Welcome to the Lounge

jochance15-Aug-23 4:39

jochance

15-Aug-23 4:39

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.

Graeme_Grant15-Aug-23 5:02

Graeme_Grant

15-Aug-23 5:02

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

jochance16-Aug-23 4:41

jochance

16-Aug-23 4:41

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.

Single Step Debugger14-Aug-23 2:56

14-Aug-23 2:56

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.

Matthew Dennis14-Aug-23 5:33

Matthew Dennis

14-Aug-23 5:33

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."

Single Step Debugger14-Aug-23 5:44

14-Aug-23 5:44

Mark Twain? Smile | :)

Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.

Nelek14-Aug-23 11:17

14-Aug-23 11:17

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.

Jeremy Falcon14-Aug-23 2:59

14-Aug-23 2:59

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.

Rob Philpott14-Aug-23 5:57

Rob Philpott

14-Aug-23 5:57

Do you find yourself stood next door to people smoking 'herb' often then? That's a very rare occurrence in my life, and I don't think I've heard of getting second-hand smoke buzzes. Not disputing it mind, just very eye opening.

Regards,
Rob Philpott.

Jeremy Falcon14-Aug-23 6:22

14-Aug-23 6:22

Yeah... It's probably location dependent. If it's rare for you, consider yourself lucky. Not really sure how much I can say in the lounge, but in some places in the US it's become very easy to acquire said herb. So easy in fact, I never thought once about moving to a different country until now.

Jeremy Falcon

Nelek14-Aug-23 11:21

14-Aug-23 11:21

Jeremy Falcon wrote:
So easy in fact, I never thought once about moving to a different country until now.

Don't move to Spain then...

M.D.V.

Jeremy Falcon14-Aug-23 11:29

14-Aug-23 11:29

Good to know. OMG | :OMG:

Jeremy Falcon

Nelek14-Aug-23 12:22

14-Aug-23 12:22

I don't know how the legal status is over there right now, but I can tell you that for the last 20 years people have been smoking cannabis and weed on the street. When I go visit my father, you can smell the neighbour's appartment from the elevator (and it is like 25 to 30 m away).
I have started to drink coffee in the inside of the bars, because outside you get the sun in the face, but if you are not the only person outside, the chances are 70% that they will smoke cigarretes and 50% that it will be a joint

M.D.V.

Jeremy Falcon15-Aug-23 2:13

15-Aug-23 2:13

Sorry to hear that man. That was pretty much Vegas... and it was everywhere. I'm in a "nice" part of Texas now and I just went to a "nice" grocery store this morning. Walked right by people camping in their car overnight in the parking lot blazing it up and caught a buzz. That just happened. Vegas was worse, but still... it's too much.

I dunno about you, but it's making me lose my faith in humanity. Not that there are losers that live on that crap, but the fact nothing is being done about the losers caring little of others.

Jeremy Falcon

Nelek15-Aug-23 8:55

15-Aug-23 8:55

Jeremy Falcon wrote:
I dunno about you, but it's making me lose my faith in humanity.

I lost it a while ago Sigh | :sigh:

M.D.V.

Alister Morton14-Aug-23 23:22

Alister Morton

14-Aug-23 23:22

Or Portugal, IIRC. And as for Amsterdam in The Netherlands...

Jeremy Falcon15-Aug-23 2:14

15-Aug-23 2:14

Good to know. Thanks.

Jeremy Falcon

Nelek15-Aug-23 8:57

15-Aug-23 8:57

My impression of Amsterdam was way cleaner than places I have seen in other countries. Yeah, you might buy in many places, but I didn't see /smell people smoking in public. When I was there as a young adult the hotel people told us to be careful on the street.

That's the good thing of having it regulated, you are allowed what you are allowed, and the rest can be punished even harder.

M.D.V.

Alister Morton15-Aug-23 21:15

Alister Morton

15-Aug-23 21:15

Yes, my impression too on the occasions I've been.

Nelek14-Aug-23 11:21

14-Aug-23 11:21

Jeremy Falcon wrote:
Anyone who thinks that weed stank is acceptable needs to live in Vegas for a year... not as a tourist.

No need... I just need to go home to have the same.

Jeremy Falcon wrote:
It's absolutely abhorrent that humanity is as such a stupid state right now

right now? sadly it has already been like this for some years.

M.D.V.

Jeremy Falcon14-Aug-23 11:30

14-Aug-23 11:30

Nelek wrote:
right now? sadly it has already been like this for some years.

Touché

Jeremy Falcon

trønderen14-Aug-23 3:21

trønderen

14-Aug-23 3:21

(For the general question of what to forbid, not smoking in particular Smile | :)

One dilemma if you select alternative 2: Who is to decide what is "for the good of society"? We have lots of laws that forbids actions or whatever simply because "You ain't supposed to!" Not because there is any obvious logical reason for it, beyond "You ain't supposed to!".

Most of this has to do with socalled "morals", which usually translates to either the human body or religion. Lots of the regulations are not laws in the legal sense, but "moral laws".

There are lots of words I can't speak, if I am to follow the commandments of church people, even if I do not belong to their faith. There are parts of my body I must keep hidden, according to some people even for my own children. There are things I can see, but I can't preserve a memory of what I saw, using a camera. Maybe not even using a sketchpad and a pencil; that depends. Lots of things I am not allowed to seem, even if I am allowed to know that it exists.

Those defending such laws claim that society would suffer if people did the forbidden thing; that's why it is forbidden. The problem with moral laws is that other cultures without such laws display none of the claimed suffering. In Thailand, if you display your foot soles to the king, you might be thrown in jail for years. That makes no sense to us: What is wrong by letting the king see your foot soles? Here, we rather throw you in jail if you display your "private parts"; that is just so terrible - think of the children! Take our attitudes to non-Westernized cultures where nude bodies can be seen anywhere. Or even go to a nudist resort searching for the terrible suffering of the kids (and adults) there!

Age limits for various knowledge varies greatly around the world. What can be told by school books varies greatly around the world. What is allowed to exist in images/movies, art, literature and so on varies a lot. If I were to move to the land of the free, USA, I would have to leave a couple dozen books behind, as they would be forbidden (depending on the state). I would have to teach my kids to build serious emotional conflicts if they see my body, or I see theirs. In some states I would tell then to keep secret that we know that two people of the same sex truly and honestly love each other. And so on.

Also, there is a great variation from one country/state to another regarding who is allowed to enjoy different kinds of food, drink and other pleasures (often, but not always, determined by age). Again: Documenting consistent harmful effects in countries allowing it, which are consistently absent in countries forbidding it may be difficult or impossible.

For smoking in particular: Sorry, Rob, I am of the sensitive kind that can have trouble breathing if a heavy smoker enters the bus, especially if he sits down on a seat next to me or in front of me, even if he hasn't been smoking for half an hour. If a smoker visits me, as soon as he leaves, I open all windows wide to get that bad air out. (Obviously, I do not permit any indoor smoking in my home.) So I am very much in favor of the current ban on smoking in indoors public places, and I would support a ban even in public outdoors places.

It does affect me. Actually, it affects me even if you only smoke in your own home and your friends' home, if you sit down next to me on the bus. But at least for now I am willing to tolerate that (to allow you to feed that creeping lung cancer of yours Smile | :)

).

I do not consider a ban on public smoking a "moral" law, but a way to protect myself (and others) from harm. I am much more concerned about those "moral" laws where noone whatsoever is harmed; the only harm is breaking that "You ain't supposed to!"

Single Step Debugger14-Aug-23 3:43

14-Aug-23 3:43

trønderen wrote:
If I were to move to the land of the free, USA, I would have to leave a couple dozen books behind, as they would be forbidden (depending on the state).

Out of curiosity can you give me an example?

Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.

trønderen14-Aug-23 5:04

trønderen

14-Aug-23 5:04

Most of them are in Norwegian, and probably not published in the US of A. One that I know is published is a photo book, aimed at preschoolers, for teaching them the difference between boys and girls: "Show Me!". I've got a couple more in the same group - in the 1980s, using photos for such teaching purposes were fully accepted.

I don't know the legal status of the pocket edition of "Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-tung" (or "The little red book"). Even if it isn't forbidden, you will be treated as a suspected communist by owing it, which would strongly affect both your social life and your professional opportunities. (I didn't buy it because of any sympathy with those ideas, but to try to see what they are. The little red book made no sense at all to me!)

I've been collecting photo art books for four decades. Some of the photos in "Was ist der Mench? Eine Antwort in 1509 Photos", from the first three world exhibitions of photography, are definitely illegal in the US of A (and maybe even in Norway, but I bought the book in a Norwegian bookstore). The photo books by Sally Mann have definitely been banned from a large number of libraries and other public collections in the US of A, but I guess at least some states permit private ownership (I have bought the books through Amazon).

Some of my private writings are such that even in Norway, I keep the text files encrypted. Like after Nine Eleven, I started contemplating what could be the next attack against The American Way. I frequently develop my ideas about various issues as imaginary scenarios, as a novel or script, to see what situations it would create, and which of the actors' reactions I could morally and legally defend. 9/11 led to two of those, and if they got out, I'd be arrested for planning terrorist actions (probably even in Norway). Before you ask: No, they are not, and will never be, published.

Book banning is mostly a state level matter in the US of A; few books are banned by federal authorities. So it could be that for every one of my books, there is at least one state who would not ban its contents. But I am convinced that even in the most liberal state I would risk that visiting neighbors might back off in horror when they discover what is in my bookshelf. Later they might reject any invitation from me, and even be unwilling to talk to me. (Even my Norwegian photography friends are reluctant to discuss Sally Mann photos.)

Single Step Debugger14-Aug-23 5:44