You could say smoking is one of the most human activities ever. Does nothing but actively harm and potentially kill everything around you. Just what we’re the best at.
But seriously now. Can we speed up smoking bans? Like, everywhere?
Yeah prohibition is famous for working very well and not have any side effect.
But seriously now. Can we speed up smoking bans? Like, everywhere?
Some European countries, including mine, has decided to raise the smoking age by 1 every year, essentially banning the next generation from smoking. Not really rapid or speeding up, but future is looking good
There was a slight problem where some people were allowed to smoke for portion of the year after birthday and before the age increase, for every year
That I can’t get on board with personally. Everyone has a vice.
Imagine doing that with cannabis or drinking. Probably wouldn’t get near the support even though those are also vices.
Second hand drinking isn’t really a thing and I don’t see people smoking weed publicly all the time to the point it’s disgusting to eat at cafe, at least never noticed it, so most don’t really care.
It’s irrelevant. You’re telling people what they can and cannot do based on when they were born.
It’d be one thing if no one could smoke. But youre not saying that. You’re strictly saying because you were born after x date that you can never smoke.
That’s entirely messed up and my point being it’s terribly against personal freedom.
And you basically proved my point- people will make allowances for other vices but not this.
Note that I was telling what the government does, not what is my opinion on this.
If I was steering the wheel, I’d just ban all drug consumption in public spaces, but allow non-destructive ones in personal spaces (your property), which includes tobacco and weed. I’d probably also limit the alcohol limit in drinks to something like 11%, so no absolut vodkas or smirnoffs as those tends to cause serious brain damage, which in return affects everyone around who have to deal with your vegetable state even when sober
Disclaimer: I’m from east europe and alcohol consumption is kinda out of control for most people (yes, most people according to my experience)
Anything but prevent phillip morris from selling their shit huh?
What country is it? I always wanted this for mine.
I thought everyone in France smoked, including the kids, no?
I gave mine nicotine patch from age 5.
all the more reason. what’s the point of banning something if no one’s doing it
In cliché world yeah… But in reality, not so much. 😀
It been years… no… decades that smoking have nearly disappeared around me - including in the office.
I work with hundreds of people and the amount of people smoking can fit one hand. 25 years ago, i needed more than 2 hands to count them. And in my family, nobody starting at my parents generation and younger smokes.
Same story with wine during lunch. 25 years ago, it was several bottles each day at lunches.
Today, no more wine bottle and the trend started since easily 15 years now. Only for big occasion and the quantity have decreased a lot.
People drink more beers now. But far less than wine.
I like these laws but also I want to smoke in some places. I’d love a return of places like cigar lounges and whisky bars
LOL like here in Montreal I see people smoking right next to the “No smoking within 3 meters” or whatever sign.
This comment section is a disaster, just as bad as reddit. Comments of no substance on the side of popular opinion get upvotes, and waves of downvotes come for anyone who disagrees even a little, and even if they do it in a reasonable way.
I’m mildly asthmatic so I don’t smoke, vape, etc. I have tried a few times and it is simply too much for my lungs to cope with. I still think banning people from smoking in public parks or on beaches is a bit much, and not doing the same with vaping seems like a strange double standard. I had a college roommate who both vaped and smoked, and the vaping bothered me more. I still put up with it.
Hopefully enforcement is reasonable - respectful smokers who deliberately try to keep their distance should be allowed to enjoy themselves, but I understand prosecuting(?) those who show no care and smoke right next to nonsmokers.
The issue with smoking is the second hand smoke. It causes cancer, among many other health issues. Vape on the other hand doesn’t really have this same concern.
They aren’t banning smoking because of nicotine, they are banning it because it causes cancer.
Yes, secondhand smoke is bad. But we are talking about outdoor environments where it should usually be possible for smokers to keep their distance.
As for vaping, it hasn’t really been around long enough yet to know for sure what the health risks are regarding the secondhand aerosol exposure, but there is reason to be concerned. It is almost certainly not as bad as secondhand smoke, but there are still risks.
While I agree, these laws aren’t being made because smokers keep accidentally smoking near others, it’s because a large number of smokers can’t be assed to keep their distance. The major place I notice smokers is when they are just meandering through a large crowd as if everyone around them is fine with the smoke.
I get that, but shouldn’t it be possible then to target that kind of behavior specifically rather than all smoking? Rather than banning smoking on x beach or in y park, they could ban smoking within x meters of a minor or non consenting adult. It would be more complicated but also more fair.
Ultimately I don’t know what all of the problems with that approach would be, but it would make more sense to me.
Comments of no substance on the side of popular opinion get upvotes, and waves of downvotes come for anyone who disagrees even a little, and even if they do it in a reasonable way.
Lemmy seems much worse for this than reddit TBH.
There’s a number of topics about which any dissent is met with vehement derision. As in those engaging in wrong think are assholes.
I don’t really know of course but I suspect it’s because lemmy has a narrower demographic than reddit. Opinions are just generally more homogeneous. I guess I’m describing an echo chamber.
There’s one section of benches on my town common that smells like cigarettes from all the way over on the sidewalk. Even if it’s empty. There are so many smokers that the stink won’t go away even though it’s outside. Why do they get to ruin that section of park for everyone else?
We have this one park with a small beach section. They try to rope off a s,all smoking section away from everyone else, but you can still smell it. Why do they get to ruin the public beach for everyone else?
Sometimes other people do things we dislike, c’est la vie.
To protect children, meanwhile the soil is filled with cancer-inducing products pumped away illegally by big chemistry plants. In belgium and netherlands we can barely eat our own produce thanks to this. When are we gonna ban them??
GOOD point. They shouldn’t ban cigarettes until everything else bad is also banned.
They shouldn’t ban cigarettes.
They should ban phillip morris and co who manifacture even more harmful tabacco to turn everybody into an addict.
But they shouldn’t ban anything else bad unless everything bad is banned. Fuck we can’t ban shit
There’s always one. Always fucking one.
yeah also ban those… how does all that affect this exactly?
Ban children!?
I love how everyone supporting this just assumes you’ll still be able to smoke at your own home when it doesn’t saying anything of the sort. It explicitly states ‘where children COULD be present’. This is literally everywhere short of some BDSM dungeon. This is basically going to make the population choose between smoking and having kids.
Which actually sounds fair. Kids do not choose to be born and do not need to inhale smoke because parents are addicted to smoking
Giving people the expectation of clean air and fresh water is far too liberal of a concept these days.
It’s always cleaner if not one is smoking around you 😅
This is basically going to make the population choose between smoking and having kids.
Hell I’d start smoking again.
Yeah don’t smoke near your kids. It’s not that hard.
They’re also making the population choose between drinking and driving.
No they’re not. Do they outlaw drinking everywhere children might one day walk through.
Do you often spill drinks into the mouths of passerby’s?
The issue isn’t the substance, it’s the second hand smoke. Children are smart enough to know “this is a thing my parents do that I can’t” but no level of smart can keep the air they breath from containing smoke.
Yes they do wtf. Dont drink and drive.
Mind your ankles. The slopes around here are slippery.
Dang, France is really about to take away the one thing that the USA has always been ahead of them on.
Whether its actually enforced or not will be the question. I went to Disneyland Paris 7 years ago, there were signs everywhere saying smoke only in designated areas but there were people smoking all over and none of the staff seemed to care.
The prolific smoking in France really hits home for me when I was subjected to a cloud of smoke on a train platform. I can’t remember the last time my personal space was so violated waiting for a train.
I was in Paris just after the Olympics ended and I don’t think I smelled any tobacco at all. Marseille? Cigarettes everywhere. I couldn’t even enjoy eating at the cafés.
Reasoning aside, i agree that it shouldn’t be permitted outside one’s home
Oh, man! I’m goin’. That’s all there is to it. I’m fuckin’ goin’.
On-and-off smoker here (mostly off)
In my experience, nicotine is great for moderating rage and resentment. It can help in bad situations and also provides a space where one can effectively shut distractions out and enter a somewhat meditative state to work on issues. It performs this task very, very well.
It is not the same as “just taking a walk” or “standing outside”. Absent-mindedly smoking provides a different experience. I am envious of people who can go to the park and get the same kind of effect out of it, but for a raft of different reasons I can’t reach the same experience.
I know smoking damages nearly every part of your body. I know it’s addictive. I know many smokers aren’t considerate of others, and blow smoke all over people downwind, in through windows and leave cigarette butts everywhere. I know wildfires start from improperly extinguished butts. I am not one of those people, and take pains to enjoy a cigarette where I will impact as few people as possible. And when my life looks up? I quit, because I don’t need it anymore, and it serves no useful purpose.
Unfortunately, there seems to be less and less room in the world to create the kind of space where one can take a few minutes such as this. And that I think is the crux of the resistance here.
We keep asking for more out of everyone, and usually to no benefit for themselves. We keep making organizational decisions which result in people feeling stressed, angry, resentful, and then in turn quite deliberately fail to understand when people pick up a vice that is harming them… and then try to ban that behavior, or sanctimoniously tut away that they are somehow selfish for wanting a break from it all for five damned minutes.
There’s so many different instances under which this theme plays out. I doubt this law will be enforced evenly, and it seems predictably authoritarian and counterproductive like many substance control laws. We can’t stop people stuffing a bunch of plants into a pipe, or into a paper wrapping and smoking it. It’s simply too easy to do, and it provides too much utility as a temporary respite from life for people to stop.
Want to solve it? Try finding ways of making life less terrible for the critical mass of people so that they won’t feel a need to smoke. And even then some still will, maybe out of spite, addiction (medical/psych treatment could be offered?) or downright contrarianism; but maybe few enough that it won’t matter. That’s the hard, and proper, fix for this. Smoking cessation drives are quite effective, as well as reasonable limitations on where one can smoke, and I think that is a fine policy balance.
I think cigarettes, especially manufactured ones, should be available and taxed appropriately for the healthcare burden they will produce later in life. Everyone should be aware of the health considerations in no uncertain terms. I think it’s appropriate to limit smoking around areas where at-risk populations live and congregate (incl. Children), and the rest really has to be allowed to work itself out in the ad-hoc grey area loosely defined as “Community”, “Consideration”, “Conscience” and “Respect”.
The Law is too heavy handed a tool to be expected to succeed here.
Anyway, I’m sure they’ve already thought about all of this and discussed it at length. Just like taxing older diesel cars without considering the consequences to folks the rural south who were unable to afford new vehicles.
The problem is that inconsiderate smokers are actively hurting the health of the people suffering from their inconsideration. Passive smoking is a thing, and it has long term consequences.
So while it sucks for the individual freedom of considerate smokers like yourself, banning public smoking protects a lot of people who get their health damaged by what is in my experience in France most of the smokers. And protection is one of the purposes of the law.
France just went up a few points in my estimation
