4 ms·

> The reason for their opposition is twofold; e-cigarettes appear to act as a gateway drug for people who don't smoke; teenagers in particular. colourful packag

by wtbob 10y ago

> The reason for their opposition is twofold; e-cigarettes appear to act as a gateway drug for people who don't smoke; teenagers in particular. colourful packaging, synthetic fruity flavours; the e-cigarette industry is well aware of this particular demographic. But why would they care if people take it up, if it's not particularly harmful? > While certainly not as bad as second-hand smoke … Since so-called 'second-hand smoke' is essentially harmless (it's less bad than wood smoke!), that means that they are safe enough. 'Second-hand smoke' is junk science propagated purely to advance bigotry. > In many parts of the world smoking is no longer accepted inside public buildings and the work place; a huge victory for public health! And, of course, a huge loss for freedom. It's no-one's business but mine if I choose to permit smoking in my spaces: the public are free to avoid them.

Freak_NL 10y ago
> But why would they care if people take it up, if it's not particularly harmful? They don't care if adults do so; they do care about teenagers getting hooked, because it acts like a habit forming step up to tobacco smoking. This doesn't mean they seek to ban e-cigarettes; merely to limit its sale to adults, just like tobacco in most countries. > 'Second-hand smoke' is junk science propagated purely to advance bigotry. I'm surprised to find that sentiment on HN, even most smokers seem to agree that their smoke may harm others and are considerate about it. Ask any asthmatic over the age of 30 if they agree — we've seen the world shift from smoking everywhere to smoking only outside and in your own home. You have no idea how much of a difference that makes to us in our daily lives. > And, of course, a huge loss for freedom. Don't be silly. No one is forbidding you to smoke in your own home. Do you really want to go back to the fifties where smoking in the office, public transport, or in public buildings was commonplace? The reason smoking is banned in the workplace is simply because many workers do not have the luxury of simply quitting their job to work for an employer that doesn't allow smoking on the premises. Freedom is about the balance between one person's freedom to do something and another's not to be unduly burdened by it — unless you are an anarchist.
- wtbob 10y ago
  > I'm surprised to find that sentiment on HN, even most smokers seem to agree that their smoke may harm others and are considerate about it. The question is not whether people agree that something may be true; the question is whether it is. As it happens, it's not. > Do you really want to go back to the fifties where smoking in the office, public transport, or in public buildings was commonplace? Yes. When I was a boy I remember going to a hospital that had ashtrays next to the elevators. I remember loving it whenever we went (my parents & their friends didn't smoke, and smoking wasn't allowed in my school, so I could only smell tobacco rarely). > The reason smoking is banned in the workplace is simply because many workers do not have the luxury of simply quitting their job to work for an employer that doesn't allow smoking on the premises. That line of specious pseudo-reasoning could be used to justify just about anything, to include mandating smoking in places of employment. > Freedom is about the balance between one person's freedom to do something and another's not to be unduly burdened by it — unless you are an anarchist. No, freedom is about doing what one will, where one's will holds sway. My will should hold sway where I am the proprietor, to include my place of business.

by wtbob 10y ago

Freak_NL 10y ago

> But why would they care if people take it up, if it's not particularly harmful? They don't care if adults do so; they do care about teenagers getting hooked, because it acts like a habit forming step up to tobacco smoking. This doesn't mean they seek to ban e-cigarettes; merely to limit its sale to adults, just like tobacco in most countries. > 'Second-hand smoke' is junk science propagated purely to advance bigotry. I'm surprised to find that sentiment on HN, even most smokers seem to agree that their smoke may harm others and are considerate about it. Ask any asthmatic over the age of 30 if they agree — we've seen the world shift from smoking everywhere to smoking only outside and in your own home. You have no idea how much of a difference that makes to us in our daily lives. > And, of course, a huge loss for freedom. Don't be silly. No one is forbidding you to smoke in your own home. Do you really want to go back to the fifties where smoking in the office, public transport, or in public buildings was commonplace? The reason smoking is banned in the workplace is simply because many workers do not have the luxury of simply quitting their job to work for an employer that doesn't allow smoking on the premises. Freedom is about the balance between one person's freedom to do something and another's not to be unduly burdened by it — unless you are an anarchist.

wtbob 10y ago
> I'm surprised to find that sentiment on HN, even most smokers seem to agree that their smoke may harm others and are considerate about it. The question is not whether people agree that something may be true; the question is whether it is. As it happens, it's not. > Do you really want to go back to the fifties where smoking in the office, public transport, or in public buildings was commonplace? Yes. When I was a boy I remember going to a hospital that had ashtrays next to the elevators. I remember loving it whenever we went (my parents & their friends didn't smoke, and smoking wasn't allowed in my school, so I could only smell tobacco rarely). > The reason smoking is banned in the workplace is simply because many workers do not have the luxury of simply quitting their job to work for an employer that doesn't allow smoking on the premises. That line of specious pseudo-reasoning could be used to justify just about anything, to include mandating smoking in places of employment. > Freedom is about the balance between one person's freedom to do something and another's not to be unduly burdened by it — unless you are an anarchist. No, freedom is about doing what one will, where one's will holds sway. My will should hold sway where I am the proprietor, to include my place of business.