Merged Smoking should be banned universally

[Kid Eager]

All of Australia is a backwater, though the only idyllic part is the single square foot not full of animals so full of poison they can kill you by looking at you.

You learn at a young age not to make eye contact with the animals...

I have redback spiders in the back yard, and black snakes in the front yeard. No big deal, except when one of the cats tries to bring a snake inside, and the snake is still alive...

 

[JFrankA]

Not inside restaurants and other public places. Thankfully, cars have never been allowed inside restaurants and other places. Why can't you be as relaxed about smoking laws as car owners have been about car laws?

Sheesh. Re-read his post:

I hate getting stuck behind a smoking person when walking down the street. Yuck.

That's what I was commenting on. If you're going to dispute my point, at least be honest with the context? Thanks.

 

[Stray Cat]

I guess you could argue all that, if you value money over lives.

It has nothing to do with valuing money over lives, it has everything to do with the reality of the situation in the UK.
Us dedicated smokers help to save the lives of poor non smokers by subsidising the NHS to the tune of approx 3bn pounds per year with our tobacco taxes.

As long as you've factored in all the lost taxes from people not working because of smoking related illnesses.

As smokers have a shorter life expectancy, we also aren't such a drain on pension/health care in our old age and yet we still get to pay in to those schemes while we're young.

 

[Francesca R]

Would you feel better if I said no NET benefits to smoking?

That would be a different statement to the one you made (and it would be subjective in that not everyone would agree, but most would).

But if you want to switch to that statement, they you're implicitly agreeing with others that your original statement, that were was "no benefit whatsoever" was wrong.

 

[23_Tauri]

Your argument is "Don't ban smoking because it's mean?" Seriously?

No, over the past year and a half I've given a multitude of reasons why smokers should be accommodated, allowed their own smoking establishments/ areas, and why smoking outdoors should be tolerated.

The likes of Patricia Hewitt (Labour Minister for Health) gave no thought to the social and economic consequences of the smoking ban when they pushed through the legislation back in 2007. Because she had targets, you see, targets. And those targets accurately reflect the health of the nation, so they must be met at all costs...

That's why she's mean.

citation needed. (Hint: don't cite someone saying 'it's mean')

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/stats/tax_receipts/table1-2.pdf

Tobacco duty 2009-10 - £8,779 million

 

[23_Tauri]

Would you feel better if I said no NET benefits to smoking?

Congratulations, you've done it again...

 

[sgtbaker]

I was going to quit but after all this, you guys successfully convinced me to do my civic duty and continue to smoke.

 

[23_Tauri]

I was going to quit but after all this, you guys successfully convinced me to do my civic duty and continue to smoke.

I hear you. Every time we have a discussion about smoking on JREF my consumption of tobacco doubles for the duration.

Due a mixture of quiet indignation and rebellion at intolerance combined with the sheer stress of it all!

 

[TragicMonkey]

Suit yourself. But it's not your place to decide everybody else must partake in the same pleasure you're willing to do. I drink beer, but I don't feel the need to insist that I drink it anywhere I please.

Oh, but I disapprove of beer, and can prove that it's bad for your health. Therefore I insist it be universally banned. You may not drink it, anywhere, under any circumstances. It is forbidden.

Sound fair? Of course not. I don't smoke, as it happens. But I don't care if other people do, why would I? They don't smoke in my house, or in my car, or at my work, or even at bars now. To be bothered by smoke I'd have to actively seek it out. Therefore banning it seems rather unnecessary.

I have a notion that unless there is a significant botheration occuring, there isn't sufficient justification to forbid something by force of law. Smoking is no longer a significant botheration. I haven't seen anyone smoke indoors in years.

 

[LTC8K6]

But where can we smoke our legalized pot? We are going to legalize pot smoking, right? It's our right to get high in our homes and apartments if we wish, right?

You will surely smell it in the next apartment, and on me if I walk by, and it might even get you a little high in the next apartment, and maybe fail you a drug test, not to mention it's not great for your lungs either, but don't worry about that...let's legalize it.

Screw tobacco, but let's light up...

In fact, let's see what else we can smoke as long as it's not tobacco...how about that salvia stuff that Miley likes?

 

[mysteronyx]

But where can we smoke our legalized pot? We are going to legalize pot smoking, right? It's our right to get high in our homes and apartments if we wish, right?

Eat, drink, or vaporize it.

 

[TragicMonkey]

But where can we smoke our legalized pot? We are going to legalize pot smoking, right? It's our right to get high in our homes and apartments if we wish, right?

You will surely smell it in the next apartment, and on me if I walk by, and it might even get you a little high in the next apartment, and maybe fail you a drug test, not to mention it's not great for your lungs either, but don't worry about that...let's legalize it.

Screw tobacco, but let's light up...

In fact, let's see what else we can smoke as long as it's not tobacco...how about that salvia stuff that Miley likes?

Is the reasoning behind anti-pot laws the same as that behind a ban on smoking? That it's bad for one's health? I always thought anti-drug laws were similar to the old saw about Puritans banning bear-baiting not because it's cruel to the bear but because it gave pleasure to the spectators!

 

[AvalonXQ]

Yet you tolerate smoke coming from a car?

In a traffic jam, getting stuck behind a car spewing a cloud of black exhaust is also pretty disgusting.
But the exhaust of cars moving past me when I'm walking down the road isn't nearly as odious of being stuck walking behind a smoker.
I have, a couple of times, been stuck standing next to or behind someone with strong B.O. Certainly that's just as rude. But the fact that it's possible to be noxious and rude without lighting up, doesn't change the fact that lighting up is noxious and rude to the people who have to walk right behind you.

 

[TragicMonkey]

I have, a couple of times, been stuck standing next to or behind someone with strong B.O. Certainly that's just as rude. But the fact that it's possible to be noxious and rude without lighting up, doesn't change the fact that lighting up is noxious and rude to the people who have to walk right behind you.

In both cases, the solution is the same--find another path to travel, or reduce your speed, or pass them. I don't see why you are able to do those things for body odor and not for smoking. And at least the smoker can be visually identified as a potential annoyance before you get in range, unlike the bodily odorifous.

 

[IDB87]

You will surely smell it in the next apartment, and on me if I walk by, and it might even get you a little high in the next apartment, and maybe fail you a drug test, not to mention it's not great for your lungs either, but don't worry about that...let's legalize it.

How much pot are you smoking that your neighbor gets high?

 

[AvalonXQ]

In both cases, the solution is the same--find another path to travel, or reduce your speed, or pass them. I don't see why you are able to do those things for body odor and not for smoking.

I do those things. But in both cases, the person should not be requiring those around them to do these things. The person with strong B.O. needs to learn hygiene; the smoker should not smoke while walking down a busy street.
I hold in my farts and belches until I'm away from other people, and I expect others to do the same with their noxious vapors as well.

And at least the smoker can be visually identified as a potential annoyance before you get in range, unlike the bodily odorifous.

Not usually in my experience. I'm not in the habit of carefully examining what people are carrying in their hands as I walk with them on the street.
...not until the disgusting smell starts, at least...

 

[TragicMonkey]

I do those things. But in both cases, the person should not be requiring those around them to do these things. The person with strong B.O. needs to learn hygiene; the smoker should not smoke while walking down a busy street.
I hold in my farts and belches until I'm away from other people, and I expect others to do the same with their noxious vapors as well.

And what are your other expectations that you feel other people should meet? Do you have a list of commands you wish enforced, or do you simply rule as the whim strikes you?

 

[23_Tauri]

But where can we smoke our legalized pot? We are going to legalize pot smoking, right? It's our right to get high in our homes and apartments if we wish, right?

You do know of course about the potty (!) situation in the Netherlands where, since the ban on smoking tobacco in public places, it is illegal to put tobacco in your joint when you have a smoke in the coffee shops*? So if you want to smoke when you buy, you gotta smoke it neat.

*coffee shops = weed cafes.

 

[AvalonXQ]

And what are your other expectations that you feel other people should meet?

Just the same ones that most other people also feel that others should meet.
Avoiding putting others in the position of having to deal with your noxious gasses is common courtesy; some smokers have just decided they should be exempt. I guarantee, though, that most of them will be quite put out if you stand in front of them and blow a fart.
And if you don't think that people should give each other this sort of courtesy, you're entitled to your opinion... but I don't think mine makes me some sort of fascist. Most subways don't allow speakers either -- if you want to listen to music, wear headphones. It's basic respect for those around you.

 

[TragicMonkey]

It's basic respect for those around you.

But it's not. This thread is about banning, universally, smoking. Whether it's around anyone else or not. That's not like saying "it's rude to fart in front of someone", that's saying "farting should be forbidden". In all cases, in company or out of it, by yourself in your own house.

Basic respect for those around you requires someone to be around you. I think if smokers are willing to go apart from others to indulge, that is sufficient and no further restrictions on smoking are necessary.