Some Musings on Etiquette (Hey what's that) When in Cozumel and Other "Stuff"

[scubafanatic]

The "so what" is that smoking in a restaurant vastly diminishes the quality of the experience for the patrons who do not smoke, along with many who do, according to some of my smoker friends. With the rest of the things you mention, it's the person who is participating in the activity who suffers the consequences. If you want to kill yourself with tobacco, go ahead, I don't care. Pollute your own air, not mine.

The point is moot, anyway. Smoking indoors virtually everywhere in Austin is now illegal, and hip, hip, hooray for that.

Seriously, I am not bashing smokers. Some of my best friends smoke. Some people whom I loved have also been killed by smoking, and some others are quite a ways down that road. I don't think that smoking is a very smart thing to do, but I do stupid things from time to time, too, so who am I to say?

My concern with 'smokers' is not so much that they are killing themselves, but that they are imposing massive parasitic finanacial/medical costs on the rest of society, which are not adequately priced into the street price of their 'smokes', society massively subsidizes their habit, yet another financial burden we ultimately cannot afford!

 

[ggunn]

I beg to differ slightly. I have seen much more immediate harm to people other than themselves, including death, brought on within minutes of drinking in restaurants. Should that be outlawed that next? (Or did we do that?) Of course not, because the majority is ok with drinking still. (or again?) My point was if those who are bothered chose to not enter a 'smoking' restaurant then the owner would have to make a decision on what he wanted to do. Apparently it didn't diminish the experience enough to change individual habits, just enough to pass a law. I just think you own the restaurant, you should be able to choose.

I do not agree. Some laws are necessary, and this is one of them. It's not that restaurant owners didn't want to ban smoking in their establishments, it's that individually they didn't want to be the only ones to do it because they thought that the business they would lose would be more than more than they would gain if the practice weren't universal. Unlike from bar owners, there was not a peep from restauranteurs when the law was passed; in fact, many restaurant owners lobbied in favor of the ordinance. Bar owners were almost universally against it because they thought it would hurt ALL their businesses, but in the long run that turned out not to be the case.

It's a win-win. The restaurant owners won because their business was not negatively impacted and their places are cleaner. The non-smoking public won because now a smoker cannot ruin their meal by lighting up next to them while they are eating. The smokers have to go outside to smoke, which is the right thing to do, anyway.

It is true that the world would be a better place if people could be depended upon to do the right thing on their own, but such is not the case. BTW, the law also applies to the workplace, which I also applaud. Finding another job because smokers were making me miserable at work wasn't an option for me.

The "what will you outlaw next" argument is a straw man. One might just as easily take the opposite stance - if you repeal the law against smoking in restaurants, what will you allow next? Theft? Murder?

 

[dmoore19]

Back on topic.

When a divemaster/guide points out a cool critter, don't forget you are not the only one that wants to see it. Wait your turn, limit your time accordingly when viewing the critter.

If you are taking pictures remember there are others that would like to see the critter too. Get your shot, move away and let others see the critter.

 

[ggunn]

Back on topic.

When a divemaster/guide points out a cool critter, don't forget you are not the only one that wants to see it. Wait your turn, limit your time accordingly when viewing the critter.

If you are taking pictures remember there are others that would like to see the critter too. Get your shot, move away and let others see the critter.

Oooh! Oooh! And if you are a photographer, please don't stop to take pictures at the exit of a swimthrough if there are other divers behind you.

 

[dmoore19]

This guy though taking his picture was fun, so did I. then I got out of the way so others could see him.

 

[BTravlin]

He looks familiar.

 

[cvchief]

I do not agree. Some laws are necessary, and this is one of them. It's not that restaurant owners didn't want to ban smoking in their establishments, it's that individually they didn't want to be the only ones to do it because they thought that the business they would lose would be more than more than they would gain if the practice weren't universal. Unlike from bar owners, there was not a peep from restauranteurs when the law was passed; in fact, many restaurant owners lobbied in favor of the ordinance. Bar owners were almost universally against it because they thought it would hurt ALL their businesses, but in the long run that turned out not to be the case.

It's a win-win. The restaurant owners won because their business was not negatively impacted and their places are cleaner. The non-smoking public won because now a smoker cannot ruin their meal by lighting up next to them while they are eating. The smokers have to go outside to smoke, which is the right thing to do, anyway.

It is true that the world would be a better place if people could be depended upon to do the right thing on their own, but such is not the case. BTW, the law also applies to the workplace, which I also applaud. Finding another job because smokers were making me miserable at work wasn't an option for me.

The "what will you outlaw next" argument is a straw man. One might just as easily take the opposite stance - if you repeal the law against smoking in restaurants, what will you allow next? Theft? Murder?

You, ah, skipped the drinking argument. It is hard to answer, given the logic. I am good with the 'what will you allow next argument'! What can we eliminate a law about? I think we might have alot between smoking and theft and murder.

Again with the alcohol, it might be way less applicable in the city with public transport, but why do we allow a bar to feed people drinks at locations they must drive too? They leave and are an immediate threat to the public. I would suggest to you that the reason we allow this yet are denying smoking is simply based in majority rule, not your argument on it being the right thing to do. Smokers are representing, THANKFULLY, a smaller and smaller segement, so they no longer carry a majority so we are content to run over them. It is the process of 'gee thats a good idea, lets make a law because we have 50% plus' that gets me. Maybe I am not getting the idea across.

Maybe if our paths cross in Coz, I can buy you a drink and we can philosophize. Better shoot for the 2 for 1 at Money?

 

[dmoore19]

He looks familiar.

He does, doesn't he. I think he hangs out around Cozumel someplace. With his buddy.

 

[Pelagicsal]

On the topic of swimthroughs... Figure out where your fin-wash goes so as not to kick up the bottom and silt out divers behind you.
Pay attention to fin-wash on the reef, too, so sand stays on the bottom, not on the reef and your kicking doesn't damage the reef.

Cannot figure out how folks can be 4-5 feet above the bottom and STILL be kicking it up!!!

 

[BTravlin]

Chief, since we're going down that path, why arrest people for smoking pot in the privacy of their own home?