I have no problem with this since I don’t smoke and don’t care to smoke. I will enjoy an occasional cigar here and there, but those are few and far between.
lol So I guess just a ban on smoking within ten feet of the university entrances would be out of the question? Smokers can light up on campus, and no one has to walk around them, which is apparently an incredible nuisance. And before anyone harps on me for supporting a bad habit, I don’t smoke and don’t like smoking, but I also don’t think it’s my place to tell someone that they can’t smoke in public.
Many people are missing my point. It is not about whether smoking is unhealthy or disgusting to you. It is about government infringing on my free will , making laws about personal choices that effect only myself. We are not talking about smoking in front of a entrance to a building or blowing smoke in children’s faces.
Considerately I could stand outside , off to the side or behind a building , away from people and smoke a cigarette and get a fine. Even just walking around campus smoking the amount of secondhand smoke one would receive is negligible. Some of you need to think more openly, and not let you hate of cigarettes blind you from the point.
All public educational institutions in California have a campus-wide smoking ban. It’s bullshit. You even have cities(like Berkeley) banning smoking in all public places(even streets and parking lots) and some cities have ordinances banning smoking in condos(yes, a condo which YOU own).
As a pipe and cigar smoker, I say it’s fucking ridiculous.
[quote]Uncle Gabby wrote:
Who gives a shit about addiction? Your only argument against smoking is that you don’t want to pay for the health costs of someone else’s bad habit. Are you against the sale of fatty foods? Sugary Foods? Motorcycles? Fast Cars? Sports equipment? All of those can cause health problems, or injury.[/quote]
Nicotine is very different from fatty foods. I keep mentioning the balancing act the State must play in protecting the community and personal liberties. Smoking is not a liberty worth defending.
Yes. This is a risky activity which I myself partake in but it is not the same as purposely causing myself cancer. And I would still treat you if you are a smoker but I, if I were the government, would want to limit people’s ability to smoke. The government prescibes speed limits for motorcycles…
I respect the private lives of my fellow citizens but does this mean I should allow them to sell and consume cocaine?
[quote]Tstud_9 wrote:
Many people are missing my point. It is not about whether smoking is unhealthy or disgusting to you. It is about government infringing on my free will , making laws about personal choices that effect only myself. [/quote]
I understand what you’re saying. It’s no different than seatbelt laws. What I’m getting at is that there are always going to be arguments like this thread and there are always going to be laws like these. There’s nothing anyone can do about it. So why not at least attempt to compromise by banning it near entrances but allowing it on campus?
[quote]Tstud_9 wrote:
Many people are missing my point. It is not about whether smoking is unhealthy or disgusting to you. It is about government infringing on my free will , making laws about personal choices that effect only myself. We are not talking about smoking in front of a entrance to a building or blowing smoke in children’s faces.
Considerately I could stand outside , off to the side or behind a building , away from people and smoke a cigarette and get a fine. Even just walking around campus smoking the amount of secondhand smoke one would receive is negligible. Some of you need to think more openly, and not let you hate of cigarettes blind you from the point. [/quote]
I have only argued as to why the State could remove your right to smoke.
What about the right for the university to set rules to be obeyed on its campus? Its not your campus after all.
The state does not have to protect individuals of the community from harming themselves in a way that they have deemed legal. Let the state and federal government protect me from outside sources of danger, I’ll take responsibility for my decisions that may or may not harm only me personally.
Apples and oranges. Selling cocaine is an illegal activity. Consuming cocaine is a potentially dangerous activity to others. Even if you believe coming in contact with smoke near an entrance is harmful, not all outdoor smoking is harmful to others.
[quote]Tstud_9 wrote:
I respect the private lives of my fellow citizens but does this mean I should allow them to sell and consume cocaine?
Apples and oranges. Selling cocaine is an illegal activity. Consuming cocaine is a potentially dangerous activity to others. Even if you believe coming in contact with smoke near an entrance is harmful, not all outdoor smoking is harmful to others. [/quote]
It is the same thing. All are drugs. Just a different scale.
Alcohol - Tobacco - Pot - Ectasy - Cocaine.
Where do we draw the line on what should BE LEGAL (cocaine is not illegal for any intrinsic reason)?
I say tobacco you say tomato.
[quote]Spry wrote:
I have only argued as to why the State could remove your right to smoke.
What about the right for the university to set rules to be obeyed on its campus? Its not your campus after all.
[/quote]
As I understand it, the law is a statewide law and not specific to individual campuses. I think there is a line between an organization’s right to establish and enforce rules on their property rules, and this particular situation as well.
To say alcohol, tobacco, and pot all fall in the same category in this situation is completely false. Yes, they do have the similarity of being drugs, but that is where the similarities end. I do not necessarily agree with current drug laws, but walking on campus smoking a cigarette, and walking around campus snorting coke are two entirely separate things.
Totally ridiculous law.
T stud, where do you go to school?
Are you a scrum half?
I probably hate smoking more than anyone here.
Grew up with it around my parents, etc etc.
That being said, I don’t mind if people smoke outside. I don’t like however when they smoke by entrance and you have to walk through it. I just don’t.
Does it bother me that they can’t smoke outside, no. Should they be able to? sure why not :shrug: better than in an enclosed space
[quote]Spry wrote:
Uncle Gabby wrote:
Who gives a shit about addiction? Your only argument against smoking is that you don’t want to pay for the health costs of someone else’s bad habit. Are you against the sale of fatty foods? Sugary Foods? Motorcycles? Fast Cars? Sports equipment? All of those can cause health problems, or injury.
Nicotine is very different from fatty foods. I keep mentioning the balancing act the State must play in protecting the community and personal liberties. Smoking is not a liberty worth defending.
[/quote]
But the only grounds on which you claim the right to intervene is that you have to pay for their health care.
The problem is, if you claim that the government can stop people from smoking because you don’t want to pay for their health care, then the old lady down the street who thinks motorcycles are dangerous can say that the government should stop you from riding motorcycles because motorcycles are more dangerous than cars, and she doesn’t want to pay for your medical care if you get hurt.
The government is made up of people, and no person other than myself has the right to choose what is best for me. As long as I am not harming anyone else, it is no one else’s business. Besides, explain how putting me in jail for doing cocaine helps me or anyone.
The government cannot protect us from ourselves and it only does more damage when it tries.
[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:
Seriously. I hate cigarettes but will smoke a cigar once in a blue moon.
What I hate about our society is this snooty self-entitlement attitude to taking offense to ANYTHING.
Have you seen people cough and grab their noses as they walk by smokers? And they claim it’s because the smoke actually DOES bother make them cough. Outside? Really? Bullshit, you fucking attention whore.
We are not talking about smoking in a nursery.
Let the smokers smoke. So what? Don’t like the smell as you’re coming up on a group of smokers, smoking in an open area?
MOVE AROUND THEM.
Yes, second hand smoke is harmful, IF you have the immune system of an infant and if you are being rocked in a crib in the middle of a poker table, in a basement, with all players puffing away.
[/quote]
I’d have to say word to that. It’s a victimhood act.
[quote]Tstud_9 wrote:
To say alcohol, tobacco, and pot all fall in the same category in this situation is completely false. Yes, they do have the similarity of being drugs, but that is where the similarities end. I do not necessarily agree with current drug laws, but walking on campus smoking a cigarette, and walking around campus snorting coke are two entirely separate things. [/quote]
That’d be awesome to walk around campus snorting coke, haha
[quote]Spry wrote:
It is the same thing. All are drugs. Just a different scale.
Alcohol - Tobacco - Pot - Ectasy - Cocaine.
Where do we draw the line on what should BE LEGAL (cocaine is not illegal for any intrinsic reason)?
I say tobacco you say tomato.
[/quote]
I say your choice is arbitrary and based on your on prejudices, as any line drawn by anyone would be. The line should be drawn where your actions directly harm another individual. If you want to stay in your own home and get high on crack that is of no concern to me.
Smoking Should Be Legal
Drinking Should Be Legal
Cocaine Should Be Legal
Pot Should Be Legal
Cussing on TV Should Be Legal
Nudity on TV Should Be Legal (although I doubt any network would do it for market reasons, not FDA reasons)
These are all victimless crimes AND therefore liberties. The line between liberty and not depends on whether or not there is a real victim. Your right to not be offended comes way, way, below my right to do what the fuck I want. Hell this is coming from a Canadian.
A drunk driver poses a threat to others on the road. I don’t think I need to go on. And don’t get me started on the second hand smoke thing (Bullshit, especially outside).
I somewhat agree with this new bout of anti-smoking legislation. Sure, if someone wants to kill themself, they can. However, Even if the effects are very minimal, i still would rather avoid the secondhand effects. I also hate the smell of cigarette smoke and smokers.
Should i be allowed to stand outside public places and spray people with something that smells disgusting? No.
That being said, the one thing about smoking that just infuriates me is when i see a pregnant woman or a person pushing a stroller smoking. You can’t convince me that’s good for the baby, or even has negligible effects.