Nebula, You need to get a little perspective here. If you want to talk about burdens on society, talk about all the burdens including, for example, the huge law enforcement and other costs directly attributable to alcohol. And your right to clean air? What about the right to a clean and helathy planet? In Los Angeles, as the following link shows, 50% of summer days are unsafe for children with asthma. Doing anything about that? los angeles clean air?
Here's a fun one: http://www.pubcoalition.com/html/resources_shs_ventilation.htm Such is the politics of smoking. ~Raithere
Raithere; Well, I don't know about you but when the bus arrives I promptly get on it, I don't sit their inhaling fumes. If I had a choice would take a bus that didn't emit poisonous gas. But, when I'm waiting for the bus in -25 weather and all the little shelters are filled with smokers, I get a little frustrated. I agree with you 100% on this point. Note in my post I explicity stated that smoking should only be banned in public places. I think that whether or not a private establishment allows smoking should be a decision left to the proprietor. His right to run his own show overrides my right to clean air because it is my choice to enter (or not enter) his establishment-- it's the individual's responsibility. I think we're in agreement on this one. And regarding how harmful 2nd hand smoke is...the only reason this issue concerns me is because my bronchitis really gets bad if I'm exposed to a lot of seconds hand smoke. Again, referring to Christmas with my family...after Christmas, without fail, my bronchitis gets really bad. BTW, that Bill Hicks line is quite good Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!. MacZ; A large chunk of the cost of alcohol abuse is the result of drunk driving. The difference is that drunk driving is illegal-- it still happens or course, but at least the gov't has acknowledged that this act should be prohibited, and has taken steps to prevent it. I'm sure the costs would be much higher if the gov't did nothing. Isn't it time to do something with smoking? I totally agree that alcoholism has a huge cost to society. I'm just saying that I think the reason anti-smoking bylaws are being enacted isn't so much the govt's response to anti-smoking sentiment, but rather the gov'ts attempt to try and reduce preventable health-related expenditures. Sadly, I don't know what more can be done to try and reduce alcohol related costs, short of banning the stuff... Again, the reason that I support bans on smoking in public areas is simply because 2nd hand smoke directly affects my health. An alcohol abuser *generally* doesn't directly affect my health. And while I'm pissed that my taxes are higher because of alcoholism, again, at least the gov't is trying to reduce the cost. I praise the gov't for doing the same with smoking. I'm sure that's the case, but I don't care about that fact for 2 reasons: one, I don't live in LA, and two, this thread is about smoking. However, if I did live in LA you can bet I'd be equally pissed about that. I'm pretty lucky to live in a clean city.
So you are next to a street where only a bus drives? Besides you can ask the smokers to stop smoking in the shelter, most smokers aren't monsters Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Here's a question for all the smokers: You're walking down the street, minding your own business, when someone walking next to you sprays a cloud of poisonous and carcinogenic chemicals iin your face. I guessing in this situation you won't just ignore this random act, or even politely ask the stranger to stop poisoning the air. So what is the difference between this and smoking in public?
No, nor do I go around demolishing coal-fired power plants. However, both are necessary evils in order to maintain our current social level, and both are beginning to be phased out in favour of cleaner alternatives. Neither is true of smoking.
In NY, Bloomberg is cracking down on smokers again. Many people who have been purchasing cigarettes online received letters stating that they have 30 days to pay taxes or otherwise face interests and penalties.
define necessary evils do you include, all the chemicals people put on there bodies, such as perfumes for example. and junk food establishments, these are all luxurys and are harming you health and the planet. smoking cigs did not cause a hole in the ozone layer, btw I dont smoke I'm just sick of the way, bleedy heart liberals all pick up the banners, when it suits them, and hide when it dont. there is no proof passve smoking hurt anyone, a least no more than anything else in todays world. imo theres too much play on smoking causing cancer it all depends on the person, I personally have never met/known anyone who got lung cancer from smoking, breathing chemicals from a laungry, working in a petrol refinery,etc. yes the smoke can smell obnoxious but so do farts ,burn toast, cooking oils, sewers,etc. the original poster is extremely ungrateful, if it was known that he/she had a dodgy heart at birth, would it have been better to have killed he/she rather then he/she suffer, no. while he/she are at it they may as well blame every body as well. there are a lot worse off, people in the world. I myself dont have the use of my legs, it's nobodys fault, shit happens.
and now for a little humour. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
No, but none of these products incorporate carcinogens. As a matter of fact, I never eat in junk food outlets, nor do I wear makeup. Love the "Cancer installed" image!
Well, now there is a company in Michigan (in Lansing) that will (as of Jan 1) no longer allow it's employees to smoke. No smoking ever- at work, at home, out at the tavern- EVER! It will fire anyone who tests positive for nicotine through a wide array of tests. However, the company has one employee in Illinois, and Illinois had a law that protects smokers, so that employee can continue to smoke. The company did it to cut insurance costs. I'm not sure how I feel about that one- on one hand it makes sense, and on the other- what next, no going to McDonalds for lunch because fatty foods might cause you to become obese (and US is already the fattest country)? So all the obese people can now stay employed with the company, while the person who goes to the bar and has two cigarettes a week can get fired? I just don't know. I'm anxious to hear your input on this one. :m: Peace.
I detest cigarettes. Spending far too much time around my dad growing up and sucking in his unfiltered Pall Mall smoke certainly didn't do my lungs or sinuses any good. Secondhand Smoke is a Serious Health Risk to Children * The developing lungs of young children are severely affected by exposure to secondhand smoke because children are particularly vulnerable to secondhand smoke. This is likely due to several factors, including that children are still developing physically, have higher breathing rates than adults, and have little control over their indoor environments. Children receiving high doses of secondhand smoke, such as those with smoking mothers, run the greatest relative risk of experiencing damaging health effects. * Children with asthma are especially at risk. EPA estimates that exposure to secondhand smoke increases the number of episodes and severity of symptoms in 200,000 to 1,000,000 children with asthma. Moreover, secondhand smoke is a risk factor for new cases of asthma in children who have not previously exhibited asthma symptoms. * Cal EPA found that exposure to secondhand smoke causes increased risk for Sudden Infant Death Syndrome. * Infants and young children whose parents smoke are among the most seriously affected by exposure to secondhand smoke, being at increased risk of lower respiratory tract infections, such as pneumonia and bronchitis. EPA estimates that secondhand smoke is responsible for between 150,000 and 300,000 lower respiratory tract infections in infants and children under 18 months of age, resulting in between 7,500 and 15,000 hospitalizations each year. * Cal EPA found that exposure to secondhand smoke increases the risk for middle ear infections in children. http://www.epa.gov/smokefree/healthrisks.html Being around it quite a bit as a child, then not at all once my parents divorced seems to have made me very sensitive to it. I find it hard to breathe in smoke filled rooms. And if I'm suffering from a cold, make that impossible. Based on the above EPA information, and my own experiences (admittedly anecdotal), I view forcing kids to breath secondhand smoke as a form of abuse. There may be far worse forms of abuse, but there is no reason to subject children to this. You smokers may puff away all you like. But not around me. Hell, roll your own and lace them with asbestos for all I care. Get where you're going even faster. As the saying goes, cancer cures smoking. As far as accusations of non discriminatory risk asessment go, we accept a certain amount of risk in everyday life. I can't think of a reasonable way to avoid breathing in gasoline fumes while filling my car. But I don't place my face inches away from the filling nozzle and huff the fumes either. You may voluntarily shorten your own life, safely away from those of us who do not wish to. You may not pollute my air in an enclosed space just to get your nicotine fix. Someone needs to invent a way to smoke that doesn't release any (or only very little) secondhand smoke. But I'm also sick of the excess taxes on tobacco. There should be enough to pay for smokers increased costs on society (and I believe that has been surpassed here in the U.S.) and no more. While you don't have the right to pollute my air, you may do as you please with yours.
it might just end my misery, but untill next year when i go to college, i have to be hear with my parents who have the brain of a goldfish and the attenttion span of a knat. and when i tell them i do not want to be smoked around, they still do, even though i have been in the hospital for having a weak heart caused by second hand smoke, they still do, so i have a reason to bitch about this stuff. i posted this just to see what other people thought about it.
who told you it was second hand smoke, where did you get you info?. if it was a doctor, he needs to be struck off. could you please post up the information, IE the persons name/article that proves it was second hand smoke that caused you heart defect. thank you.
