Topic: What to do about smokes..

[KnuckleBuckett]

Just to clarify my position, I dislike government interference in peoples lives. I think that if people want to pollute their lungs with carcigonens (sp), and it doesn't affect anyone else, then they have an absolute right to do that. Natural selection takes care of stupidity, not legislation.

Hey, I like that. Time for a new sig...

But it does affect others.  I thought I had explained that.

[Govtcheez]

> But it does affect others.  I thought I had explained that.

How?  Besides making you smell bad, secondhand smoke's effects on others have been greatly exaggerated.

[KnuckleBuckett]

> But it does affect others.  I thought I had explained that.

How?  Besides making you smell bad, secondhand smoke's effects on others have been greatly exaggerated.

Yes.  It stinks.  That sucks.  Smells like shit.

Also secondhand smoke isn't exactly good for you either.  Who says that it doesn't have negative effects?  Gimme a break.  It sucks to have some ass thoughtlessly blowing that nasty shit all over everyone else.

[Govtcheez]

> Who says that it doesn't have negative effects?

I didn't say that.  I said it has been greatly exaggerated.  Just look around a little bit - a lot of the "common knowledge" about this was based on things that were falsified and exaggerated beyond any sort of reason.  It's political, not scientific.

And before anyone says anything, I've smoked about a half a pack of cigarettes in my life.

[micah]

> Who says that it doesn't have negative effects?

I didn't say that.  I said it has been greatly exaggerated.  Just look around a little bit - a lot of the "common knowledge" about this was based on things that were falsified and exaggerated beyond any sort of reason.  It's political, not scientific.

And before anyone says anything, I've smoked about a half a pack of cigarettes in my life.

OMG, cheez and i agree on something once again!

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewForeignBureaus.asp?Page=%5CForeignBureaus%5Carchive%5C200305%5CFOR20030516d.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/htmlContent.jhtml?html=/archive/1998/03/08/wtob08.html

edit:

It's political, not scientific.

JUST LIKE GLOBAL WARMING   

[Govtcheez]

edit:

It's scientific, not political.

JUST LIKE GLOBAL WARMING   

Fixed it for you

And while we're using this to debate all sorts of shit not associated with the article, I really do think pot should be legal (again, before anyone says anything, I've never done it).  Also religion is for weak minded fools who aren't able to grasp simple science and need to have their hand held and be told that everything is going to be alright.  Also conservatism is in the same boat, except add a healthy fear of change and minorities to it.

[charlie]

I have to say that one thing I love about this thread is that several different people have argued different specific points that land on either side of the original question.




Edit: cheez's most recent post notwithstanding.

[Rob]

But it does affect others.  I thought I had explained that.

Rewrote the relevant part of my post with the implied emphasis made clearer...

I think that if people want to pollute their lungs with carcigonens (sp), and if it doesn't affect anyone else, then they have an absolute right to do that.

Smoking in a sealed room on your own maybe?

[KnuckleBuckett]

Cool.

[VBprogrammer]

> Who says that it doesn't have negative effects?

I didn't say that.  I said it has been greatly exaggerated.  Just look around a little bit - a lot of the "common knowledge" about this was based on things that were falsified and exaggerated beyond any sort of reason.  It's political, not scientific.

And before anyone says anything, I've smoked about a half a pack of cigarettes in my life.

OMG, cheez and i agree on something once again!

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewForeignBureaus.asp?Page=%5CForeignBureaus%5Carchive%5C200305%5CFOR20030516d.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/htmlContent.jhtml?html=/archive/1998/03/08/wtob08.html

edit:

It's political, not scientific.

JUST LIKE GLOBAL WARMING   

Interesting article by an IPCC lead author on the very same subject.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7082088.stm