First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
Should smokers be allowed to make their own decisions?
30236 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
It doesn't matter.
Offline
Posted 10/19/14 , edited 10/27/14
Smoking is harmful to the users and people around them for no gain.
It makes no sense financial or otherwise to start or continue the act.
So should people that make such poor decisions be allowed to think for themselves?
Posted 10/19/14
i think being a nazi kind of person is worse than smoking, tbh.

you can reason with smokers (if i tell them to stop, they won't smoke in front of me), but you can't reason with nazi mentality.

922 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / Pretoria, South A...
Offline
Posted 10/19/14
I just don't agree with public smoking..
20192 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / The Heroes Associ...
Offline
Posted 10/19/14

Sir_jamesalot wrote:

So should people that make such poor decisions be allowed to think for themselves?



lol. So i assume you dont make stupid decisions either then?

by that logic. No one on earth should be able to think for themselves.


If someone wants to smoke, let them. As long as they don't smoke near me and blow smoke on me. I don't care if someone smokes in my area as long as they are polite and realize i don't enjoy inhaling jet fuel.

Theres nothing wrong with someone smoking, its their own personal decision. As long as they dont force their lifestyle on someone else (smoking right next to a non smoker who doesn't like the smell of smoke, actively trying to get people to start smoking and so on)

There are far more dangerous things in life compared to second hand smoke. For example.. ignorance.
Posted 10/19/14 , edited 10/19/14
"420 yolo that swag"

I think people with arrogant minds shouldn't think for themselves. JUST saying. ;]
30236 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
It doesn't matter.
Offline
Posted 10/19/14 , edited 10/19/14

GayAsianBoy wrote:

you can reason with smokers (if i tell them to stop, they won't smoke in front of me), but you can't reason with nazi mentality.


I don't think ending an addiction as simple as telling them to stop?



AzazelOfNexium wrote:


Sir_jamesalot wrote:

So should people that make such poor decisions be allowed to think for themselves?



lol. So i assume you dont make stupid decisions either then?

by that logic. No one on earth should be able to think for themselves.


If someone wants to smoke, let them. As long as they don't smoke near me and blow smoke on me. I don't care if someone smokes in my area as long as they are polite and realize i don't enjoy inhaling jet fuel.

Theres nothing wrong with someone smoking, its their own personal decision. As long as they dont force their lifestyle on someone else (smoking right next to a non smoker who doesn't like the smell of smoke, actively trying to get people to start smoking and so on)

There are far more dangerous things in life compared to second hand smoke. For example.. ignorance.


Mabe I should paraphrase.
Should people that repeatedly make the same poor decisions and shorten the lives of themselves and everyone else around them be allowed to think for themselves if this means that they can decide to continue this behavior?
Posted 10/19/14 , edited 10/19/14
No age stated. Is single. Has nothing better to do than to post rude things about people who are actually more nice than him. I sense a bit of jealousy from your arrogance. I take pity on you for you were most likely raised wrong. Don't judge based on what the person does judge based on how they treat others. That's why you're being judged here.

Let them live their lives how they want. As for you just worry about your own life.
6506 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M
Offline
Posted 10/19/14

Sir_jamesalot wrote:

Smoking is harmful to the users and people around them for no gain.
It makes no sense financial or otherwise to start or continue the act.
So should people that make such poor decisions be allowed to think for themselves?


To be honest, I'm all for somebody else thinking for me. I started smoking cigarettes a lot later than everyone else, so my two years compared to my friends' 10 makes it very embarrassing to know that I'm just as hooked.

Nicotine increases adrenaline, dopamine, and epinephrine, which together makes a person feel alert and good about that alertness. There are lots of ways to get these reactions without cigarettes, but...

I especially like to smoke cigarettes when I'm cleaning, because it's good to have something to break up two tedious tasks that I can't get distracted by for more than about 5 minutes. I don't take cigarette breaks at work, and I try hard not to smoke around non-smokers. I also do not litter my butts, which limits the places and times that I can smoke.

Basically, for me, it's sacrificing my physical health for a short-term benefit in my mental health.

But for all this, I cannot disagree with your points, so don't take any of it as an excuse. I just think that for me, it's a decision I've made as responsibly as I could.

Plus it looks cool, that's probably the best part about it.
4571 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M / Winnipeg, MB.
Offline
Posted 10/19/14

IgniteBadIntentions wrote:

No age stated. Is single. Has nothing better to do than to post rude things about people who are actually more nice than him. I sense a bit of jealousy from your arrogance. I take pity on you for you were most likely raised wrong. Don't judge based on what the person does judge based on how they treat others. That's why you're being judged here.

Let them live their lives how they want. As for you just worry about your own life.


^This

Also OP, if you're so scared of second hand smoke, just go to a non-smoking zone. There are thousands of them in every city.
11154 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / UK
Offline
Posted 10/19/14

Sir_jamesalot wrote:

Smoking is harmful to the users and people around them for no gain.
It makes no sense financial or otherwise to start or continue the act.
So should people that make such poor decisions be allowed to think for themselves?


They shouldn't be allowed to smoke near non smokers imo, passive smoking is a disgrace.

They should be allowed to think for themselves though.
6506 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M
Offline
Posted 10/19/14 , edited 10/19/14

octorockandroll wrote:


IgniteBadIntentions wrote:

No age stated. Is single. Has nothing better to do than to post rude things about people who are actually more nice than him. I sense a bit of jealousy from your arrogance. I take pity on you for you were most likely raised wrong. Don't judge based on what the person does judge based on how they treat others. That's why you're being judged here.

Let them live their lives how they want. As for you just worry about your own life.


^This

Also OP, if you're so scared of second hand smoke, just go to a non-smoking zone. There are thousands of them in every city.


High-and-mighty and self-assured are rude no matter what the cause. Here's an example.

What I think is worse than people smoking in front of stores or in parks (as long as they don't litter) is when people smoke e-cigarettes indoors, because it's not as harmful, so some people think it's not rude. I was at a Pinback show and the band literally had to tell a guy to stop blowing vapor in their faces.

I haven't counted that many "non-smoking zones" around here, maybe just because they're not enforced or maybe I just don't understand what you mean by a "non-smoking zone" that you could go to exactly? I should look into the laws about smoking in public. I know five years ago you could still smoke in businesses across the county line. There was a Fox and Hound or a Billy Frogg's or some franchise bar out there that lost almost all its business once the ban made it over there. I wasn't a smoker at the time, and it did suck for me when we went all the way out there just so my friends could smoke inside. Not enough for me to want to take away their thinking-rights, but enough for me to be really annoyed if I had to drive.

I think the OP has been less rude than that e-cig guy and at least half the responders to his statements. Why treat somebody's bad attitude as a counterpoint to what they're saying? If you're so frustrated with the question he posed, I rudely suggest asking yourself "is it time for a cigarette?"

27230 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 10/19/14 , edited 10/19/14
What is this....I can't even--

Yes, smoking is unhealthy. Yes, it affects people around you. Yes, it can be a very bad thing to do if one gets addicted and ignores the people around them.

But these people are a minority among smokers. Smoking tobacco is not as common as it was back when I was a kid. More and more areas are designated as smoke-free. This is not lost on most people and I find that smokers now will ask: "Is it okay if I smoke here?" or "Do you mind if I smoke?" Well, unless it's a bar, nightclub, casino, or open outdoor area with no/few people, smokers do pay extra attention to their surroundings and the preferences of others. And with the invention of the e-cig, tobacco smoking is fading out even more. Still, the stigma remains and smokers are aware of the impression they make to others if they vape openly in a family restaurant or something without asking for permission.

The errant smoker who lights one up in a crowd of schoolkids in church is different. He is just an inconsiderate douchebag, a disrespectful person overall. He's not the typical smoker and it would be irresponsible of you an an observer to lump all other smokers in existence in with him.

Smokers are very much aware that nicotine addiction is bad. You clearly do not understand the issue of addiction and withdrawal. You clearly do not know what it is like to enjoy a leisurely smoke at the end of a long day. There are tons of behaviors that are potentially damaging to both a person and the people around him. Does this mean anybody who engages in these behaviors needs to be thought-policed and herded like some farm animal through life? I think not. Believing so is like hyperreflexia, it is an extreme and grossly out-of-proportion response. Sort of like burning down your house to kill a spider, or shooting a person for looking at you wrong.

6506 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M
Offline
Posted 10/19/14 , edited 10/19/14

MarkyD73 wrote:

They shouldn't be allowed to smoke near non smokers imo, passive smoking is a disgrace.

They should be allowed to think for themselves though.


I like this response, it seems to take everything into account.

So there's got to be a way to have a majority of smokers thinking for themselves and a way to protect a majority of people from the decision of smoking at all.

I don't think we can rely on everybody to actively smoke, so that's why there's rules about not smoking in businesses whether the business wants it or not.

The problem seems to be getting solved, I've been looking up local regulations. Well, cross county-line regulations because the smoking ban has been in effect for much longer in my city.

So we start here, 2004, headline "Bellevue Sidesteps Smoking Ban http://www.wowt.com/news/headlines/893261.html

And over the course of ten years, we're suddenly here, http://m.omaha.com/sarpy/bellevue/city-survey-seeks-input-on-broad-smoking-ban/article_25af8a9c-8641-59c3-8a36-63afdae9faf1.html?mode=jqm

Summarized, where it started out, the mayor and city council decide it's best for businesses to make the call themselves, but within a decade the city not only accepts the smoking-ban, it is asking residents if they want to ban tobacco use in any open public area, like a sidewalk or a park.

Maybe the best way to think for smokers is to create a few designated smoking areas instead of a thousand designated non-smoking areas.

Then we'll know who's really being a jerk about their smoking.
Posted 10/19/14
there's a few reasons to smoke actually. Because somebody chooses to smoke doesn't mean they have less capacity for thought, how do you even come to this conclusion.
8566 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 10/19/14 , edited 10/19/14
Why would making it inconvenient to smoke be a reputable or fair decision in any way. The inverse surely isn't fair.

While we're at it, why don't we put restrictions on the number of hours allowed to be continuously online. It's for "your own good" and "we should help you with that decision"
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.