All These Anti-Smoking Laws

Log in

SmokingPipes.com Updates

Watch for Updates Twice a Week

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

Status
Not open for further replies.

fyfol

Starting to Get Obsessed
Nov 3, 2015
101
0
After a day thoroughly spent on discussing tobacco laws, I wanted to hear your thoughts, as I figure that many people here have seen more than myself at 20 years, and I thought a broad discussion might be good.
I'm seeing all kinds of anti tobacco talk on the internet, people thinking smokers are "idiots because they do something that harms them". I think almost all the people on the planet have or is doing something that's detrimental to life expectancy, and they should be free to do so. While I hear all kinds of tax increases, I've never seen any kind of an attempt to more thoroughly regulate what's allowed to go into a cigarette/cigar/pipe tobacco. Cigarettes are increasingly becoming less tobacco/more jet fuel with the time passing, and for the life of me I can not understand why no one is talking about trying to change that besides smokers. If the state is gonna have any say on what I smoke, please worry about quality and ingredients, and let me kill myself in a flavorful way rather than a bland experience, if I want to do so :)
Anyway, that's my two cents, and I'll be glad to hear your opinions. I think I'm not violating any rules (or hope), I've read the guidelines and I think this post is not political discussion or an inflammatory thread but I'm sorry if it is determined so.

 

bcharles123

Starting to Get Obsessed
Mar 18, 2014
236
1
Any statements regarding human health really require context. Statistically smoking is bad when looking at large numbers and general populations. Individually, smoking may be good if it reduces stress and provides enjoyment.
Exercise is generally good but not if it causes a stroke or you get hit by a car while bicycling. Foods should not be labeled good or bad. A diet of pure refined sugar is probably not an optimal strategy, but sugar can save the life of a diabetic. And so on. What is the context?
Society attempts to provide rules that serve the greater good but these generalizations do not look at specific cases. Furthermore, the rule makers are typically biased and do not apply consistent scientific principles. That's human.
We either believe in liberty and individual rights or we believe in societal rights and the good of the group. Both are problematic and that's why there is a middle ground.

 

perdurabo

Lifer
Jun 3, 2015
3,305
1,575
In a country that is getting closer to relaxing cannabis laws, its quite funny to see these fascist go after tobacco. The tar in cannabis is more worrisome than in tobacco, yet these idiots think it's a OK to inhale cannabis. Now I'm fine with cannabis legalization, but to vilify tobacco is asinine. Tobacco is a legal substance. Smoking Kills? Talk to George Burns.

 

perdurabo

Lifer
Jun 3, 2015
3,305
1,575
Individual rights and Liberty are problematic? Collectivism kills! The middle ground enables tyranny, bcharles123. You lost me there, sorry brother.

 

fyfol

Starting to Get Obsessed
Nov 3, 2015
101
0
We either believe in liberty and individual rights or we believe in societal rights and the good of the group. Both are problematic and that's why there is a middle ground.
Would you elaborate a little bit? I don't think it is an either/or situation, maybe I misunderstood.
Also I'm not suggesting that tobacco use is bad no matter what, and I agree that the context is important. But the main issue behind the society deciding whether I can smoke or not is, from what I saw, basic self-righteousness. People love defending causes by defining them to be "for our own good". However, I think all of us are capable of deciding whether or not we accept these risks much like a person who enjoys BigMacs. I, therefore, do not like people telling me what to do, especially by raising the prices. I mean, I've been smoking cigarettes since high-school, and I certainly experienced some lengths that I would go to just to enjoy my morning cigarette and neither the school board nor any authority kept 80 people congregating behind the bushes for some tea and cigarettes :lol: Hence my proposition that the state should only regulate tobacco as a quality-control and shouldn't have any more authority on which method I choose to "harm" myself.

 

bcharles123

Starting to Get Obsessed
Mar 18, 2014
236
1
Individual rights and Liberty are problematic? Collectivism kills! The middle ground enables tyranny, bcharles123. You lost me there, sorry brother.
Well yeah! And I'm a Libertarian!
Someone who smokes, AND gets lung cancer, causes my health insurance premium to go up and or my taxes to go up. Under a true Libertarian ideal, the individual would pay their own way. But given the current situation, yeah, it's a problem. Same thing for seat belts, pollution, drugs, guns.....
Ideallisticly I'm with you. I also think things are skewed away from this ideal and I would

like to see then swing back, but it is unrealistic to think it will swing all the way back.

 

bcharles123

Starting to Get Obsessed
Mar 18, 2014
236
1
When I say "problematic" I mean that solid philosophical arguments can be made by both sides (independent of what I personally believe).

 

fyfol

Starting to Get Obsessed
Nov 3, 2015
101
0
I did misunderstand you, and thanks for clarifying. I can say that I agree with you, and I couldn't come up with an example about how the individual affects the group in this context, and thank you for adding that perspective sir.

 

warren

Lifer
Sep 13, 2013
11,699
16,205
Foothills of the Chugach Range, AK
Of course your thread was meant to be inflammatory (second paragraph, first sentence) and start a discussion. No harm in that. Then you commence by decrying attempts to reduce smoking and then calling for yet more government oversight into what you may smoke. Forgive me for being more than a bit confused.
And, yes you will get a very broad discussion with even a bit of it related to smoking and tobacco. Most likely many of the responses will be unrelated to your thread and will middle the conversation by introducing drugs, politics, and nearly all of the world's perceived ills into the discussion. You've picked a very polarizing subject, a few forum members, myself included, readily admit that our smoking is the result of less than stellar decision making and simply a choice based on selfishness.
That said, I'll take the "money is the driving force" of the tobacco controversy position. No surprise in that. Many of the anti-smoking crowd depend on the controversy to earn a living. Donations, government grants, etc. fund their operations and pay the salaries. Very similar to other organizations, such as "Green Peace" and the global climate change groups. All depend on gathering public support for their cause.
Years ago, when the first scientific research showed the dangers of tobacco use some very smart people perceived that there were big moneys available for the taking. All that needed to be done was to organize a message and the moneys would flow. There would be PACs to fund, more research, advertising, law suits, etc. The controversy needs to be fueled and kept at the forefront if these people are to continue to make good money.
The science of the argument is simply not necessary any longer. Society has decided the argument, smokers lose and the world continues serenely on, generally unaffected by the actions of some of denizens.

 

fyfol

Starting to Get Obsessed
Nov 3, 2015
101
0
I'm sorry, perhaps I couldn't make myself clear enough. I'm not in support of any oversight, I'm just trying to say that if the government's going to be involved, they should worry about what goes into cigarettes or tobacco in general, and try to reduce unnecessary harmful substances. If they don't wanna do that, and they don't, then I don't want the government and the self-righteous anti-smokers to try and make me stop smoking. Hope this clears it up a bit.

 

warren

Lifer
Sep 13, 2013
11,699
16,205
Foothills of the Chugach Range, AK
Not really. Government has already decreed tobacco use as unhealthy. They can't make it any clearer. Society has spoken and I doubt the people want government to explore how tobacco can be made safer. It's not the anti-smokers anymore it is a substantial majority of society, in the US anyway, that finds smoking repulsive. They do not like the reek the smoker carries into the room and leaves in the paint, drapes and carpet.
Science be damned! Smoking is now viewed a social no-no as well as being unhealthy. The medical arguments pale next to societal standards these days. People just prefer that you do not smoke around them. It's not simply the "self-righteous" as you call them. We smokers shouldn't expect society to embrace our nasty habit simply because it makes us happy. Why in the world should we expect society to embrace our self-serving behavior. That's just being unduly selfish.
Many want to blame government when in fact they should be blaming their neighbors, co-workers, fellow diners, theater goers, etc. for not liking to be around reeking smokers. Ask yourself: would you by a used car that reeked of Chanel #5? Terrible body odor? Freshly filled diapers? Dead fish? This is how society as a whole views the smoker. Smoking is unacceptable in many public places and most private homes. Would you smoke in an infant's home? I wouldn't.
Heck, I've even developed the good grace, when smoking outside, to try and stand downwind from non-smoking acquaintances. Government certainly isn't forcing me to quit smoking. It's legal, just frowned upon. You can choose to smoke, just accept the consequences gracefully.

 

smokinfireman

Starting to Get Obsessed
Aug 17, 2015
176
1
I can be philosophical too:
I can volunteer to go die to protect my country. I can work in the coal mines and get black lung to fuel my country. I can become a crab fisherman and be thrown into the abyss to feed my country. But I shouldn't be allowed to smoke because it might kill me. There's some " philosophy " for ya.

 

warren

Lifer
Sep 13, 2013
11,699
16,205
Foothills of the Chugach Range, AK
I'm still not getting this "not being allowed to smoke" part of the argument. If your employer is the big, bad wolf you can move on. The wife? You still have choices. Even minors are not prohibited from smoking, only purchasing the cigarettes until of age. Granted there are restrictions on where you may smoke but, who the hell is prohibiting smoking to the extent that you cannot exercise options and continue to smoke?

 

jvnshr

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 4, 2015
4,616
3,868
Baku, Azerbaijan
I agree with Warren. Smoking used to be something popular and fancy few decades ago. People didn't have any statistics about smoking related deaths. Everything has changed recently. Even the older generation in my country which used to smoke during 70s, 80s quit smoking during 90s (not everyone for sure) and now they are also on the opposite side supporting anti smoking laws. I lived in South Korea from 2008 until 2012 and smoking cigarettes was not a big deal there, you could easily smoke in a bar, club, cafe (some of them had smoke free zones). Then I went there this year in summer and everything has changed substantially. Government doubled cigarette prices, you cannot smoke in a public place anymore and it affected the smokers a lot. People are not smoking as they used to smoke. Personally I was smoking every 20-30 minutes while sitting in a bar in 2012 and I smoked only 2 cigarettes in 2015 at the same bar just because I didn't want to go out every 20-30 minutes and smoke in front of the bar. Long story short, we choose governments, they set rules, rules are working and they set more rules seeing that outcome. I don't even doubt that some countries will start banning cigarettes in few years.
The issue here is whether to consider cigars and pipes as harmful as cigarettes. Who cares? Really. They have already made their minds, government doesn't want us to smoke and society agrees with that. Taking recent studies into account I also don't want to bother anyone with my pipe/cigar/cigarette smoke. I just want a silent place to smoke and fortunately there are lots of good places around to go to have a smoke.

 

beerandbaccy

Starting to Get Obsessed
Apr 22, 2015
276
140
As someone who has worked in pubs, bars and restaurants I have to say it was a relief when smoking was banned in working enclosed spaces. Breathing others (mainly) cigarette smoke for 8-12 hours every day 5-6 days a week was not nice - and I'm a smoker!!
I do enjoy the pub beer garden or patio in the summer when I can light up outside though. I miss it as a customer but the health of workers has to trump my rights to enjoy an indoor smoke in a pub/bar.

 
Apr 26, 2012
3,342
5,130
Washington State
Things that are and/or may be harmful to ones health and may lead to death. Driving a car/truck, owning guns/weapons, walking down the street, living in a large city, working in an industrial factory, playing golf in a thunder/lighting storm, eating fast food daily, jumping out of airplanes, swimming with sharks etc. There are lots of things that are harmful to the human body and may lead to death, some just plain stupid and others if abused. Did you know that microwave popcorn is one of the most unhealthy foods and can lead to cancer, but you don't see people banning popcorn. Alcohol causes thousands upon thousands of deaths each year but you can buy alcohol everywhere, even in grocery stores and around here the pharmacy. Did you know the number one cause for oral cancer is oral sex, however, the porn industry is a 4+ billion dollar a year industry, and the bulk of all companies use sex to sell their products. Smoking is unpopular and out of fashion now days, so therefore people want to eliminate it in all forms. Even though there are may be some benefits to smoking pipes and cigars in moderation, people don't care to learn the facts about something; such as smoking pipes and cigars in moderation, and just lump all tobacco products together. Its a shame really.

 

smokinfireman

Starting to Get Obsessed
Aug 17, 2015
176
1
If the gay/transgender crowd were seen smoking pipes and cigars, they'd leave tobacco well enough alone :) Us Joe Blows that don't make the news are just not popular enough to be treated better in today's world full lifestyle strong-arm groups such as the FDA and others. I am a grown man and do not need my bo-bo powdered by mommy-type orginazations that claim my health will be better off without __________. I also like Spam, Coca Cola and coffee and will regularly continue to harden my arteries and erode my stomach lining until I am called home to the big tobacco store in the sky. If the government is really worried about people doing stupid things they should be more worried about the morons jumping into patches of cacti and jumping from moving cars on youtube than me smoking a stogie. I'm more worried about building a wall between us and Washington D.C. than between us and Mexico, because D.C. is where the true criminals are.

 

robwoodall

Can't Leave
Apr 29, 2015
422
5
I think a lot of people are confusing "people don't like it when I smoke" with "I'm not being allowed to smoke."
It is true that a lot of people disapprove of smoking, and it is equally true that people are willing to use shaky science and unproven assertions to "prove" that their opinions are valid, but when has this not been the case?
The American government "proved" in the 50's that marijuana turned people into sex-crazed thrill-killers. I don't use marijuana, so it's easy for me not to care.
The Russian government "proved" that homosexuals are more likely to harm children. I'm not gay, so it's easy for me not to care.
Parents claimed for decades that masturbation would make you blind. I don't... wait. enough examples!
Closest thing to truth I believe is that people on both sides of any argument are often idiots. I love it when either side of the political spectrum calls the other side dishonest! LOL
Do I really have the right to demand that others approve of me? Probably not.

 

fyfol

Starting to Get Obsessed
Nov 3, 2015
101
0
I think what I've said is misunderstood here. I'm not saying "the government is making me quit", what I'm saying is somewhat the opposite, I'm saying "if you have to be involved, please talk about what goes into cigarettes and make THAT safer". I didn't intend to discuss this on a society perspective. But if we're talking about the general public, yes, no one has to tolerate me beyond reason. And I try to be sensitive about where I smoke my cigarette or pipe, such as if there is a large group of children around (like in a mall), or there are people with physical sensitiveness towards tobacco smoke, I'll change my seat or put out whatever I'm smoking. I'll be just demanding a reasonable stance and some manners, such as not being rude.
I mean, just because society agreed on the idea that smoking is repulsive, doesn't mean that I/we should be ostracized.

 

warren

Lifer
Sep 13, 2013
11,699
16,205
Foothills of the Chugach Range, AK
Of course your smoking will make you "persona non grata" or cause you to be ostracized by many. Stale smoke smell is a repellent to some. If you are a relative they may have to suck it up and abide your presence. Others do not and can move on, refusing to be in your company and effectively ostracizing you. Remember, it is their choice to move on or refuse you entrance to their homes. Your choice to smoke and reek.
I'm asocial, as such I do not mind a bit of shunning or ostracizing myself. I think we smokers need to quit being so damned sensitive to how others see us. You can't behave in an anti-social manner and expect to be embraced or even tolerated by society. The idea is absurd.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.