Firstly, thank you for your thoughtful responses.
mdv96: So you can become very sick because of smoke when you never smoked in your life.
Actually research into second hand smoke is argued to be poorly undertaken by some doctors and politicians.
Although most see it as common sense that second hand smoke should be dangerous, the research appears to be very unbalanced. Some of the best research has been ignored in favour of research that politicians or tobacco companies can use to promote their causes.
Also it's extremely difficult to be sure that second hand smoke actually is the "
rimary cause" of illnesses that are related to it.
Freakenstein: If they want to smoke to calm them down, then let them. If they want to stop, we got ways.
The freedom element is something that cannot be discouraged, but smoking is not "sensible", and we have a moral and altruistic responsibility to stop people harming themselves.
We don't permit suicide so why permit something that "supposedly" causes it?
Hypermnestra: What I meant was not that people might misunderstand the topic, but that your arguments would be supported. Just talking is weak, in a debate you should always link out to the source where you got your information.
The problem with opinions and arguments is that they are directed from one point of view. I enjoy understanding a range of perspectives and then forming one neutral instinctive view that encompasses them all.
Smoking in public places is wrong, smoking in restaraunts and businesses is wrong, but if they can't smoke in their own home, where are they going to smoke? Do you want them to drive all the way out to the middle of nowhere just to smoke a cigarette? I understand your point, but I'm saying that this sort of thing is unpreventable, and that to smoke around your children is your choice. You can just go outside to smoke, and that would be fine if your kids are indoors. You can crack a window in your car and that would make it so that the smoke does not stay in the car.
The issue here is the difference between children and adults. An adult can choose to be in the room with another smoker but very often a children will be forced to endure the smoke and not have any right to object. This causes the most concern, especially if parents are not making sufficient effort to reduce the amount of exposure.
Also opening the window in a car does not help much, since all it would do is blow the smoke to the back.
Once you start smoking, it's very difficult to stop.
This is why the emphasis should be on preventing new smokers rather than punishing current ones. By bringing in laws it makes it less appealing to start smoking.
SangreNaranjada: In this manner, people who do not want to be exposed to cigarette smoke can avoid smoking allowed establishments, and people who do smoke can do so without fear of offending other patrons. Similarly, people who do not want to be exposed to smoke can choose not to work in a smoking allowed establishment, and can seek employment in places where no smoking is the rule.
This is slightly idealistic because of the difficulty of finding employment, especially in these economic times. I doubt the worry about second hand smoke would overrule the thought of turning down a possible job.
nevetsthereaper: I'd like to segregate smokers from everybody else - at least make them go outside when they want a fag. I'm happy for you to smoke as much as you like - just don't make me be a secondhand smoker. I don't want to catch the cancer or lung diseases that you'll most likely be getting.
Some measures to segregate smokers can be really simple and affordable, but it would reduce work efficiency if a worker had to make extra effort to move to smoker designated areas.
SirNoobalot: It also gives a home/business owner, or even msybe a customer, good basis to make someone not smoke in their home/business, besides just preference.
This is a good point. Smoking used to look fashionable and acceptable, but now it is extremely rude to smoke in somebody else's home or personal space. We just have much less tolerance for it now.
unlimitedpower: Mhh, I wouldn't let small children smoke, that's a pretty bad idea, especially if it caught on and many of them did it. Be a serious health hazard, and the number of mutated children would probably rise drastically.
Cite your sources, especially for the pictures. Otherwise it is plagiarism.
The thought of children smoking is sickening. It's just pure defiance and arrogance to think that smoking benefits a child in any way. There are far more effective and safer methods of stress relievement that should be taught to children.
Also the pictures didn't produce an automatic hyperlink like I thought they would, so thank you for pointing that out.
Joe96: Now they have electronic cigarettes which don't have all that stuff...
I've seen those in a magazine. They operate using batteries as its main power source and
even have fire visuals and fake smoke.
nevetsthereaper: what about chewing tobacco, is it cool if i spit chew on the ground?
I've never tried a tobacco leaf. I expect that they taste dry and bitter.
