Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it,
follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given
their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
Workplace smoking bans - Some facts and figures
Posts
They don't allow smoking there.
ZING!
It's not even that. Some people honestly don't care if there are health effects involve...like the guy from page 1. They just don't think they should ever have to smell it, because it's "icky." Seriously, fuck those people.
That, or I want to see some more support for my patchouli ban.
Actually, probably more than that. Since second hand smoke ostensibly causes serious long-term damage, then the actual number of heart attacks attributable to SHS is likely much higher. Presumably, if they keep this ban, number of heart attacks will continue to plummet. Why, I wouldn't be surprised if every heart attack in the world is somehow caused by SHS. I mean, smoking kills half a million people in the US each year (by which I mean that half a million people who have ever smoked even one cigarette die by some means or another, but you know, same thing). I bet SHS kills the rest.
Ponce de Leon had it all wrong - the secret to immortality is smoking bans.
Maddie: "I am not!"
Riley: "You're a marsupial!"
Maddie: "I am a placental mammal!"
Hey, wow, I agree. But dumbass on page one was saying we should ban it pretty much everywhere but inside your own home (including outside)...because regardless of a lack of adverse health effects, he didn't even want to smell it. Because it offends him.
This is what I was arguing against. Do you disagree?
Bullshit. Ban patchoulli, problem solved.
My wife is horribly allergic to certain pollens. Ban those flowers from outdoors.
She's also allergic to perfumes. Ban perfume.
It's all very doable. And there are externalities to allowing all of these things. It's not apples to apples at all; it's more like Fujis to Granny Smiths.
Maddie: "I am not!"
Riley: "You're a marsupial!"
Maddie: "I am a placental mammal!"
But your hypothetical is flawed, smoke is bad for you. It can cause an adverse reaction in a lot of people. I don't disagree that banning things because it offends people is retarded. Yet this forum you can't say certain words, so I guess offense can be legislated by those in power.
If you outlaw hippies, only hippies will be outlaws? Good I fucking hate people who don't bathe.
The concentration of smoke you'll inhale from passing a smoker on the sidewalk is highly unlikely to cause adverse health effects. I breathe worse air up here for months on end during fire season. Also, this forum is a private establishment, and rules here have no bearing on a public policy argument.
And regardless, it wasn't my hypothetical. It was his. He actually postulated that, even assuming no adverse health effects, smoking should be banned except in one's home. Simply because of the offensive smell. Which is fucking retarded.
"Hello citizen, what is your boggle?"
Some people are trying to do just that.
Maddie: "I am not!"
Riley: "You're a marsupial!"
Maddie: "I am a placental mammal!"
I don't see why banning that is so awful. I mean, we have pretty much banned cars without catalysators, factories can't pollute the air and cause people to cough anymore because a law probhits it, and every similar thing is considered equally bad.
If someone builds a coal factory right next to your house, that would suck, wouldn't it? You would complain about it? Yet when some kids smoke under my window that isn't somehow a bannable offense? When someone sits next to me and starts smoking, I'm the bad guy? Does anyone not see the hypocrisy in that?
Like I said, why do smokers get a free pass from causing uncomfortability to people? I don't see the logic in it. When you choose to participate in, something that causes people next to you difficulty to breathe, you usually do it where other people are not subjeted to it.
I went too far when I said it should be banned on anywhere except your own house, yeah, but I really don't want to suffer from it when I walk on the streets or anything similar to that.
Fixed. God I love that movie.
It's only a matter of time before they ban everything. Then people will revolt and my ultimate dream of a real life "The Postman" will be realized!
It seems so. Very high concentration of new smokers in Finland seem to be assholes who think that because smoking isn't banned on some areas it's right to walk past people and not even bother to turn their head to other side when they blow their smoke away, or sit next to them in public bench for example and start doing so. Or there was this one asshole who thought it was okay to smoke on the balcony and get tobacco smell all over some old lady's sheets that were being dried out, and when complained said that he had the right to do so and the old lady should take his clothes somewhere else. Or the damn teenage assholes who think its okay to go and smoke in a yard of some multi-story building when they hide from their teachers who try and catch all the underage smokers.
I have relatives who smoke, and somehow they *gasp* manage to do it somewhere where it doesn't annoy people. Sure, they could do it in a park or something, but they actually care about their fellow man and respect people who don't want to have anything to do with smoking, and realize that their choice shouldn't affect others in any way. I really don't understand people who can't do the same.
You need a hobby. Although amusingly enough I prefer to smoke in the cold over hot and humidness.
Drunks Against Mad Mothers
What say we to that?
Well...wait, it isn't?
And is it really a "punishing" if they can still smoke on designated areas and their own homes? Why do they feel the need to smoke at the exact spot they want to do it in, when there are non-smoking people around who may obviously get bothered by it for a completely logical reason?
Like I said, as long as they don't bother anyone, leave them alone.
So you are okay with drugs?
How about seatbelt laws?
How about answering the question, eh?
Strong drugs impede judgment, anyone on narcotics is not fit to understand exactly what they are doing to themselves.
2) Prohibition laws are a lot more closely related to the subject at hand.
Regardless, if a person decides, fully informed of the risk they are undertaking by driving a car while not wearing their seatbelt, to drive without wearing said seatbelt I have no problem with that and do not see why there should be legislation prohibiting it.
And since smokers do it, it'll be cool and hip and all the kids will want head bubbles.