|
Damn right they should ban smoking.. nasty habit that brings no good out. It's disgusting and only wastes peoples lives.
Oh yea we are citizens, free country I should do with my life as I please!
Thing is people who smoke makes other people have to smell the shit they exhale from their lungs into our own, affecting poor smoke-free passersby and dealing damage to their health.
Sure there are so many responsible smokers that do not smoke in public places. But that's not what you see everyday is it? Even though it is indeed harsh to those who do so responsibly, it's the majority we are talking about. Really few smokers give a damn about what the other people around are breathing.
The concept of freedom has limits, we should be able to do as we please as long as it doesn't affect others
And for fuck's sake you only feel good smoking because of a drug that's in there, why do people cut their lives by a third and make other's sniff trash just waste money just to feel "pleasure" for a brief moment that is such crap makes no sense.
Sorry, I know really good people that smoke, I don't look down on you, but seriously I don't know why that nasty habit still exists..
|
Hopefully smoking eventually gets banned even more strictly...and they tax cigarettes much more...and all the smokers realize it is a shitty habit anyway. Damn I hate smokers, isn't it just awesome to be walking in a nice sunny day with a blue sky and inhale a big cloud of smoke? That kind of thing just makes my day.
|
I think your argument is missing some things.You can still smoke can't you? Just not in public places. In regards to the first argument I think you're missing the fact that it isn't just about your well-being, it's the fact that your smoking could be affecting the well being of others. Your rights after all are still there and are protected, but they are your rights only insofar as they do not negatively affect others.
For instance, I think we can agree that as soon as your actions, whatever they may be, impinge on the well-being of others, that society is then entitled to stop you in some way. We can also agree that some people are negatively affected when they are around or smell smoke in public places, and that they are--and perhaps more importantly--affected through physical factors via second hand smoke.
If that is the case, then it can be argued that smoking in public places does negatively affect the rights of others, and therefore because of that society can put restrictions on your right to smoke.
|
United States47024 Posts
I have some issues that I feel I have to raise with your definition of rights.
On March 13 2009 19:36 lOvOlUNiMEDiA wrote:
First, rights are trump cards. When the term right is used in an argument it takes up the weight of infinite value. For example, you really don’t like what I’m saying? It is making a lot of people cry? So what – I have the right to free speech. The government really doesn’t want to give me a trial? So what – I am guaranteed it. A group of people really want to kill me – and they can show how it would be really great for their community? Sorry – I have a right to life.
Not quite. Having infinite value would imply that you can't resolve a situation in which two rights conflict, which is not the case. Some rights are more valuable than others (e.g. the right to life arguably trumps free speech), and saying they have "infinite value" doesn't allow those comparisions.
On March 13 2009 19:36 lOvOlUNiMEDiA wrote:
Second, rights are negative obligations – and necessarily so. A right guarantees freedom to act and to possess ownership to the results of one’s actions -- nothing else. So, for example, my right to property does not ask more of you than you respecting it. It does not ask you to give some of your property to me but only that you leave my property alone. The same structure applies to free speech. I can’t force you to listen to me but you can’t force me to not voice my view. Or, more succinctly: “If some men are entitled by right to the products of the work of others, it means that those others are deprived of rights and condemned to slave labor.”
Wrong. Trial by jury. The onus is on the government to provide you with legal counsel. If you cannot provide your own legal counsel, the government has the positive obligation to provide one for you.
Positive/negative obligations are a hairy thing to base your argument off of, because its possible to frame many things either way.
|
Netherlands13554 Posts
Smoking is disgusting, people who smoke are disgusting (when they smoke).
They go out, suck on their cancersticks for 15 minutes, come back in and smell like they've been dragged through a sewer pipe for 15 miles. Our anti-smoking ban got enforced 1st of July last year and going out has become so much more pleasurable. No more teary and annoyed eyes, no more clothes and hair smelling like shit. Oh man the times I stood under the shower after a night out having to smell the fucking smoke coming out of my hair again.
People who smoke in places where there are non-smokers are selfish. For me, this is the best argument someone can give. Why do we as non-smokers have to cope with health problems and general annoyances such as smelling like shit after going out to a bar even when you're there only for like 30 minutes?
The cars-argument is ridiculous as well. Cars don't generate nearly as much pollution and health problems as cigarettes in public places. Cars aren't in crowded pubs they are in the streets and the polluted air doesn't get into my clothes and stuff and the only pollution I sniff is very thin. Not to mention that cars serve a general purpose where cigarettes do not. They are only for personal pleasure.
'why not ban alcohol then'
When someone drinks alcohol next to me my liver doesn't blow up. When someone smokes next to me my longues do.
|
On March 15 2009 23:07 Twisted wrote:
Smoking is disgusting, people who smoke are disgusting (when they smoke).
They go out, suck on their cancersticks for 15 minutes, come back in and smell like they've been dragged through a sewer pipe for 15 miles. Our anti-smoking ban got enforced 1st of July last year and going out has become so much more pleasurable. No more teary and annoyed eyes, no more clothes and hair smelling like shit. Oh man the times I stood under the shower after a night out having to smell the fucking smoke coming out of my hair again.
People who smoke in places where there are non-smokers are selfish. For me, this is the best argument someone can give. Why do we as non-smokers have to cope with health problems and general annoyances such as smelling like shit after going out to a bar even when you're there only for like 30 minutes?
The cars-argument is ridiculous as well. Cars don't generate nearly as much pollution and health problems as cigarettes in public places. Cars aren't in crowded pubs they are in the streets and the polluted air doesn't get into my clothes and stuff and the only pollution I sniff is very thin. Not to mention that cars serve a general purpose where cigarettes do not. They are only for personal pleasure.
'why not ban alcohol then'
When someone drinks alcohol next to me my liver doesn't blow up. When someone smokes next to me my longues do.
alcohol probaby causes at least as much victims by car crashes and violence and maybe some other things i dont think of atm...
and cars in big cities are a big problem, i've read that a day of breathing shanghai air equals smoking 1 pack of cigarettes...edit: turns out a 10 minute walk equals that..... so yea you can imagine it doesnt matter but of course it does... and no they are not in bars, but you actually HAVE to go outside... you cant go to a non car outside, you could go to a non smoking pub... and just because it doesnt make you smell its imo much worse since you cannot avoid it... Also cars are often being used for distances that could also be travelled with a bike or by foot... so its not always that necessairy at all i think...
i agree it smells horrible tho, it really does... and its a retarded habit...
but if ppl wanna do it why not?! theres so many things that smell bad and/or are retarded... and it doesnt meassure up to other things at all... so in the end we are just being intolerant and nasty to other ppl...
|
On March 15 2009 23:07 Twisted wrote:
Smoking is disgusting, people who smoke are disgusting (when they smoke).
They go out, suck on their cancersticks for 15 minutes, come back in and smell like they've been dragged through a sewer pipe for 15 miles. Our anti-smoking ban got enforced 1st of July last year and going out has become so much more pleasurable. No more teary and annoyed eyes, no more clothes and hair smelling like shit. Oh man the times I stood under the shower after a night out having to smell the fucking smoke coming out of my hair again.
People who smoke in places where there are non-smokers are selfish. For me, this is the best argument someone can give. Why do we as non-smokers have to cope with health problems and general annoyances such as smelling like shit after going out to a bar even when you're there only for like 30 minutes?
The cars-argument is ridiculous as well. Cars don't generate nearly as much pollution and health problems as cigarettes in public places. Cars aren't in crowded pubs they are in the streets and the polluted air doesn't get into my clothes and stuff and the only pollution I sniff is very thin. Not to mention that cars serve a general purpose where cigarettes do not. They are only for personal pleasure.
'why not ban alcohol then'
When someone drinks alcohol next to me my liver doesn't blow up. When someone smokes next to me my longues do.
perfectly stated
|
On March 16 2009 03:04 Kaolla wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2009 23:07 Twisted wrote:
Smoking is disgusting, people who smoke are disgusting (when they smoke).
They go out, suck on their cancersticks for 15 minutes, come back in and smell like they've been dragged through a sewer pipe for 15 miles. Our anti-smoking ban got enforced 1st of July last year and going out has become so much more pleasurable. No more teary and annoyed eyes, no more clothes and hair smelling like shit. Oh man the times I stood under the shower after a night out having to smell the fucking smoke coming out of my hair again.
People who smoke in places where there are non-smokers are selfish. For me, this is the best argument someone can give. Why do we as non-smokers have to cope with health problems and general annoyances such as smelling like shit after going out to a bar even when you're there only for like 30 minutes?
The cars-argument is ridiculous as well. Cars don't generate nearly as much pollution and health problems as cigarettes in public places. Cars aren't in crowded pubs they are in the streets and the polluted air doesn't get into my clothes and stuff and the only pollution I sniff is very thin. Not to mention that cars serve a general purpose where cigarettes do not. They are only for personal pleasure.
'why not ban alcohol then'
When someone drinks alcohol next to me my liver doesn't blow up. When someone smokes next to me my longues do.
On March 16 2009 03:04 Kaolla wrote:alcohol probaby causes at least as much victims by car crashes and violence and maybe some other things i dont think of atm...
and cars in big cities are a big problem, i've read that a day of breathing shanghai air equals smoking 1 pack of cigarettes... so yea you can imagine it doesnt matter but of course it does... and no they are not in bars, but you actually HAVE to go outside... you cant go to a non car outside, you could go to a non smoking pub... and just because it doesnt make you smell its imo much worse since you cannot avoid it... Also cars are often being used for distances that could also be travelled with a bike or by foot... so its not always that necessairy at all i think...
Are you serious? I cannot believe my eyes... I don't know why I'm gonna bother, but whatever.
Alcohol can cause crashed because people are idiots, and there ARE laws against drinking and driving. Don't dare compare drinks to smoking. Drinking normally and responsibly will cause you no harm and no harm to others, and no matter how little you smoke somebody WILL be bothered and you will cause yourself harm, no matter how responsible you are. And yea, let me tell you something, you know what the fuck comes out of cars? CO2 and CO mostly, and few other chemicals that are irrelevant. You know what comes out of a cigarette? 4000 fucking substances out of which 200 are toxic. Here are some:
cetaldehyde (1.4+ mg)
arsenic (500+ ng)
benzo(a)pyrene (.1+ ng)
cadmium (1,300+ ng)
chromium (1,000+ ng)h ydrazine (14+ ng)
lead (8+ µg)
nickel (2,000+ ng)
radioactive polonium (.2+ Pci)
And please, even if that was close to the truth, are we in fuckign shanghai? Cars have filters, cause much MUCH less harm than cigarettes and are a NECESSITY. smoking is NOT. When you get old enough to drive a car use bicycles and foot to do everything you need, see if that works.
i agree it smells horrible tho, it really does... and its a retarded habit...
but if ppl wanna do it why not?! theres so many things that smell bad and/or are retarded... and it doesnt meassure up to other things at all... so in the end we are just being intolerant and nasty to other ppl...
My god... I don't mind people arguing but I don't know if your problem is ignorance or something else. "if ppl wanna do it why not? Lot's of things smell bad? " ... for starters because there are OTHER people who ALSO happen to have RIGHTS. And secondhand smoke is not one of them, nor is the shit they have to be obligated to smell because some addict cannot control himself.
Man if you are gonna discuss this bring some real arguments. Don't bring crap like "If you ban smoking, you will also have to ban cars and drinking because it kills people too!!".
|
On March 16 2009 03:46 Z-BosoN wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2009 03:04 Kaolla wrote:On March 15 2009 23:07 Twisted wrote:
Smoking is disgusting, people who smoke are disgusting (when they smoke).
They go out, suck on their cancersticks for 15 minutes, come back in and smell like they've been dragged through a sewer pipe for 15 miles. Our anti-smoking ban got enforced 1st of July last year and going out has become so much more pleasurable. No more teary and annoyed eyes, no more clothes and hair smelling like shit. Oh man the times I stood under the shower after a night out having to smell the fucking smoke coming out of my hair again.
People who smoke in places where there are non-smokers are selfish. For me, this is the best argument someone can give. Why do we as non-smokers have to cope with health problems and general annoyances such as smelling like shit after going out to a bar even when you're there only for like 30 minutes?
The cars-argument is ridiculous as well. Cars don't generate nearly as much pollution and health problems as cigarettes in public places. Cars aren't in crowded pubs they are in the streets and the polluted air doesn't get into my clothes and stuff and the only pollution I sniff is very thin. Not to mention that cars serve a general purpose where cigarettes do not. They are only for personal pleasure.
'why not ban alcohol then'
When someone drinks alcohol next to me my liver doesn't blow up. When someone smokes next to me my longues do. Show nested quote +On March 16 2009 03:04 Kaolla wrote:alcohol probaby causes at least as much victims by car crashes and violence and maybe some other things i dont think of atm...
and cars in big cities are a big problem, i've read that a day of breathing shanghai air equals smoking 1 pack of cigarettes... so yea you can imagine it doesnt matter but of course it does... and no they are not in bars, but you actually HAVE to go outside... you cant go to a non car outside, you could go to a non smoking pub... and just because it doesnt make you smell its imo much worse since you cannot avoid it... Also cars are often being used for distances that could also be travelled with a bike or by foot... so its not always that necessairy at all i think... Are you serious? I cannot believe my eyes... I don't know why I'm gonna bother, but whatever. Alcohol can cause crashed because people are idiots, and there ARE laws against drinking and driving. Don't dare compare drinks to smoking. Drinking normally and responsibly will cause you no harm and no harm to others, and no matter how little you smoke somebody WILL be bothered and you will cause yourself harm, no matter how responsible you are. And yea, let me tell you something, you know what the fuck comes out of cars? CO2 and CO mostly, and few other chemicals that are irrelevant. You know what comes out of a cigarette? 4000 fucking substances out of which 200 are toxic. Here are some: cetaldehyde (1.4+ mg) arsenic (500+ ng) benzo(a)pyrene (.1+ ng) cadmium (1,300+ ng) chromium (1,000+ ng)h ydrazine (14+ ng) lead (8+ µg) nickel (2,000+ ng) radioactive polonium (.2+ Pci) And please, even if that was close to the truth, are we in fuckign shanghai? Cars have filters, cause much MUCH less harm than cigarettes and are a NECESSITY. smoking is NOT. When you get old enough to drive a car use bicycles and foot to do everything you need, see if that works. Show nested quote +i agree it smells horrible tho, it really does... and its a retarded habit...
but if ppl wanna do it why not?! theres so many things that smell bad and/or are retarded... and it doesnt meassure up to other things at all... so in the end we are just being intolerant and nasty to other ppl... My god... I don't mind people arguing but I don't know if your problem is ignorance or something else. "if ppl wanna do it why not? Lot's of things smell bad? " ... for starters because there are OTHER people who ALSO happen to have RIGHTS. And secondhand smoke is not one of them, nor is the shit they have to be obligated to smell because some addict cannot control himself. Man if you are gonna discuss this bring some real arguments. Don't bring crap like "If you ban smoking, you will also have to ban cars and drinking because it kills people too!!".
ok last reply this thread is getting boring and same things again and again...
all that stuff isnt in your lungs thru 2nd hand smoke so who gives a shit, and i am quite often in Shanghai yea so its quite relevant for me.. its not like the air is awesome in other big metropolitan areas... and mind you that this was about smoking packets of cigarettes, not just 2nd hand smoking them (which is much less bad than actually smoking afaik)... so what's the big deal ...
1 drink has some effect, so does 1 cigarette's 2nd hand smoke i guess but both are negligible... we all know people cannot drink RESPONSIBLY tho and the laws currently in place are just not good enough (there are many action groups with this belief)...fact is alcohol is poison and its not good and 1 drink can already affect your responses...
im more than old enough to drive a car, i don't know what you mean by that but it seems you are just a lazy ass... and dont mind polution the world a bit for everyone...
sure some things can hardly be done without a car, but there's lots of things than easily be done by bike and by foot which are being done by car, but which are done by car just because its easy... i guess especially in a country like usa there's alot of ppl doing that and the cars also use way too much fuel compared to the ones here... anyway if they really give a shit about our health they could do something bout that, but they are just witch huntin.... cause i feel thats what this is all about..
the main thing however is still ->
so if you think you have the RIGHT to go to a non smoking bar then do so by all means...
no one FORCES you to be in or go to a smoky bar mr smartass.... If you dont like you can go to a non smoking bar or start one yourself and your problem will be solved?? if you HAD to go there then I would agree with you... but its just free will and as it usually works in our free market if there is a NEED or WISH for something it will be created...
your arguments would make sense if it was banned outside, where you have to go...
what makes you think we cant hande this ourselves?! If you think its so important to go to a bar without any smoking then why dont you go there?? there's no market for it??
then that means apperently too few ppl give a shit... no need to make laws for that i'd say...
and yes alot of things in our world are based on comparison, so usually when we make arguments we compare similar shit .. if smoking gets banned for some reasons and drinking has similar effects there are many ppl who will (and already do) greedily take advantage of it..
there's a good chance this will lead to more and more things will get banned/restricted (i guess you have the sense to understand that) in the future and in the end where will it end?! i dont think we need this protectionism and people are capable of handling this themselves... no need to make laws about it...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
