• Illecors
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1361 year ago

    I see angry wankers want to moan for the sake of moaning.

    Eliminating smoking is a goos thing! I’ll take my wins whenever possible, doesn’t happen all that often.

    • @evatronic@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      471 year ago

      But but there are other things that are also bad and if one proposal doesn’t solve everything it is complete trash!!!

    • Otter
      link
      fedilink
      English
      331 year ago

      Yea not everything is a partisan issue, and this seems like a good thing? Antismoking efforts have largely been successful in a lot of places.

      It’s not one of those things where someone is choosing to harm themselves only. Smoking affects the people around you

      • @ThePenitentOne@discuss.online
        link
        fedilink
        English
        171 year ago

        So many people like to portray everything as a ‘personal choice’ while ignoring all said implications to others. Very rarely does something only actually impact you.

          • @ThePenitentOne@discuss.online
            link
            fedilink
            English
            31 year ago

            Too many people use it as a cop-out to avoid being accountable. It’s like when meat eaters say it’s a ‘personal choice.’ Like yeah, it is a choice you mean, but it also implicates other things not only you.

    • @000999@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      281 year ago

      First and foremost, people have the right to slowly kill themselves with cigarettes as long as it isn’t harming innocent bystanders.

      Arguably more importantly, the proposed ban is worryingly dystopian.

      Finally, agreeing with anything Sunak does is unforgivable. And in this case would reflect neo-liberal sympathies.

      • Alto
        link
        fedilink
        461 year ago

        as long as it isn’t harming innocent bystanders.

        Considering that’s exactly what second hand smoke does, I really don’t see what point you’re trying to make.

        • @SupraMario@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          101 year ago

          Except it doesn’t, less than 9% of the population in the USA uses tobacco in any form, including in that group is past smokers and vapers so it’s probably around 7% or less. Continually attacking a vice that’s basically done is just virtue signaling bullshit. Alcoholism has skyrocketed and kills way more people a year, and obesity is now our number one killer by miles. No one is dying from second hand smoke…you sitting in traffic is doing way more damage to your body than getting a random breeze of smoke from someone outside.

      • @jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        361 year ago

        Except smokers always insist on slowly murdering everyone around them and littering everything in their path. If you want to smoke in a hermetically sealed room and not get close to me for at least 6 hours after, fine by me.

        • @GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          131 year ago

          I mean, I understand that it smells really bad to non smokers. On the other hand, statements like this seem so ridiculously over the top that it makes me question you as a person.

          We live in car country - assuming you are German as well -, with a wide variety of unhealthy crap that you have to inhale on a daily basis. Smog, exhaust fumes, half the food we can buy is unhealthy.

          Honestly I don’t understand how people can be so worked up about smokers in that context. Is it because those are people you can bitch at and boss around, instead of nebulous corps and governments who ignore your calls for climate action and environment protection?

          Otherwise it makes no sense. Smokers are already segregated away from non smokers nowadays, what about their freedom to live (or die) as they want? Your freedom not to smell unpleasant things doesn’t trump that. Me farting in your vicinity doesn’t constitute harm to your individual rights.

          • @jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            171 year ago

            Your freedom ends where mine begins. You are free to kill yourself, but not to blow cancerous substances on top of me - and yes, that should include cars.

            • @GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              12
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I generally agree, just that it seems cheap to pile on smokers like they are some sort of lepers. Also you are free to go somewhere else when around a smoker. Their habit doesn’t make them second class citizens, or should I say your freedom ends where theirs begins?

              If we want clean air we have to start with the actual polluters, not the easy pickings who are just random people. That’s like, obsessively worrying about your personal climate impact when the vast, vast majority of climate change is caused by just a handful of corporations.

      • Otter
        link
        fedilink
        English
        331 year ago

        First and foremost, people have the right to slowly kill themselves with cigarettes as long as it isn’t harming innocent bystanders.

        That’s the thing with smoking though, second hand smoke is a big problem, especially for vulnerable people

      • @mriormro@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        20
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        They’re literally cancer sticks…

        I guess we should allow people to sell antifreeze as both an industrial chemical and a soft drink. Arguably, people have the right to quickly and painfully kill themselves as well.

        • @000999@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          161 year ago

          Humans have been smoking tobacco for thousands of years. Banning it will only allow the black market to swell to an unimaginable size

          • @mriormro@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            151 year ago

            These are cigarettes. Engineered to be as addictive as possible. We aren’t talking about hand rolled stogies here

            • @SupraMario@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              71 year ago

              They absolutely are talking about any form of tobacco…hell track and trace in the EU has effectively destroyed the nasal snuff industry in Germany…a form of tobacco that has no deaths on its hands… literally. This is just ignorance being used in the name of “think of the children” hell that’s one of the main things everyone keeps bringing up in this thread.

              Meanwhile, smoking has been on a sharp decline for decades, is no longer a mass killer…while obesity is and alcoholism has grown 10 fold, so much so that they created a new label called social drinkers because it would put a massive amount of the population into alcoholic territory.

          • @Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            41 year ago

            By that logic we should continue slavery. Aren’t you worried someone’s going to purchase one of your children on the black market!?

            • @000999@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              31 year ago

              Not necessarily. People could actually start smoking more because tax free cigarettes are astronomically cheaper

              • @ABCDE@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                21 year ago

                Are people smoking less weed now it’s legal in many US states?

                Where do you think tax free cigarettes are going to come from?

                • @000999@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  31 year ago

                  They are either domestic bootlegs or imports. If cigarettes were actually fully banned, organized crime groups would begin mass cigarette smuggling and manufacturing operations. Sounds ridiculous, but it’s true

      • @PixxlMan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        “If it harms the people using it (and makes them addicted and unable to stop even if they wish to), the people around them, and the planet, I don’t like it”

        • actually me
      • @chris@l.roofo.cc
        link
        fedilink
        English
        41 year ago

        If I never have to smell cigarette smoke again and also no one ever uses the medical system to cure the consequences of smoking then I don’t care. Otherwise I am all for this.

      • @Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        31 year ago

        The difference being that cigarettes are always unhealthy, no matter how many you smoke, they procure zero benefits. McDonald’s is just a meal and becomes an issue if you eat too much of it, once every now and then won’t have any consequences.

      • Flying SquidM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        31 year ago

        I mean… I wouldn’t complain if megacorporation fast food restaurants that provide nothing but cheap, unhealthy junk were driven out of business…

    • @kshade@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Banning it for everyone is OK, telling some people that they can’t ever because they were born too late is silly, discriminatory and will inevitably create a flourishing black market.