I took down the old-style roll-up window shades, and they were yellow and sticky with tar. I scrubbed the cabinet doors under running, and yellow tar rolled off them. And then, three and a half years later, I replaced the back door, which was steel on the outside with a foam insulation interior. I cut it in half, and the fucking insulation REEKED of cigarettes. That shit gets into EVERYTHING, and it’s expensive as hell to remove. No wonder a hotel would want to charge for smoking in their rooms. If you TRASH a hotel room, expect to pay to fix it. If you spread TAR all over every goddamn surface, expect to pay for somebody ELSE to remove your mess.

  140. smoothtom says:

    @Jinx: Yeah, and restaurant owners should be able to determine whether they want rats running through the kitchen, or whether they want to serve you on filthy dishes, or whether they should wash their hands after wiping their asses and before returning to cook your food. Because it’s their business, damn it, and if they want to be filthy, so be it.

  141. pda_tech_guy says:

    I worked part time at a holiday inn express for a while, and our fee was 250 dollars. The first thing I would do when a guest checked in was highlight the no smoking policy and made it very clear to them that we will charge their credit card an extra $250.00 if they smoked. I would never let it slide for anyone! (Holiday Inn Express hotels are usually no more than 150 rooms) so its easy to catch a smoker. I would literally walk up and down the halls. We asked the housekeepers to check for butts, smoke smells, anything.

    We had a sundeck on the third floor where you could go smoke if you needed to, so sometimes the smell came back to the room with the guest. However, you can tell really easily whether someone was smoking in the room, or wheter it was just the stench from the guest.

  142. sketchy says:

    @Jinx: Actually, that’s a really good point. Half of the arguments in support of the fines/charges are ‘let the market decide/it’s the hotels’ right to do it’ yet when we are asked if smoking in bars should be allowed it’s always ‘make a law, because I (sanctimonious non-smoker) have RIGHTS!’.

    I don’t get how a Hotel Chain can allow smoking and it’s ‘how markets work’ but bars and restaurants can’t be trusted to make the same decision.

    From an economics perspective I can see the unintended consequence here – that $250 charge is an invitation for a smoker to smoke and just pay the $250. It will deter some people, but not all.

  143. DMDDallas says:

    @smoothtom: False analogy. Smoking is not an immediate health hazard. Rats and dirty dishes are. Not to mention that a place that allows smoking is immediately obvious, whereas a place that does not engage in proper cleaning practices may not be so obvious.

  144. Chief Wahoo says:

    @smoothtom: Cool. Those restaurants would get no business and eventually close. Bars that allowed smoking, a legal activity desired by a majority of their patrons, would make lots of money and be successful businesses. That would be consistent with the values this country was founded on, such as the right of a business owner to run his establishment as he pleases. You good with that?

  145. Tank says:

    I’m a smoker and don’t even smoke inside my own house. i always go outside, and have for years. It sounds funny, but I don’t like the smell. I always ask for a non smoking hotel room, and go outside to smoke, even in the middle of the night when I’m too drunk to know I’m pissing in a closet.

  146. rpm773 says:

    I read posts like bdgbill’s above and have to wonder when some enterprising person is going to come along and create a hotel that
    A) caters to the smoker, and
    B) is a really nice hotel.

    I suspect such a place won’t first appear in Manchester, NH, but I’d think a few of the larger hubs for industry in the nation would have the client base to be able to house a few, provided the state lets them operate.

    I’m not a smoker, and I don’t like to inhale second hand smoke, but these people aren’t second-class citizens.

    And smokers, to you I say this: The line between sticking it to the state by continuing to smoke and sticking it to the state by quitting is becoming more blurred every day. I say give the latter a chance – I would love to see state governments try to find their next scapegoat for budget shortfalls.

  147. Michael Belisle says:

    @smoothtom: That’s a great analogy.

  148. Ailu says:

    I grew up in a smoking household, and started smoking at 15. Fortunately, with the help of friends, I quit at the age of 20. Because I had always grown up around smoke, I never knew how much it reeked. But after a few months, I started being able to smell. And Pee Yewww! People who smoke stink to high heaven! Before then, I’d no idea how disgusting I stunk, when I used to smoke. Ug. How embarrassing it was to learn I had been walking around as a teenager stinking like that.

    Seriously, you guys that are still smoking really stink. You just have no idea, cause you are soo used to it, like I was. I feel sorry for ya, havin to go about life reaking worse than B.O. all the time, every where ya go. Poor things.

  149. smoothtom says:

    @Chief Wahoo: Hey, I’d rather see somebody go all the way with the libertarian viewpoint, as you have done, and say “no regulation, ever” than scream about “businesses should be able to do business as they see fit!” while also bitching about unsafe practices. But, I’m not a libertarian, and I believe that government has and has always had a role to play in regulating commercial activity in order to ensure the health and safety of the public. You can say that a restaurant’s unsanitary conditions will eventually force it out of business, but I do not wish to risk public sickness in the meantime.

  150. smoothtom says:

    @DMDDallas: No, not a false analogy. The argument is whether the government has a role to play in regulating commerce in order to ensure public health and safety–we are not talking about the immediacy of the health threats involved. If you want to be a libertarian, then be a libertarian; don’t pick and choose.

  151. DMDDallas says:

    @smoothtom: Yes, it is a false analogy. You cannot make the comparison between the two painting them as the same thing when they are not.

    I am not a libertarian. I support reasonable assertion of the government wherever it is appropriate. You can most certainly pick and choose which policies are reasonable and which aren’t.

    When people enter an food service establishment, they expect the food to be safe and the preparation area to be clean. On the other hand, they are well aware of any smoking policies and can make an informed decision whether they should be there or not.

  152. @smoothtom: I think his point was that its a slippery slope as to where you want to draw the line, an what we want to ban from society. We really are walking a fine line these days about exactly how unhealthy behaviors are. In fact, eating at restaurants regularly is the easiest way to get sick as most establishments, even while following regulations, accidentally do something that is “unclean”. You coul even reach further and say that because alcohol causes X number of deaths per year, you should ban that too. Or ban serving more than the doctor recommended 3 oz. of wine.

    Its really a shame that it has to be all or nothing in this argument. I miss the days where you could say, ok, you can run your restaurant any way you want, as long as you keep everything clean enough to prevent infectious diseases/bacteria.

  153. @DMDDallas: Exactly. A good rule of thumb when I used to go out with my family is whether they had a bar menu or if they dedicated half or most of the restaurant to bar stools.

    You wouldn’t go to bar to have a family dinner, but hey, if you think people can’t make decisions, that’s fine, LOL. This is just as bad as that parents TV watch that’s led to a disneyification of primetime tv, which kids shouldn’t even be awake to watch anyways.

  154. kbarrett says:

    “Smoking”, in most jurisdictions, is defined as tobacco use in one form or another. Pot is not “smoking” … but generally illegal.

    So I guess gigantic skunk weed “incense” bowls are OK. Or I could just burn jimson weed and watch people twitch an writhe.

    Heh.

  155. MrMold says:

    For those interested, the EPA (pre-Bush) had a draft document on SHS. State-of-the-art, it was. It also would have banned smoking anywhere but in little “suicide booths”.

    Doesn’t bother me one bit that smokers would be charged for pissing in the room by smoking. I’ve gotten rooms that stank of smoke and I did pay for the non-smoking room. That hotel has lost my business. If it takes totally non-smoking hotels, so be it. You want to kill yourself, fine.

    Your cancer risk by living in an urban area, say Philadelphia, only doubles your cancer risk. Smoking easily approaches certainty.

  156. MrMold says:

    Smoking bans didn’t kill business. You just lost the losers. The no-smokers more than made up for the addicts that left.

  157. Trai_Dep says:

    @Katorok: “WOW your stupid..”

    Okay:

    1) If you’re going to call someone else stupid, learn the difference between “your” and “you’re”. Else – well, wow, you’re stupid. (See how I did that? Live & learn).

    2) If you’re going to call someone else stupid, learn the difference between an ellipse and a period. Don’t just settle the difference by typing “..”. It fools no one.

    3) If you’re going to call someone else stupid (boy do I need a macro), learn when to use commas. A non-stupid person would have used one.

    4) I’m going to assume that you typed “WOW” instead of “Wow” because, well, you’re stu…

    Never mind. Horse beaten into a fine wallet.

    Have to admit, perversely impressed that you can make four mistakes when typing a three-word sentence.

    On behalf of readers everywhere, stay away from writing books? Thanks!

  158. gStein_*|bringing starpipe back|* says:

    @bdgbill: such. a. fucking. asshole.

  159. Trai_Dep says:

    One of the things that trouble me about the 2nd-hand-smoking studies is a correlation problem. Households that smoke are much likelier to be working class or lower, which have a host of other factors that affect longevity. My understanding of the smoking studies, including the Surgeon General one that started the hysteria is that they simply looked at households with smokers versus those without.

    Not correcting for this would be garbage science.

    I’ve seen perfumed, unctuous ladies, sitting in a Starbucks patio next to a parking lot with long lines of SUVs driving past loudly complaining about smokers three tables over. Of course, it was “for the children”. The mind boggles.

  160. Buran says:

    @parad0x360: It’s happened to me. I have no reason to believe that the people I know are lying either.

    As for correlation — I imagine various studies use various methods but you’d have to read the study to know.

  161. Buran says:

    @Trai_Dep: You used a question mark in the wrong place in your final sentence. ;)

  162. leficent says:

    The property that I work for has a 150 dollar fee for those caught smoking in non-smoking rooms.

    For those who think that it is unreasonable to charge for smoking in a non-smoking room, here is what 150 dollars pays for:

    1. Steam cleaning the carpets and upholstery
    2. Sending the curtains out to be cleaned
    3. Extra staff time to strip all ‘soft’ items from room, run an ozone generator to eliminate lingering odors, and replace ‘soft’ items with new or clean.
    4. Putting the room out of order if we do not have a spare clean set of curtains or if there is not enough time between the checkout and check in time to let the carpets dry completely.

    In most cases, we do lose a night of business on a room that is being deep cleaned. Add that to the cost of professionally cleaning curtains and overtime for housekeeping and 150 dollars is a bargain.

  163. sventurata says:

    @snoop-blog: I don’t pay to sleep in a factory, thanks.

  164. Sian says:

    @Trai_Dep: Welcome to the internets! ‘Your stupid’ is often intentionally misspelled that way to add a bit of irony.

    I’m one of those people that has physical allergies to cigarette smoke. It gives me asthma, a headache, stiff neck, and eyes that feel like they’re on fire. Often this reaction is my first clue to a nearby smoker, before I actually smell the smoke.

    Needless to say, a smoked-in room is totally unacceptable.

  165. sketchy says:

    @Trai_Dep: ellipsis, not ellipse. One is a geometric figure, one is a figure of speech (in a manner of speaking).

  166. Bunklung says:

    OK, I always request non-smoking rooms and I always smoke in them.

    This is probably the worst thing I do as far as being a jerk goes. Hotels have been making me sign off on smoking fees as high as $300.00 for years now but I have never been charged.

    That about sums it up. Thanks for being honest. I wish you good luck in your financial and health misgivings in the future. Thanks for the cigarettes tax revenue. To be honest, I don’t really appreciate fixing your health when you get sick though :(

  167. lakesnake says:

    Next time I check into a hotel and ask for a non-smoking room and it smells of smoke, I am going to charge them $250.00 for the privilege!

  168. sketchy says:

    @Bunklung: Smoking actually provides a net benefit, smokers pay in more than they collect in health benefits. [medicine.plosjournals.org]

  169. smoothtom says:

    @HRHKingFriday: I get what you’re saying … but my point should be narrowly construed. A typical objection to smoking laws rests with a libertarian argument–i.e. that businesses should be allowed to determine how they do business, period. If a person is opposed to smoking laws but still in favor of other health and safety laws, AND couches his disagreement in libertarian terms, he is being disingenuous. Instead, he should accept that smoking laws are of an ACCEPTABLE CLASS of laws while still arguing against the NECESSITY of that specific regulation–that is, to say that it is not the kind of health and safety law that is needed. Many people do that, by arguing that second-hand smoke is not dangerous, or that type of health “violation” is readily apparent whereas unclean kitchens are not, or so forth.

  170. spyglass says:

    There are many things I encounter in everyday life that could offend me. Rambunctious children. Loud music or any loud noise. Perfume. Hell, any chemical smell. Any kind of smoke, including BBQ smoke and wood smoke. Obesity. Seeing a fat person is looking at a pool of vomit. The reek of alcohol, and drinkers in general because they are putting me at risk because of their mental impairment. The smell of auto exhaust. All of these things annoy me.

    You know what I do when I encounter these things? I shrug it off because that’s life. If let all these things get too me I would go crazy. So I let it go. And I let it go because I believe in Live and Let Live, Different Strokes for Different Folks, and It’s A Free Country. Whatever happened to those sentiments in this country?

    And by the way, I used to have asthma. I never blamed anyone else for my asthma. I figured there was something wrong with me if I got a bad reaction.

    If I don’t like smoking in a bar, I won’t go in there. If I want to smoke in a hotel, I’ll stay at one those permits smoking. If I don’t like something, I just change the channel.

  171. spyglass says:

    smoothtom,

    Then you would be in favor of banning public alcohol consumption, right. Doing so would certainly save lives.

  172. joellevand says:

    @TheUncleBob: OMG, thank you!

    Smokers have a right to smoke. On their own property, or the private property of those who permit it.

    Smokers do not have a right to smoke on private property where they are clearly told “No Smoking”. Period.

    Why is this even a debate??

  173. smoothtom says:

    @spyglass: That’s an illogical and sensational conclusion of my argument.

  174. spyglass says:

    smoothtom,

    Please elaborate. I don’t see how anyone could dispute that a prohibition of alcohol consumption in public places would not save lives. If alcohol was invented today, it would almost certainly be prohibited by the FDA on the basis of the mental impairment that it causes.

  175. spyglass says:

    “Smokers have a right to smoke. On their own property, or the private property of those who permit it.

    Smokers do not have a right to smoke on private property where they are clearly told “No Smoking”. Period.

    Why is this even a debate?? “

    I don’t think there is the debate about that at all. The debate is whether an anti-smoker can prohibit smoking on another’s private property, such as a bar. I don’t hear anyone seriously objecting to smoking bans when the owner bans it. They simply take their business elsewhere. As it should be.

  176. radio1 says:

    You know, I don’t hate smokers. I don’t smoke, but my parents do.

    I just wish you all would get over your attitude about these supposed ‘rights’ you have. You have no rights, I have no rights, when we are on private property even if we are paying to stay there.

    And please just stop crying about discrimination. You are not born a smoker. Unlike skin color, gender and sexual orientation. Your ‘right’ to smoke is not inherently protected by the Constitution, unlike the freedom to worship (or not). If the FDA had the wherewithal to federalize and regulate nicotene, it would be better controlled or possibly illegal.

    So, you have your freedom to smoke. All you have to do is obey the rules. Private property owners and private entities limit smoking? Well, don’t go there or work there or just obey the rules. Don’t like all the hassles and tax payments you make on every pack, quit. Simple solution.

    You can’t cry about freedom to smoke and then complain when people or businesses want to limit smoking in differing situations and then say you are powerless to stop.

    Hell, somedays, I’d like to take a walk around with a beer or nurse a beer on Sunday drive. Oh yah, that’s illegal, though drinking is… Hmph.

    I truly doubt back 40-60+ years ago when smokers were in the majority, MDs endorsed Camels and recommended that pregnant women take up smoking for their nerves; that majority cared about the minority who didn’t.

    Oh, what’s that you say? They did not know the health issues and were ignorant? Well, what’s your excuse?

    I think you should be able smoke, hell, I was even against banning smoking in bars… Christ, if you can’t smoke in a bar what’s the point? Just stop complaining, already.

  177. mac-phisto says:

    these charges are easy to avoid. do what i do – smoke in the hallway or the elevator.

    i keed.

  178. no.no.notorious says:

    i was visiting friends in maryland over winter break and was riding the elevator in their apartment complex, where their was a sign saying “no smoking. $25 fine”

    i laughed so hard. not much of a deterrent really.

  179. sjg1402 says:

    I am tired of everyone’s thinking that rules (or laws) don’t apply to them. If you break the rule or law, fine. But don’t bitch about your punishment. I don’t care if it’s smoking in a no smoking room or exceeding the speed limit or insider trading or or or. You know it’s wrong, yet you do it anyway. Surprise! The rules DO apply to you.
    As for making smoking illegal, it ain’t gonna happen people. There is entirely too many tax dollars dependant on smokers buying cigarettes.

  180. thepassenger says:

    @bdgbill: You’re an asshole, plain and simple.

  181. KJones says:

    The comments here by the buttheads – sorry, the smokers – is truly astounding. Why are you on a consumer advocate site if you’re against customers expecting to get what they pay for?

    For the intellectually challenged, think of it this way: If you rented a car and rear-ended it into a pole, you’d be an idiot not to expect to pay for repairs.

    Both cars and hotel rooms are rented, so it is a valid analogy. That means: stop trying to excuse your selfish and filthy behaviour of damaging others’ property.

  182. Rusted says:

    @NameGoesHere: Same here. The odor gets in everything, my eyes sting, and that’s not good.

    I don’t drink. I don’t smoke. My health is really good.

    If someone wants to die early. so be it. It’s a free country.

  183. Osi says:

    @smoothtom:

    While your being sarcastic, it’s true. The differences is, there are some minimum cleaning standards required to even get a restaurant license.

    The smoking ban on bars happened after the fact and not part of the bar licensing.

  184. MrMold says:

    My dad had a rental property with a smoking tenant. I used TSP on the walls, floors, and ceiling for one week. I still didn’t get all of the gunk.

    I paid for a hotel room and a night’s sleep. The smoke irritates my lungs and eyes, permeates my clothes in the suitcase, and doubles my cancer risk. Please keep your toxins to yourself.

    The EPA draft document on second hand smoke should clear up any doubt on the hazards.

  185. ? graffiksguru says:

    @bdgbill: so your the guy.. I’m sure that $10 helps pay off a huge chunk of that $1000.

  186. mac101 says:

    @timsgm1418:

    Some time last year there was a non-smoker that fought a $250 cahrge. Turned out the cleaning staff was smoking in the rooms while cleaning, and then blaming it on the hotel vistitor. Wish I could find a link for this story.

  187. dandd says:

    Working in health care I can honestly say that non-smokers have a 100% mortality rate.

    A little dirty secret about health care is that smoking is sort of a catch all etiology. If you come in and have a problem that can’t be linked to a definitive cause, they’ll blame it on smoking 99% of the time.

    As far as SHS, if you live and/or work with a smoker that smokes around you in an enclose area you could very well have adverse health effects. Passing a smoker on the street and/or building entrance isn’t going to hurt you.

    The funniest thing I see/hear are the fat people that bitch about smoking. These people wolf down Mickey D’s like it is going out of style, but don’t dare light up near them. Remember, heart disease is the #1 killer.

  188. synergy says:

    I’ve been in non-smoking rooms that stink of smoke and instead of staying in it I ask to be moved. Smelling cigarette smoke for a while gives me bad migraines, so staying in a room for 6-8 hours while sleeping is not going to happen. Changing the room right off the top also prevents the hotel from charging me for a stench I didn’t create.

  189. shufflemoomin says:

    As much as I think smokers who ruin the non-smoking hotel room I’m paying for should be punished, I think paying a bonus to maids for finding smokers is asking maids who want to make a little extra cash to set people up. I wouldn’t put it past some people.

  190. davidfbecker says:

    I work at a hotel in Los Angeles. We’re pretty new, so all of our rooms are non-smoking. We have a smoking fine, but we make people sign off on our non-smoking policy on the registration cards when they check in. If they smoke in the room, they’re boned. Additionally, our linens are imported from Europe, and they’re expensive to relplace. If someone smokes in the room, I think we just toss the linens out.

  191. MrEvil says:

    I think people that say that they can’t stand the least little hint of cigarette smoke should harden the fuck up. I’m a non smoker and don’t particularly care for coming home reeking of Camels…but I go to the bar for the company. I can’t stand the least little hint of perfume or cologne or chemical smelling hair-care products. You don’t see me having a fucking cry about those things and proposing city ordinances to ban them. There’s far worse things being put in the air in the world than Tobacco smoke. Don’t see too many people banning Hummer H2s or jet aircraft or semi trucks. Those put out more bad shit for you than their weight in smokers.

    Yes, what’s in second hand smoke is harmful…HOWEVER the studies that make this “fucking duh” conclusion fail to conclude weather or not the substances are present in amounts that can actually harm you. Even the surgeon general’s most recent study just says that the substances in SHS can harm you it does NOT say weather or not they are present in sufficient quantities to actually harm you.

    It’s like saying, “there’s lead in most tap water”….there probably is and yes lead is bad for you. However, is there enough lead to actually make you sick?

  192. Michael Belisle says:

    There was a time in the US, just a few decades ago, when second-hand smoke was unavoidable: on airplanes, in movie theaters, in hospitals, in hotels, in bars, and so on. Non-smokers have not forgotten, which is why we have no sympathy when smokers complain about shivering in the cold, 30 feet from the door.

    @dandd: Sounds like you’re full of love for your patients. Can I come to your ward?

    @spyglass: Public consumption of alcohol (i.e., drinking in public) is illegal in many jurisdictions.

    @MrEvil: You may not complain about perfume, but don’t worry: others do.

  193. sketchy says:

    @MrEvil: Holy cow, a human making sense?

    @dandd: Good point. That is why those studies are so biased.

    Of course the anti-smoking lobby wants to talk about getting smoking banned, but they don’t actually want it banned, they’d be out of work and a fair chunk of change, some of which is from the Tobacco companies.

    I love how the nonsmokers all get their panties in a knot and start name calling and threatening rather than making logical, rational arguments. Grow up a little. You don’t like something, change rooms, that’s your power, not banning everything you don’t like.

  194. JoeVet says:

    The evidence for a causal relationship between second hand smoke exposure and asthmatic symptoms and reduced lung function in young children is quite strong. [www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov]

  195. Marc.Medios says:

    One of the few instances where I agree 100% with the “solution”. Being a –very accomodating– non smoker, I don’t mind if people smoke in restaurants, bars, their cars, their homes, outside… but I should not have to put up with second hand and third hand smoke and odors just because someone is not strong enough to control his/her vices.

    Go outside and smoke.

  196. magnus150 says:

    I see nothing wrong with the fine. If a company policy specifically says “No Smoking” and you violate that rule, then they are completely within their rights to fine your ass.

  197. RvLeshrac says:

    @harumph:

    Vegans find meat-eating unhealthy and disgusting, and will cite many studies which have found eating red meat to be detrimental to your health.

    Should we ban eating meat?

    @jpmoney:

    The overuse of perfumes and colognes gives me a major headache. I frequently have to leave the room when someone walks in wearing too much of one scent or another.

    How about pop music playing in stores? That should be banned, since it gives many of us headaches.

    Mariachi bands? Ban them, too. Headache-inducing.

    The sale of spicy foods should be banned because a lot of people cannot tolerate spicy food.

    Liver should be banned because I will involuntarily gag and vomit when I’m around the smell of cooked liver, and many other people have the same reaction.

    Guns should be banned because many people in higher-crime areas find it very difficult to get to sleep at night due to the threat of gun violence, to say nothing of those killed in the various school and workplace shootings.

    PE should be banned in schools because it causes those children who are not athletic to become depressed and suicidal when they fail to fit in.

    Ban peanuts, since people with peanut allergies can suffer fatal bouts of anaphylaxis even when merely breathing near them or coming into the briefest contact with them or any of their by-products.

    Ban Umeboshi. The pits contain cyanide, swallowing them can be lethal.

    For that matter, ban sashimi, since raw fish can contain many parasites and toxins.

    ——–

    You can come up with “valid” reasons to ban nearly anything. As wiser men than I have said, “If someone says ‘there oughta’ be a law,’ there oughtn’t.”

  198. taylorich says:

    What really bothers me is the fact that some people have clearly commented that they desire another human being to die because they are a smoker.

    I think this may be a warning sign to you…you need to reevaluate your life. It’s really more sad than smoking. Smokers generally have some self-esteem issue that predisposes them to smoking (i.e. wanting to look cool, or fit an image), at least at some point in life. Then they’re stuck with it as they get older. Those who make comments like these are showing that they don’t value human life.

    We should be trying to support these people, not demonize them. Even in the case of the people who are blatently defying non-smoking rules.

    Screaming and taunting smokers is the last thing anyone should be doing. We all have our demons. Imagine if you took the worst thing about yourself, publicized it for all the world to see, and then total strangers felt free to randomly comment on it. It wouldn’t make you want to be more social, or help your self-esteem…it would make you more defiant.

    Have rules, enforce them, but don’t be so harsh with your attitudes. No human being deserves some of the actions and wishes that I have read in these comments.

    And no, I am not a smoker.

  199. cde says:

    @sketchy: Because, with a bar, you are in the same room as the smoker when they light up, so you are inhaling 2nd hand smoke. With a hotel, you only smell the smoke after it has been absorbed by the room, so no actual damage to lungs.

  200. cde says:

    @Trai_Dep: Him capitalizing wow is not a mistake. It is an internet use of typing to add emphasis, ala shouting at someone.

  201. Antediluvian says:

    @cde: You didn’t mean it as slang for cigarette. You meant it as an insult. More than once. Grow up.

    @timsgm1418: Actually, it’s a lot more than “just a word.” It’s a nasty, vile insult, intended not for just one person but a whole group of people. Just because it’s common on playgrounds does not legitimize it. Like you, I didn’t know what a lot of slurs meant when I first heard them because my family never used them. And when I did learn them what they were and what they meant, I STILL never used them.

    But I did learn a lot about the people who use those words.

    ————–
    On topic: I think people who smoke in non-smoking rooms are arrogant jerks. If you want a smoking room, go to a hotel that allows smoking — let the marketplace decide. I’ve been in too many rooms that are non-smoking that reeked of smoke. For me, it’s a comfort thing. I also don’t go to bars or clubs where they smoke, and avoid it at other places. I think people should be allowed to smoke in their own cars and homes, and places designated for it.

    It’s more than a health issue– it’s a courtesy and politeness issue.

    Smoking in areas designated non-smoking is a lot like peeing in a pool. You shouldn’t do it, even if you can get away with it.

  202. Buran says:

    @RvLeshrac: If I eat meat, it doesn’t cause harm to a vegetarian at the same table. Chances are they can’t even smell it. Smoke however IS dangerous and DOES stink up everything. In other words, a meat-eater isn’t causing harm to those nearby, while the smoker is.

    “Your right to swing a punch ends where my nose begins” as they say.

  203. cde says:

    @Antediluvian: So I can’t use a word outside of its normal, intended use? So calling you a tool, a robot, a lemming, a slug, or anything like that wouldn’t be an insult.

    And where did I use it more then once?

  204. Antediluvian says:

    @cde: Wow, I’m impressed that you actually read my comment.

    Obviously you didn’t understand it, but hey, it’s important to start somewhere, right?

    Oh man, how did I miss this one?
    Okay, you got me.
    I fed the troll. My bad, folks! Sorry ’bout that.

  205. cde says:

    @Antediluvian: Also, so people shouldn’t use fag as in cigarette, or faghag, or black people shouldn’t use nigger or nigga, or spanish people spic, or bitch, or “the gays” shouldn’t call each other fag either?

  206. cde says:

    @Buran: If your streak doesn’t smell enough like steak to someone at the same table, you need to go to a better restaurant.

  207. snoop-blog says:

    wow people. wow. that is all.

  208. Bye says:

    I have a very severe reaction to Febreze. It very much interests me that people who claim to have a violent reaction to cigarette smoke are often found dancing in a mist of Febreze hailing its refreshing renewal properties.

    Either way, when I’m in a room that’s been Febrezed or near somebody who has sprayed those chemicals all over their clothes, I develop an instant sore throat and can feel it start to close as I sneeze and hack like crazy. When I’m around a smoker? Nothing, curiously.

    Can I get my No-Febreze room?

  209. stre says:

    @bdgbill: you suck. though i certainly can understand the desire to have a room that isn’t shitty.

    @gyroball: if it wasn’t for the legislation, there would be no bars that were smoke free. hooray madison and chicago (and the other smoke free states/cities that i haven’t lived in)

  210. jpmoney says:

    @RvLeshrac: I’m with you on perfumes and some of your other annoyances being, well, annoying.

    However, I think you’re misunderstanding. I never said to ban smoking. I have no problem with smokers smoking where it is allowed and in/on their own property. As others have said, if a business wants to fine someone for breaking a no-smoking rule, that is their policy. Que the “your rights end at…” line.

    @taylorich: I don’t think people are saying all smokers should die. The smokers drawing ire are those who WILLFULLY and purposefully smoke in non-smoking rooms for various reasons.

  211. nemesiscw says:
  212. disavow says:

    @doctor_cos: Find me a bottle of perfume with dozens of carcinogens, and I’ll agree that it should be banned from my personal space.

    (ex-smoker)

  213. disavow says:

    @nardo218: Totally. I once worked about 4′ away from a guy who showed up every day smelling like urine–his cat had “sprayed” in his shoes. Supervisors talked to him about it, but he felt that since he had run the shoes through the wash and the smell wouldn’t come out, he’d done his part and that was that. Nevermind actually buying new shoes at one of the city’s many fine thrift stores. There were so many complaints he actually got fired for it–NOT the people who were sick of the smell.

  214. Rectilinear Propagation says:

    The hotel has to pay to clean the smell out of all of the fabrics in the room: carpet cleaning, curtains, and seating with fabric sections, maybe even the mattress.

    If you smoke in a non-smoking room the fee is fair. The hotel should be sure the person did smoke in the room: if the person’s clothes just carried the smoke smell in the room then the carpet and curtains shouldn’t smell of smoke.

  215. Rectilinear Propagation says:

    I also meant to ask:

    200+ comments?

  216. SecureLocation says:

    Buy a spray bottle of Fabreze at the nearest convenience store

  217. taylorich says:

    @jpmoney: I still don’t wish them death, even if they blow smoke in my face.

  218. banmojo says:

    I think this is a GOOD thing. Smokers should not smoke in non smoking rooms, smokers should not smoke OUTside their rooms and then bring the dirty butts into the NONsmoking rooms, and finally, SMOKERS WITH CHILDREN SHOULD NOT BE SMOKING IN THE VICINITY OF THEIR KIDS! It’s about TIME this is made into a law! Little kids have NO choice in the matter, and 2nd hand smoke DOES contain cancer causing chemicals, not to mention its link to lung disease such as asthma.

    Smoking MAY be a choice, but it’s a STUPID choice. Science has proven that beyond a shadow of a doubt, if common sense hadn’t already.

  219. TrinityLast says:

    Oh, for crying out loud – walk outside and smoke. That’s what I do at HOME. Why are you smoking inside to start with? I don’t know about other smokers, but I cannot STAND the scent of lingering smoke in a room.

    I’ll take my cancer slow and in nice, otherwise fresh air, thank you.

    But then, I’m also the polite smoker who never drops her butts and always finds a way to throw it away if there’s no ashtray – and if there is, I put the cigarette out and then toss it.

    So I’m probably unusual. :p

  220. unklegwar says:

    Teh awesome. I just wish they’d move faster, like when the jerk in the room below/new to you is smoking RIGHT NOW.

    And nothing beats it when you open your patio door just to catch a nice lungful of POT smoke from the losers downstairs.

    How about a fine, AND kicking them out (or throwing them over the balcony)? Is that too much to ask?