Should smoking and overeating be illegal to keep people from killing themselves? And a smoker and an overeater

Question

are sickening to watch, so shouldn't the public be protected from the agony of having to see them in action?

Answer 1

Unfortunately people do a lot of self-destructive things besides smoking and overeating, so where do we stop with the Police? What I have often thought is that it's a pity we cannot devise some way to penalize those who deliberately put themselves in jeopardy and as a result the rest of us have to pay for it in some way.

But it beats me how to do that. I mean, I know how I would accomplish it if I ruled the world. People who don't keep their body organs in good working order and then present in the ER with heart attacks and in other life threatening situations, just don't treat them. They would get fair warning and if they didn't pay attention, too bad, too sad.

There is absolutely no excuse these days for health ignorance. We are told again and again in news reports and health publications, exactly what we are all doing that we shouldn't be doing, and vice versa. Whew, but imagine just trying to put that kind of plan into effect! Think of the loopholes and the mistakes that would be made. It'll take some sharper minds than mine to devise a system that would work well.

Nope, I think this is going to have to happen by the same old process everything else has... slowly... and by a system of attrition... just keep on nagging nagging away at people, trying to get new parents to understand what it really is going to mean to their children if they do not start the good health practises early, and getting them to realise that what they do with that child at the age of two years old, is going to set that kid up for a long and healthy life, or eventually a body breakdown and sickness and disability during the latter half of their lives.. I think the process has begun in that direction, but it may not be till the end of this century before we can really see the benefits of change.

Answer 2

American hero? YEAH RIGHT. You think you can control the world? DON'T go to where over eaters eat. Don't sit by a smoker then.

so shouldn't the public be protected from the agony of having to see them in action?

so shouldn't the public be protected from arrogant people like you having them see you in action?

Why don't you give over eaters a membership to the gym? and Smokers Cestations aids to quit smoking? SOUNDS LIKE A GOOD PLAN HUH? You aren't very smart you know. Give people all your money to help them feel better. GET LOST. YOU asked this 9 times already.

Answer 3

There are SO many ways I'd like to answer this one, but I think it all boils down to this:

Just how much do you want others, especially the government, to control your life and what you do with it?

Taking a slightly different point of view, suppose you were to actually get such things to even be policed, at what point would you then tell the enforcing parties that you no longer need their services? You'd give them power to control the things you see then later try to temper it?

Good luck with that!

edited to add: Far too many people allow others to do their thinking for them. Do you need laws established because you're emotional over some other persons actions?

I'm beginning to think that your emotional agony is causing me great stress. I shouldn't be subject to this! It's unhealthy! I am surely not able to know what to do without being micro-managed. I know.....there should be a law! Yes! A law to keep me safe from having to see things that upset me.....things like other people being upset about other people doing things they don't like.

Come on, give me a break. Why anyone would want to be told how to think, act, and when to pee is beyond me!

It's called Freedom. Stop trying to give yours away and appreciate that you have it to call your own.

Answer 4

The measure of our liberty is the amount of space between those things that are required by law and those things that are forbidden.

The smaller the space in which freedom of choice and action exists, the space where nothing is required of us or forbidden to us, the closer we are to totalitarianism, the complete absence of any personal liberty whatsoever.

If and when we arrive at that state of affairs, it will be because we have allowed our personal space in which freedom of choice and action remains to have been squeezed out of existence, so that our governing principle has become, "All things that are not required are prohibited."

As I'm sure you'll infer from my general approach to the defense of our liberty, which requires eternal vigilance, I would consider legislation that would outlaw smoking and overeating, except when they impinge on the rights of others to breathe unpolluted air, for example, to be an intolerable and outrageous infringement upon our personal freedom of choice and action, our last remnant of individual autonomy, and I would oppose it vigorously.

Answer 5

When you start protecting society by reducing the burden placed upon it by a member of that society's actions you are headed for trouble.

Smokers and obese people cost this society millions of dollars and if we can protect them from harming themselves we are helping them and helping society.

Then we can begin to rid the society of others who place a burden upon the society.
We can sterilize those that should not be allowed to reproduce and euthanize those that are suffering and have no future.

Then we will be a perfect society similar to the Nazi government in Germany.

Answer 6

We ban cocaine and heroine because of their health dangers. However, taking away personal responsibility erodes freedom of choice. The ban on trans fat makes sense because the food tastes just as good without it. Smoking should be banned in public places.

Now in fantasy land when they sterilize people and open concentration camps then you will hear my disapproval.

Answer 7

I have no problems with *watching* smokers, it's only when their second-hand smoke comes near me that I get pissed off. Everyone is entitled to kill themselves in which ever way they choose...eating, smoking, naked skydiving....whatever...it's when they put OTHERS in jeopardy that I have a problem with it. Nobody -- and that includes restaurant and bar employees -- should have to put up with toxic substances to make a living.
That being said, no-one ever died from second-hand chocolate cake. And no overweight person has ever forced ME to overeat. Smokers standing near me force me to breath their choice of poison.
Do what you will, as long as you don't hurt the people around you.

Answer 8

No then %66 percent of the obese society would be in jail. I believe it's wrong, but look at the familiy dinamics. Some people are raised that way through generations and don't know any better. It's rather odd though that Americans are unhealthy yet are living longer. So go figure.

Answer 9

first of all,in that same breath,shouldn't we ban and tax your question to death also,I mean what our question really is, Is that you want to control my choice etc.Do you realize that more money is taken from me being a smoker,and that if I stopped smoking the Govt has to find that free money from somewhere else.I'm sure you've probably not thought this through as many like you have.I will now live longer and be a burden on society in my older years because of the liberalistic point of view you have,costing you and the taxpayers more money in the long run,because you wish to infringe on the rights i have,to suit your own whim of what you find unpleasant,I find your thinking unpleasant and its unfortunate we havent found a way to attack you,monetarily and socially

Answer 10

I smoke if I'm in a smoke-free place I don't but what we choose to do to our bodies is our choice should we have to live with @$$ holes like you everyone has a choice if you don't want to see someone smoke or overeat don't watch turn your head are you being forced to look ,noooo!