Tuesday, September 15, 2009

Smoking Bans

Let me name you one thing that's absolutely ludicrous- smoking bans.

"But smoking is dangerous! Haven't you ever heard of the dangers of second-hand smoking?! It can give you lung cancer!"

Yeah. And that asphalt truck driving five miles an hour down the road in front of me won't do a thing to harm my lungs. That diesel-guzzling, exhaust-belching truck won't do a single thing to my lungs.

Okay. I see the logic we're operating on now.

Alice in Wonderland logic. Ain't it fun?

Lots of people operate on this logic. Like the New York City health committee, seeking to ban smoking. Outdoors.

Okay.

Heaven help us if some smoke were to get into the atmosphere. I mean, it might tip the delicate balance between global warming and global alrightness and global cooling, sending us into a catastrophe of unknown proportions, making the world hotter than even we can send it at an astronomically high rate, even higher than now, even though the effects right now are really negligible, but besides that, we might get lung cancer cuz dont'cha know only SHS gives you lung cancer, and it's not at all due to the smell coming off that tar over there!!

Okay. I see how this works.

Bookmark and Share

10 comments:

Christopher said...

Actually, yes. Direct smoking is much more dangerous than even breathing in smoke that is blown over in the wind. Of course, being around smokers all the time is dangerous, but not even as much as directly.

And that's why we're trying to limit the use of gasoline and so on.

Liberty said...

Personally, I think people have the right to be stupid, and that includes smoking.

And I still don't understand the limiting gasoline thing...seems to me like a way to gain control under the guise of helping...

Kendra Logan said...

I agree that people have the right to be stupid. However, there is a difference between the truck and the smoker: the truck is at least somewhat necessary, whereas smoking is just an addiction.

Liberty said...

An addiction people are quite free to have, whether it's 'neccesary' or no.

Alex Floyd said...

I can see what you mean, and they're welcome to have that addiction. But just because they want to, does not mean that I want to be annoyed with all their smoke outside. I hate it when you're sitting outside at a resturant and someone sits next to you and lights one up. If they want to smoke, great! Do it inside, at your own place, on your own time. Second hand smoke is not incredibly dangerous, but it is incredibly annoying, and not good for you.

Liberty said...

Have you ever thought of nicely, politely asking the person if they would mind respecting your wishes and not lighting up at the moment? Have you ever thought of just getting up and moving if it offends you so?

I may not like people who play rock music next to me, with their windows rolled down so I can hear it. But if it isn't louder than city ordinance limits, then there isn't much I can do about. I know! I'll outlaw playing rock music in cars!!

Alex Floyd said...

Rock music will not physically harm you in any way. Sorry. But smoking can, even if it's just a little. Plus, asking them just gets you the finger (seen this too many times unfortunately) and I really don't feel like I should have to move because they want to poision themselves.

Liberty said...

Alex, I think you are missing the point. I don't think that SHS does that much to harm you- that big deisel truck that just roared by probably has much more to do with whether or not you get lung cancer than the smoker who smokes one cigarrete ten feet from you.

Alex Floyd said...

you think a disel truck that goes by you in ten seconds is worse than someone smoking next to for for an hour? Wow, not even going to debate that.

Liberty said...

People are exposed to exhaust all. day. long. over a period of years. Lots of years. I am exposed to cigarette smoke maybe- maybe- a couple times a month.

If I get lung cancer, I'll know what to blame it on.