Castle Ramp Smoking Section Eliminated

Status
Not open for further replies.

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
Isn't disney technically private property? wouldn't they then be allowed to decide which legal substances they can control (they already ban alcohol at MK aside from Be Our Guest).
Wow, I never thought of it that way, but, Disney has a Designated Drinking Area as well. I want it stopped, I think alcohol is one of the worst drugs that ever existed. In fact, I have a number of relatives that have died from Alcohol related diseases and none from smoking. I want it out of Disney and I don't care if it's legal or not. I also had a close friend killed by a drunk driver. That must be known as second hand booze. I heard a news report of some woman that got killed when her husband came home drunk and when she got upset, he solved the problem by killing her. I guess my logic is just flawed.
 

wogwog

Well-Known Member
I agree, although I have never understood the spot across from the Dole Whips stand alongside The treehouse either. Wish they would move that one!
Moved that one last year to outside the entrance of Adventureland under a tree.
 

Ringo8n24

Active Member
Bottom line is anyone can be offended by something once you step out of your own home. Yes, the smoking area by the castle was very wrong. If Disney has a plan to move the smokers to designated areas, then let it be. Why keep pushing the issue? What about the vegan who is offended by the guest who is enjoying a turkey leg right next to them in line for an attraction? What about the person offended by the group that fired up a joint in Liberty Square and did "puff puff pass" right in front of you, your child, and a cast member? Or the group of people on the balcony smoking pot at a Disney hotel? What about the woman who exposes her to feed her child at the park? What about the girls who wear stiletto heels to the park to look cute only to annoy everyone around her as she keeps stumbling, will probably fall and sue Disney? The POP Warner group that does their annoying chants late at night on the bus while you are exhausted and don't want to hear it? The obese person who should NOT have rented that scooter, but should actually WALK to lose some of that weight? The people saturated in perfume to go to an amusement park? The people "making out" in an attraction line??? This could go on and on...let the corporate powers be as long as they have a plan to TRY to make everyone happy and get over it. It is all about the dollar and you have to be PC for everyone these days. Just deal with it every single time you step out in public.
 
Last edited:

GoofGoof

Premium Member
Bottom line is anyone can be offended by something once you step out of your own home. Yes, the smoking area by the castle was very wrong. If Disney has a plan to move the smokers to designated areas, then let it be. Why keep pushing the issue? What about the vegan who is offended by the guest who is enjoying a turkey leg right next to them in line for an attraction? What about the person offended by the group that fired up a joint in Liberty Square and did "puff puff pass" right in front of you, your child, and a cast member? Or the group of people on the balcony smoking pot at a Disney hotel? What about the woman who exposes her ******* to feed her child at the park? What about the girls who wear stiletto heels to the park to look cute only to annoy everyone around her as she keeps stumbling, will probably fall and sue Disney? The POP Warner group that does their annoying chants late at night on the bus while you are exhausted and don't want to hear it? The obese person who should NOT have rented that scooter, but should actually WALK to lose some of that weight? The people saturated in perfume to go to an amusement park? The people "making out" in an attraction line??? This could go on and on...let the corporate powers be as long as they have a plan to TRY to make everyone happy and get over it. It is all about the dollar and you have to be PC for everyone these days. Just deal with it every single time you step out in public.
This is exactly why these types of issues are always arguments on these types of boards. Everyone is out for themselves. Somebody joking brought up strollers and ECVs earlier, but there is some actual similarities. People who don't smoke think smoking should just be banned. People without kids want strollers banned or limited. People without handicapped family or friends complain about ECVs and the former GAC. People who don't drink want alcohol banned or limited. It's all because people tend to see things from their own perspective. If something doesn't benefit them and they perceive it to be a negative on their experience then it should be eliminated. The best part is most people will deny this is their way of thinking and will instead try to post examples (often exaggerated) of how the offending parties are ruining their time.

Disney has to balance these things out and try to make things accommodating for various types of guests. I think moving this particular smoking area is in the best interest of everyone. Removing all smoking areas is not. The rules can't always be tailored to your exact situation. My attitude is to try to just mind my own business and not worry about what others are doing. I agree it's hard to do when you get run over by a stroller or ECV or have smoke blown in your face or have a drunk guy puke on your shoes, but these are all extreme examples that rarely happen.
 

StarWarsGirl

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
No
I appreciate your perspective based on your background, alcohol can very certainly be a disaster waiting to happen. However, to be fair, it has one benefit smoking does not. In moderation, alcohol can actually be beneficial to one's health, whereas smoking is always detrimental. Even if the Ill effects do not manifest in cancer, exposure to any cigarette smoke is more harmful than not having been exposed. I cannot say the same for alcohol. That glass of wine at Be Our Guesr can actually contribute to a guest's heart health.

Is that justification to keep alcohol in the parks, I don't really think so. Do I supoort alcohol in the parks? I have to say yes, I find a beer in Epcot to be an enjoyable cultural experience, but I never overdo it. Cigarettes on the other hand, I would shed no tears if they were banned forever. They killed the namesake of the resort, that in itself should be a red flag.
large.jpg
 

Kman101

Well-Known Member
@betty rose

Don't smoke, never did. I am a bit of a Switzerland on this subject as long as the smoking is remote from everyone else.

But to update on Disney policy, '...or use an electronic cigarette' from your post is no longer an option. Disney now requires even the fake smokes to be used only in smoking areas if they produce any vapor. GSM aquaintences tell me they are instructed to remind "vapor" folks of the rules, and yes that change is published.

And on that note, it's definitely not enforced all the time. Nothing can be, really, but I've seen so many walking around and vaping. Have yet to see one in a smoking area. But a quick vape is a lot different than taking some drags on a cigarette. You can quickly take a vapor hit and put it away.
 

Section106

Active Member
That's funny.

Since you've read all 18000+ posts and you know all about my character, then you should clearly You Know.

Also, why are you defending a poster that berated a 66-year-old woman? If I'm a troll for sticking up for a 66-year-old woman, then call me a troll all day.

Dave, I believe you've told people to kill themselves on this board. Enough said.
 

Section106

Active Member
You know, that is really insulting. Stockholm syndrome is a serious psychological condition. You are suggesting another member here has it. I hope you realize how hurtful that can be. You do realize that she's 66 years old, and therefore when she was young, smoking was just something that was done socially, right? It was common. No, it is not a psychological disorder.

Second, she was not saying that she's okay with smoking. She said she is okay with smoking being relegated to the designated areas and if she happens to catch a whiff because she was not vigilant enough, she's ready with her inhaler. If someone wore too much perfume, it's what I would do. If I wasn't careful and walked into a perfume shop, it's what I would do. How is that unreasonable?

Just because something is accepted socially doesn't make it right. In her lifetime it was socially acceptable to sexually harass women in the work place and openly discriminate against African-Americans. Does that mean that it should be tolerated today in designated areas?

I questioned her motives given the stated circumstances of her life . I used a metaphor to describe the situation as I saw it. But don't let me stop you from clutching your pearls in horror at my use of artifice.

And I never said that people who smoke should be denied the privilege within the confines of the designated smoking area. That is Disney's call. I was responding to the out sized outrage from some of the posters here that questioning someone's "right" to smoke is somehow discriminating against or being mean to them. Get a grip.

I looked up the Florida Clean Indoor Air Act. Did you know that it illegal to smoke near schools? Why would that be? It is because second hand smoke is dangerous to children. But by all means let's not hurt anyone's feelings who thinks that it is perfectly reasonable to subject children at a theme park to over 7,000 known toxic and carcinogenic substances.

Here are a few facts from the Tobacco Free Florida website:

  • Exposure to SHS can cause serious illnesses and even death.
    • Since 1964, 2.5 million nonsmokers in the U.S. have died because of SHS exposure. 6
    • Secondhand smoke exposure is causally linked to heart disease, stroke, lung cancer, lower respiratory illness, and impaired lung function. 7
    • Each year, among U.S. nonsmokers, exposure to SHS causes an estimated 33,000 premature deaths from heart disease 8 and about 3,400 premature deaths from lung cancer. 9 10
    • Nonsmokers exposed to SHS at home or at work increase their risk of developing heart disease by 25 to 30 percent and their risk of developing lung cancer by 20 to 30 percent. 11
    • Inhaling SHS could be enough to block arteries and trigger a heart attack in someone whose arteries are silently clogged. 12
  • Exposure to SHS is very dangerous for children.
    • Breathing SHS increases a child’s risk of lung problems, ear infections, and severe asthma.
    • Infants exposed to SHS are at a greater risk of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS). 13 SIDS is the sudden, unexplained, unexpected death of an infant in the first year of life. SIDS is the leading cause of death in otherwise healthy infants. 14
    • SHS can trigger an asthma attack. A severe asthma attack can put a child’s life in danger. 15
    • In the first two years of life, children exposed to SHS have more than a 50 percent increased risk of getting bronchitis and pneumonia. 16
- See more at: http://www.tobaccofreeflorida.com/current-issues/florida-clean-indoor-air-act/#sthash.b7wGZnEG.dpuf

So @StarWarsGirl95, tell me how many people have died from exposure to a whiff of too much perfume or how many diseases can be attributed to a whiff of too much perfume? I'll guess it's zero. Exposure to second hand smoke is not the same as perfume and you are doing a disservice to the conversation by continuing to make the comparison.

The pro-smoking people in this thread are deluding themselves if they think that they aren't hurting anyone except themselves. By smoking cigarettes they are introducing dangerous, life threatening substances into the environment that they are sharing with the rest of us, many of them their own loved ones. That is a shame.

And I will continue to shame smokers, especially those brazen selfish a-holes that continue to light up in public.
 
Last edited:

thehowiet

Wilson King of Prussia
Just because something is accepted socially doesn't make it right or wrong. In her lifetime it was socially acceptable to sexually harass women in the work place and openly discriminate against African-Americans. Does that mean that it should be tolerated today in designated areas?

I questioned her motives given the stated circumstances of her life . I used a metaphor to describe the situation as I saw it. But don't let me stop you from clutching your pearls in horror at my use of artifice.

And I never said that people who smoke should be denied the privilege within the confines of the designated smoking area. That is Disney's call. I was responding to the out sized outrage from some of the posters here that questioning someone's "right" to smoke is somehow discriminating against or being mean to them. Get a grip.

I looked up the Florida Clean Indoor Air Act. Did you know that it illegal to smoke near schools? Why would that be? It is because second hand smoke is dangerous to children. But by all means let's not hurt anyone's feelings who thinks that it is perfectly reasonable to subject children at a theme park to over 7,000 known toxic and carcinogenic substances.

Here are a few facts from the Tobacco Free Florida website:

  • Exposure to SHS can cause serious illnesses and even death.
    • Since 1964, 2.5 million nonsmokers in the U.S. have died because of SHS exposure. 6
    • Secondhand smoke exposure is causally linked to heart disease, stroke, lung cancer, lower respiratory illness, and impaired lung function. 7
    • Each year, among U.S. nonsmokers, exposure to SHS causes an estimated 33,000 premature deaths from heart disease 8 and about 3,400 premature deaths from lung cancer. 9 10
    • Nonsmokers exposed to SHS at home or at work increase their risk of developing heart disease by 25 to 30 percent and their risk of developing lung cancer by 20 to 30 percent. 11
    • Inhaling SHS could be enough to block arteries and trigger a heart attack in someone whose arteries are silently clogged. 12
  • Exposure to SHS is very dangerous for children.
    • Breathing SHS increases a child’s risk of lung problems, ear infections, and severe asthma.
    • Infants exposed to SHS are at a greater risk of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS). 13 SIDS is the sudden, unexplained, unexpected death of an infant in the first year of life. SIDS is the leading cause of death in otherwise healthy infants. 14
    • SHS can trigger an asthma attack. A severe asthma attack can put a child’s life in danger. 15
    • In the first two years of life, children exposed to SHS have more than a 50 percent increased risk of getting bronchitis and pneumonia. 16
- See more at: http://www.tobaccofreeflorida.com/current-issues/florida-clean-indoor-air-act/#sthash.b7wGZnEG.dpuf

So @StarWarsGirl95, tell me how many people have died from exposure to a whiff of too much perfume or how many diseases can be attributed to a whiff of too much perfume? I'll guess it's zero. Exposure to second hand smoke is not the same as perfume and you are doing a disservice to the conversation by continuing to make the comparison.

The pro-smoking people in this thread are deluding themselves if they think that they aren't hurting anyone except themselves. By smoking cigarettes they are introducing dangerous, life threatening substance into the environment that they are sharing with the rest of us, many of them their own loved ones. That is a shame.

And I will continue to shame smokers, especially those brazen selfish a-holes that continue to light up in public.
tl;dr
 

wm49rs

A naughty bit o' crumpet
Premium Member
Just because something is accepted socially doesn't make it right. In her lifetime it was socially acceptable to sexually harass women in the work place and openly discriminate against African-Americans. Does that mean that it should be tolerated today in designated areas?

I questioned her motives given the stated circumstances of her life . I used a metaphor to describe the situation as I saw it. But don't let me stop you from clutching your pearls in horror at my use of artifice.

And I never said that people who smoke should be denied the privilege within the confines of the designated smoking area. That is Disney's call. I was responding to the out sized outrage from some of the posters here that questioning someone's "right" to smoke is somehow discriminating against or being mean to them. Get a grip.

I looked up the Florida Clean Indoor Air Act. Did you know that it illegal to smoke near schools? Why would that be? It is because second hand smoke is dangerous to children. But by all means let's not hurt anyone's feelings who thinks that it is perfectly reasonable to subject children at a theme park to over 7,000 known toxic and carcinogenic substances.

Here are a few facts from the Tobacco Free Florida website:

  • Exposure to SHS can cause serious illnesses and even death.
    • Since 1964, 2.5 million nonsmokers in the U.S. have died because of SHS exposure. 6
    • Secondhand smoke exposure is causally linked to heart disease, stroke, lung cancer, lower respiratory illness, and impaired lung function. 7
    • Each year, among U.S. nonsmokers, exposure to SHS causes an estimated 33,000 premature deaths from heart disease 8 and about 3,400 premature deaths from lung cancer. 9 10
    • Nonsmokers exposed to SHS at home or at work increase their risk of developing heart disease by 25 to 30 percent and their risk of developing lung cancer by 20 to 30 percent. 11
    • Inhaling SHS could be enough to block arteries and trigger a heart attack in someone whose arteries are silently clogged. 12
  • Exposure to SHS is very dangerous for children.
    • Breathing SHS increases a child’s risk of lung problems, ear infections, and severe asthma.
    • Infants exposed to SHS are at a greater risk of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS). 13 SIDS is the sudden, unexplained, unexpected death of an infant in the first year of life. SIDS is the leading cause of death in otherwise healthy infants. 14
    • SHS can trigger an asthma attack. A severe asthma attack can put a child’s life in danger. 15
    • In the first two years of life, children exposed to SHS have more than a 50 percent increased risk of getting bronchitis and pneumonia. 16
- See more at: http://www.tobaccofreeflorida.com/current-issues/florida-clean-indoor-air-act/#sthash.b7wGZnEG.dpuf

So @StarWarsGirl95, tell me how many people have died from exposure to a whiff of too much perfume or how many diseases can be attributed to a whiff of too much perfume? I'll guess it's zero. Exposure to second hand smoke is not the same as perfume and you are doing a disservice to the conversation by continuing to make the comparison.

The pro-smoking people in this thread are deluding themselves if they think that they aren't hurting anyone except themselves. By smoking cigarettes they are introducing dangerous, life threatening substances into the environment that they are sharing with the rest of us, many of them their own loved ones. That is a shame.

And I will continue to shame smokers, especially those brazen selfish a-holes that continue to light up in public.
Oh, the bravery of the interwebs....
 

photomatt

Well-Known Member
I haven't read the last 16 pages but let me guess...

Sound about right?

If you didn't read the entire thread, then why do you think your argument could possibly be accurate?

For the record, you were not right. Here is a more detailed summary.

Opinion 1: Smoking areas should be banned at WDW theme parks or completely enclosed.
Opinion 2: *Logical fallacy* + Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Repeat
 

jakeman

Well-Known Member
If you didn't read the entire thread, then why do you think your argument could possibly be accurate?

For the record, you were not right. Here is a more detailed summary.

Opinion 1: Smoking areas should be banned at WDW theme parks or completely enclosed.
Opinion 2: *Logical fallacy* + Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Repeat
So my plan to hand out cigarettes with every stroller rental is a bad idea?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom