4 ms·

You don't have a clue. The alternative for many of (myself included) is cigarettes, not quitting. You can call us lazy, weak, whatever, it doesn't matter; we li

You don't have a clue. The alternative for many of (myself included) is cigarettes, not quitting. You can call us lazy, weak, whatever, it doesn't matter; we like smoking and we're not going to stop.

olcor 7y ago
Yes, I don't have a clue. No, I'm not calling you weak/lazy/whatever. Incorrigible doesn't mean either of these things. You like smoking, feel free to do so. I'm just saying that it's known that nicotine, in general, is a bad idea. If you know that and yet you smoke, go ahead. But there's going to be efforts from any reasonable government to not get any new members to the club. > we like smoking, and we're not going to stop I have a feeling that you don't mean that, but would you rather have a bunch of kids thinking they're doing a cool thing (apparently a lot of kids used to think that about Juul not too long ago in the States)? For them, cigarette's not going to be a substitute as it is for smokers currently. Cigarettes are already that icky thing old people do and cause lung cancer (basically their favorite movie star told them so for 2 years). By all means, smokers can continue smoking, but they should expect some backlash towards your new favorite thing because it might be less harmful than smoking, but is still harmful for potential new users.
- EpicEng 7y ago
  >I have a feeling that you don't mean that, but would you rather have a bunch of kids thinking they're doing a cool thing (apparently a lot of kids used to think that about Juul not too long ago in the States)? I do, and please spare me the "think of the children" argument. It's not a good enough reason to infringe upon my rights and health. Kids have and will do things that are bad for them. It's inevitable. I'm not saying don't try to curb it, just don't punish me at the same time. Make it harder to get for anyone under 21. Institute reasonable regulations for juice manufacturers. I'm fine with that. >By all means, smokers can continue smoking, but they should expect some backlash towards your new favorite thing because it might be less harmful than smoking, but is still harmful for potential new users. Banning it completely is far from "some backlash".
  - olcor 7y ago
    > please spare me the "think of the children" argument. For the sake or argument, why? Don't they deserve some thought? Or are you completely insensitive to so many of the teenagers who've gotten addicted and can't go back to a nicotine-free life? > It's not a good enough reason to infringe upon my rights and health What's a guard rail for you is a potential car crash for the rest. > It's inevitable. I'm not saying don't try to curb it, just don't punish me at the same time. Make it harder to get for anyone under 21. Institute reasonable regulations for juice manufacturers. I'm fine with that. I'm sure that's what they said (and maybe did) about cigarettes. How's that going? "We like it and we're not going to stop" -- that's what an entire generation which didn't have full knowledge about the ill effects of smoking might be saying. That's what a million vapers from the next generation are going to say because they didn't have full knowledge of the harms, and people better hope it's just an addiction issue and not a health one. Kids will probably always do what's bad for them, but it's up to the adults to minimize damage. And yes, there's a gap. A Juul is going to reach middle India faster than the knowledge that it's addictive and should be handled with care. > Banning it completely is far from "some backlash". Yes, and I didn't say it was perfect; in fact I believe it might end up having an opposite effect. But the reasonable ways out haven't worked well. There's a very high probability that the government knows this too, and is going to end up trying all the steps you suggested. But at least the message is out.
    - EpicEng 7y ago
      >For the sake or argument, why? Don't they deserve some thought? Or are you completely insensitive to so many of the teenagers who've gotten addicted and can't go back to a nicotine-free life? Because it's an emotional response that gets people all worked up and all of a sudden facts, logic, and adult choice go out the window. There is a wide array of actions which can be taken to curb child use which are far short of a complete ban, and let's not forget that this all began with "VAPING IS KILLIN PEOPLE!" headlines, an issue which has nothing to do with vaping in general or its long term effects. >What's a guard rail for you is a potential car crash for the rest. How so? We have no reason to believe that vaping is harmful long term. It's a risk, sure, but "car crash"? Based on what exactly? >I'm sure that's what they said (and maybe did) about cigarettes. How's that going? Smoking rates are way down. Why do you think it's your responsibility or right to dictate whether or not I can smoke? >But the reasonable ways out haven't worked well. What are those? What have we tried so far? Btw, cigarettes are still perfectly legal!

You don't have a clue. The alternative for many of (myself included) is cigarettes, not quitting. You can call us lazy, weak, whatever, it doesn't matter; we like smoking and we're not going to stop.

olcor 7y ago

Yes, I don't have a clue. No, I'm not calling you weak/lazy/whatever. Incorrigible doesn't mean either of these things. You like smoking, feel free to do so. I'm just saying that it's known that nicotine, in general, is a bad idea. If you know that and yet you smoke, go ahead. But there's going to be efforts from any reasonable government to not get any new members to the club. > we like smoking, and we're not going to stop I have a feeling that you don't mean that, but would you rather have a bunch of kids thinking they're doing a cool thing (apparently a lot of kids used to think that about Juul not too long ago in the States)? For them, cigarette's not going to be a substitute as it is for smokers currently. Cigarettes are already that icky thing old people do and cause lung cancer (basically their favorite movie star told them so for 2 years). By all means, smokers can continue smoking, but they should expect some backlash towards your new favorite thing because it might be less harmful than smoking, but is still harmful for potential new users.

EpicEng 7y ago
>I have a feeling that you don't mean that, but would you rather have a bunch of kids thinking they're doing a cool thing (apparently a lot of kids used to think that about Juul not too long ago in the States)? I do, and please spare me the "think of the children" argument. It's not a good enough reason to infringe upon my rights and health. Kids have and will do things that are bad for them. It's inevitable. I'm not saying don't try to curb it, just don't punish me at the same time. Make it harder to get for anyone under 21. Institute reasonable regulations for juice manufacturers. I'm fine with that. >By all means, smokers can continue smoking, but they should expect some backlash towards your new favorite thing because it might be less harmful than smoking, but is still harmful for potential new users. Banning it completely is far from "some backlash".
- olcor 7y ago
  > please spare me the "think of the children" argument. For the sake or argument, why? Don't they deserve some thought? Or are you completely insensitive to so many of the teenagers who've gotten addicted and can't go back to a nicotine-free life? > It's not a good enough reason to infringe upon my rights and health What's a guard rail for you is a potential car crash for the rest. > It's inevitable. I'm not saying don't try to curb it, just don't punish me at the same time. Make it harder to get for anyone under 21. Institute reasonable regulations for juice manufacturers. I'm fine with that. I'm sure that's what they said (and maybe did) about cigarettes. How's that going? "We like it and we're not going to stop" -- that's what an entire generation which didn't have full knowledge about the ill effects of smoking might be saying. That's what a million vapers from the next generation are going to say because they didn't have full knowledge of the harms, and people better hope it's just an addiction issue and not a health one. Kids will probably always do what's bad for them, but it's up to the adults to minimize damage. And yes, there's a gap. A Juul is going to reach middle India faster than the knowledge that it's addictive and should be handled with care. > Banning it completely is far from "some backlash". Yes, and I didn't say it was perfect; in fact I believe it might end up having an opposite effect. But the reasonable ways out haven't worked well. There's a very high probability that the government knows this too, and is going to end up trying all the steps you suggested. But at least the message is out.
  - EpicEng 7y ago
    >For the sake or argument, why? Don't they deserve some thought? Or are you completely insensitive to so many of the teenagers who've gotten addicted and can't go back to a nicotine-free life? Because it's an emotional response that gets people all worked up and all of a sudden facts, logic, and adult choice go out the window. There is a wide array of actions which can be taken to curb child use which are far short of a complete ban, and let's not forget that this all began with "VAPING IS KILLIN PEOPLE!" headlines, an issue which has nothing to do with vaping in general or its long term effects. >What's a guard rail for you is a potential car crash for the rest. How so? We have no reason to believe that vaping is harmful long term. It's a risk, sure, but "car crash"? Based on what exactly? >I'm sure that's what they said (and maybe did) about cigarettes. How's that going? Smoking rates are way down. Why do you think it's your responsibility or right to dictate whether or not I can smoke? >But the reasonable ways out haven't worked well. What are those? What have we tried so far? Btw, cigarettes are still perfectly legal!