Pet peeve of mine also. Except I’ve never actually seen a smoker who didn’t just toss it when they were finished.
Alright, now you’re hijacking two threads and this is is arguably trolling. Knock it off.
I’ve already said I don’t agree with the smoking ban in bars.
If you can demonstrate that wifi and cell phones are as harmful as cigarette smoke, or even harmful in general, I’d be happy to vote for a ban on them.
Cigarette smoke is more harmful than parking in a garage is.
See, in this thing we like to call civilization, we make rules so people can enjoy a reasonable level of safety. Can’t beat your kids. Can’t run red lights. Can’t smoke anywhere it affects other people. Can’t blast your music at 2am. Can’t leave your dog unleashed in public. There’s thousands of perfectly reasonable laws that protect people from the shitty things other people would otherwise do to them.
Let’s have a test, I’ll go in a garage witht he door shut with 10 smokers smoking and stay in there for 10 minutes, and you go into a garage with the door shut with 1 car running and after 10 minutes, let’s see who is doing better.
Well, if the car’s a Prius (you know, one of those faggy liberal cars), I’d bet against the guy with the smokers.
Yes never mind the drunk that comes home and startes to cook then falls asleep - smoking is worse…
If they banned all car use then I would be happy if they banned smoking. after all its about polution not just ‘second hand smoke’ right - what about those people who dont cleen well enough - the smell from the house makes mine smell. Ban them.
god what a load of crap - 'long-didtance second hand smoke - I have heard it all
I don’t even know what you’re trying to say here. Or what you think I’m saying.
The argument the nannies have for second hand smoke being bad is tar. Tar is the cancer causing ingredient in smoke that causes lung cancer. Burning anything that produces smoke produces tar. So you breathing in pot smoke, you are breathing in tar. If second hand tobacco smoke causes lung cancer than so does breathing in pot smoke.
Smoke is smoke. So lets ban pot head and hte medical marijuanuts from smoking in their homes too and ban them from smoking in “clinics”
Get back to us when smoking two or three packs of pot a day becomes a widespread problem, o.k.?
Let’s assume for just a second that we agree that medical marijuana is a legitimate. If it is then you DO understand that a lot of drugs have side effects that while unfortunate are less harmful than the disease they treat, right?
Now I’m not completely convinced that medical MJ really is legit but since I have no medical drgree I’ll leave it up to others to make that call.
In addition I would agree that if you can’t smoke cigs in your house the same logic should apply to dope, but what’s wrong with the clinic?
Because it’s hypocrisy. Pot produces second hand smoke, yet I’d have to go outside to smoke a cigarette there, but not to smoke pot.
I think you’ll find that a typical smoker is more in the vicinity of one pack or less a day. Also, unless the young people are doing things dramatically differently than they did back in my day (war on, yellow onions, belt, etc.), rope smokers commonly draw the smoke very deeply into their lungs and hold it there. I don’t see too many cigarette smokers doing that.
Where did you get that? I just said that if you can’t smoke cigs in your house the same should apply to dope.
Also, I’m not sure about where you live but around here you can join a club where you can smoke indoors - usually cigars. I’d say that’s pretty much the same as going to a clinic, so no hypocrisy there either.
ETA - I was addressing stevenova’s claim above
Aren’t dictionaries great?
maybe my mis understanding - on re-reading I get your point - but I think the 'long-distance secondhand smoke fried my brain. sorry:smack:
So do they limit the amount of smokers of pot at one time so it doesn’t accumulate too much? Or it is okay to persecute smokers of cigarettes?
There seems to be an illusion (delusion?) that if you don’t see clouds of secondhand smoke in your apartment but only smell it, you have no exposure to the chemicals in secondhand smoke.* Not true.
“People who live in apartment buildings, especially those with children, breathe in tobacco smoke even if no one in their own household smokes, a new study shows.”
“Researchers found that about one third of study participants living in apartment buildings, condominiums and other multi-unit housing reported smelling smoke in their buildings, and about half of those residents reported smelling smoke in their own units. People were only eligible to participate in the study if no members of their household smoked in the home…taken together with another recent study, the findings mean that half of parents whose children are exposed to tobacco smoke don’t know it, Winickoff said. In that earlier study, Winickoff and his colleagues found that nine out of 10 children living in apartments had a chemical called cotinine in their blood. Cotinine is an indicator that a person has breathed in tobacco smoke.”
We have cut down on harmful pollution from car exhaust and factories for public health reasons. So why not limit harmful pollution from smoking, which is far less essential for commerce and employment than autos and factories?
why not ban all the unhealthy things in the air, which would involve banning cooking, carpets, dry cleaned clothes, etc. Why are you singling out smokers?