Smoke Kills

[RVertigo]

I'm just saying that the danger of second hand smoke has been grossly overstated.

It's really about the smell more than anything else.  People try to make it about health, but that's total BS.  Second hand smoke is like Vitamin C compaired to diesel fumes.

[Badger]

The only thing is, non-smokers don't think they have to rationalize and justify them NOT smoking. Smokers always get defensive. Do what you want.

I don't understand.  Not once have I attempted to defend or justify why I smoke.  This is a discussion about second hand smoke.  I can't justify why I smoke...I don't think it's a very smart thing to do, but that is beside the point.  What I am trying to 'defend' is the liberty to smoke.

One fact of reality, though, is that you smoking in public creates an offensive byproduct that infringes on the rights of people who choose not to smoke. Why should other people have to breath in your dirty air? :dunno:

And this is exactly where I take exception.  This is not a health issue...this is a personal preference issue.  Look, I don't want to smell anyone's nasty perfume or their body odor.  To me, those are identical complaints to the "why should people have to breathe in your dirty air" attitude.  If that's what you're after then I feel you need to address the issue universally, not pick out one group that you particularly don't like and harass them.  Who gets to determine what is offensive?  Slippery slope, my friend.

Smoking is not a natural act. You have every right in the world to smoke; but you have no right to infringe on others. Remember "your rights stop where another's begins".

Where does that end?  And which rights are you referring to being impinged by smoking?  Your right to avoid offensive odors?  Your right to not breathe trace quantities of particulate matter?  Can I force you to stop wearing Old Spice becaue i find it offensive?  Wearing perfume is also not a natural act.  It infringes on me.  Outlaw it.

I think smoking should be outlawed in all public places everywhere in the country.

What should we outlaw next?  I've got some ideas.

[Phaedrus]

There are a lot of things worse than secondhand smoke. Having your eyes gouged out with a spoon, or being forced to swallow a razorblade. Having a broomstick rammed up your ass is in there, too. The deflect game is fun - point fingers at things that are worse to make the original topic mild   . It doesn't matter why someone doesn't like second hand smoke. So what if it is "just the way it smells", or even if it is for health reasons. The point is, there is no reason for it. If what you do directly affects someone else - and they do not like it - you need to stop.

Would it be ok if I went downtown and sprayed people with some rotten smelling chemical, even if it did not hurt their health?

[Phaedrus]

By the way RVertigo and Badger, I'm not trying to shaZam! in your Easter Basket. Just having a mature, spirited debate. No offense intended  

[Badger]

But, many studies have proven your health returns to normal after quitting, depending on how much damage was done...  Odd huh?  So, it takes years to screw yourself up and you can recover from it faster than it took to screw you up.

I heard a long time ago that the majority of the damage done was repaired after quitting for as little as two weeks.  I used to think that I get around any health problems by not smoking for two weeks each year.  

Not smoke for two weeks?  Yeah, right.  :lol:

[Badger]

Would it be ok if I went downtown and sprayed people with some rotten smelling chemical, even if it did not hurt their health?

Haven't you ever walked through a department store's perfume department?

[davipu]

in the military we whould weld on oxidized alum. (causes althhimers) galvinized steel (after about 30 minutes of having your head in that you literally pass out and fall over from the zinc)  welded plain steel (without the osha approved ventalation the CO2 levels got up to 52% of total volume, almost tripple what's in the atsmophere) same thing with the nickle and Ti.  then when you didn't have any welding to do you were out in the composite shop sanding on fiberglass/ kevlar/ carbon fiber.  being a welder we weren't allowed to wear resperators as welders are not composite repair technitions <--- typical military thinking. even though avaition welding is a secondary occupational speciality to the metalsmithing/composite repair.

and all this was done in a shop whare all the paint on the walls was filled with asbestos, the oven linings were ceramic with asbestos. and then the strip shop which used chem stripper vented into the main shop so you always had headaches. you could never clean up all the dust so you were always kicking it up and breathing it.

smoke breaks were almost religious in thier regularity.

now i smoke when I run out of KY.

or feel the need for a cigar.

[Badger]

By the way RVertigo and Badger, I'm not trying to shaZam! in your Easter Basket. Just having a mature, spirited debate. No offense intended  

If I thought otherwise, I would already have written you off as an ass-gasket and left the discussion.

I think Americans, by and large, have abandoned fine art of debate.  Discuss.

[davipu]

and just to get back into the debate, we should outlaw any 4-6wheel viecal that get's less than 10 mpg. as i don't like the smell of the exxessive exaust they produce.  and harleys i don't care for the excessively loude pipes, that's noise polution

[davipu]

to abandon something you must aquire it first.

[RVertigo]

By the way RVertigo and Badger, I'm not trying to shaZam! in your Easter Basket. Just having a mature, spirited debate. No offense intended  

Oh, I've had much worse debates with lots of people that are still my friends...

On two separate occasions I've had someone tell me to "Shut the f%$k up because no one gives a f%$k what you have to say" and "Shut your f%$king mouth before I shut it for you."  And they were both in person, not on the Internet... :lol:   The second one didn't end well though...  That guy ended up totally flipping out. :lol:  Both were over really stupid arguments about nothing important.

The worst was when I told my boss the shut the f%$k up in front of five co-workers...  I thought he was going to kill me on the spot.

[JetSwing]

irreversible harm...IRREVERSIBLE harm!

ahem...let me compose myself...you see even if you quit smoking and feel healthy again, it doesn't mean that you get to wipe out what you've done. your body doesn't work that way.

sure, you may not die from smoking related disease but your longevity has still been affected

[RVertigo]

irreversible harm...IRREVERSIBLE harm!

Untrue.

OWNED!   :lol:

[Jake D]

Yes.  It does.  

All the cells in your body are replaced every 6 months.  

A brand new you!  Like shedding a skin, except all over.

[JetSwing]

Yes.  It does.  

All the cells in your body are replaced every 6 months.  

A brand new you!  Like shedding a skin, except all over.

shaZam!, no need for quit smoking then. every 6 month you get a new body  

[JetSwing]

irreversible harm...IRREVERSIBLE harm!

Untrue.

OWNED!   :lol:

that is so childish  

[Badger]

to abandon something you must aquire it first.

Badger, in his lifetime, has been both a master debater and a cunning linguist.  

[Badger]

Let me try to put this in perspective for non smokers.

Imagine this situation:

You like to ride your motorcycle.  Someone (actually a group of someones) decides that the pollution, noise, and bother of you out tooling around (which serves absolutely no purpose other than to bring you joy) is bad for people.  It is.  You create more toxic pollution riding your motorcycle than you would if you stayed home and watched Oprah and ate bon bons.

Those someones decide to propose laws to prevent you from impinging on their freedom of quiet, freedom from pollution, and freedom from you.  They propose that all motorcycles be fit with transponders.  They propose that you must notify authorities of the start and end point of your trip, as well as the purpose of such, your time of departure and estimated time enroute.  It has to be for a valid purpose..."enjoyment", "practice", or "twisties" don't count, you must be travelling somewhere for a reason.  Your route must be the most direct route from your start point to your destination.  You must remain on schedule.  You will be tracked via your transponder.  Disabling your transponder will result in civil and criminal penalties.  Travelling without first notifying authorities will also suffer civil and criminal penalties, and will result in the immediate revocation of your license.  You are no longer allowed to ride your motorcycle simply for enjoyment.  You are being watched.

How do you feel?  Defensive?  Vulnerable?  Angry?  Threatened?

Is this example far fetched?  

I bring this up, becuase it is essentially the content of new rules proposed by a group of citizens to the FAA only a few short years ago.  They are pissed off that recreational airplanes are loitering over their property, ruining their peace and quiet.  Their (very expensive) homes are situated near a fairly empty tract of land around central Massachusetts that is commonly used as the aerobatic practice area of the flight school I rent planes from.  They see no point in recreational aviation, and want it stopped.  The FAA has reviewed and rejected their petitions (which included other covenants including larger registration numbers on aircraft so they could more effectively identify and sue the pilots).

So they want it stopped for no other reason than they don't like it.  But polution, the possibility of crashing on bystanders (although extremely rare), and disturbing the peace are their justifications.  These are frighteningly similar complaints to smoking (pollution/bystanders/smell) and motorcycling.

Of course, the FAA rejected the proposal.  They already have rules that serve the public safety in ways they feel are adequate and that do not impose onerous restrictions on pilots without cause.  That hasn't stopped the group from trying to harass the pilots using the courts and continuing their struggle to get the rules changed to get their world just the way they like it.  And they are trying to gather additional support and public outcry to force the change.  Lots of people don't like having airports near them.  Many are fearful after 9/11.  It seems like only a matter of time.  Already restrictions like the ones above are imposed on any flight travelling near the DC area, and there are changes being proposed to expand this to cover the areas surrounding the 30 largest airports in the nation.  I recently recieved an NPRM (Notice of Proposed RuleMaking) to this effect, and the FAA is holding meetings to discuss the impact.

It's commonly pointed out that Freedom of Speech doesn't exist to protect the speech that we like, it's there to protect the speech we don't like.  Smoking is unpopular.  That doesn't mean that it shouldn't be protected.  I think that smokers would (and have been) generally supportive of rules that serve the public safety (no smoking on airplanes, that kind of thing) but do not impose onerous restrictions.  The latest rash of prohibitive laws is (in my opinion) going over the boundary into onerous territory.

There was a town in Massachusetts (Sharon) that tried to pass legislation prohibiting smoking on any public land within the town limits.  This included pretty much anywhere that wasn't a private residence.  Saying that you have to leave town to have a cigarette is just stupid, and doesn't protect anybody.  From what I understand, Rhode Island has recently put laws in place that prohibit smoking within some number of feet (50?) of a workplace.  

Which liberties are next?

[Blueknyt]

being a former smoker, i smoke cause i enjoyed the flavor of tobacco, and the mild headrush it gave me.  it also helped  (in a sense) to step away from a problem for a differnt veiw.  when i quit, i still enjoyed the smoke but felt my health was more important.  most folks i know still smoke, but it doesnt bother me.  i wont badger them when they light up unless they are chain smoking (too much really is rude)   OR if they have constant health issues involving thier lungs already.   I do feel a smoker has no right to Buddha Loves You about thier health if they refuse to quit smoking

I also agree, some of them older female folk dont know when to say when with thier fumigation session.  If they think they stink that bad, change your diet or shower more often.   i dont find a mild  B.O. near as bad as over splashing the french whore jiuce.  cant say ive found many men hosing thierself down with aftershave or cologne much. i imagine there are some.

Smokers shouldnt be Ostersized for smoking but rather given an Option with as much Curtisy as a Non smoker.   All the Non smoking seats are full but the smoking section is only 1/4 filled? no, you dont have the right to Buddha Loves You, be glad many have chossen not to smoke and support them by waiting to sit in non smoking section.

[tab]

The Smoking Ban is about smell, nothing else...  

um, yea, its not the smoke that makes my eyes start to water and burn or cause me to wheeze and cough