4 ms·

> doing no harm to anyone but at best themselves Secondhand smoke is disgusting, and so dangerous that it has been proven to kill thousands of non-smokers [1].

> doing no harm to anyone but at best themselves Secondhand smoke is disgusting, and so dangerous that it has been proven to kill thousands of non-smokers [1]. I'd call causing death, "harm". Also smoking in private is still legal, unfortunately. Hardly a "human right". [1] "Since 1964, approximately 2,500,000 nonsmokers have died from health problems caused by exposure to secondhand smoke." - https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/secondhand_smoke/general_facts/ https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/seco... - Stats from the US, from the first google result I came across.

thomasthomas 10y ago
> unfortunately !? some people want to control what they do with their own bodies and not be slaves to the state. gtfo
- SyneRyder 10y ago
  This comment would have been better without the last 'gtfo' appended.
- davidlumley 10y ago
  You still have complete control over what you do to your own body in your own privacy. This gives other people complete control over their body too – in terms of not having to breathe in your smoke.
aaron695 10y ago
> Secondhand smoke is disgusting, and so dangerous that it has been proven to kill thousands of non-smokers And this is why people vote Trump. I never mentioned second hand smoke, it's irrelevant to the conversation, if the science is there then ban it where it harms others. Australia does this for instance. You just picked something that conforms to your world view which you later admit since you say its not even relevant to you, you still want to control other human beings. "Also smoking in private is still legal, unfortunately."
- cyphar 10y ago
  > And this is why people vote Trump. Irrelevant and nonsensical comment is irrelevant and nonsensical. > I never mentioned second hand smoke, it's irrelevant to the conversation, if the science is there then ban it where it harms others. Australia does this for instance. GP said that smokers are "doing no harm to anyone but themselves". Since secondhand smoke is known to kill and otherwise harm non-smokers I would very much argue that smokers are doing harm to others. Hence why parent brought up secondhand smoking. And that's why Australia has laws against smoking indoors (outside your home) and near public places where people have no choice where to stand (such as near bus stops, on some promenades and other similar places). Unfortunately, there are no laws against smoking on busy sidewalks (in NSW) and the pitiful "3m from the entrance" laws don't actually mean you can enter or leave some cinemas without running into a wall of carcinogenic and toxic smoke. Not to mention that people routinely break the law and smoke near bus stops (which as someone who catches public transport, this pisses me off no end and I enjoy telling smokers to fuck off when they decide to increase the cancer risk of the people around them). I have no issue with people that smoke in their own homes. But people who decide to smoke on public walkways where other people are walking past are simply disgusting for harming others because of their habit.
  - exodust 10y ago
    Actually there are some laws here which protect residents in apartment blocks from suffering the second-hand smoke of neighbours smoking on their balconies. I'm currently putting up with my neighbor's smoke which enters my apartment on a daily basis. He smokes many cigarettes in a day and it wafts from his balcony to mine and comes inside. I haven't taken action yet, mainly because I'm not looking forward to taking action.
    - cyphar 10y ago
      Really? In which state do you live? In NSW I don't believe there's laws against smoking on balconies (though I don't live in apartments, so I don't have first-hand experience with this).

thomasthomas 10y ago

> unfortunately !? some people want to control what they do with their own bodies and not be slaves to the state. gtfo

SyneRyder 10y ago
This comment would have been better without the last 'gtfo' appended.
davidlumley 10y ago
You still have complete control over what you do to your own body in your own privacy. This gives other people complete control over their body too – in terms of not having to breathe in your smoke.

aaron695 10y ago

> Secondhand smoke is disgusting, and so dangerous that it has been proven to kill thousands of non-smokers And this is why people vote Trump. I never mentioned second hand smoke, it's irrelevant to the conversation, if the science is there then ban it where it harms others. Australia does this for instance. You just picked something that conforms to your world view which you later admit since you say its not even relevant to you, you still want to control other human beings. "Also smoking in private is still legal, unfortunately."

cyphar 10y ago
> And this is why people vote Trump. Irrelevant and nonsensical comment is irrelevant and nonsensical. > I never mentioned second hand smoke, it's irrelevant to the conversation, if the science is there then ban it where it harms others. Australia does this for instance. GP said that smokers are "doing no harm to anyone but themselves". Since secondhand smoke is known to kill and otherwise harm non-smokers I would very much argue that smokers are doing harm to others. Hence why parent brought up secondhand smoking. And that's why Australia has laws against smoking indoors (outside your home) and near public places where people have no choice where to stand (such as near bus stops, on some promenades and other similar places). Unfortunately, there are no laws against smoking on busy sidewalks (in NSW) and the pitiful "3m from the entrance" laws don't actually mean you can enter or leave some cinemas without running into a wall of carcinogenic and toxic smoke. Not to mention that people routinely break the law and smoke near bus stops (which as someone who catches public transport, this pisses me off no end and I enjoy telling smokers to fuck off when they decide to increase the cancer risk of the people around them). I have no issue with people that smoke in their own homes. But people who decide to smoke on public walkways where other people are walking past are simply disgusting for harming others because of their habit.
- exodust 10y ago
  Actually there are some laws here which protect residents in apartment blocks from suffering the second-hand smoke of neighbours smoking on their balconies. I'm currently putting up with my neighbor's smoke which enters my apartment on a daily basis. He smokes many cigarettes in a day and it wafts from his balcony to mine and comes inside. I haven't taken action yet, mainly because I'm not looking forward to taking action.
  - cyphar 10y ago
    Really? In which state do you live? In NSW I don't believe there's laws against smoking on balconies (though I don't live in apartments, so I don't have first-hand experience with this).