I'm always confused by pro-smoking freepers who attack smoking bans like smoking is something in the bill of rights. Nicotine is a dangerous drug that kills people. I'll admit the war on some drugs is a bigger failure than prohibition, but I'm not sure legalizng all drugs is wise. If you smoke, but agree with controls on some substances, you are a hypocrite. Is nicotine safer than heroin and cocaine because it kills you slower? If you want all drugs legalized, at least I can respect your consistent opinion. I quit smoking 20 years ago. Secondhand smoke makes me and most other non-smokers feel quite ill. God designed our bodies with these defense mechanisms like pain to tell us something is wrong. Inhaling secondhand smoke is unhealthy. Would any of you smokers complain about someone expelling nasty rotten farts next to you constantly? I would really like a smoker try to explain how they could justify making drugs other than nicotine controlled or illegal. I would also like to hear one seriously say they would not mind smelling someone else's sewer smelling farts all day. It cannot be done without imposing egregiously liberal double standards on people. Being anti-smoking is being pro-life.
Too bad the pro-life bone is attached to the anti-freedom tendon in this knee-jerk reaction.
Non-smoker here, but as far as I know, nicotine, while addictive, is not itself harmful. That's why nicotine patches are allowed to be sold. The harmful part of cigarettes is the tar and other ingredients. The nicotine just keeps you wanting to smoke, from what I understand.
It was your own choice to quit. Since I haven't chosen to do so, you find fault with me. Quitting doesn't give you the right to demand that everyone else do so. I am no more a hypocrite than you are.
If you are smart enough to be a Republican, you are smart enough to give me at least 3 reasons why nicotine can't be compared to heroin or cocaine. Give it a try for the next 10 minutes and get back to me.
I'm a nonsmoker and, in the right environment like a music bar, I like smokiness. There is supposed to be a haze between you and the band. If you smell afterwords, wash your clothes and take a shower. Since Minneapolis banned smoking in bars I miss the atmosphere the smoke provided. The chance of such smoke harming my health in any way is about one tenth the risk that loud music poses. Maybe we should ban that too, huh? I mean isn't it obvious that the human ear was not meant to endure what a night of rock and roll will do to it. Oh that's right, if you don't like loud music, and are concerned about it's health effect, you don't go where it's offered. Seems simple enough.
Being anti-smoking is being pro-life.
Being anti-smoking the way you describe it is being a naive to the rest of the agenda of your fellow prohibitionists.
See, the thing with smoke gnatzies such as you is that sooner or later (usually sooner) they revert to third grade arguments about farts or peeing in the pool or some other juvenile chit.
Grow up and then get back to us.
How are the personal choices other adults make any of your business?
Nice post.
I'm always confused by something also.
I'm confused by anti-smoking/nannystatist freepers who support smoking bans because they believe they have a right to be completely comfortable and not offended 24/7/365. Living in a free society and respecting individual liberty means living with things you may not like or that may be inconvenient. Living in a police state I believe would present daily inconveniences that are more intense than expereincing a bad smell occasionally. That's clearly the road people who support govt. enforced morality at the point of a gun.
Indirectly it is. If you want to look at it from the perspective that a business/property owner has the right to engage, or allow legal activities on his property as he sees fit. Tobacco is legal, possessing and smoking tobacco is still legal.
The problem I, and many other FReepers have with bans, is the nanny state. The other problem we also have is the so-called conservatives here who should know better than to allow the state to have more power than it should, and yet cheer on these new laws.
I'm glad you quit smoking, and if being around smoke bothers you; don't patronize any private establishment that allows it. But don't send the state in to make the decisions for you and me.
No one forces a non-smoker to go into a smoking establishment, if they do, you should have them arrested for putting that gun to your head.