3 ms·
> no punishment is too harsh, this should be considered the equivalent of lighting up a cigarette on a plane. Okay this is ridiculous. One is a fire hazard and
by dataflow 6mo ago
> no punishment is too harsh, this should be considered the equivalent of lighting up a cigarette on a plane.
Okay this is ridiculous. One is a fire hazard and the other is not. Do you really need the hyperbole here?
- BenjiWiebe 6mo agoThe lack of cigarettes on a plane isn't due to the fire hazard.
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- 0xffff2 6mo agoAre you aware that smoking used to be allowed on planes? We didn't stop allowing it because of a rash of airplane fires either.
- dataflow 6mo agoYes, I'm fully aware. And it is emphatically irrelevant. It's kind of ridiculous to suggest the original motivations for the rule somehow render the associated risks on people's safety, lives, and properties permanently ineligible for consideration.
- eudamoniac 6mo agoJapanese pilots still smoke every flight