English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Is it a more worthy pursuit to secure the freedom of self indulgence and stupidity of human nature and allow second hand smoke to inflict thousands daily... or allow a goverment to control the amount of exposure in an attempt to lower victims and save what little fresh air is left?
I am torn.

2006-12-26 05:06:51 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

15 answers

I'm not sure cigarette smoke is destroying the fresh air, compared to other means of pollution but that is not really the issue.
IMO, the issue is this is opening the door for government deciding all individual's decisions. If they can decide you can't smoke, you can't eat transfat...what is next? What if they decide they don't like the way you choose a mate? Or maybe they don't like your decision on how many children you should have.
Next, they think your music may be too bad for society, so they decide what you can listen to.
The more you let them make decisions for the individual, you'll find as an individual, you are in less control of any decisions.

2006-12-26 05:20:56 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

I think smoking should be legal, people are going to do it anyways.
Non-smokers should not have to breathe in second hand smoke. Many people have asthma and other allergies and often are triggered by smokers.

As a smoker, trying to quit, I have no problem going outside to smoke if I feel I need a cigarette bad enough. I'm not going to subject others to my bad habit. There are worse things in the air than cigarette smoke, there is smog and pollution.

But if I develop lung cancer, I'm the only one at fault, and I won't sue someone else due to MY behavior and actions. However, I've heard from my doctor that tobacco companies are adding more addictive drugs in the cigarettes to make it harder for people to quit, because many people, like myself are trying to quit.

2006-12-26 13:19:15 · answer #2 · answered by Erica, AKA Stretch 6 · 0 0

if tobacco was outlawed who would pay the billions in tax money lost? it's a personal choice. as for smoking bans the business owners should decide,not the government. many restaraunts already were smoke free,before bans. will they kick out fat people next?
in ohio conservatives were the big supporters of the smoking ban

2006-12-26 14:06:33 · answer #3 · answered by J Q Public 6 · 2 0

The smoking question, I would suggest you watch the movie thank you for smoking.

It's a debate, but honestly if you smoke it is your decision not someone elses. Now we know the facts so if you start it's you choice you know the truth about smoking and being an adult know the pros and cons

2006-12-26 13:09:56 · answer #4 · answered by Juleette 6 · 2 0

Let people choose whether or not to smoke. And if you do smoke, just be thoughtful of other people who don't want your smoke blown in their face.

You have as much right to ban smoking as you do drinking, being gay, or pretty much any decision anyone makes in life.

2006-12-26 13:12:57 · answer #5 · answered by ? 2 · 2 0

i think people should be able to smoke in their own homes, and outside. if the goverment wants to stop it totally what is next? you can't eat a twinke if you are fat because it is dangerous to others and the health care system?

2006-12-26 13:14:19 · answer #6 · answered by honeyc73 4 · 1 0

No, it's bad for you. I would rather live a longer funner life than to be stuck on cigarettes and always have to be smoking one every 5 minutes.

2006-12-26 13:09:10 · answer #7 · answered by EhGirl 2 · 0 1

i do not smoke, i tried it and i hate smoking, just to let u know.

2nd hand smoke is a bunch of bull ****. unless you live in a trailer where everyone smokes, you cannot really be hurt my 2nd hand smoke. my uncle lived in a house with 4 SMOKERS for 15 years, but he has perfect lungs and it never affects him

people need to just say "please dont smoke" or " can you please leave the room", but they want to go to their NANNY government.

for god's sake, we have smoked since the 1700's, and there are more important issues then smoking in america

2006-12-26 13:16:50 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

It is simply a matter of time before the governement controls eveyrhting we do.. thanks to democrats and liberals who are so wishy washy on everything. It is impossible to create a place where everyone is happy and no one is offended or harmed. Deal with it.

2006-12-26 13:48:34 · answer #9 · answered by badneighborvt 3 · 0 1

Smoking should be outlawed all over the world,along with drinking.Its ignorant and non productive harm full behavior.
If your rights..... kill me them your "rights" are wrong.

2006-12-26 13:13:49 · answer #10 · answered by Yakuza 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers