Anti-Smoking Laws

[Ree]

Ya know what?

It's sad that laws and regulations against smoking are even necessary.

"The freedom to swing my fist ends at my neighbour's face."

Sure, you have a right t enjoy your cigarette.
They're your lungs and if you don't mind filing them with crap, that's your business. However, second hand smoke has been proved to be harmful, whether anyone wants to admit or acknowledge those studies and case histories. Just ask Heather Crowe.

I am a non smoker. At one time, before they had to enforce a regulation against smoking by anyone within a foster home, I was living with 5 smokers. I spent most of my time in my room because I couldn't breathe when everyone sat around puffing on their cigarettes.

I also worked for over 20 years with smokers who were allowed to light up in the breakroom. There were times when the air in the breakroom was so thick you could cut it, even with the vent running full force. (There was one place I worked where they didn't even have a vent.)

All these years I sat, silently inhaling those toxic chemicals coming from the unfiltered end of a cigarette.
My answer to, "Do you mind if I smoke," (if they even bothered to ask), was always, "It's a free country."

I always felt, just because I chose not to smoke, that did not give me the right to force others not to smoke around me. I could have simply gone somewhere else to sit, but why should I have to be the one to go find a smoke free place to eat my lunch or drink my coffee?

I now have a chronic cough that will not go away. It has actually become so chronic that I don't even notice it any more. My sister does, though. Every time we're together, she notices my cough, and she keeps bugging me to go for a chest X-ray, but I am just a little afraid to do that. I always brush it off by saying that it's just me getting over a cold, or that she only sees me when I have a cold. She wants to know who has a cold that lasts 4 years or more.

So, you can dress it up all you want and claim laws and regulations on smoking are impeding your rights as a citizen and you can insult people who point out that you are putting everyone around you at harm all for the sake of your own pleasure and enjoyment. (Personally, I prefer to think of it as putting others at risk to feed your own addiction, but whatever.)

You can make ridiculous claims that people can just hold their breath when they pass by you smoking outside a building.

You can even imply that you aren't deliberately harming other people, but the fact is, the world has known for more than 40 years that smoking kills. I am 48 years old and I remember when I was in grade school, watching an old black and white TV documentary about people who got cancer from smoking.

It has been at least 20 years since the studies were done on the effects of second hand smoke. Obviously, the studies were done because people were dying and there was a lot of questioning whether second hand smoke was connected to those deaths.

To stand back and say you aren't deliberately hurting anyone is ignorant and stupid. There is no excuse for not knowing that your activity is hurting others.

Yeah, it sucks that we have the government meddling in our private lives, enacting laws that impede our freedom, but sometimes, when people are too stubborn and pigheaded to realize they are hurting others, the government does have to step in and force them to smarten the hell up.

[rahmota]

ree: I think it more depends on the individual person's genetics about the cough. Yourcough could be from a variety of sources and instantly jumping to the conclusion that it was caused by second hand smoke without a doctor's exam is a rather presumptious one.
I am 35sey (Standard Earth Years) old and have been around smokers since I was born. My dad smoked, a couple of my friends have smoked since they where 12, my uncles smoked and while I never smoked tobacco I have smoked an herbal substance before on occasion..... anyhow according to my last physical my lung capacity is above nominal for the average human. Even though I have been exposed to smoke, agrichems, dust, histoplasmosis (A fungal infection brought about by exposure to bird droppings) , had pneumonia when i was 18 months old and a variety of other environmental factors my lungs are still quite halthy and functional.

machinest:

In reply to Rahmota's assertion that smokers are purposely harming others it is not so much a case of deliberate purpose as one of neglecting to ensure that their activities do the least amount of harm to others.

thats not my restarded half arsed assertion but colchecks.

Designfox: And so what we do now is swing the pendulum back the other way to shit all over the smokers and treat them like second class citizens. Oh thats fair.

Anyhow as for the rest of this i stll believe in personal responsibility. ie I am responsible for my life and not yours you are responsible for your life and not mine. As long as we stay out of each other's face live will be a lot better and more peaceful indeed. There is no need for the government to come in and hold your hand if you're not adult to deal with the problems in your life and you cannot and should not even attempt to legislate consideration. And I have picked up today a pouch of cavendish cherry blend pipe tobacco in honor of this thread. Already smoked a pipe full of it and did not cough once or have a single fit. Depending on how things go I may go down to maysville and pick up some organic burley tobacco cigars from the warehouse this weekend.

[Sylvia727]

Anyhow as for the rest of this i stll believe in personal responsibility. ie I am responsible for my life and not yours you are responsible for your life and not mine.

But wouldn't you agree that you are responsible for your actions in not hurting other people? And if so, aren't you responsible for taking reasonable precautions to keep potentially harmful substances away from other people?

[Ree]

ree: I think it more depends on the individual person's genetics about the cough. Yourcough could be from a variety of sources and instantly jumping to the conclusion that it was caused by second hand smoke without a doctor's exam is a rather presumptious one.
I am 35sey (Standard Earth Years) old and have been around smokers since I was born. My dad smoked, a couple of my friends have smoked since they where 12, my uncles smoked and while I never smoked tobacco I have smoked an herbal substance before on occasion..... anyhow according to my last physical my lung capacity is above nominal for the average human. Even though I have been exposed to smoke, agrichems, dust, histoplasmosis (A fungal infection brought about by exposure to bird droppings) , had pneumonia when i was 18 months old and a variety of other environmental factors my lungs are still quite halthy and functional.

You have to be the most stubborn and deliberately obtuse individual I have ever encountered. Bully for you that you have such a wonderful lung capacity after all that exposure to toxins and crap, but just because you were so damned lucky does not mean that the rest of the world is not getting sick from exposure to second hand smoke. One lab rat as an exception to the rule does not definitive proof make.

The statistics are out there, and they are more and more holding up the side of the argument that second hand smoke is killing people.

The fact that I have not seen a doctor for a chest X-Ray does not mean that I have not consulted a doctor at all. I have seen a doctor for other things, and on listening to my chest, they have asked me if I smoke and when I tell them I live with a smoker, they just nod their heads.

When I was pregnant over 21 years ago, a doctor actually told me to tell my husband to "butt out".

I just haven't mentioned the chronic cough to my doctor because it's easier to stay in denial than actually find out something I don't want to know.
Yeah, it could be other environmental factors, but it could also be the smoking and it's rather irresponsible to deny that possibility at all.

To say that each person is responsible for their own well being is just an excuse to allow one's self to go through life in a constant state of self absorption and a lack of consideration for others.

Why should the rest of the world have to step aside for you, lest they be harmed by your choices? As Sylvia is saying, you have a personal responsibility to exercise precautions to prevent harm from coming to others because of your choices.

It's as if you are saying that you have all the freedom in the world to tear down the middle of the highway at top speed if you want to do that, because if you get into an accident, then that's your own poor choice, yet you are ignoring the fact that there may be other cars on the road who get taken down in the process.

[MadMike]

As long as we stay out of each other's face live will be a lot better and more peaceful indeed.

Yes, the smokers need to stay out of the faces of the nonsmokers.

This might piss a few people off, but I get a little sick of smokers who whine about their "rights" being taken away. If the government was trying to tell you you can't smoke in your own home, that's one thing, and I'd be complaining about that too. But just because something is legal does not mean it's OK to do in public. It's perfectly legal for me to have sex with my wife, but if I tried to do it in public, we'd both get arrested.

As several other people have pointed out, having smoking and non-smoking sections simply don't work. It's like trying to have a pissing and non-pissing section in a swimming pool.

[FashionLad]

Without reading much of the posts at all, considering most of them are probably what people like or don't like.

I have to say that since Minnesota has gone to non-smoking in bars, I find bars to be a lot more enjoyable. Funny thing is, my smoking friends have actually said that they do enjoy the fact that they don't go home smelling like an ashtray. I don't think it's too much to ask of the smokers to go outside and smoke, I really don't. Everyone should be able to enjoy the bar, not just smokers.

[Lace Neil Singer]

and yeah I didlike peopel who just throw their butts anywhere but then I also hate folks who litter in general.

Just throwing this in here; chewing gum wads is WAY worse than fag ends. A town near where I live has flipping gum parks where people are supposed to stick their gum, just to stop people chucking it on the floor and sticking it all over the place. These people are way more inconsiderate than smokers; and a lot of them are either nonsmokers or people who have given up. Fag ends will eventually disintegrate but chewing gum is there forever.

Also, something to think on; if cigarettes were really as bad as some of the fanatically nonsmokes say, then why aren't the government banning them? Answer; cuz of all the money they make on taxes. If they were banned, taxes will skyrocket. Hell, cigarette tax is probably the only thing keeping the NHS going; the smokers not only pay for their own health problems but for the health problems of everyone else, including all the obese people causing just as much or even more damage to the NHS coffers.

[Lace Neil Singer]

Not weighing in on either side here, but I feel that one thing should be made clear:

Nicotine is the most addictive substance known to man. It addicts almost 98% of all users within the first year. Compare this to heroin (second on the list) at 87%.

Nicotine withdrawal symptoms are worse than that of cocaine.

Carry on.

I'm not addicted to cigarettes. Never have been, never will be. I'm not in denial; it's just a fact. I can go for days, weeks, months without having a smoke; I just enjoy smoking. You might as well say that everyone who has a drink is addicted, or everyone who enjoys their coffee is a caffine addict. Or everyone who enjoys having sex or gambling is addicted.

There are people who have addictive personalities; there are people who don't. End of.

Btw, I'm not desputing that there are people hooked on cigarettes. But it's silly to claim that every smoker is.

[Boozy]

Btw, I'm not desputing that there are people hooked on cigarettes. But it's silly to claim that every smoker is.

True. Which is why I claimed no such thing.

The statistic is that nicotine will addict 98% of regular smokers (one per day or more) within one year.

There are people who have addictive personalities; there are people who don't. End of.

There are no addictive "personalities" when it comes to chemical addiction. Its physiological.

[Lace Neil Singer]

Stop splitting hairs. I actually know a lot of people who smoke out of choice, not cuz of addiction. And as someone said earlier in the topic, you can find statistics to say anything you like. It doesn't mean it's true.

For the record, about the only thing that really bugs me about the smoking ban is that now if someone comes into the pub after a dodgy curry, the whole pub knows about it. -.- In the days of smoking, that overpowered every other smell. I just wonder what the next thing will be. 3 drinks maximum? Cameras in the toilets to stop people chatting to Charlie? A licience to drink alcohol? The mind boggles. O.o

[Boozy]

I actually know a lot of people who smoke out of choice, not cuz of addiction.

I know a lot of addicts who say that. Then they try to quit and realize they're addicted.

I do believe you when you say you're not addicted. Anyone who can go more than a few days without a smoke without going nuts is clearly not addicted.

[Difdi]

I have an extremely strong aversion to tobacco smoke. It stems from a combination of strong dislike for how it smells, asthma attacks caused by exposure to it, and an allergy on top of the asthma (makes my skin itch and my eyes burn). On the other hand, I am not particularly affected by a number of caustic industrial chemicals; I certainly wouldn't eat any, but I have an abnormally mild reaction to some things that cause reactions much like pepper spray in most people. And I actually find raw skunk musk to smell better than many brands of perfume. It's an odd personal quirk, but it's true.

Now, suppose I were to carry around a jar of chemicals and skunk musk with me. The effects on most people would mimic my reaction to tobacco smoke. Some people would be mostly unaffected. Some would react like one of my cousins does to tobacco, and literally vomit their guts out at the first whiff. How many smokers would support my right to carry my peculiar brand of odorant around with me?

I'd have just as much right to do so (it smells pleasant to me) as a smoker would to smoke in public. But how many people would object to me carrying what amounts, from their perspective, to a highly toxic and extremely foul smelling compound into their immediate presence? How many restaurant meals could I ruin by opening a jar of the stuff? And how many smokers, who simply light up in a public place, have the honesty to admit what they're doing to people like me?

[ebonyknight]

Now, suppose I were to carry around a jar of chemicals and skunk musk with me. The effects on most people would mimic my reaction to tobacco smoke. Some people would be mostly unaffected. Some would react like one of my cousins does to tobacco, and literally vomit their guts out at the first whiff. How many smokers would support my right to carry my peculiar brand of odorant around with me?

I'd have just as much right to do so (it smells pleasant to me) as a smoker would to smoke in public. But how many people would object to me carrying what amounts, from their perspective, to a highly toxic and extremely foul smelling compound into their immediate presence? How many restaurant meals could I ruin by opening a jar of the stuff? And how many smokers, who simply light up in a public place, have the honesty to admit what they're doing to people like me?

I'll punch that equine corpse once more.

I'm not smoker anymore, but I would allow you to. Why, because I have the freedom to leave your presence. If you are making me sick, am I supposed to be stupid enough to stand there and continue to get sick? Do I exercise a freedom, or remove one from someone else? Cut and dry, to me.

Unfortunately there are plenty of people who don't bathe and could burn your nose hair with their BO. Some people actually gag, but I don't see any kind of ban, on BO.

At a restaurant? As I said before, as far as I am concerned that would be up to the restaurant. If you owned the restaurant and you liked to have that smell, it would be your right (as far as I am concerned), but I am sure you wouldn't be in business long. Customers would vote with their feet.

[rahmota]

Difdi: I'll agree with ebony in this. You can carry it around all you want. Unless you are physically restraining me and preventing me from leaving or otherwise physically forcing me to remain then you are not harming me and I can exercise my capacity as a consenting human adult to choose to remain where I am or to remove myself from the area. I do not have the right or permission to stop you from having a bottle of skunk juice open or not on your person. Its your life and your decision. I do not control you and should not attempt to control you.

Ree:

You have to be the most stubborn and deliberately obtuse individual I have ever encountered.

Aww gee thanks. Its always nice to have people recognize ones better qualities.

The statistics are out there, and they are more and more holding up the side of the argument that second hand smoke is killing people.

Maybe, maybe not. A lot of thigns are killing people. I'd rather live in a world where I can enjoy myself than live in nerf world where the government or other self rightious groups of nannies tell me how to live and remove all risks. Utopia may be safe and pleasant but it would be incredibly boring.

To say that each person is responsible for their own well being is just an excuse to allow one's self to go through life in a constant state of self absorption and a lack of consideration for others.

No saying each person is responsible for their own life is to say that each person is a responsible adult. Just because you are responsible for your own life does not make you self absorbed or have a lack of consideration for others. But like I said those two thigns are beyond the scope, realm, or area of control of legislation.

As Sylvia is saying, you have a personal responsibility to exercise precautions to prevent harm from coming to others because of your choices.

yes and you have the personal responsibility to not interefere in someone doing their actions that are not forcing you to be there. Someone sittign in the corner smoking is not forcing someone to be there.

It's as if you are saying that you have all the freedom in the world to tear down the middle of the highway at top speed if you want to do that, because if you get into an accident, then that's your own poor choice, yet you are ignoring the fact that there may be other cars on the road who get taken down in the process.

annng. Wrong! Going down the highway is an example of real, actual harm to other people. A car doing 90 is difficult to see or react to. It is not like a stationary smoker. Also goign down the highway you dont Know if there is a drunk driver or a speeder or road rager in the next car. you know certain places are goign to have smokers around. Therefore the burden to protect yourself is on you not the others. Which thats true for most of life. It is your responsibility to protect yourself not the governments and not someone else. Its yourlife if you cant be obliged to protect it by taking your own responsibility for yourself then noone else should.

One always has the right to do harm to oneself no matter what. So if the road was closed and there was no other traffic then yeah drive as fast or on whatever side you choose to do so. If its a public road then takign care to not harm others is exercising personal responsibility.

Smoking on the other hand is potential harm only. It is not actual harm to anyone involved, except maybe the smoker. You are not being forced to be there and can leave at anytime you want.


Anyhow since this "discssion" seems to be a rather good example of the general intolerance and hatred prevalent in america today I'm not going to bother coming back to this thread.

[Ree]

Anyhow since this "discssion" seems to be a rather good example of the general intolerance and hatred prevalent in america today I'm not going to bother coming back to this thread.

An excellent idea, I think, since it seems to be one that has caused a lot of animosity and is obviously upsetting you.