I heard on the news this morning one city here in California was one step away from banning people from smoking outdoors of restaurants and in crowds of people, to me this seems a little un-fair because if you are outside than it would be easier to avoid the second hand smoke. Just my opinion.
2007-07-25 04:58:56 · 22 answers · asked by 1982 3 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Polls & Surveys
It's utterly ridiculous.
When you compare the output of a smoker's second hand smoke to the continuous output of every car, truck and diesel engine in the city, the smoker's contributions to hazardous air quality is miniscule.
And when you consider the known deleterious health effects of diesel exhaust with the tenuous data about second-hand cigarette smoke - then look at the exposure of people in traffic around poorly maintained buses, trucks and other fume-spewing motor vehicles, any argument that smoking bans are a public health issue is specious at best.
All smoking bans are is an attempt at legislating behaviour. Some people find smoking disgusting (which it admittedly is), and want to ban that. If they were really, truly concerned about public health, they'd be banning exhaust producing vehicles, or at least requiring regular maitenance.
Anti-smoking laws are merely pandering to get votes.
2007-07-25 05:50:26 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
You have a point. You would think that it's easier to avoid second-hand smoke outside. But -- in my opinion -- it's more likely for people to inhale someone's smoke if the person if smoking in a crowded area. I'm not saying smokers have to move to remote areas just so they can smoke in public, just to smoke in places where there aren't many people. (It's so weird; almost everyone used to smoke several decades ago. Have you heard about those people who want to give a movie that shows people smoking an R rating?)
2007-07-25 12:10:08 · answer #2 · answered by dinosaurbess 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Well, seeing as how smoking is harmful, no matter where it is done, I think that it should be banned everywhere. Except for maybe at home. I agree, outside it is easier to avoid second hand smoke. However, in crowds of people outside, there are more people to be affected by second hand smoke. Therefor increasing the risk.
Whatever ends up happening, just abide by it. Law is law, no matter how stupid it is.
2007-07-25 12:08:23 · answer #3 · answered by hotbigtoad 2 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Yes, as a matter of fact I do. I have had a problem that when I breathe in smoke, I get sick, and Im sure Im not the only one. And just because some people made wrong decisions in their life, doesnt mean EVERYONE else that they are near when they are smoking should have to duffer from it. Even if you dont smoke, you get the same amount of damage to your system if you just breathe it in. I believe that EVERYWHERE inside or out should be a non-smoking area.
2007-07-25 12:04:10 · answer #4 · answered by *Ninja w/ awesome pirate powers* 3 · 5⤊ 0⤋
I'm guessing you would get a different answer if you were to ask this question to a smoker and a non-smoker. Going strictly with the percentages of people that don't smoke, as opposed to those that do, it would be in the interest of the majority to put this law into effect. Is it fair....debatable. Is it fair that a non smoker has to breathe second hand smoke...no. Is it fair that a smoker is being treated like a leper....no. Is the decision right...probably.
2007-07-25 12:06:55 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
No one should be forced to breath second hand smoke. I smoke and still believe this. Second hand smoke is more dangerous than first hand smoke and it should not be our right as smokers to inflict innocent people (children) to this.
JMHO
2007-07-25 12:03:21 · answer #6 · answered by T~ 2 · 6⤊ 0⤋
I think it's ridiculous. Nobody "forces" anyone to smell second hand smoke, you CAN walk away from the smoker. But, I assume you'd rather sit there and whine.
And contrary to your assumptions, I'm not a smoker. I just believe in individual rights. Health Insurance will always be high, guess what, they're businesses. No matter what you do, how healthy we all become, it will always be high. They're businesses. They exist to make money.
2007-07-25 12:06:17 · answer #7 · answered by liz 4 · 2⤊ 3⤋
I agree with the smoking outdoors that is it unfair and stupid I do agree with indoor no smoking like bars even though I hate it. I am a smoker. Also where I live they are going to ban smokes from all pharmacy's any place that has a pharmacy in it will not sell smokes.
2007-07-25 12:04:03 · answer #8 · answered by Bullz_ eye 6 · 1⤊ 4⤋
As far as inside yes, where I moved from was smoke free in all resturants and stores but bars and outside wheren't. I loved living there, plan on moving back.
2007-07-25 12:03:54 · answer #9 · answered by Katelynn & Melissa's Mommy 2 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I'm a smoker and I think the smoking bans are going WAY too far!!!! I understand not smoking in restaurants, but BARS??!!! Most people that go to bars smoke!!!!! It's totally ridiculous!!!
2007-07-25 12:03:52 · answer #10 · answered by Kraziegurl79 ist ein Rock Star 7 · 2⤊ 4⤋