Good-bye to Seats at the Ralph

[zazie]

Not good enough. No reason to burden the health care system because of a persons choice to put a carcinogen into their body.

I have no problem with people smoking in an area away from me as long as they pay for their own treatment for anything caused by smoking now or in the future out of their own pocket. If they can't afford treatment, then they die.

Carrying your own health insurance = paying for their own treatment.

 

I was in LA in the early 1990s when the helmet law was a great debate as motorcyclists felt it was terrible and unfair. If there was a wat to know for sure that they all had insurance, I would have been against thehelmet law. Unfortunaltey the taxpayers had to foot the bill for a number of coma patients who did not. So the helmet law was in fact needed and for the public good.

 

Same idea.

[tombstone56]

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.

 

i got a idea for you ,,go lick a ashtray .your breath will be the same and then you can taste the smoke longer .that 3 hours it takes to watch must be a real hardship i guess..

 

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.

 

i got a idea for you ,,go lick a ashtray .your breath will be the same and then you can taste the smoke longer .that 3 hours it takes to watch must be a real hardship i guess.. by the way season ticket renewal arent due for 3 months so blow smoke up someone else s a@@!

 

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.

 

i got a idea for you ,,go lick a ashtray .your breath will be the same and then you can taste the smoke longer .that 3 hours it takes to watch must be a real hardship i guess.. by the way season ticket renewal arent due for 3 months so blow smoke up someone else s a@@!

[CodeMonkey]

Carrying your own health insurance = paying for their own treatment.

 

I was in LA in the early 1990s when the helmet law was a great debate as motorcyclists felt it was terrible and unfair. If there was a wat to know for sure that they all had insurance, I would have been against thehelmet law. Unfortunaltey the taxpayers had to foot the bill for a number of coma patients who did not. So the helmet law was in fact needed and for the public good.

 

Same idea.

With all due respect, it does not seem to be the same idea at all. I don't want them to pay for their own insurance to the tune of $10,000 a year say, then have surgeries, ongoing treatments and meds to the tune of $500,000 a year and drive up everyones health insurance costs. I want them to pay the $500,000 a year because it was their choice to put the carcinogen into their body. If they don't have the $500K then they die.

[zazie]

With all due respect, it does not seem to be the same idea at all. I don't want them to pay for their own insurance to the tune of $10,000 a year say, then have surgeries, ongoing treatments and meds to the tune of $500,000 a year and drive up everyones health insurance costs. I want them to pay the $500,000 a year because it was their choice to put the carcinogen into their body. If they don't have the $500K then they die.

Point well taken. I concede.

[RkFast]

They should ban cigarettes everywhere. Those things just cause cancer. You want to smoke - cool. Just be prepared to be treated like a 2nd class citizen. You will get no sympathy

 

 

Very mature.

 

You don't get it... When we drink beer you don't get drunk . But if you smoke anyone who sits around you inhales that nazty nicotine. No not right. I support the smoking ban in the stadium

 

Youre right...people drinking alcohol NEVER do anything to those around them. A few million battered wives, familes affected by alcoholism and those who had their spouses and children clipped by drunk drivers may feel a WEE BIT different than you...but hey.....you smelled a whiff of tobacco from someone 30 feet away.

 

And thats just...TERRIBLE.

Edited December 29, 2011 by RkFast

[BobDVA]

"What you going to do, arrest me for smoking?"

[PO'14]

After reading all this dribble, hard to imagine why a great candidate like Ron Paul doesnt easily win the election. He is all about America, freedom and liberty!

 

IF you want to smoke in an open stadium...SMOKE! If you want to get hammered at the stadium paying 10$ beer...DRINK! Dont be rude to others and things should be just fine!

 

Here in Brazil, they dont serve alcohol in Futebol stadiums. 2 years ago one of the biggest riots occured after a team lost the final game and dropped to the 2nd division...THE ALCOHOL BAN WAS IN EFFECT! It aint the booze and the smokes baby!

 

 

FInally, if all else fails,

 

Vote Quimby!

Edited December 29, 2011 by curitiba

[nucci]

Very mature.

 

 

 

Youre right...people drinking alcohol NEVER do anything to those around them. A few million battered wives, familes affected by alcoholism and those who had their spouses and children clipped by drunk drivers may feel a WEE BIT different than you...but hey.....you smelled a whiff of tobacco from someone 30 feet away.

 

And thats just...TERRIBLE.

Another reason I don't get how marijuana is illegal but alcohol is not. It would be safer, more fun and less fights if people were stoned instead of drunk.

[CodeMonkey]

Another reason I don't get how marijuana is illegal but alcohol is not. It would be safer, more fun and less fights if people were stoned instead of drunk.

The stadium would be too quiet if people were stoned instead of drunk.

[Zulu Cthulhu]

The stadium would be too quiet if people were stoned instead of drunk.

But concession revenue would skyrocket

[yungmack]

Cigaretts are bad for your health.

Life is bad for your health.

[Direhard Fan]

It's real simple. Follow the rules. Stay inside. Go to the fence. Light a cig. and stick it out thru the fence. Cig is lit outside. Your all set. Whats the problem?? Talk about beating a dead horse. And I read every post. Yep- lots of time on my hands. Don't smoke any more.

[BillsfaninFl]

IMO, there is a big difference between being a nonsmoker sitting between two people chainsmoking in a casino, and getting a little smoke mixed in with the fresh air of an open stadium. And while nobody can mount a convincing argument that drunks are not dangerous when driving, prohibition was repealed a long time ago and it is okay for people to drink alcohol.

 

To me, the thing I have difficulty understanding is why would a football organization believe it is in their best interest to alienate a substancial percentage of their paying customers by trying to limit their enjoyment (related to smoking, tailgating, etc.) at a time when their main entertainment product (the football team) has sucked for several years? Do they really believe enough tee-totalers will show up for games that will more than make up for the party types who will quit coming?

 

I got the inside scoop on the conversation that took place in the high level meeting about all this. There was a fly on the wall and these are his notes of what was said:

 

"Look. If we make them park in the order we let them into the lots, then there is less chance that friends will be able to be together. So there will be less partying before and after games. We will save money on cleanup.""

"True. And if we frisk them when entering the stadium and confiscate their beer and booze, they'll have to buy more of what we sell."

"We could also ban smoking in the stadium, even though the nonsmokers have been coming for half a century knowing that people around them will be smoking. I'll bet a lot more families with young children will buy tickets."

"Only if we also ban swearing, prancing around half dressed, painting yourself and a dozen other things that will be frightening to toddlers."

"We can't do everything at once, we can think about that stuff next year."

"Let's also not let fans leave to have a smoke and return."

"Why?"

"No reason. I just want to piss them off."

"Okay, let's do it. Even if some fans quit coming to games, there are plenty of others on the waiting list, right?"

"Actually, there is no waiting list. We just said that to keep season holders from giving up their tickets."

"Oh. Well, let's do this anyway. It's not like there's another NFL team nearby that they can switch to."

[bbb]

That's the only conversation that makes sense. You're exactly right when you say this:

 

To me, the thing I have difficulty understanding is why would a football organization believe it is in their best interest to alienate a substancial percentage of their paying customers by trying to limit their enjoyment (related to smoking, tailgating, etc.) at a time when their main entertainment product (the football team) has sucked for several years?

 

The one thing the Bills have going for them is their rep for tailgating. I don't even drink or smoke anymore, but I love the Bills and don't want the people who smoke to stay at home or the tailgating to become such a hassle that it's not worth doing anymore. (Even if I don't drink anymore, I do love the tailgating).

[BadLandsMeanie]

I assume as a non smoker you will die Quickly, at no cost. Just like turning off a light bulb. Cool.

 

Wonderful!

 

And now for some good points, that will be ignored! (by BadLandsMeanie)

 

Americans are raised from Kindergarten on to respect our tradition of individual liberty. It is distressing to me to see how many people do not understand or believe in it. The right to make personal decisions is even more important when you disagree, not less.

 

There is no health risk, except in your mind, to sitting in outdoor stadium while someone smokes a cigarette 200 or more feet away from you.

 

It's odd to me that nobody expressed concern about the exhaust from the forty thousand cars in the parking lot or sitting in close packed traffic with thousands of cars for hours before and after games. Seems to me that if someone were to be frighted of an emission it would be of that because it is thousands of times more volume of gasses and many times more poisonous.

 

That being said the Bills are also free to do as they choose and they have a right to say they do not wish to have patrons smoking and will not readmit them if they lave to do so.

 

Except that it is not their stadium is is Erie Counties stadium and Erie County's property.

 

And I wonder since they want 100 Million Dollars of tax money for stadium improvements, if the Bills will follow through and refuse to put their hands into the pockets of the New Yorkers who smoke? Can we have that tax just for the non-smokers who are welcome in the stadium?

Edited December 30, 2011 by BadLandsMeanie

[skibum]

Ever heard of Copenhagen?

 

Anyway, I think it's really sad that you would choose smoking cigarettes over going to games. It's a horrible thing to do to your body and to the people in your immediate vicinity.

[UticaBill]

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.

 

Actually there has never been any scientific evidence that second hand smoke has any noticeable negative effects on non-smokers in an outdoor environment. Closed environments like Bars and Restaurants are a different matter.... but the only studies that have ever shown a negative impact have been in closed space environments. Several studies have been done in open air close-quarter contact situations without showing any direct and appreciable effects.

 

Stanford Study:

"A typical cigarette lasts about 10 minutes," Klepeis said. "We found that if you're within two feet downwind of a smoker, you may be exposed to pollutant concentrations that exceed 500 micrograms of PM2.5 over that 10-minute period. If you're exposed multiple times to multiple cigarettes over several hours in an outdoor pub, it would be possible to get a daily average of 35 micrograms or more, which exceeds the current EPA outdoor standard." This is similar to levels that toll collectors and commuters in highly congested traffic jams are exposed to regularly. It represents levels roughly 50 times higher than that of fresh air.

 

Regardless of your political or social views on smokers, they are being targeted unfairly by laws and regulations that are more about population control than public health. Those pining about alcohol not "directly" effecting the person next to you are very short sighted. The number one cause of death in this country is automobile accidents and the #1 cause of those accidents is Alcohol. That is a MUCH more proven direct connection than anything science has established for second hand smoke (even in CLOSED environments)so curtailing drinking would be a much better use of resources if public health was the real reason behind smoking bans.

 

For those quoting the constitution; The constitution does not tell us what are rights are, but limits what control the government can exercise over individuals. The Constitution does not expressly give the federal government the power to regulate tobacco either! Specifically the 10th amendment states that the government is limited to ONLY THOSE POWERS delegated to it by the constitution. So while there may be no specifically stated right to smoke, there is also no specifically stated power of the government to regulate it!

 

No I don't smoke. I just believe in our constitution and it LIMITATIONS on government.

Edited December 30, 2011 by UticaBill

[RealityCheck]

Smokers are not only losers, but are whiners too apparently.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

Ever heard of Copenhagen?

 

Anyway, I think it's really sad that you would choose smoking cigarettes over going to games. It's a horrible thing to do to your body and to the people in your immediate vicinity.

Uh, the discussion was about smoking areas… noy smoking in the stands.

 

Smokers are not only losers, but are whiners too apparently.

I'm not a smoker but would you and the other self-righteous people please stop whining?

[CodeMonkey]

There is no health risk, except in your mind, to sitting in outdoor stadium while someone smokes a cigarette 200 or more feet away from you.

It's not the ones 200 feet from me I care about. It's the ones sitting right next to me and making me want to puke from the stench. Not sure why the Bills or the NFL care about smoking areas in a outdoor stadium though.

 

It's odd to me that nobody expressed concern about the exhaust from the forty thousand cars in the parking lot or sitting in close packed traffic with thousands of cars for hours before and after games. Seems to me that if someone were to be frighted of an emission it would be of that because it is thousands of times more volume of gasses and many times more poisonous.

Or concern about being in said parking lots when people are around who have been drinking all day and decide it's a good idea to drive.

 

Live and let live I say. Let the addicts have a smoking area far away from the rest of the people. But at the end of the day I'd still rather have a smoker sitting next to me than a drunken !@#$ raging alcoholic.