Good-bye to Seats at the Ralph

[todd]

(this reply is not aimed at you specifically)

 

Rights?!? This is the worst argument from the smokers' side. They sound so ridiculous when they get all huffy about their "rights".

 

As far as I know, there is nothing in the Constitution or Bill of Rights that says anything about people being allowed to do their drug of choice whenever and where ever they feel like it.

 

Nor is anything written regarding the right to subject other people to your habit and mess with their health and safety.

 

Her rights go about as far as her ability to stay home and smoke on her own property, since her drug of choice is legal. That's about it.

 

+1

 

Americans are so whiny they can't differentiate between a "right" and a "privilege"

[Toshiero]

Saw our last home game Saturday at the Ralph - after 10 years as a season ticket holder in the club seats (sad)! And 50 years of going with my Dad to games and sitting in his season seats. Never thought we would give them up - but this whole smoking ban really made us mad. Guys from the Press Box are allowed to walk 5 feet outside the gate, smoke their cigarette, and then come right back into the stadium. You or me -NO. I am a considerate smoker (would only smoke away from non-smokers), but this is ridiculous. There is enough smoke in the parking lot every Sunday to cloud the air when the wind is still. When we bought our seasons, we had heated seats, minimal hassle getting into the game, and staff that made you feel appreciated. All of that is gone.

 

Did some research, and found that only 3 of the 31 stadiums have rules similar to the Ralph. The other 90% of the stadiums either have smoking areas or allow fans to go to their cars and then re-enter the stadium. Washington even has a cigar bar in their stadium.

 

I am not defending a bad habit - but the overuse of alcohol is an equally bad habit. This is okay since the organization makes money on this one!

 

I am surprised that the Bills did this to further reduce their season ticket base - but it is their business to run. Looking forward to road trips next season to see our Bills - and ENJOY the experience.

 

Smoking should be abolished in America period. That said I read your title and thought maybe you had wised up not to pay ralph anymore to keep putting a crappy team on the field, I was wrong

[UConn James]

Yep, if it helps you through your day and cope with life then it's bad for you. But don't feel singled out, that guy slaps pacifiers out of babies mouths and kicks walkers out from under the elderly too. Can't have pacifiers ruling our infants lives!

 

I think they should ban your ability to use the internet. it is called freedom. Quit stepping on it you commie.

 

I forget who said it, but "The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins."

 

If blowing smoke for everyone around you to inhale is a freedom, then I'm sure you won't mind granting me the freedom to piss on your head. Your definition of freedom is seriously skewed.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

I forget who said it, but "The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins."

 

If blowing smoke for everyone around you to inhale is a freedom, then I'm sure you won't mind granting me the freedom to piss on your head. Your definition of freedom is seriously skewed.

Beer piss from being bombed out of your mind at a football game or just regular piss?

 

Why are you people who are criticizing smokers and their 2nd hand smoke continuing to avoid the fact that drunk a-holes at football games are also subjecting non-drunks to their:

 

1) Urinating in public

2) Vomiting

3) Fighting

4) Abusive language and profanity

5) Injuring and possibly killiing other fans while driving while intoxicated to and from the stadium

 

If we can stop bashing on smokers here for a moment, can someone please explain to me why drunks have more rights to their behavior than smokers do?

Edited December 27, 2011 by San Jose Bills Fan

[DrDawkinstein]

Beer piss from being bombed out of your mind at a football game or just regular piss?

 

Why are you people who are criticizing smokers and their 2nd hand smoke continuing to avoid the fact that drunk a-holes at football games are also subjecting non-drunks to their:

 

1) Urinating in public

2) Vomiting

3) Fighting

4) Abusive language and profanity

5) Injuring and possibly killiing other fans while driving while intoxicated to and from the stadium

 

If we can stop bashing on smokers here for a moment, can someone please explain to me why drunks have more rights to their behavior than smokers do?

 

First off, I agree with your take on Drinkers, especially at the game. They are more dangerous and more annoying than smokers. Even after I turned 21, I didnt drink at games. Im there for FOOTBALL, not to get loaded. And when you are loaded, you cant follow or remember the game. What a wasted $100+!

 

To answer your bolded question, that's simple and I think you know why... The Bills and the NFL profit from beer sales. Therefore, booze stays. It's not fair or logical, but that's how it is.

 

When do they stop selling beer at games? Is it after the 3rd quarter? Do they do that anymore?

[backinwny]

What gets me is for some reason the majority of smokers feel that they are exempt from the littering laws……. It never fails, walking into a store with a cigarette disposer right at the door; so many smokers have to toss the butt on the ground….really?? Why??

[CBD]

When do they stop selling beer at games? Is it after the 3rd quarter? Do they do that anymore?

Halftime

[UConn James]

Beer piss from being bombed out of your mind at a football game or just regular piss?

 

Why are you people who are criticizing smokers and their 2nd hand smoke continuing to avoid the fact that drunk a-holes at football games are also subjecting non-drunks to their:

 

1) Urinating in public

2) Vomiting

3) Fighting

4) Abusive language and profanity

5) Injuring and possibly killiing other fans while driving while intoxicated to and from the stadium

 

If we can stop bashing on smokers here for a moment, can someone please explain to me why drunks have more rights to their behavior than smokers do?

 

Maybe it seems that way.

 

But the simple thing is that with someone drinking alcohol, it doesn't necessarily mean that the drinker's actions are going to cause an annoyance or harm to someone. It is possible for people to drink and not be a bother to anyone. With smoking, that's much more difficult if not impossible; the act and physical reality that inherently goes with smoking is the harm.

 

Also, there are rules regarding the behavior of drunks as well. It's not like they get off Scot-free because they bought the beer from the stadium vendors.

[DrDawkinstein]

Maybe it seems that way.

 

But the simple thing is that with someone drinking alcohol, it doesn't necessarily mean that the drinker's actions are going to cause an annoyance or harm to someone. It is possible for people to drink and not be a bother to anyone. With smoking, that's much more difficult if not impossible; the act and physical reality that inherently goes with smoking is the harm.

 

Also, there are rules regarding the behavior of drunks as well. It's not like they get off Scot-free because they bought the beer from the stadium vendors.

 

Very good point as well.

 

And Id like to point out again, no one has any right to partake in these activities. It's a privilege. Just like driving. Or did we all forget what our parents told us at 16?

[backinwny]

Forgot to share what my buddy told said a long time ago (have to give credit where credit is do) "Having a designated smoking area in a bar/restaurant is like having a designated pissing area in a pool".......

 

Happy New Year!! Go Bills!!

[San Jose Bills Fan]

Maybe it seems that way.

 

But the simple thing is that with someone drinking alcohol, it doesn't necessarily mean that the drinker's actions are going to cause an annoyance or harm to someone. It is possible for people to drink and not be a bother to anyone. With smoking, that's much more difficult if not impossible; the act and physical reality that inherently goes with smoking is the harm.

 

Also, there are rules regarding the behavior of drunks as well. It's not like they get off Scot-free because they bought the beer from the stadium vendors.

James, you're a good poster and this is not directed at you personally. I'm just springboarding off your comments.

 

At 5 pages and counting, it's reached the point where I don't expect everyone to read through the entire thread before commenting, although very conscientious posters will do that.

 

The discussion was about providing smoking areas for smokers or allowing them to leave the stadium (security gates I assume) and return so that they can smoke.

 

There is no smoking areas at The Ralph anymore and those leaving the stadium to smoke are not allowed to return.

 

I'll add, that smokers are being called whiners in this thread.

 

But if there was a smoking area as apparently there was in years past, you'd have people smoking OUTDOORS in a designated smoking area with a very few fans getting SMELLS of second-hand smoke. SMELLS, not some sort of actual smoke/health hazard.

 

In this context the smokers are not the whiners. It's the people who smell the smoke from afar in an outdoor setting who are the whiners.

 

People who are anti-smoking will conveniently ignore all the real issues in this discussion.

 

Ranting onto a tangent, no one is arguing whether smoking is bad, or a bad decision. Smoking is bad and a bad decision.

 

But this country has extracted many billions of dollars from smokers in taxes and from tobacco companies in settlements but they want to restrict the behavior of smokers while allowing drunks to ruin the gameday experience for others.

 

 

 

 

[bbb]

James, you're a good poster and this is not directed at you personally. I'm just springboarding off your comments.

 

At 5 pages and counting, it's reached the point where I don't expect everyone to read through the entire thread before commenting, although very conscientious posters will do that.

 

The discussion was about providing smoking areas for smokers or allowing them to leave the stadium (security gates I assume) and return so that they can smoke.

 

There is no smoking areas at The Ralph anymore and those leaving the stadium to smoke are not allowed to return.

 

I'll add, that smokers are being called whiners in this thread.

 

But if there was a smoking area as apparently there was in years past, you'd have people smoking OUTDOORS in a designated smoking area with a very few fans getting SMELLS of second-hand smoke. SMELLS, not some sort of actual smoke/health hazard.

 

In this context the smokers are not the whiners. It's the people who smell the smoke from afar in an outdoor setting who are the whiners.

 

People who are anti-smoking will conveniently ignore all the real issues in this discussion.

 

Ranting onto a tangent, no one is arguing whether smoking is bad, or a bad decision. Smoking is bad and a bad decision.

 

But this country has extracted many billions of dollars from smokers in taxes and from tobacco companies in settlements but they want to restrict the behavior of smokers while allowing drunks to ruin the gameday experience for others.

 

Great post - you have totally nailed the picture.......Like I said earlier, I didn't even know where the smoking areas were, they were so far removed from bothering any of us non-smokers.

 

The team should not be alienating any of it's fans.

[agardin]

There was a somking section outdoors away from anyone. No one was blowing smoke in any faces. There is zero health risk from having an outdoor smoking section removed from patrons.

 

It is not a right but it is also not very accomodating to a significant portion of your fans. Why get rid of the smoking section?

 

They (politicians and activists groups) are creating a situation where if someone isn't going to quit for the right reason they will make you quit for the wrong reasons. And don't say second hand smoke kills because having a smoking section along the fence at the stadium will not cause anyone any harm.

 

People have negative reaction to political groups imposing their will over others. The key words below are 'motivate smokers to try to quit' Removing more and more places where people can smoke is a very active strategy.

 

Here it is right from NY State DOH. Their stated goal is to rid the state of tobacco use. They do not say to have an accomodating society where people who smoke can live alongside non smokers in peace and harmony in a safe environment for non smokers.

 

http://www.health.ny.gov/prevention/tobacco_control/

 

The program began in January 2000, and is built on a foundation of community partners using evidence-based strategies from the Guide to Community Preventive Services to decrease tobacco use. Over time, the program has effectively implemented a strong clean indoor air law, maintained support for high tobacco taxes to keep the price of tobacco high, and worked to increase access to effective cessation services and motivate smokers to try to quit. As a result of programmatic efforts, youth and adult smoking rates are at their lowest levels on record.

[Toshiero]

(this reply is not aimed at you specifically, T-good)

 

Rights?!? This is the worst argument from the smokers' side. They sound so ridiculous when they get all huffy about their "rights".

 

As far as I know, there is nothing in the Constitution or Bill of Rights that says anything about people being allowed to do their drug of choice whenever and where ever they feel like it.

 

Nor is anything written regarding the right to subject other people to your habit and mess with their health and safety.

 

Her rights go about as far as her ability to stay home and smoke on her own property, since her drug of choice is legal. That's about it.

 

^^^^

 

this!!!

 

Thank you!! last time I checked the first thing a doc does when you are born is establish your air way. Same for first aid. I don't remember anyone coming out of their mother with a pack in one hand and a lighter in the other.

 

Smokers have NO rights period. It is a drug and an addiction that seriously effects the health of others.

[DrDawkinstein]

I cant go 3 hours without touching myself and should be able to do so wherever I want, when ever I want. Why cant the Bills designate "Jerkin' It" areas where I can whip it out and take care of business? It is my RIGHT as a citizen.

 

It's not illegal, it's frowned upon. Like masturbating on an airplane...

 

Edited December 27, 2011 by DrDareustein

[Toshiero]

Great post - you have totally nailed the picture.......Like I said earlier, I didn't even know where the smoking areas were, they were so far removed from bothering any of us non-smokers.

 

The team should not be alienating any of it's fans.

 

There shouldnt' be any smoking areas. If they can't do without their addiction for 4 hours then stay home.

[Maddog69]

Have no issue with the smoking bans where they are enforced for everyone - and do not defend the habit. But the exception for the Press Box folks is what made me mad. Would renew our seasons if not for this exception.

 

1.) I don't believe that the press box exception is the reason you are giving up your tix

2.) the reason for the press box exception is that anyone from the press box has press credentials and is therefore entitled to come and go from the stadium at will. They do not use a ticket to get it. The Bills don't allow ticket holders to leave and come back because one person could easily leave with more than one ticket and come back with other non-paying people. The Bills don't want to pay to babysit those who cannot control their smoking habit for 3 hours.

3.) I agree with the earlier poster who said smoking should be totally banned. It is a filthy, disgusting habit and directly causes serious illnesses and costs the government, the medical industry and the taxpayers BILLIONS of dollars.

 

I say good riddance to you as a season ticket holder. I will enjoy the cleaner air in the stadium without all the smokers.

[Turbosrrgood]

Beer piss from being bombed out of your mind at a football game or just regular piss?

 

Why are you people who are criticizing smokers and their 2nd hand smoke continuing to avoid the fact that drunk a-holes at football games are also subjecting non-drunks to their:

 

1) Urinating in public

2) Vomiting

3) Fighting

4) Abusive language and profanity

5) Injuring and possibly killiing other fans while driving while intoxicated to and from the stadium

 

If we can stop bashing on smokers here for a moment, can someone please explain to me why drunks have more rights to their behavior than smokers do?

 

Yeah I get what you are saying but it comes down to this... If someone near you smokes, chances are you will be forced to inhale the smoke with them. If some one near you drinks, you will not likely be forced to drink the beer with them (peer pressure?).

 

While alcohol does cause those behavior issues above, they are indirect BEHAVIORAL issues. You could compare those secondary effects to a secondary effect such as constantly coughing near you after one is done smoking. It's not the same as being directly affected by actually inhaling or drinking the product.

 

Just pointing out the facts, smoking in public directly affects non smokers. Drinking in public does not directly affect non drinkers.

 

It's very simple actually.

 

You have the right to smoke all you want, but you don't have the right to make others smoke your cigarette with you.

Edited December 27, 2011 by Turbosrrgood

[GOBILLS78]

I cant go 3 hours without touching myself and should be able to do so wherever I want, when ever I want. Why cant the Bills designate "Jerkin' It" areas where I can whip it out and take care of business? It is my RIGHT as a citizen.

 

[Direhard Fan]

I smoked for 40 years. Had a massive heart attack due 100% to smokeing. I can't go to the Ralph anymore either. Can't walk the steps. Boy- sure wish I could. Really miss that place. Started with the rock pile. Now nothing. Be happy with what you have. Keep your tickets and enjoy. Wish I could.

[Bob in STL]

Beer piss from being bombed out of your mind at a football game or just regular piss?

 

Why are you people who are criticizing smokers and their 2nd hand smoke continuing to avoid the fact that drunk a-holes at football games are also subjecting non-drunks to their:

 

1) Urinating in public

2) Vomiting

3) Fighting

4) Abusive language and profanity

5) Injuring and possibly killiing other fans while driving while intoxicated to and from the stadium

 

If we can stop bashing on smokers here for a moment, can someone please explain to me why drunks have more rights to their behavior than smokers do?

 

 

I agree that the drunks are worse than smokers. My biggest issue with the drunks is having to listen to their foul language. Every other word is F'in this and F'in that. I really never have a problem with them fighting or harassing me or my friends.

 

For a joke, I timed a trip into the bathroom at the start of the 2nd half (upper deck by the exit ramp). I counted 47 F-bombs in two minutes. Almost once in every three seconds an F-bomb was dropped. Somtimes there were rapid fire F-bombs, 6 to 8 per sentence. Every one spewed by a drunken kid in his twenties. I had a good laugh but I would not have been happy with it back in the days when my kids were young and with me.

Edited December 27, 2011 by Bob in STL

[The_Philster]

I really have no sympathy for smokers...my former season ticket partner quit going to games because of them designating a specified smoking area in 2006 but they supposedly weren't clear on where it was (that was his reasoning for quitting, anyway)..still owes me $2K for several years of season tix, anyway...it's a disgusting habit that harms the people around you in addition to yourself...that being said, as much as I hate smoking, I thought removing the smoking areas this year was going overboard.

As far as the comparisons to drinking, one thing people haven't brought up is the fact that you can have a few beers without getting drunk or harming anyone, yourself included. Drinking in moderation harms no one....smoking, in any amount, is harmful to everyone

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

This is all market-based, as it should be. Bills can sell more seats and make more money by banning smoking.

 

If the Bills could make more money by banning alcohol consumption, they'd do that too.

 

The OP's response is the correct one. He didn't like the policy, so he didn't renew.

[IDBillzFan]

Besides, if it wasn't for smokers, who would we be able to discriminate against?

Fat people.

[Just Jack]

..... The Bills don't allow ticket holders to leave and come back because one person could easily leave with more than one ticket and come back with other non-paying people.....

Not with the ticket scanners they use now. If I want to leave the club area, I have to have my ticket scanned as I leave, they will then rescan it when I enter. This prevents people from allowing others to sneak in on a ticket that was already used.

[SactoBillFan]

Can't believe you couldn't find a place to sneak a smoke in. Follow those people at half time that are firing up the doobies.

[uncle flap]

wow some of you guys are some mr. softie pansy pussycats.

 

"oh no, some secondhand smoke is wafting in my personal hygiene zone!!!"

 

i bet you wear spf 150 indoors and have your mom check under your bed in your parents basement for monsters before you go to sleep.

 

you're probably the same schmucks that ask people to sit down and not cheer so loudly.

 

seriously tho, what was the problem with the smoking areas hidden by the gates?

 

bills got rid of smoking for a publicity bump and prob got a grant or tax break from ny or the county.

 

and to all those baffled about not being able to not smoke for 3-4 hours: it's not about the time, its the environment. for example, i go without smoking during a full day's work. but when i'm having a good time drinking and pigging out in a party atmosphere, i'd like to be able to smoke to complement the experience.

 

so overpriced beer/concessions, invasive security procedures, asinine parking/traffic rules, occasional competitive football, and foul-mouthed rowdy drunks are okay, but someone's DESIRE to smoke in a designated area is offensive?

 

lots of people dont ENJOY secondhand smoke. but i doubt exposure outdoors for a few minutes here and there is enough to cause serious detriment to your health. ill leave it to someone else to find some statistics, but i'm sure it's marginal when coupled with the exhaust fumes from tens of thousands of cars. or do you guys wear surgical masks walking thru the parking lots?

[macnmotion]

Solution: Join the press.

[Zulu Cthulhu]

Solution: Join the press.

+1

[BiggieScooby]

As Ralph Wilson once said "I save money by not smoking, and thanks to ignorant people I make money owning tobacco stocks."

[PromoTheRobot]

Well at least you can always get Club seats later if you want them. It's not like they are sold out.

 

PTR

[Lurker]

I think they should ban your ability to use the internet. it is called freedom. Quit stepping on it you commie.

Appropriate user name...

[San Jose Bills Fan]

^^^^

 

this!!!

 

Thank you!! last time I checked the first thing a doc does when you are born is establish your air way. Same for first aid. I don't remember anyone coming out of their mother with a pack in one hand and a lighter in the other.

 

Smokers have NO rights period. It is a drug and an addiction that seriously effects the health of others.

Smokers have no rights?

 

Then why do they sell cigarettes which are taxed to the point where the tax is higher than the product?

 

What you're trying to say is that if you ran the world, you would make sure smokers have no rights.

 

And again, you continue to avoid the question as to why drunks in the stadium have rights but smokers don't.

 

There shouldnt' be any smoking areas. If they can't do without their addiction for 4 hours then stay home.

Yet another thing you aren't getting in your simple prejudice against smoking is that this is not an issue of addictions, habits, or anything like that.

 

It's an issue of what freedoms people are allowed.

 

In Ralph Wilson Stadium, drunks have freedoms but smokers don't. Perhaps you're not formed enough to understand that this is a contradiction.

 

Yeah I get what you are saying but it comes down to this... If someone near you smokes, chances are you will be forced to inhale the smoke with them. If some one near you drinks, you will not likely be forced to drink the beer with them (peer pressure?).

 

While alcohol does cause those behavior issues above, they are indirect BEHAVIORAL issues. You could compare those secondary effects to a secondary effect such as constantly coughing near you after one is done smoking. It's not the same as being directly affected by actually inhaling or drinking the product.

 

Just pointing out the facts, smoking in public directly affects non smokers. Drinking in public does not directly affect non drinkers.

 

It's very simple actually.

 

You have the right to smoke all you want, but you don't have the right to make others smoke your cigarette with you.

Yet again (for about the 5th time in this topic) I'm talking about a smoking section, NOT people smoking in their seats.

 

So your second-hand smoke argument doesn't apply here.

 

And again to another issue, people are not allowed to leave and return to the stadium which is absurd considering that this practice is permitted in numerous other stadiums and that the technology is already in place to allow the practice.

 

 

[Jim in Anchorage]

This is all market-based, as it should be. Bills can sell more seats and make more money by banning smoking.

 

If the Bills could make more money by banning alcohol consumption, they'd do that too.

 

The OP's response is the correct one. He didn't like the policy, so he didn't renew.

Exactly. If doesn't want to go if can't smoke, so what? It's supposed to be fun, not a willpower test.

[Just Jack]

As Ralph Wilson once said "I save money by not smoking, and thanks to ignorant people I make money owning tobacco stocks."

Link?

[RayFinkle]

Exactly. If doesn't want to go if can't smoke, so what? It's supposed to be fun, not a willpower test.

Everyone has their vices. Some folks smoke, some folks drink, some folks over eat. I guarantee a lot of the folks who are quick to criticize for smoking are probably 40lbs overweight. Can't have a smoke, but you can eat nachos which have 40 grams of fat....6 on one hand, have dozen on the other.

[BRH]

Sounds like a law suit

A frivolous one.

 

The Bills can set whatever rules they like about smoking as long as they are not discriminating against a protected class. If they said only white guys under 40 could smoke, THAT would be a lawsuit.

[opfball91]

Wow, some people in here are funny. Smoking is awful for you, yes, but people have a right to smoke. They aren't second class citizens, they happen to have a bad habit. I bet all these people shunning smokers are perfect. FYI, if you drink, and shun smokers at the same time, you're a hypocrite.

[RyanC883]

I'm not a smoker, and I hope you quit because it's really terrible for your health. With all that said, you seem to understand the tremendous risks of smoking, are willing to smoke in a designated area away from non-smokers, therefore you should be allowed a place to smoke. The Ralph needs a smoking section, or should at least let you go in and out. Totally rediculous. You are only harming yourself. (assuming you are doing it in a well-ventaliated smoking section). I wish you wouldn't, but that's your choice to make, not mine. The Bills should be treating their fans like adults.

 

Wow, some people in here are funny. Smoking is awful for you, yes, but people have a right to smoke. They aren't second class citizens, they happen to have a bad habit. I bet all these people shunning smokers are perfect. FYI, if you drink, and shun smokers at the same time, you're a hypocrite.

 

 

Well, the comparison to drinking is not a real comparasion. One drink a day has no effect on your health, and some studies show it to be beneficial. But, one cigarattee a day increases your risk of cancer to some degree, and has no known health beneefits. Drinking is only dangerous to yourself and/or others when done irresponsibly. Smoking is always dangerous to yourself, and can be dangerous to others in varing degrees if done irresponsibility.

 

Bottom line: let smokers smoke responsibly, and let those who want to drink do so, but responsibly. Bannking smoking at the Ralph is a terrible move. There is no reason they can't make a cigar bar, smoking room, or allow re-entry.

 

Link?

 

I thought the last part of his quote was "but thanks to ignorant people I make money by owning the Buffalo Bills." We all have a bad habit, being a Bills fan!

[RealityCheck]

Wow, some people in here are funny. Smoking is awful for you, yes, but people have a right to smoke. They aren't second class citizens, they happen to have a bad habit. I bet all these people shunning smokers are perfect. FYI, if you drink, and shun smokers at the same time, you're a hypocrite.

Cigarettes are a gate way drug and yes, smokers are second class citizens. Their willingness to be price gouged on a product that can cause respiratory failure is absurd. Get a real vice for Christ' sake.