Discussion Forums > Politics
2012 US Presidential Election
Nikkoru:
--- Quote from: AceHigh on November 12, 2012, 03:23:43 PM ---Hire smokers, problem fixed. There is no problem if nobody is complaining.
--- End quote ---
Yeah, I think confirming you're a drug user as a requirement for a job position could open its own host of issues. More to the point, being in a space with substantial second-hand smoke for long periods of time has detrimental health risks exceeding that of being a smoker.
Burkingam:
--- Quote from: Nikkoru on November 12, 2012, 08:21:24 PM ---
--- Quote from: AceHigh on November 12, 2012, 03:23:43 PM ---Hire smokers, problem fixed. There is no problem if nobody is complaining.
--- End quote ---
Yeah, I think confirming you're a drug user as a requirement for a job position could open its own host of issues. More to the point, being in a space with substantial second-hand smoke for long periods of time has detrimental health risks exceeding that of being a smoker.
--- End quote ---
And it would make it that much harder to quite smoking. Which was one of my points. If it means you have to find a new job or new places to hang out, it can be enough to discourage people who want to quit. Ban it from all public places and you solve this problem.
AceHigh:
So where would a smoker be able to smoke then? Let's review the social engineering policies: you are not allowed to smoke in public areas, but a street in a city definitely counts as a public area. Also people smoking outside also "disturb" others with smoking. In your own house or in your car? There is already an outcry "think of the children" even if you personally don't have any. In the forest? no, that's littering and in dry areas also a fire hazard. In your garden? Well great if you have one.
Some laws are in place, others are slowly but surely being pressed through the system. Very soon all those laws combined would be equal of smoking ban altogether, however until then smokers will have fewer and fewer places where they can smoke.
Here is a personal experience which made me hate anti smoking whiners:
At work there were clear rules that you can't smoke inside. That was fair, smokers went outside and sat on the benches that were in front of the cafeteria (front side of our company's building). Then non-smokers started to complain that they also wanted to sit outside during lunch and enjoy the good weather without having to second hand smoke. A short while later ash trays were removed from that spot.
Now our smoker colleagues had to take the back door to the loading area/parking lot without any benches and loud racket due to the forklifts moving containers nearby. Personally I don't care about second hand smoke especially out in open air, so I went with them during breaks to chat and hang out. Didn't take long time for many other non-smokers to go there as well because after all both those who smoked and not, were colleagues that knew each other and naturally gathered together during breaks. Guess what, not long after the complaints started pouring in again. It's like non-smokers forgot that they were the ones that joined smokers in the area designated for smoking.
I got angry seeing this shit, it didn't take many years before smokers who could once relax on the benches on the lawn now had to literally hide and take breaks separately to be able to smoke in peace. Sorry, but I hang around people that both smoke and don't, most of them I respect without judging their habits. I hate the whiny bitches that want to force everyone to adopt their lifestyle on the people who haven't done anything to deserve it. More surprising that Nikk and Burk who so often spout their tolerance crap, at the same time are so intolerant to other demographics because it suits their personal comfort.
Burkingam:
We can draw the line to "you can smoke outside or in your house/personal places". There is no reason to slip on the slope any more than that.
I already told you, I was against this law at first. The reason I changed my mind isn't because it suits my personal comfort though I do appreciate not having to endure the smell. What actually made me change is that as a result of the law a significant percentage of the population stopped to smoke.
And could you give me an example of a specific pro-tolerance speech I have made which you think is inconsistent with a tobacco ban in public places?
Ixarku:
--- Quote from: AceHigh on November 12, 2012, 12:39:07 PM ---
--- Quote from: Nikkoru on November 12, 2012, 11:44:22 AM ---Except that, as I've mentioned -- no business has the right to poison its employees. Which essentially is what your saying that those owners are free to do to everyone who works for them. I don't think the connection between 2nd hand smoke and cancer/COPD need be reiterated.
--- End quote ---
If you seek employment in a pub called "Cigar and whiskey", then you pretty much know what you will be dealing with on a daily basis. It's not like anyone is forced to work in places that specifically caters to smoking customers. As I said free market and it includes job market as well.
--- End quote ---
I agree with Ace. As I've said before, I completely despise smoking but if a business wants to cater to a specific demographic -- smokers in this case -- and as long as full disclosure of this is provided to prospective employees & customers, I've got no problem with it. If, hypothetically, it were legal to smoke in such environments, personally I'd never under any circumstances work there or frequent the place as a customer. But I know a few smokers who wouldn't mind being there.
It's about personal freedom -- if society considers the practice legal enough to allow it at all, then it should be allowed in conditions where like-minded individuals are allowed to gather provided that they do not infringe on the rights of others. OTOH, if a society chooses to ban tobacco altogether, I'm not going to complain about it. I'm not arguing in favor of tobacco -- smoking is a filthy, disgusting habit with absolutely no health benefit whatsoever, and I'd gladly vote to ban it completely. But as long as it's legal, smokers should be allowed some opportunity to practice their hobby in a fashion that doesn't impinge on the health or rights of unwilling bystanders. The key is designating areas where smokers are isolated from non-smokers, and in providing full disclosure to anyone before they enter such a location. Nobody is forced to work at a bar that allows smoking -- employees choose to be there, and someone applying for a job at such a place has a right to know what they're getting into before they accept a such a job.
Of course, I'm perfectly fine with other forms of social engineering designed to discourage smoking -- high taxes on tobacco, penalties on health insurance premiums for smokers, etc. And I wouldn't object to positive incentives, such as tax breaks or other subsidies to people who engage in healthy behavior -- buying fresh vegetables, paying for a gym membership, etc.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version