The Nicotine Nazi Handbook

I recently received a link to the latest Nicotine Nazi handbook (PDF).  It provides detailed, step by step plan these spineless goobers can use to coerce Big Brother into to imposing their will on business owners.

I usually try to be witty and pithy in these columns, working in the clever metaphor or silly pun, but my hatred for these scumbags, the most useless and vile of all the parasites who infest our planet, requires a more direct approach. They are more disgusting than two day old hotdog water.  The only way to describe them accurately is with a copious amount of obscenity.

The best way to demonstrate their evil is to quote directly from their own document.

“Advocates new to the smokefree indoor air movement often wonder why they should bother trying to convince local elected officials to enact a strong smokefree indoor air ordinance when they could put the matter on the municipal ballot and let voters decide. The answer to this question is found in the experiences of smokefree advocates around the country, which indicate that ballot initiatives are NOT the preferred method to enact local and state smokefree laws.”

I’ve never been a fan of direct democracy, especially when it comes to voting on people’s rights.  (This is a property rights issue.  If you’ve been conned into believing it’s a health issue, please keep reading to get Smartnized.®)  But they are opposed to it, not for any philosophical reason, but because it’s not 100% successful.  There are several cases of people choosing freedom over nannyism.  That simply can’t be allowed.

They show their true colors in the Dealbreakers section, which outlines why any compromise must be avoided.   The first item is ventilation.  Ventilation units are available that can make the air inside a bar full of smokers cleaner than the air outside, but they continue to lie about this, proving it’s not a health issue.  If it were, they’d be demanding ventilation instead of fighting it.

They work through a long list of compromises, rejecting every one with idiotic rationalizations.  They never mention their actual reason: the compromises are reasonable and allow choice, two things they simply won’t tolerate.

They come down particularly hard on “hardship exemptions,” where venues that can prove the ban has caused significant losses are allowed to go back to treating their smoking customers like human beings.  In realty, hardship exemptions are a joke.  New York’s draconian anti-smoker/anti-business law had a hardship exemption, but the Department of Health simply refused to allow them no matter how badly the venue was hurting.  They handed out less than a half dozen exemptions in the entire state.

NNs constantly harp on the idea of protecting the workers who have chosen to work in smoky environments.  These anencephalic asswipes will never admit that they’ll also protect them from the inconvenience of a steady job and a regular paycheck.

Let’s get back to their freedom abolishing how-to:

Sunset provisions:

A “sunset provision” stipulates that a law will expire on a certain date unless it is renewed, and it carries with it the inference that there is some reason to revisit the law, perhaps in order to ensure that the law is not having an adverse economic impact or other negative effects. Sunset provisions unfairly place the burden on the public health community to prove that the law is working successfully and to advocate for its renewal. Public health measures should be permanent and should not be left vulnerable to political pressures to allow these measures to expire. Advocates should not be forced to fight the same battle over and over again.

So they can apply political pressure, but no one else should be able to.  They can attack businesses year after year after year after year, forcing them to fight back year after year after year, but if they win they want it done for, forever.

Exemptions for membership associations (Private Clubs):

Membership associations (also referred to as “private clubs”) are rarely private at all. The public may be misled to believe they are “private” spaces, but in practice, they are often open to the public at certain times and may have paid employees. If an organization has employees, it should be treated like any other workplace. Smokefree laws should apply to all workplaces, regardless of ownership. The only exception to this rule may be if the membership organization is entirely closed to the public at all times and has no paid or volunteer employees. Keep in mind that membership associations routinely comply with public health and safety laws (building codes, sanitation laws, etc.) so complying with a smokefree law would not be out of the ordinary.

Here they show their complete disdain for the very concept of private property.  I suspect part of the problem is that these mega-douchebags would never be allowed in a private club, (the Whiny Little Bitch Club wasn’t a financial success) so they want everyone to be as miserable as they are.

Exemptions for tobacco retail shops, cigar bars, and hookah bars:

These exemptions, although once common, are no longer the norm. The tobacco industry and other opposition groups continue to assert that these establishments warrant exemption. In reality, these businesses are no different than any other workplace or public place. All employees, no matter where they are employed, deserve the right to breathe clean air at work.

Here’s a free clue, you miserable shitstains: Nobody works in a cigar store unless tobacco is their favorite vegetable.  Tobacconists and their employees pride themselves in their thorough knowledge of cigars and pipe tobacco.  They can tell you more about a Hoyo de Monterrey Double Corona than a wine snot can tell you about a vintage Merlot, and they gain most of that knowledge through (shudder) smoking!

Cigars from a tobacconist cost at least 2-3 times the on-line price.  There are only three reasons to by them there.

One minor reason is to sample a stick or two before deciding if you’d like to buy a box on-line.  The other minor reason is the “mercy sale,” a purchase made just to help the place out.  But the major reason, hell, the real reason, is to sit in the cigar lounge and enjoy a smoke with other cigar lovers.

We’re a very diverse bunch.  Visit any cigar lounge and you’ll meet people from every economic level, with every political viewpoint, every religious affiliation and every personality type, except for one.  You’ll never find a dickless weasel in a cigar lounge.  No wonder the nannies hate us.

Grandfather clauses:

These provisions establish separate rules for restaurants, bars, or other hospitality businesses based on the date that they obtained their operating permit. Grandfathering in establishments that have a permit as of a particular date locks in a two tier system of smoking restrictions. It is unfair to employees and customers of older establishments to deny them the health protections that apply in newer establishments. Again, smokefree laws are only effective and fair when they make all businesses in a given category smokefree. In addition, these provisions may open the door to legal challenges by business proprietors who claim that their businesses are being placed at a competitive disadvantage and point out that the provisions are not based on legitimate public health grounds. (Emphases added.)

Here they dance around the ugly truth – if most businesses are forced to go smoke free, the revenues of the few exempted venues will soar at the expense of those burdened with the nanny law.  Naturally, those affected will complain about it, and in the process expose one of the nicotine nanny’s biggest lies: bans are good for business.

The experiences of countless campaigns show that no matter how small or isolated a community, the tobacco industry, its allies, and other organized opposition groups will go to great lengths to prevent, overturn, or undermine the enactment and implementation of a strong smokefree law.

Too bad this isn’t true.  Although there are rare exceptions, Big Tobacco usually ignores pending bans, much to the consternation of the business owners who could use a little help in their fight for freedom and property rights.

Newer advocates often swear that they have never heard from the opposition. But the industry often operates beneath the radar, since it has essentially no credibility at the community level.

The industry seldom operates at all, although anyone who opposes smoke free laws can expect to be accused of working for the tobacco industry.  On the flip side, the “health” industry is always a hidden partner of the Nicotine Nazis.  The biggest dirtbag in this scam is the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the “charity” arm of Johnson & Johnson.  They funnel money to The American Cancer Society and similar organizations, which pass it on to the NNs, who may not even be aware that they’re dupes of Big Pharma.  It’s textbook astroturfing.

Smokefree laws are one of the most powerful weapons in the public health arsenal. If you pursue them strategically, drawing on the principles and lessons outlined above, you can reap major benefits for your community. In addition to protecting all people from secondhand smoke exposure, smokefree laws also help smokers quit and change norms about the social acceptability of smoking.

And there’s the bottom line folks.  Literally – it’s the bottom line of their document.  These fucktard’s real goal is to force people to quit.  They’re doing it by conning the public into considering smoking, and especially smokers, abnormal.  This is what really drives them.  I’ve been dealing with these wankers for a years, and seen hate that would make a Klansman jealous.  People driven by this much hate won’t ever stop, unless we stop them.

So far, our record sucks.

More Info:

If you’ve been duped into believing that second hand smoke is dangerous, visit The Facts and get Smartenized.

If you think it’s inapprorpate to call then Nazis, find out why it’s the perfect description.


24 Comment(s)

  1. GAWD we love you david………no greater truth was ever spoken.

    harleyrider1978 | Aug 2, 2009 | Reply

  2. Sorry but I totally disagree with the opinion being expressed in this article. Don’t get me wrong though, I am a heavy smoker, cigars especially. I think its better to have non smoking areas in the public, it just makes the community or the store/restaurant better in fact. And yes I have read the part about the ventilation system and how it can make the air cleaner and I agree with that, but you have to look at it from a business man’s point of view. Think to yourself what will be cheaper, to get a ventilation system installed throughout your shop or just put up a sign that says no smoking? I can live with non-smoking zones, if I really want a cigar, I’ll stay home, relax and really take in my Cuban cigar that I got from gocubans.com.

    Kevin Partidge | Aug 4, 2009 | Reply

  3. Kevin:

    So, then, what’s so horrible about having the the business owners, their employees, and their customers make that decision as opposed to the government? If their cost benefit increases by prohibiting smoking they will surely do it, and anyone objecting could take their business someplace more accomodating. A business prohibiting smoking is not what most of us object to. Forcing other businesses to do the same is what we find deplorable and unconstitutional.

    TimS | Aug 4, 2009 | Reply

  4. They started out with 99 million dollars to start all this BS. The unfortunate part of this whole thing is that the average person has no clue that this “war on smokers” even exists. I keep linking their guide book as often as possible on ban comments everywhere I can. I still hear the comment “California, good for them. No way it will happen here”. the average person doen’t have a clue.

    Bob | Aug 7, 2009 | Reply

  5. http://www.rwjf.org/pr/product.jsp?ia=143&id=14912

    Bob | Aug 7, 2009 | Reply

  6. NAZI,your no more a smoker than obama is white…….who would support laws that criminalize their own acts…….what a dweeb

    harleyrider1978 | Aug 9, 2009 | Reply

  7. This is a very comprehensive article. You need to “clean it up” a little so it can be linked to major news media without the censors deleting it.

    Bob | Aug 11, 2009 | Reply

  8. According to me it will be better if we declare No Smoking zone than to install an air cleaning system in a room. It will cost a lot then just to put a sign board that says No Smoking Zone. And also what is the point in making the public feel uncomfortable because of our smoking habit. Those who want to smoke they can stay at their home and enjoy the cigar.

    Martin Hill | Aug 16, 2009 | Reply

  9. freedom,one of those cherished rights we had til the progressives got into power back in 2006……..if it says smoking allowed then its up to you to choose……..if it says non-smoking due to owners preference I have to decide…..thats how america works freedom,freedom to choose…..which you want outlawed…..now be a good nazi and quit pretending to be a smoker and tattle tale on home to your master……

    harleyrider1978 | Aug 21, 2009 | Reply

  10. Maybe a little different take on this: It’s an editorial I wrote for an Arizona newspaper when this was coming up for a vote.

    Smoking is assault.

    Consider this, if you were enjoying a meal in a nice restaurant and I were sitting next to you and sprayed a clear liquid over my food and some drifted onto your table and food, you’d probably want to know what it was. If I replied, “Oh it’s just distilled water with a little arsenic in it, but it hasn’t been proven that those concentrations are really dangerous and it does enhance my enjoyment of my meal.” How long would it take you to call the management, demand a new meal and request that I be removed?

    Yet people smoke in food service establishments and proven carcinogens are distributed by the air handling system onto everyone’s food.

    Ventilation systems that make the “Air cleaner than the outside are lie. They only remove the odor and visible particles. The carcinogens are still there. In fact, just today, I was seated in a “non smoking” area with the smoking area only inches away with no physical barrier between us.

    Now that hard evidence is in about second-hand smoke, it’s time to face the facts about smoking. Smoking around others is assault with a deadly weapon and should be treated as such legally and ethically. Given the evidence we now have about second hand smoke, this would seem to constitute assault with a deadly weapon. In the above instance, should I have defended myself by every legal means?

    In the case of children, it is even worse. When someone smokes around children, isn’t it child abuse? Because it does not kill them immediately is hardly an excuse. If you were to hit them with a club often enough, I think most people would agree that you are causing long-term damage.

    The children are helpless because they are usually unaware of the damage being done to their developing bodies and cannot make the adult stop smoking or often even get away from the danger.

    At some point, we have to decide that “smoker’s rights” stop where our lungs begin. For myself, I will never patronize that establishment again nor any other that permits smoking on site. Perhaps when enough people do this, more food service places will understand that it is bad business and bad health to allow smoking at all.

    In California, where smoking is not permitted in any food establishment, restaurants report an increase in business. This is because non-smokers will nor patronize them. Smokers will come anyway because they still drink and eat.

    Perhaps our experience will be the same?

    James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil | Feb 14, 2010 | Reply

  11. Perhaps youd like a listing of the thousands of venues that have gone out of business after smoking bans went into effect!

    Perhaps youd like to debate this hard evidence about shs/ets as its all fabricated from beginning to end.

    second hand smoke is 94% water vapor and air!

    The Chemistry of Secondary Smoke About 94% of secondary smoke is composed of water vapor and ordinary air with a slight excess of carbon dioxide. Another 3 % is carbon monoxide. The last 3 % contains the rest of the 4,000 or so chemicals supposedly to be found in smoke… but found, obviously, in very small quantities if at all.This is because most of the assumed chemicals have never actually been found in secondhand smoke. (1989 Report of the Surgeon General p. 80). Most of these chemicals can only be found in quantities measured in nanograms, picograms and femtograms. Many cannot even be detected in these amounts: their presence is simply theorized rather than measured. To bring those quantities into a real world perspective, take a saltshaker and shake out a few grains of salt. A single grain of that salt will weigh in the ballpark of 100 million picograms! (Allen Blackman. Chemistry Magazine 10/08/01). – (Excerpted from “Dissecting Antismokers’ Brains” with permission of the author.)

    smoking over the last 60 years smoking has more than halved (UK 1948 66% of the population, 2009 22.5%) but asthma has risen by 300% (again in the UK). So smoking is not the primary cause of asthma and atopy, I assume the doctor’s cars and industrial pollution. The inconvenient truth is that the only studies of children of smokers suggest it is PROTECTIVE in contracting atopy in the first place. The New Zealand study says by a staggering factor of 82%.

    “Participants with atopic parents were also less likely to have positive SPTs between ages 13 and 32 years if they smoked themselves (OR=0.18), and this reduction in risk remained significant after adjusting for confounders.

    The authors write: “We found that children who were exposed to parental smoking and those who took up cigarette smoking themselves had a lower incidence of atopy to a range of common inhaled allergens.
    “These associations were found only in those with a parental history of asthma or hay fever.”

    They conclude: Our findings suggest that preventing allergic sensitization is not one of them.”


    This is a Swedish study.

    “Children of mothers who smoked at least 15 cigarettes a day tended to have lower odds for suffering from allergic rhino-conjunctivitis, allergic asthma, atopic eczema and food allergy, compared to children of mothers who had never smoked (ORs 0.6-0.7)

    CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates an association between current exposure to tobacco smoke and a low risk for atopic disorders in smokers themselves and a similar tendency in their children.”

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubm…pubmed/ 11422156

    harleyrider1978 | Feb 14, 2010 | Reply

  12. You’re drinking the kool-aid, James. SHS may be unpleasant, but the idea that it’s dangerous is bullshit.

    There is no hard evidence on SHS, merely epidemiological studies, financed by anti-smoker organizations, that show tiny RRs that are barely statistically significant, RRs that would be ignored it the subject was anything other than smoking.

    Here, Smartenize Yoursef on the subject: http://www.davehitt.com/facts/index.html

    Hittman | Feb 14, 2010 | Reply

  13. the movie The Ugly Truth is an interesting movie and i really love Katherine Heigl ..

    Glass Coffee Table · | Nov 4, 2010 | Reply

  14. I am not drinking the cool-aid. I am recognizing established facts, not lies paid for by tobacco companies. Face it, smokers of often arrogant, inconsiderate assholes that use words like “freedom” and “smoker’s rights” to excuse their lack of respect for themselves or anyone else.

    If someone is smoking around me, I will ask them politely to stop – once. After that, it will get physical with the cigarette stuffed up their nose, lit end first. Yes, I have done this and more than once. So you morons that smoke, if you want to kill yourselves. step in front of a bus, but you’re not dragging me with you.

    James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil | Nov 4, 2010 | Reply

  15. Yeah, I bet you have, tough guy.

    It must be nice to live in a fantasy world.

    Hittman | Nov 6, 2010 | Reply

  16. Yes, I have and I am not living in a fantasy world you arrogant asshole. Smoke around me and I will show you. Any time you’re feeling lucky big moron.

    James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil | Nov 6, 2010 | Reply

  17. Gots to love them internet balls, especially since every nicotine nazi I’ve ever met in person has been a complete pussy.

    But just in case you want to pay a visit, here’s a picture so you can identify me easily: http://www.davehitt.com/temp/axe.jpg

    Hittman | Nov 9, 2010 | Reply

  18. Tell you what, asshole. You are living in a fantasy world. Because you are bigger than most, all your life you have thought you could intimidate people just with your size. That doesn’t work with me.

    If you’re so tough, tell you what, I’ll buy you a ticket from wherever you are to where I am. Then we’ll see how tough you really are. I’m putting y money and my skin where my mouth is. You can at least put up your skin. Neither your picture or your axe worries me. You’re just another fat-assed bully that needs to be taken down and taken down hard. So let’s get it on. Anytime you are ready, fat boy.

    James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil | Nov 9, 2010 | Reply

  19. You’re the one making the threats, asshole, so you get to carry them out. If you visit Upstate NY drop me a line and I’ll send you my address. Or we can meet at my favorite cigar shop. I’m sure some of my friends there would enjoy a conversation with you.

    Hittman | Nov 10, 2010 | Reply

  20. You have always been the one making threats spoken or unspoken all your life. You remind my of another fat fool from may years ago. Because I’ve always worn glasses, many stupid bullies like you think that means a weak, cowardly person I was challenged to “Take your glasses off, punk. ” I tossed them into the grass a few feet away and said, “OK, now what, fat boy?” Like you, he found an excuse to walk away. I knew you’d find a way to get out of having your ass kicked. You ignorant smokers always do.

    So, come on down and I’ll beat you into a bloody bag of broken bones. I said I’d pay your way. So now what, fat boy? You going to take a couple of days to think up another excuse?”

    James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil | Nov 10, 2010 | Reply

  21. Ok, send me a ticket. My e-mail is on this blog. Make it round trip from Albany, NY. First class, of course. And accommodations while I’m there. Someplace nice, although it doesn’t have to be too fancy.

    E-mail me the confirmation numbers for the tickets and the hotel and I’ll pay you a visit.

    You may be surprised to know I’m not holding my breath.

    Hittman | Nov 10, 2010 | Reply

  22. What a moron you are showing yourself to be. Even some one as arrogantly stupid as you should know that more information than that is needed to book a flight. You have my email because I am registered on this site. So you will have to send the following:

    Your full name, address and phone number. Your passport number. You will also need a visa to visit Brazil, obtainable at the nearest Brazilian consulate. That will cost $100, that you will have to pay yourself, but I will immediately reimburse you for if you are brave enough to show up.

    The light will not be first class , nor will I send you a ticket that you can cash in or exchange for somewhere else. I am not at stupid as you are. The ticket will only be refundable to me and will be an e-ticket that you will only have the number for it. It will also be only one way as your return will be through the arrangements between Brazil and the USA for deporting undesirables (you).

    No accommodations will be needed as your stay will be in the hospital (very nice here) and he jail system ( not quite as nice).

    So email me the necessary information an then prepare to travel. BTW, there will also be no smoking on any of the flights or in any of the airports. The ball is in your court. Bluster all you want, but you are going down hard, fat boy.

    James Smith João Pessoa, Brazil | Nov 10, 2010 | Reply

  23. Dave,just ignore that foolish boy,pretending to be tough.I like USA,because if somebody like that stupid motherfucker comes up to you,you can put bullet in his head no matter if it’s mr.Olympia or Bruce Lee.He is just a stupid Brazilian boy,probably from some of the ghettos over there.

    Angel | Nov 10, 2013 | Reply

  24. With Mr. Smith, you are actually dealing with an intolerant, emotional religious fanatic, not a rational person who is interested is facts, logic and reason. His religion is progressive state-ism which values government control over the individual. Members of that religion usually suffer from feelings of inferiority, guilt, emptiness, narcissism, envy and derive a sadistic delight in forcing others to conform to their will through government bullying. Don’t waste your time with this pathetic, tortured, disillusioned moron.

    Raoul | Nov 12, 2013 | Reply

Post a Comment