This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Smoking and the Law.
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
606231
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Jubilee
I don't believe smoking laws (apart from the age restrictions) should have any say over what private establishments can or cannot allow. In the public sphere I think it should be whatever the community wants.
That's my answer to almost every social issue =P
Post by
Azazel
I think it should be illegal in public places, near children and for pregnant women.
Post by
OverZealous
It's a kind of difficult question, given how many people actually smoke. But at the same time, the "Its their own choice, they should be allowed to smoke if they want to" doesn't quite work either, seeing as smoking hurts both yourself
and
those around you, whether they smoke or not.
Personally, I would like to see smoking removed fully, but that's nothing more than a dream that isn't going to be realized any time this decade, unless something extraordinary happens.
What
can
be done, though, is tightening smoking laws - let people smoke, but only in designated, relatively large areas (much like those that already exist on ships and the like).
I think it should be illegal in public places, near children and for pregnant women.
This is what I would like to see, really, but it wouldn't work since most people don't really pay attention - "How was I supposed to know that she was pregnant?" "I didn't see that kid!" etc.
Post by
Azazel
I think it should be illegal in public places, near children and for pregnant women.
This is what I would like to see, really, but it wouldn't work since most people don't really pay attention - "How was I supposed to know that she was pregnant?" "I didn't see that kid!" etc.
Yeah, it would be quite hard to make sure she didn't smoke when she knew she was pregnant if she was already a smokemachine before. But we should atleast try, so the baby won't get cancer or brain damages.
Post by
Interest
I say there should be some tighter smoking laws. As much as it is their freedom to smoke, harming others while partaking in that activity is over the line.
Post by
134377
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
xaratherus
I don't really care either way; I don't smoke, and never have, but I've never been particular bothered by it either.
That said, if laws were to be made more strict, I'd prefer the laws to based on conclusive data. For a report I did in college a few years ago, I read over a lot of the EPA reports upon which public smoking laws are/were based.
There
are
obvious health risks for certain groups - those who are susceptible to any airborne allergen or irritant, like the asthmatic or the elderly - but to say that "environmental tobacco smoke" (as it's called in the EPA reports) has a clear causative relationship with lung cancer or heart disease isn't a true statement.
Basically, the EPA looked at around 15-20 different studies and made a correlative deduction. The problem is that later studies (including one performed by the World Health Organization in the early 2000s) did not confirm the correlation. And despite that it's questionable whether any study could really show more than a possible correlation, because there are far too many factors you simply cannot control in your study group.
So if we're going to ban it or limit it, I feel we should do so because of the confirmed dangers (dangerous to asthmatics, allergics, the elderly and infants; dangerous to personal health), not because there
might
be a correlation between it's second-hand effects and lung cancer (maybe, if you look at the data in this particular way).
Post by
pezz
Smoking laws are entirely unnecessary.
If you're worried about second-hand smoke, there should be laws about assault or pollution that already cover that. I.e., putting carcinogens in someone's lungs against his/her will is some kind of assault on another person's body, surely*. We already have laws covering such things. In any other circumstances, such behavior would be illegal. It's no like it's only okay in some contexts to poison people against their will. Anything else is the individual's choice. There's no need to ban certain private institutions from allowing or disallowing smoking; plenty of bars, restaurants, etc, already made the choice to ban smoking or have designated smoking sections and they were very clear about these rules. Individuals can make the choice to do business with non-smoking institutions or not, and the market can decide how many non-smoking bars, restaurants, etc., we need or don't need.
*If, as xara pointed out, it actually turns out to be dangerous. Laws based on spurious scientific data harm personal freedom for absolutely no benefit to anyone. I'm not saying I'm working for a tobacco lobby and trying to get your kids to smoke via Wowhead. I'm just saying if we're going to restrict personal freedoms (which smoking laws do, make no mistake) we'd best be damn sure we have a good reason to do so.
Post by
Monday
Considering that I have severe asthma that smoke can set of really easily, I vote for tighter smoking laws.
Post by
pezz
Considering that I have severe asthma that smoke can set of really easily, I vote for tighter smoking laws.
Because I feel like it, I'll use this as an example to illustrate my point.
I'd say it's Funden's responsibility to live his life in a way that is conducive to his health based on his medical condition (e.g., visit the voluntarily, market-driven non-smoking establishments I mentioned), and to alert others around him when they're engaging in acts which may harm him.
Asthma attacks are not a joke. If you light up and someone near you says 'can you please put that out, it may cause me an asthma attack' (and the asthmatic isn't
coming to the nuisance
), you should put your cigarette out. If you don't,
you're willfully putting someone's health at risk despite the fact that they've made it explicitly clear that they do not want you to do so.
That's no different than throwing a punch, and should legally be treated as such.
Post by
292559
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Monday
The point is, Pezz, not only do some people refuse to put it out, but some people are just smoking as they walk by. It doesn't matter though, as just being near it can be bad for my lungs. I can't go around asking every single person to put out their cigarettes when they walk by, but I can't stay around them, now can I?
Post by
204878
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Monday
If you don't want to be around someone that's smoking, then don't go near them.
Because this is totally possible all the time. /facepalm
Post by
pezz
No, but you're not staying around them to begin with if you're just walking past each other.
I think there's absolutely no space between the time frame where you're only near a smoker for about 10 seconds and could pretty much just hold your breath, and when you're around a smoker for a longer time frame and could justifiably ask them to stop smoking around you.
I also assume you have an inhaler if you're an individual prone to asthma attacks. You could also carry around one of those SARS masks, perhaps which was designed to fold up and fit in a pocket, for walking on the street and such? I mean, whatever the law code says, you need small, portable devices to help ensure quality of life if you have asthma.
Post by
Monday
No, but you're not staying around them to begin with if you're just walking past each other.
I think there's absolutely no space between the time frame where you're only near a smoker for about 10 seconds and could pretty much just hold your breath, and when you're around a smoker for a longer time frame and could justifiably ask them to stop smoking around you.
I also assume you have an inhaler if you're an individual prone to asthma attacks.
If several people at a time are smoking, this means that I'd have to hold my breath for several minutes at a time. This just isn't possible for me.
And, secondly, I've used my inhaler so much that it has quite literally stopped working. In fact, almost all emergency inhaler medicines have stopped working for me. I mentioned my asthma is really severe, right?
Post by
pezz
Out of curiosity, what do you do about smokers currently?
Post by
Monday
Out of curiosity, what do you do about smokers currently?
I don't have to deal with it too often (nice thing about living in a primarily Mormon community), but whenever I go to Salt Lake, there's really not much I can do. I'm always "in range" of a smoker, for lack of a better term, and I often get sick that night or the next day.
That's why I want the laws tightened. There's
nothing I can do
when one is around, so the best option, for me, is to stop them from being around me.
Post by
Haxzor
I voted D because if someone wants to smoke (unless if they're underage) they should be able to do it, provided it does not hurt someone else's health.
Smoking is ALWAYS hurting someones health
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.