The Straight Dope

Go Back   Straight Dope Message Board > Main > The BBQ Pit

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-28-2006, 03:10 AM
Monty Monty is offline
Straight Dope Science Advisory Board
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Beijing, China
Posts: 17,674
Second Hand Smoke is too bad for you

So says the Surgeon General. From that link (bolding mine):
Quote:
U.S. Surgeon General Richard H. Carmona today issued a comprehensive scientific report which concludes that there is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke.
1. I put this in the Pit because it's going to end up here, no doubt.

2. I found out about the report from this article in the Austin American-Statesman (requires free registration). From that article:

Quote:
"The debate is over. The science is clear: Secondhand smoke is not a mere annoyance, but a serious health hazard," said U.S. Surgeon General Richard Carmona.
3. You folks that say there's no danger from secondhand smoke are now proven wrong.
Reply With Quote
Advertisements  
  #2  
Old 06-28-2006, 03:20 AM
cerberus cerberus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
I find that in these matters the full account is preferable to incompentent yammerings from the fourth estate.

A Direct Link to Dr. Carmona's Report
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-28-2006, 03:22 AM
cerberus cerberus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Make that incompetent yammerings ... there's only one R in yammer, right?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-28-2006, 03:34 AM
Monty Monty is offline
Straight Dope Science Advisory Board
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Beijing, China
Posts: 17,674
cerberus: The first link I provided is from the HHS. I'd say they're not incomptent nor are they the fourth estate.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-28-2006, 03:44 AM
kambuckta kambuckta is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty

3. You folks that say there's no danger from secondhand smoke are now proven wrong.
Who's said that?

Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-28-2006, 04:30 AM
yBeayf yBeayf is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Quote:
I'd say they're not incomptent nor are they the fourth estate.
Well, they're certainly not the fourth estate...
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-28-2006, 04:33 AM
cerberus cerberus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
d'Oh! I missed the first link.

The page is rather complete. I like the 50 or so years of SG reports on smoking.

I also like the phrase Involuntary Smoking: that's exactly what it is.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-28-2006, 04:41 AM
Cheesesteak Cheesesteak is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by kambuckta
Who's said that?

I think it's generally smokers responding to whiny bitches who can't walk past a smoker in any setting, anywhere in the world, without acting like they just met the Boston Strangler. *cough* *hack* *dirty look*

The smokers, forced from the building to smoke outside, in the rain, snow and bitter cold, are made pariahs because people who are allowed in the building have to walk past them, sucking in their deadly second hand smoke for 3 seconds. Now, smoking opponents will drive smokers further into the underground because second hand smoke isn't just smelly anymore, it's dangerous! Look for a new round of laws that make smoking the most difficult legal activity to partake in this side of shooting a firearm.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-28-2006, 04:55 AM
chrisk chrisk is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Southern ontario
Posts: 5,953
Well, I'm going to add my usual smoking-related complaint here... smokers at bus stops. Yes, I understand that for some people with a serious smoking problem, taking a long trip on a smoke-free intercity bus is enough of a stretch that they want to get a puff in first, but... I do get upset when people smoke right there at the stop, or in the line-up waiting for the bus. It forces non-smokers to decide whether to breathe their fumes or back away, thus effectively giving up our place in line. This may sound harsh, but deep down I feel that if anyone should have to give up their place, it should be the smokers.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06-28-2006, 04:56 AM
yojimbo yojimbo is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 9,280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak
I think it's generally smokers responding to whiny bitches who can't walk past a smoker in any setting, anywhere in the world, without acting like they just met the Boston Strangler. *cough* *hack* *dirty look*
I've gotten that in a fucking smoking area in a beer garden in a pub.

I'm outside, smoking where I should be and still this fucking cunt moaned at me. Generally I'm what you call a conscientious smoker but some people just need to fuck right off.

As to the OP. I always thought that 2nd hand smoke wasn't great so it's no surprise
.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 06-28-2006, 05:05 AM
cerberus cerberus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Well, here's the message from the NonSmoking Public...

Ready?

If we have to share the air with you, then we do not want to breathe your fucking exhaust fumes

Got it?

It's analogous to you not wanting us to sprinkle our shit onto your food and drink, not even a tiny little bit, say the tiny amount of shit equivalent to three seconds' worth of breathing your respiratory shit/exhaust. Oh, and our sprinkle/shit? We added a few carcinogens and other and sundry poisons, just really small doses, don't trouble your pretty little head about it. Just shut the fuck up and eat our shit, the shit we sprinkle in your food. 'Cos, see? We're more important than you!

It's just like that, yes?

There's second hand smoke; but no second hand cheeseburger; no second hand heroin...

If you must indulge/suffer your self-destructive activity, then do it with your own fucking air.

Having said that, part of the problem are the rocket scientists that decide to put the smoking areas near the entrances/exits, hence placing the exhaust clouds in the path of everyone entering or leaving the building.

Then again, I can hold my breath for a loooooong time now.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 06-28-2006, 05:38 AM
kambuckta kambuckta is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by cerberus
Well, here's the message from the NonSmoking Public...

Ready?

If we have to share the air with you, then we do not want to breathe your fucking exhaust fumes

Got it?

It's analogous to you not wanting us to sprinkle our shit onto your food and drink, not even a tiny little bit, say the tiny amount of shit equivalent to three seconds' worth of breathing your respiratory shit/exhaust. Oh, and our sprinkle/shit? We added a few carcinogens and other and sundry poisons, just really small doses, don't trouble your pretty little head about it. Just shut the fuck up and eat our shit, the shit we sprinkle in your food. 'Cos, see? We're more important than you!

It's just like that, yes?

There's second hand smoke; but no second hand cheeseburger; no second hand heroin...

If you must indulge/suffer your self-destructive activity, then do it with your own fucking air.

Having said that, part of the problem are the rocket scientists that decide to put the smoking areas near the entrances/exits, hence placing the exhaust clouds in the path of everyone entering or leaving the building.

Then again, I can hold my breath for a loooooong time now.
Meh. Fuck off.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 06-28-2006, 06:20 AM
Czarcasm Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Beervania
Posts: 38,448
Quote:
Originally Posted by kambuckta
Meh. Fuck off.
Meh. Don't take a last, long drag right before you get on the bus, toss that butt on the ground as if the world is your ashtray(and don't even try to convince me most smokers don't do this-I have yet to see a bus stop smoker who doesn't), then exhale that crap out on the tightly packed passengers. You don't do this? Fine and dandy, but you know damn well that you are the rare exception.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 06-28-2006, 06:28 AM
Contrapuntal Contrapuntal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by kambuckta
Meh. Fuck off.
No you. Way over there. Far away from people who do not want to breathe your nasty poisonous exhalations. Maybe I'll just give you a blast of bug spray from this little aerosol can every time you blow your smoke on me. Fair enough?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheeseteak
Now, smoking opponents will drive smokers further into the underground because second hand smoke isn't just smelly anymore, it's dangerous! Look for a new round of laws that make smoking the most difficult legal activity to partake in this side of shooting a firearm.
Is it legal to shoot a firearm at someone who is not an immediate threat to you? Why should it be legal for you to poison the air I breathe?
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 06-28-2006, 06:33 AM
SteveG1 SteveG1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
At this point, I don't really give a damn what some report says. Everyone has an opinion, just like everyone has an asshole. You don't want to smell mys smoke? Then stay the hell away. It's a big world out there. I'm sure you can find someplace else to be, other than right next to me. If I was there first, you can move your ass away.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 06-28-2006, 06:46 AM
Contrapuntal Contrapuntal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveG1
At this point, I don't really give a damn what some report says. Everyone has an opinion, just like everyone has an asshole. You don't want to smell mys smoke? Then stay the hell away. It's a big world out there. I'm sure you can find someplace else to be, other than right next to me. If I was there first, you can move your ass away.
Well, that's a start. Would you then agree that if you were not "there first," you would not light up? Would you also agree that anyone's opinion is as valid as peer reviewed medical research?
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 06-28-2006, 06:58 AM
Cheesesteak Cheesesteak is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Contrapuntal
Is it legal to shoot a firearm at someone who is not an immediate threat to you? Why should it be legal for you to poison the air I breathe?
If you're going to keep it legal to buy tobacco, then the rules around using it should at least be reasonable. It's an addictive drug, we've known this forever, so demanding that people stop using it for 12 hours when they're not in their homes is ridiculous. We've already made it illegal to smoke in most public enclosed spaces, the only place left is the open air. You make it illegal to smoke in the open air, then we're talking the 12 hour law, which is not a workable solution.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 06-28-2006, 06:58 AM
Who_me? Who_me? is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Contrapuntal
Well, that's a start. Would you then agree that if you were not "there first," you would not light up? Would you also agree that anyone's opinion is as valid as peer reviewed medical research?

I really don't care whether you like smelling my smoke or not. I do move away from non-smokers when I smoke, but I'm not going to run away and hide in a corner just to keep you smoke free.

If you are going to die by inhaling my smoke, then by that thinking... I'll be dead first.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 06-28-2006, 06:59 AM
SteveG1 SteveG1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Contrapuntal
Well, that's a start. Would you then agree that if you were not "there first," you would not light up? Would you also agree that anyone's opinion is as valid as peer reviewed medical research?
At one time, the answer would have been yes to not lighting up. But anymore, I'm not so sure. Attitude has everything to do with it. If they ask politely, fine. If they are assholes, I light up. As for valid opinions, hell no. Everyone has a right to an opinion. I have the right to ignore their opinion. Besides, there have been cases where "valid medical research" or "valid scientific reserch" was later discovered to be skewed to reach a foregone conclusion, or totally false, or was contradicted by some other "valid research". It's simple. I won't smoke near you, if you are polite, or if I know already that you object. If you are a jerk about it, then you can "smell what the Rock is cooking". A little courtesy goes a long way.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 06-28-2006, 07:00 AM
jjimm jjimm is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
I support the smoking bans. I bend over backwards to be conscientious. I go outside to smoke unless I've sought permission from those around me. I stay away from non-smokers. I take my butts home with me, in my pocket if needs be.

Help me to help you stay away from my smoke, but don't fucking bitch if you happen to be exposed from dozens of metres away, for half a second, diluted by the vastness of the atmosphere. So "there is no risk-free exposure". I'd imagine the same is true of any other airborne pollution, and especially car exhausts.

Yeah, some smokers are inconsiderate bastards, but then again some non-smokers are whining little drama queens.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 06-28-2006, 07:31 AM
Jackmannii Jackmannii is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
There's nothing terribly new here. Secondhand smoke, in addition to making things unpleasant for non-smokers, causes or worsens serious diseases and increases the likelihood of fatalities in non-smokers. As the heavy majority in the U.S. (and increasingly so, around the world), they will use this latest report to make their personal space a little safer, and more power to them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjimm
I support the smoking bans. I bend over backwards to be conscientious.
I've always thought how marvelous it is that the SDMB's acknowledged smokers are this way...considerate, thoughtful, non-littering etc. Just like smokers in general.

Unless they're not paying attention. Or having a bad day. Or seizing on some tone or glance from non-smokers that they can use to take offense at and justify their antisocial behavior.

Which is why we need anti-smoking laws and serious enforcement.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 06-28-2006, 07:45 AM
jjimm jjimm is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackmannii
I've always thought how marvelous it is that the SDMB's acknowledged smokers are this way...considerate, thoughtful, non-littering etc. Just like smokers in general.
Cast aspertions as ye may. I stand by my claim. Ever since I got busted (by a dog warden) for throwing a butt out of my car window, and absorbed the data about second-hand smoke, I've taken a long look at how I used behave while smoking, and have mended my ways.
Quote:
Or seizing on some tone or glance from non-smokers that they can use to take offense at and justify their antisocial behavior.
I'm only talking about the thankfully small number of people who shout, or make very obvious hand-flapping gestures out of proportion to their exposure. None of which would make me try to "justify" anything. Now if only we can get the inconsiderate smokers to be a vanishing minority too. Which is why I urge activist non-smokers to concentrate their ire on the really bad ones, not to exaggerate the effects of those trying to reform.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 06-28-2006, 07:47 AM
SteveG1 SteveG1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackmannii
Which is why we need anti-smoking laws and serious enforcement.
Just what we need. More "nanny government". Maybe we need anti-jerk laws to lock up loud and obnoxious morons who feel some overpowering urge to stand right next to someone who is smoking. Just. Move. Away. From. Them.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 06-28-2006, 08:08 AM
CandidGamera CandidGamera is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveG1
At one time, the answer would have been yes to not lighting up. But anymore, I'm not so sure. Attitude has everything to do with it. If they ask politely, fine. If they are assholes, I light up. As for valid opinions, hell no. Everyone has a right to an opinion. I have the right to ignore their opinion. Besides, there have been cases where "valid medical research" or "valid scientific reserch" was later discovered to be skewed to reach a foregone conclusion, or totally false, or was contradicted by some other "valid research". It's simple. I won't smoke near you, if you are polite, or if I know already that you object. If you are a jerk about it, then you can "smell what the Rock is cooking". A little courtesy goes a long way.

Yeah, I rarely bash anybody with the two by four I carry around, unless they're an asshole.

Smoking near someone to punish them for their attitude is pretty much the same thing as punching them in the jaw for it. It's gauche. It's assault.

I'm so terribly sorry that you have to put up with the contempt of a portion of your fellow human beings. Poisoning them is not a measured response, though.
__________________
-Official Doper Brat #007- When life gives you harlequins, make a harlequinade.
I am the very model of the modern kaiju Gamera / I've a shell that's indestructible and endless turtle stamina. / I defend the little kids/ and I level downtown Tokyo/ in a giant free-for-all mega-kaiju rodeo.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 06-28-2006, 08:25 AM
UncleBeer UncleBeer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 1999
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackmannii
Which is why we need anti-smoking laws and serious enforcement.
Then y'all could at least be honest about your intentions and encourage legislation that completely outlaws the sale of tobacco for smoking. Anything else makes you a hypocritical fuck. It's death by a thousand cuts; just like the dickheads who wanna take away my guns. And I say this as an ex-smoker; a group of people who're generally the most sanctimonious of this particular boquet of assholes.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 06-28-2006, 08:35 AM
Czarcasm Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Beervania
Posts: 38,448
Quote:
Originally Posted by UncleBeer
Then y'all could at least be honest about your intentions and encourage legislation that completely outlaws the sale of tobacco for smoking. Anything else makes you a hypocritical fuck. It's death by a thousand cuts; just like the dickheads who wanna take away my guns. And I say this as an ex-smoker; a group of people who're generally the most sanctimonious of this particular boquet of assholes.
I knew this line of "logic" would pop up sooner or later. While there is a (questionable by some) right to keep and bear arms, there is no such right to smoke.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 06-28-2006, 08:36 AM
Happy Clam Happy Clam is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveG1
Just what we need. More "nanny government". Maybe we need anti-jerk laws to lock up loud and obnoxious morons who feel some overpowering urge to stand right next to someone who is smoking. Just. Move. Away. From. Them.
What about when this isn't an option, such as at a bus stop? Or, for that matter, why should the person who isn't smoking be forced to move when it is the smoker who is intiating the passive smoking (ok, the link proves passive smoking is bad, but "poisoning" is hyperbole).
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 06-28-2006, 08:40 AM
UncleBeer UncleBeer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 1999
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm
I knew this line of "logic" would pop up sooner or later. While there is a (questionable by some) right to keep and bear arms, there is no such right to smoke.
Great. Then there's nothing stopping y'all from outlawing the sale of tobacco for smoking. Right?
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 06-28-2006, 08:42 AM
Czarcasm Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Beervania
Posts: 38,448
Quote:
Originally Posted by UncleBeer
Great. Then there's nothing stopping y'all from outlawing the sale of tobacco for smoking. Right?
The crap is poison. Can you give me any reason, besides addiction and obscene profit, why it shouldn't be outlawed?
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 06-28-2006, 08:48 AM
Cluricaun Cluricaun is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
I'm kind of torn on this issue. I wonder how many of the non-smokers also use things like Sweet'N Low or Equal, or maybe have had some food cooked on a grill lately, or maybe inhaled some of those bus exhaust fumes.

It almost seems that Americans now insist on some Howard Hughesian bubble around them thatís germ free and odor free and smoke free and touch free and that the rest of the world needs to have some legal compulsion to not only respect that space, but to immediately grovel and beg forgiveness for any slight against that space no matter how real or imagined it might be.

The world we live in is a scary, dirty and often dangerous space. If the most you have to worry about is cigarette smoke then be thankful.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 06-28-2006, 08:50 AM
Happy Clam Happy Clam is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm
The crap is poison. Can you give me any reason, besides addiction and obscene profit, why it shouldn't be outlawed?
Liberty, perhaps?

If we assume that we are criminalizing use in any enviroment where someone else is going to be exposed to passive smoke, and that the only person who is going to be effected is the smoker themselves- they can go ahead and knock themselves out. After all, we don't ban bungee jumping or mountain climbing, although those are very dangerous past-times. It is a principle going back to J.S. Mill that the only grounds for forbidding an act is if it harms someone else. Smoking (when considered in a vacuum...insert obligatory joke here) harms only the smoker, who has made a choice to do so. Or are you in favour of banning suicide as well?

I'm fully in favour of restricting the circumstances under which someone can be exposed to passive smoke, however.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 06-28-2006, 08:54 AM
jsgoddess jsgoddess is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm
The crap is poison. Can you give me any reason, besides addiction and obscene profit, why it shouldn't be outlawed?
People should be allowed to ingest as much poison as they want.

They shouldn't be allowed to force me to ingest poison I don't want.

There are unavoidable sources, but smoking isn't one of them.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 06-28-2006, 09:00 AM
Jackmannii Jackmannii is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by UncleBeer
Then y'all could at least be honest about your intentions and encourage legislation that completely outlaws the sale of tobacco for smoking. Anything else makes you a hypocritical fuck.
What a great idea, except that Prohibition doesn't work. It just spawns smuggling and corruption.

So smoking will continue to be regulated and taxed.

I have no "intention" to get smoking banned anyway. People have the right to pursue activities that are self-destructive. They just don't have the right to take me and other non-smokers down with them.

If you want to argue that governments should devote a heftier portion of their tax revenues from smoking to health initiatives, smoking cessation programs, litter control and protecting non-smokers, I'm with you.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 06-28-2006, 09:06 AM
LionelHutz405 LionelHutz405 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm
The crap is poison. Can you give me any reason, besides addiction and obscene profit, why it shouldn't be outlawed?
Because outlawing it wouldnít have any affect on its use. Just like prohibition didnít put an end to drinking. An addict isnít going to quit just because itís now illegal. They will just switch to illegal sources for their smokes. At least some of the obscene profit can go towards providing health care. If it was illegal, none of it would.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 06-28-2006, 09:14 AM
George Kaplin George Kaplin is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 893
"I now realize I smoke for simply one reason, and that is spite. I hate you non-smokers with all of my little black fucking heart. You obnoxious, self-righteous, whining little fucks. My biggest fear, if I quit smoking, is that I'll become one of you."

Bill Hicks
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 06-28-2006, 09:19 AM
UncleBeer UncleBeer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 1999
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm
The crap is poison. Can you give me any reason, besides addiction and obscene profit, why it shouldn't be outlawed?
I don't have one. At least one to which you (and many others) probably won't find objections. So, again, what's stopping you guys from introducing legislation banning smoking tobacco? Has that been done? I'm not aware of any such legislation being introduced.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 06-28-2006, 09:28 AM
CandidGamera CandidGamera is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsgoddess
People should be allowed to ingest as much poison as they want.

They shouldn't be allowed to force me to ingest poison I don't want.

There are unavoidable sources, but smoking isn't one of them.
Bingo. I think tobacco is silly, wasteful, impractical, and of no value whatsoever and I tend to think just a little bit less of those who choose to use it. But I have no intention of supporting legislation to ban it outright because of the reasoning presented by jsgoddess. If you want to slowly kill yourself over the course of twenty years, go right ahead. But when your smoking infiltrates a single molecule of carcinogenic material into my lungs, you've crossed a line.

My tolerance for being slowly poisoned varies with the degree to which I like the person doing the poisoning, of course. I make sure to stand upwind of my father if we're both outside and he's puffing away on a cigarette though.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 06-28-2006, 09:32 AM
Cheesesteak Cheesesteak is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by LionelHutz405
Because outlawing it wouldnít have any affect on its use. Just like prohibition didnít put an end to drinking.
Bullshit. Put tobacco on the same criminal level as marijuana. Do you think you could get enough marijuana to support a pack a day habit without going broke? Think you could smoke 20 joints a day without getting caught?

There's also a huge difference between tobacco and alcohol/marijuana. You can't get drunk or high on tobacco*, so why would someone bother to break the law to smoke it?

Yes, in the short term there will be continuing use because people are addicted, but in the mid-long term making it illegal will kill the tobacco industry.

*Well, maybe you can, but I doubt the high is anything like the other two.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 06-28-2006, 09:34 AM
yBeayf yBeayf is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
To be honest, this is one of the reasons I've switched to using snuff almost exclusively. While the poor, mistreated smokers (and I don't mean that sarcastically) are huddling out in the street, I can be merrily snuffing away indoors, out of the sun and the rain and the heat. And taking a pinch of snuff is so quick and unobtrusive, if you weren't watching carefully you might never even know I was doing it.

The day they outlaw snuffing (which, unlike smoking, *truly* doesn't affect anybody but the person doing it) is the day I start bombing government offices.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 06-28-2006, 09:40 AM
Seven Seven is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Great. I can see where this report is going.

Now when I walk down the street I'll have obese Americans telling me how I'm killing them because they can smell cigarette smoke. Of course it will take them a moment to get the words out between bites of McBurger and Crispy Creme.

I don't know how serious to take a report like this from a fear-based Government. The CDC website has three headlines on their main page; Secondhand smoke, Firework Injuries and *gasp* Pandemic Flu.

This coming from a crack department that did nothing about AIDS for years.

What next? A report on how drinking is bad for you because it kills brain cells? How the toxins in household cleaners are really bad for you?
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 06-28-2006, 09:57 AM
kayT kayT is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Austin
Posts: 2,599
People in places like LA who complain about second hand smoke from the driver's seat of their Hummer are very amusing to me.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 06-28-2006, 09:59 AM
davenportavenger davenportavenger is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cluricaun
I'm kind of torn on this issue. I wonder how many of the non-smokers also use things like Sweet'N Low or Equal, or maybe have had some food cooked on a grill lately, or maybe inhaled some of those bus exhaust fumes.

It almost seems that Americans now insist on some Howard Hughesian bubble around them thatís germ free and odor free and smoke free and touch free and that the rest of the world needs to have some legal compulsion to not only respect that space, but to immediately grovel and beg forgiveness for any slight against that space no matter how real or imagined it might be.

The world we live in is a scary, dirty and often dangerous space. If the most you have to worry about is cigarette smoke then be thankful.
Fuck yeah. Screw those sanctimonious non-smokers who will chastise me as they scatter their SUV fumes in my face. Or who will spray their anti-germ sprays, which make me cough and smell nasty, in the name of "health." I make way less pollution than a car or an aerosol can. I don't doubt that there are health problems associated with secondhand smoke, but guess what? There are health problems associated with everything. Everything!

And if you don't like it, then don't leave your house or use any chemicals at all. And don't drive your car, especially not around me, a non-driver who does not relish getting a lungful of smoke that is far more toxic than my piddling cigarettes. And don't dare use your anti-stink Oust sprays around me, do you know what's in those aerosol cans? Carcinogens! And you're forcing me to be exposed to them, without my consent. Mountain fresh, my ass.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 06-28-2006, 10:00 AM
Hampshire Hampshire is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 9,377
Know why smokers get dirty looks from others even when they're smoking where they are allowed to?

Cause you stink!!

Same reason the lady that puts on too much perfume gets dirty looks. Same reason that the guy with horrendous body odor who hasn't showered in days gets dirty looks. Same reason the guy with garlic/onion breath gets dirty looks.

Sure none of them are doing anything illegal. But when your in my space and you STINK, I'm gonna give you a dirty look.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 06-28-2006, 10:05 AM
Caricci Caricci is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak
I think it's generally smokers responding to whiny bitches who can't walk past a smoker in any setting, anywhere in the world, without acting like they just met the Boston Strangler. *cough* *hack* *dirty look*


Look for a new round of laws that make smoking the most difficult legal activity to partake in this side of shooting a firearm.
Oh, yeah, that would be me. Even with my own mother.

And I look forward to those laws with eager anticipation.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 06-28-2006, 10:07 AM
Homebrew Homebrew is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm
The crap is poison. Can you give me any reason, besides addiction and obscene profit, why it shouldn't be outlawed?
Because people should be free to do what they want as long as it doesn't actively harm others, even if it is dangerous and harmful to themselves. Being overweight is dangerous, and causes much more disease and harm than second-hand smoke. Are you going to next lobby the government to force people to be physically fit?

I have no problems with making restaurants, air planes, malls and other such places non-smoking. I think it's asinine to go so far as to make smoking illegal.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 06-28-2006, 10:10 AM
davenportavenger davenportavenger is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hampshire
Sure none of them are doing anything illegal. But when your in my space and you STINK, I'm gonna give you a dirty look.
Cars stink too.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 06-28-2006, 10:17 AM
Hampshire Hampshire is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 9,377
Quote:
Originally Posted by davenportavenger
Cars stink too.
Yep, and if I'm sitting at an outside eating area and someone backs their car up to it and lets it run while I'm eating I'll give them a dirty look too.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 06-28-2006, 10:32 AM
Cluricaun Cluricaun is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hampshire
Yep, and if I'm sitting at an outside eating area and someone backs their car up to it and lets it run while I'm eating I'll give them a dirty look too.
Give them a dirty look? Sure, go ahead I would too. Attempt to legislate that people canít operate their legal vehicles close to where youíre having a sandwich and weíre talking a little bit crazy.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 06-28-2006, 10:40 AM
Uvula Donor Uvula Donor is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak
Bullshit. Put tobacco on the same criminal level as marijuana. Do you think you could get enough marijuana to support a pack a day habit without going broke? Think you could smoke 20 joints a day without getting caught?

There's also a huge difference between tobacco and alcohol/marijuana. You can't get drunk or high on tobacco*, so why would someone bother to break the law to smoke it?

Yes, in the short term there will be continuing use because people are addicted, but in the mid-long term making it illegal will kill the tobacco industry.

*Well, maybe you can, but I doubt the high is anything like the other two.
You're absolutely right. Marijuana's been illegal for decades. Heroin, too. Cocaine, too. And it's worked: The trade in those substances has been absolutely crushed by prohibition, and the "industries" supplying them have totally collapsed. Why, if it weren't for illustrations in textbooks and some museum exhibits, no one today would even know what a marijuana leaf looks like.

Fucking idiot.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 06-28-2006, 10:44 AM
yBeayf yBeayf is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2002
Quote:
There's also a huge difference between tobacco and alcohol/marijuana. You can't get drunk or high on tobacco*, so why would someone bother to break the law to smoke it?
You can't get high on normal, measured, regular use of small doses of tobacco, much like various native peoples in South America chew on coca leaves all day long without getting high. Taking large amounts of tobacco at once can certainly induce altered states of consciousness, and it was used as an entheogen by native peoples. If tobacco is outlawed, I guarantee you'll start seeing people using it as a recreational drug and overdosing on the stuff.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright © 2013 Sun-Times Media, LLC.