|
Hello Codepojectens, it's been a while!
So here are two conflicting views on smoking:
1) If you want to smoke, that's your business and not for others to tell you whether you can or can't (as long as you do it such that if affects no-one else), and
2) Smoking should be banned, for the good of society and also for the good of the poor victims of an addictive drug.
As I get older, I'm able to think back to freer times when people really were genuinely freer to do what they want, like the teachers who used to smoke in my classrooms. They were also free to use physical violence in the case of bad behaviour. Happy days! I suppose we have 'progressed' more from 1) above to 2) or are at least heading there.
The problem is, to my mind, these mutually exclusive ideas about smoking are both valid and worth defending to the hilt, which also means I don't have a valid standpoint on the subject - the logic is broken. It's fairly rare for me to be not able to reach some conclusion, even if the conclusion is flawed or just wholly incorrect.
Tricky, and for context I've dithered in and out of nicotine addiction (mostly in) for the last 25 years. Vape time.
Regards,
Rob Philpott.
|
|
|
|
|
I largely agree - personal responsibility seems to be a thing of the past
In a closed society where everybody's guilty, the only crime is getting caught. In a world of thieves, the only final sin is stupidity. - Hunter S Thompson - RIP
|
|
|
|
|
Probably because most people ignore the "responsibility" part and focus on "personal".
Take mobile phone use when driving, or DUI: People who do it don't think about the effect on others just their own wants and needs. Coercion is required because personal responsibility isn't even considered.
Smoking is the same: my parents both smoked, and sometimes it was difficult to see out the window on the other side of the car due to the smoke level. To protect the children it's now illegal in many places - but you still see people doing it!
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Sadly I think society has entered a period where rights trump responsibility. I think 'selfie sticks' sum it up, I was quite shocked the first time I saw one, what new level of vanity was this? But culture adopted this sort of thing willingly. Yes it's completely normal to take endless pictures of yourself to post on the internet these days. It's very odd and inward looking when you think about it.
Man, I'm really on a 'middle-aged man depressed with the state of the world' roll today!
Regards,
Rob Philpott.
|
|
|
|
|
Don't worry about it, I make 2 of us !!!
I hate the way things are today.
|
|
|
|
|
Rob Philpott wrote: ... as long as you do it such that if affects no-one else ...
... the teachers who used to smoke in my classrooms ...
Your example doesn't exactly fit into #1 though. 
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
That's true, but back then it was just normal and usual. I guess people have become more sensitive to it (psychologically) over the years. Incidentally on a similar note, I don't recall peanut allergies existing as a kid. But these days peanuts seem to be contraband in school. And there weren't seatbelts in the back of cars or bouncy tarmac under climbing frames. What a strange wonderful world it was - and that's not because I dismiss all these advances in safety and wellbeing, but simply because people didn't worry about them then.
Regards,
Rob Philpott.
|
|
|
|
|
Rob Philpott wrote: because people didn't worry about them then.
Or more likely because they were not aware of them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
When I was a kid, back in the day (I'm 82 now) we called them "camcer sticks". Yea, people were aware of the hazards back then. We also knew they "stunted your growth 
|
|
|
|
|
Objectively, the tobacco industry paid professional to bury the long term effects of smoking and 2nd hand smoke. It is only in recent times that the truth that smoking is carcinogenic is taken seriously.
Smoking would be banned today if it was not for the revenue that it still generates for Governments.
As an asthmatic growing up in a home of 2 smokers, I can tell you that the smoke triggered me many times. I had no rights. Propaganda back then convinced them it was not the smoke. It wasn't until the truth started coming out, they realized the impact that it was having on their children. They then moved to smoking outside, then stop smoking.
Whilst you are worried about your rights as a smoker, you're being ignorant of the impact on those around you. Why should we have no rights and be forced to inhale your by-product of smoking?
Graeme
"I fear not the man who has practiced ten thousand kicks one time, but I fear the man that has practiced one kick ten thousand times!" - Bruce Lee
|
|
|
|
|
Playing devils advocate, while I agree with what you said, start extending that thought, and things may get out of hand fairly quickly.
Quote: Whilst you are worried about your rights as a [insert your objectionable behavior here] , you're being ignorant of the impact on those around you.
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
jeron1 wrote: Playing devils advocate, while I agree with what you said, start extending that thought, and things may get out of hand fairly quickly.
Without consideration for others, it is exactly that.
Graeme
"I fear not the man who has practiced ten thousand kicks one time, but I fear the man that has practiced one kick ten thousand times!" - Bruce Lee
|
|
|
|
|
I re-read your comment about being the "devils advocate" and it's ignorant of addressing the medically proven negative impact that second hand smoke has on bystanders.
Going back to the mid-nineties, when smoking inside the workplace was prohibited, it was after hours and I could smell cigarette some. It turned out it was a guy over 100 metres away on the other side of the building. It turned out he felt it was his right to smoke at his desk because it was after hours, so the rules did not apply. The issue was his desk was directly under the air conditioning intake and it was sucking up the smoke and distributing it to both floors of the building.
I approached him and explained what was happening. He told me it was his right. I saw his briefcase on the floor. I said to him, if he feels it is okay to flagrantly smoke indoors against policy, then I am free to whip it out and fill his briefcase. He put it out and HR was informed the next day. They had to spend money professionally cleaning the air conditioning system.
Do smokers really think that they have rights beyond those of others who choose not to?
We have public toilets. I think that we should have public smoke boxes where all the smokers can go and puff to their heart's desire, sharing second hand smoke with each other. The building should prevent smoke from leaking into the public space. They get what they want, and we're free to breathe fresh air. Governments suckle on the tax revenue that cigarette sales generate, so they have plenty of money to invest in this type of scheme.
Graeme
"I fear not the man who has practiced ten thousand kicks one time, but I fear the man that has practiced one kick ten thousand times!" - Bruce Lee
modified 14-Aug-23 12:10pm.
|
|
|
|
|
The devil is aware of the studies  . I was simply coming at it from the standpoint of, other behaviors (drinking, gambling, gun ownership (U.S.) :ducks:,...) where studies have shown negative impacts on those around these behaviors.
Graeme_Grant wrote: Do smokers really think that they have rights beyond those of others who choose not to?
Trying to justify their addictive actions?, and no it's not right.
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
I saw a smoker's window box in an airport once. I think it was Dallas-Fort Worth. It was really weird looking at the smokers through the glass in their haze.
|
|
|
|
|
Graeme - this is my story TO THE LETTER as well! My dad was one of those "you are just a complainer" guys who towed the smoking line into his late 70's, even after he stopped smoking. Then one day he realized, after DECADES or reading news on the harmful effects of 2nd hand smoke, that he had three children, none of whom ever smoked, but who all had asthma or lung issues. He said "I can't believe we used to smoke in the car with you kids, with the windows rolled up."
The cigarette industry committed fraud on a massive scale and what they paid was not enough. But that said, if you want to smoke go ahead, just don't do it where it poisons anyone else.
|
|
|
|
|
Bah.
It's tyranny of the majority with little to do with actual harm when it comes to 2nd hand smoke.
They had the flare up over gas stoves recently. I always knew the 2nd hand thing was a ruse and people twisting fact just to get a toehold for screwing over the rights of others in the name of their convenience and comfort.
The gas stove stuff just proves it. Oh the people like gas stoves? And they'll fight for them? Nevermind then.
Granted, kids have little authority/control over where they are. But it's not as though smokers even make rank on the list of bad parents they have to contend with.
Ignoring the impact on those around you? Go elsewhere then. It's not any different than any number of things people may be doing to annoy/offend. Painting it otherwise was always bullshit sham.
|
|
|
|
|
jochance wrote: Ignoring the impact on those around you? Go elsewhere then. It's not any different than any number of things people may be doing to annoy/offend. Painting it otherwise was always bullshit sham.
A very ignorant and selfish point of view.
Graeme
"I fear not the man who has practiced ten thousand kicks one time, but I fear the man that has practiced one kick ten thousand times!" - Bruce Lee
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah it's not at all myopic stupidity to conflate desire with fact and claim numbers making your case. There's no subjective valuation of numbers and might making right to be considered. That's just ignorant.
What can go wrong twisting science and populism into a brand of political rule? I wonder if there are any historical examples?
I might know, but it's already horribly selfish to be insisting that people should be able to do what they want and if others do not like it they can go be around other people. It's not like entire countries basically operate on such a premise of different strokes for different folks, that'd be 50 shades of dumb.
|
|
|
|
|
Smoking is a very strong addiction. Stronger than alcohol and in the same league with hard drugs. So, any measures to prevent young people from getting into this habit are justified. With that said the stigma against smokers is absurd. Smokers should have every amenity to get along with their habit. For example, those smoking boots in the European airports are like gas chambers. Whoever invented and approved these should be ashamed.
Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
|
|
|
|
|
I disagree.
It's easy to quick smoking.
I did it thousands of times
"Mistakes are prevented by Experience. Experience is gained by making mistakes."
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Twain? 
Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.
|
|
|
|
|
Single Step Debugger wrote: For example, those smoking boots in the European airports are like gas chambers. Whoever invented and approved these should be ashamed.
Why? Smokers get a place to smoke, they have an extra ventilation pipe that gets out of the building without mixing with the rest. Non smokers are "safe" as long as one of those getting out of the room, does not sit just next to you.
And I have been hard smoker and used the rooms a lot of times.
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Smoking is disgusting (both tobacco and the herb). Secondhand smoke is real problem. You can get a secondhand high too from the herb. If you want to destroy yourself, that's fine. People do it all the time with their diet. It's your right. But, your right to do that stops at my right to breathe clean air. It's not victimless. I have to breathe your crap if I'm around you.
Back in the day, before the herb was made easier to obtain, you could have a neighbor that smoked cigarettes and they'd be stinky, but you woudln't get a buzz... unless maybe you went right up to them and barely with even that. These days, stoners who lit up right before going grocery shopping, their stank will give you a buzz just from standing next to them. This should not be acceptable (and no intelligent person would buy the medicinal argument). What if I have kids standing next to that stoner in line? Am I not supposed to care about their health?
The problem is you cannot legislate decency or morality. These people are filthy but try making "don't be a nasty arse" a law. It's absolutely abhorrent that humanity is as such a stupid state right now that people cannot figure out how to at least keep their vice to themselves and care little enough of others to do something about it (generally speaking here btw... not targeted at you directly).
Anyone who thinks that weed stank is acceptable needs to live in Vegas for a year... not as a tourist. It'll fix you, assuming you like to think and are a decent person.
Jeremy Falcon
modified 14-Aug-23 9:53am.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
