3 ms·

> On the other hand, a person smoking 1 or 2 cigarettes near me is actively harmful to my health. I think you have a strange way of placing responsibility, bec

> On the other hand, a person smoking 1 or 2 cigarettes near me is actively harmful to my health. I think you have a strange way of placing responsibility, because I am nearly certain what is actively harmful to your health is choosing to remain in the proximity of someone that smoked not only one cigarette but more than one. We know why they're smoking: they're addicted to nicotine, and it's unlikely they chose to become addicted. Why would you linger near them? Is it peer pressure?

sarchertech 4y ago
Because they linger near the entrances of buildings, or are otherwise in a place I would like to be. If someone walks around swinging a chain, so that everyone who doesn’t want to be hit has to run away from them, would you say that’s is my fault when I get hit? Talk about victim blaming.
- Maursault 4y ago
  > Because they linger near the entrances of buildings, or are otherwise in a place I would like to be. If the smoke doesn't alter your desire to be there, then it is still your choice to be there. > If someone walks around swinging a chain, so that everyone who doesn’t want to be hit has to run away from them, would you say that’s is my fault when I get hit? This is both the weak analogy and straw man fallacies in one. > Talk about victim blaming. One can believe you were offended, briefly, when they initially lit up, but once you stayed after they continued to smoke near you and completed their smoking, and then smoked a second cigarette, unless you were being restrained and prevented from leaving, then you were not being victimized. Once you chose to remain, you are stubbornly victimizing yourself. It is your choice to be offended when it is easy enough to walk away. Smoking is legal, and there are no stand your ground laws concerning it. If you were legitimately being victimized and you had the ability to move away, if you were rational, that is exactly what you would do. It would be similarly absurd for the smoker to be offended that you stayed within their secondhand smoke. You are in charge of you and not of them.
  - sarchertech 4y ago
    The fact that I can avoid harm by leaving the place where I otherwise want to be doesn’t mean that the person causing harm bears no responsibility. This is known in my he literature as the “Bart Simpson I’m just walking towards you swinging my arms defense”. It also doesn’t change the fact that I am annoyed that I have to leave the area I otherwise desired to be in when someone else decides to smoke. In most of the US smoking near the entrance to a public building is in fact illegal. If I am waiting under an awning for an Uber in the rain and you decide to light up, you are an obnoxious, asshole, scofflaw who is actively harming me. Despite the fact that I choose to accept that harm rather than stand in the damn rain.
    - Maursault 4y ago
      These are all straw man arguments and not mine. And these arbitrary decisions you describe are just as irrational and exhibit just as much entitlement as the smokers that you allow to aggravate your paranoia and are apparently stalking you. I trust you drive an electric car, because if your vehicle has an exhaust, and if you've ever parked with the engine running, the hypocrisy here is overwhelming.
      - sarchertech 4y ago
        Good think I use natural gasoline that doesn't contain any of those dangerous cancer chemicals that the man started adding in 50s.
        Maursault 4y ago
        It will convert easy enough to burn ethanol for much better performance and clean burning, but at the cost of a few less miles per tank.

sarchertech 4y ago

Because they linger near the entrances of buildings, or are otherwise in a place I would like to be. If someone walks around swinging a chain, so that everyone who doesn’t want to be hit has to run away from them, would you say that’s is my fault when I get hit? Talk about victim blaming.

Maursault 4y ago
> Because they linger near the entrances of buildings, or are otherwise in a place I would like to be. If the smoke doesn't alter your desire to be there, then it is still your choice to be there. > If someone walks around swinging a chain, so that everyone who doesn’t want to be hit has to run away from them, would you say that’s is my fault when I get hit? This is both the weak analogy and straw man fallacies in one. > Talk about victim blaming. One can believe you were offended, briefly, when they initially lit up, but once you stayed after they continued to smoke near you and completed their smoking, and then smoked a second cigarette, unless you were being restrained and prevented from leaving, then you were not being victimized. Once you chose to remain, you are stubbornly victimizing yourself. It is your choice to be offended when it is easy enough to walk away. Smoking is legal, and there are no stand your ground laws concerning it. If you were legitimately being victimized and you had the ability to move away, if you were rational, that is exactly what you would do. It would be similarly absurd for the smoker to be offended that you stayed within their secondhand smoke. You are in charge of you and not of them.
- sarchertech 4y ago
  The fact that I can avoid harm by leaving the place where I otherwise want to be doesn’t mean that the person causing harm bears no responsibility. This is known in my he literature as the “Bart Simpson I’m just walking towards you swinging my arms defense”. It also doesn’t change the fact that I am annoyed that I have to leave the area I otherwise desired to be in when someone else decides to smoke. In most of the US smoking near the entrance to a public building is in fact illegal. If I am waiting under an awning for an Uber in the rain and you decide to light up, you are an obnoxious, asshole, scofflaw who is actively harming me. Despite the fact that I choose to accept that harm rather than stand in the damn rain.
  - Maursault 4y ago
    These are all straw man arguments and not mine. And these arbitrary decisions you describe are just as irrational and exhibit just as much entitlement as the smokers that you allow to aggravate your paranoia and are apparently stalking you. I trust you drive an electric car, because if your vehicle has an exhaust, and if you've ever parked with the engine running, the hypocrisy here is overwhelming.
    - sarchertech 4y ago
      Good think I use natural gasoline that doesn't contain any of those dangerous cancer chemicals that the man started adding in 50s.
      - Maursault 4y ago
        It will convert easy enough to burn ethanol for much better performance and clean burning, but at the cost of a few less miles per tank.