• cali_ash
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    10 months ago

    The effect on others is no more relevant than those of a myriard of other recreational activity and certainly doesn’t justify a flat ban.

    • indomara@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      It may not justify a flat ban, and such heavy handed measures often fail, as this one has.

      Perhaps instead we could focus on harm reduction? The amount of tar and nicotine in commercially available cigarettes today is astronomical compared to historically available tobacco.

      “In the 1970s, Brown & Williamson cross-bred a strain of tobacco to produce Y1, a strain containing an unusually high nicotine content, nearly doubling from 3.2 to 3.5%, to 6.5%.”

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco#Contemporary

      The average cigarette today has around 10.2mg of nicotine.

      We do not ban people from driving cars, but we have laws that require seat belts.

      We do not ban drinking alcohol but we have responsible service laws, age limits, and don’t allow driving while intoxicated.

      We do not ban extreme sports, but we have mandates for helmets and protective gear.

      Not having these measures in place affects everyone.

      • cali_ash
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        By all means, smoking is disgusting and should be reduces. But that’s really not my point.

        • indomara@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Your point was originally that it doesn’t affect others, and we were discussing the ways that it does, and how those negative effects might be reduced.

          I’m actually really glad to see these sorts of exchanges here more and more.

          I love lemmy. <3

    • voracitude@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      So first it doesn’t affect others, now it does but it doesn’t matter? The effect on others is cancer, friend. Not to mention it stinks. Smoking is “fun”, according to you? Yeah, calling bullshit. At best, you’re a troll. At worst…

      • FfaerieOxide@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Smoking is “fun”, according to you? Yeah, calling bullshit.

        Look who’s never smoked and fancies themself an opinion.

        Smoking feels incredible.

      • cali_ash
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Those effects are about as much as any other activity you do in private. Neglibably.

        It affect others when you take a walk the woods? Not really. Unless you fall and break a leg and “others” have to come get you in an amblance. Literally every can have some effects on others. But it’s ridiclous to pretend that would be a valid argument for a ban.

        Smoking is “fun”, according to you? Yeah, calling bullshit.

        A lot of people sure seem to enjoy it. Maybe more pleasure then fun

        The effect on others is cancer, friend

        If someone smokes in private it causes less cancer than your comments. Banning smoking in public palces isn’t the issue, the total ban is.

        Not to mention it stinks

        So should we ban your mum, too?