Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[ChairmanPoo]

just be aware that secondhand smoke and secondhand car driving both kill you, and the latter probably sooner than the first

Sorry, but no cigar to you either. The health hazard from tobacco has not been conjured from thin air, you know. Do you have data supporting the assertion that car exahusts are significatively increasing the risk of cancer, coronary disease, etc...? Let alone to a higher degree than tobacco does? Ah, thought so.

Mind you, this is not to say that car exhausts have no effect at all over health. But I doubt very much it's higher than tobacco. In fact I doubt it's particularily high either way

And this is humoring your  (silly) pretension of putting modern transport systems on the same league as petty drug addictions of course. Or, for that matter, trying to somehow portray it as an either-or matter (Lets suppose for a moment that the arse-pull you did about car cancer risk was true. Do you realize it is of NO CONSEQUENCE to the tobacco debate whatsoever? That if there WAS a higher risk of cancer due to car exhausts it would be of NO JUSTIFICATION to bear an even HIGHER risk due to second-hand tobacco?)

[Boksi]

It'd be ridiculous to say the only problem with cigarettes is carbon monoxide. There's freaking tar in the smoke, too. Tar. And it's not like cancer is the only problem smoking causes, there are lots of other more immediate and certain effects. Smoking lessens your overall health in all areas.

My mother smokes, and as far as I'm concerned that's one smoker too many in my family.

In addition, both of my grandfathers smoked, and both died before I was born.

Is it any wonder I don't intend to take up smoking?

[Jackrabbit]

Also rocket fuel and rat poison.

[Alexhans]

Always. But still, she's getting old enough to see me smoke (even when shivering in the cold on the balcony with an umbrella in the pouring rain, just picture that pathetic moment for a second) and I want to set a good example... But it's hard, so hard

That sounds badass, not pathetic...

^^ This is what publicity has inserted in your brains... Smoking is cool... Smoking is baddass... that's why 90 % of teenagers start smoking (made up statistic, of course ).  Then, they drop it without further ado.  When they reach 20-23... responsabilities come down upon them and they take up the habit and never quit (until some doctor tells them so, then they begin the struggle).

I'm just arguing that disallowing people to smoke in public places is the same as disallowing non-smokers to drive a car in public places, and the limit to personal liberty is a grey area. Especially when smoking, then it's grey and cloudy. My personal stance on the matter is irrelevant.

Wrong.  Your rights end where the other guy's rights begin.

Dude... They want to put me in jail for killing someone... Such dictators... Denying my freedom!

Of course being near a car WILL harm you, by Carbon Monoxide poisoning, at a greater rate than being near a smoker will, if you're in a place with any kind of ventilation to speak off, like say, outside.

That is a matter of ecology that the goverment should handle (A very important one).  Find a way to avoid polution.  Smoking is PURELY for leisure.  Cars are a technological need. 

[Siquo]

"A technological need", such a hollow phrase. Take the train. Or the bus. They pollute a lot less. On the other hand, subjectively the cigarette is a need for 'teh smoker', as I explained before.

Wrong.  Your rights end where the other guy's rights begin.

And where exactly is that? My right to breathe poisonous air infringes on your right to breathe clean air. But whose right is more right? The answer every person will give you: MY RIGHT! So you'll honestly believe that your clean air is more important, while another will equally vehemently believe that his poison is more important. Now to decide who is right? The healthy one? But there comes the car analogy again, with driving a car you're infringing on my right to breathe clean air. Now who is right? I know, I know: you again.

Do you realize it is of NO CONSEQUENCE to the tobacco debate whatsoever? That if there WAS a higher risk of cancer due to car exhausts it would be of NO JUSTIFICATION to bear an even HIGHER risk due to second-hand tobacco?

I realize that, and am aware of that. Justification is just subjective. Objectively it's just strange to allow one and disallow another.

Again, I'm not proposing smoking is allowed everywhere, just saying that (hypothetical, not you guys) people who whine about it being so poisonous for them but drive a car themselves, eat meat daily, or don't want to pay extra for green electricity or organically grown food should S the F U. 

[Jude]

If you have willpower, smoking is not an issue really.

I'll have a cig (well, clove, that's the only type of cig I like) or two once in a while. Last time I had one was....maybe 2 weeks ago? Tonight is a party so I'll probably have a couple, and then if all goes as usual, it'll again be another week or two before another one.

You don't have to get addicted. You let yourself get addicted - or you don't.

[andrea]

most people just get addicted. They start saying " I am not addicted. I smoke a cigarette at most once a month... week... day... 6 hours... give me one now! I need it." That is goes often. People think they are not addicted, and drag it as long as they can, for years even, up to the point that the claim of not being addicted is ridiculous.
Few people are like you, Jude. I , at least, never met a person who would claim to not be addicted, and actually saying the truth.At least not for more than a month or 2.

[Rozenbuddy]

I still don't get why people smoke, does it taste good or something? :p

[Siquo]

I started it for coolness, nihilism and "I hope it kills me soon because life sucks anyway". That was a long time ago, mind you.

[Alexhans]

"A technological need", such a hollow phrase. Take the train. Or the bus. They pollute a lot less. On the other hand, subjectively the cigarette is a need for 'teh smoker', as I explained before.

You're lame.  I use a bike if you want to know but the train and the bus also pollute.  As a matter of fact, in Argentina, buses pollute almost as much as cars because theres no maintenance and the goverment doesn't enforce it.

Wrong.  Your rights end where the other guy's rights begin.

And where exactly is that? My right to breathe poisonous air infringes on your right to breathe clean air. But whose right is more right? The answer every person will give you: MY RIGHT! So you'll honestly believe that your clean air is more important, while another will equally vehemently believe that his poison is more important. Now to decide who is right? The healthy one? But there comes the car analogy again, with driving a car you're infringing on my right to breathe clean air. Now who is right? I know, I know: you again.[/quote]sigh... If i could.  I would be literally spitting on you because that would be my right... (not really, but you should get my point)

Again, I'm not proposing smoking is allowed everywhere, just saying that (hypothetical, not you guys) people who whine about it being so poisonous for them but drive a car themselves, eat meat daily, or don't want to pay extra for green electricity or organically grown food should S the F U. 

This is stupid.  What we were discussing here is that people who smoke should think about others and not impose their smoking if they're bothering.  If you want to smoke outside, fine by me.  If you smoke in the bus stop (those 5 minutes you're waiting because you can't hold it) I'm going to put myself wherever the wind is not blowing.  If that bothers you, drop that cigarette.  People have the right to smoke.  But they should mind the non-smokers and realize that they DO hurt their health.

Saying that OMGZ, FACTORY RESIDUES CONTAMINATE MORE! I HAZ A RIGHT TO SM0K3! SUckas!  won't make you right...  It's a fine comment for a youtube argument, though.

[Rozenbuddy]

The whole idea of smoking tobacco sounds redundant to me.

[Siquo]

First and foremost, let's keep this civil.

1. Bus and train usually pollute a lot less than a car, per person. Point stands, there is no need.

2. Really, spitting on me is your right? Well I believe it is my right not to be spat upon. Now who is right? Really, rights are not universal immutable objective facts, they are very subjective. For instance, I believe I have the right to kick the ass of anyone who spits on me on purpose. The law states otherwise, but the law is also a subjective set of arbitrary rules.

3. Yes, and I think it's unfair that smokers should take extra care while non-smoking polluters shouldn't. For extra reference by the way, at the bus stop I always make sure no-one is downwind or in my smoke when I light a cig.

4. That last thing was not a quote of mine, and nowhere am I making a stand that I am in my right to blow my smoke in your face. I'm merely stating that your right to bitch about it is limited. For I will take my right of bitching back about whatever you're doing that even remotely impedes my rights for clean air.

To take your previous example, you can't tell me I shouldn't spit in your face while you're spitting in mine all the time.

[Rozenbuddy]

You're off subject, you're reverting the conversation from smoking and going into global warming and pollution. This is a sure-sign of denial to changing from the redundant smoking habits.

SHAME.

[Siquo]

Yeah yeah we all know smoking is bad for you and everyone around you. So what do you do that makes you such an improvement to the world and gives you the right to bother other people about their bad habits? Eh?

Plus, I never mentioned global warming anywhere, don't you kids learn how to read anymore?

Yes, it's friday afternoon and I'm taking it out on you. 

[JoshuaFH]

I bet Siquo has a cool job as like, a fireman or something. That'd be ironic, kinda sorta.