Do you smoke?

Anthony Kim18 said:And why on earth would they need to?

😲

because smoking is a silent k.i.l.l.e.r

Lisa Morales4 said:😲

Because smoking is such a silent killer

Just like fast food. Or smog in the air.
Do your buddies even ask if they can start their car when you're around!?

Anthony Kim18 said:just like fast food or air pollution.
Do your friends ask if they’re allowed to start their car when they're standing near you!?

Tobacco Smoking is the largest single preventable cause of death and disease in the United States. Smoking causes more than 19,000 deaths each year - 80% of all drug-related deaths, and around 11 times the number of road crash fatalities. (THAT'S 11 TIMES THE FATALITY RATE OF CAR ACCIDENTS!!)

Every day, 52 Americans die from diseases caused by smoking!
[US population: 330 million]
(American Cancer Society)

... it seems like we can live without cigarettes, but we just can't live without cars. 😎

By the way, what happened to that discussion about Nazi Germany in Latin script from last night?

Anthony Kim18 said:Hold on a second. Where do you get the right to defend someone smoking in a cafe or a public space right next to you and your kid? If it really bothers you that much, why go to places where smoking is allowed?

I was talking about someone in my own home...🙂 not cafes... nobody smokes at my place and everyone who knows me respects that...

@ Lisa Morales4

You’re repeating yourself.

Look, if you're taking your child to places where smoking is actually legal, then you aren't being any more conscientious than the smokers themselves. The real issue here seems to be this conviction that everyone around you should simply bend to your personal will. Smokers don't have any right to light up where it's legally prohibited, but in those spots where it is allowed, you really don't have much grounds to complain.

Lisa Morales4 said:... it seems like we can manage without cigarettes, but we just can't live without cars 😎

Well, you might be able to quit smoking, but you’re still stuck needing a vehicle.

As for me, I could definitely get by without a car, but if I did that, what would I even do now?

Anthony Kim18 said:And why exactly should they?

Because it’s just common courtesy—you ask the people you're hanging out with if they mind before you light up. It shows a bit of respect for those who might be sensitive to it; some people really can't handle smoke being right in their face.

That said, if you're at a spot where everyone is smoking like there's no tomorrow—say, a dive bar or a club—then there's really no point in asking. You wouldn't even hear the answer over the noise, and besides, half the crowd is likely smoking anyway. 😬

Jamie Newman40 said:You can live without cigarettes, and you can live without a car.

I, for one, could manage without a vehicle—so what’s the plan now?

Regardless, you probably shouldn't be asking Lisa Morales4 for rides in her car anyway. 😬 🤣

Gary Cox72 said:In any case, you probably shouldn't be asking Lisa Morales4 for a ride in her car. 😬 🤣

Look, Lisa Morales4 has access to cigarettes, she just chooses not to smoke because it's deadly. It's like if I decided to stop driving because that's also dangerous. Would she give up her car just because it bothered me?

Jamie Newman40 said:Lisa Morales4 div>

Well, they aren't quite the same thing. It’s true that the moment you get behind the wheel, you become a potential participant in an accident; however, people use cars primarily out of necessity—and with the baseline assumption that a crash won't happen.

Smoking is different—it's a pleasure, sure, but it's also an addiction that undeniably harms health, both for the smoker and those nearby (passive smokers).

I’m not actually talking about car accidents here, but rather the exhaust fumes coming out of vehicles.

Regarding exhaust fumes, you're right—they're harmful. But then again, vehicle usage has its own "defense" 😁, namely that cars are an absolute necessity these days for moving people and freight. As for smoking, what exactly is the benefit there?

Jamie Newman40 said:@ Lisa Morales4

I think you're missing the point.

If you're taking your child to places where smoking is actually allowed, then you aren't being any more responsible than the smokers themselves. The issue seems to be that you feel people should have to bend to your will regardless of where you are. Smokers don't have any right to light up where it's legally prohibited, but where it is permitted, you really don't have a leg to stand on.

Honey, I honestly can't think of many places here in the US where you'd run into smokers, unless we're talking about private spots like apartments or balconies—maybe in certain neighborhoods... I know plenty of former smokers in my own circle who all decided to QUIT SMOKING once they moved here to the US! It’s not worth it, they say; everything feels healthier now, and there are so many better things to spend money on than cigarettes!

In nightclubs, discos, and bars, smoking is strictly banned.
The only exception is in a specific area like the Bellagio's lounge. 🙂

It's also banned at sports stadiums; at all major US sports venues, you can't smoke within 10 yards of the entrance. It's banned in parks too, because of the playgrounds, and many beaches explicitly forbid it as well. Even at those beaches where it might technically be allowed, you wouldn't see anyone doing it anyway, because why would you ruin a healthy walk along an ozone-filled beach with the stench of a cigarette?

If I were back home in a place where these kinds of smoking bans were unimaginable, I probably would have still been a smoker myself. 👎

See, a healthy environment actually saves us! 🙂

Anything that isn't healthy is just unhealthy, plain and simple.

Jamie Newman40 said:I'm not talking about accidents; I'm talking about vehicle emissions.

But that’s exactly the point, my friend! It all comes down to the fuel and everything else.

Down here in Phoenix, we are gradually replacing our city buses with Greyhound units that run on hydrogen fuel cells rather than pumping out toxic fumes. We've had them since 2004, and they're becoming increasingly common. They aren't cheap—around $500,000 USD per bus—but it pays off for the city in the long run because we save so much on healthcare costs for smokers, who are becoming fewer and farther between, which means more funds can be shifted toward healthier options.

(image)[/IMG]

(image)[/IMG]

Work is also being done on manufacturing eco-friendly personal cars, with the goal of making them cheaper and accessible to everyone.

You see how much it matters:

cigarette smoking, dirty industries, wars, and the act of spraying toxins into the very air we share with future generations.

It really is far, far behind progressive thinking, healthy practices, and investing in a sustainable future...

Lisa Morales4 said:down here in Phoenix, we’re slowly transitioning our city transit over to Greyhound buses that run on hydrogen fuel cells instead of pumping out toxic exhaust. We've had them in rotation since 2004, and the fleet keeps growing. They aren't cheap—we're talking about half a million dollars per bus—but I honestly think it pays off in the long run because of how much is saved on medical costs related to smoking . Since there are fewer smokers these days, those healthcare burdens drop, leaving more resources available for healthier lifestyle options.

I'm not following—how does a Greyhound bus have anything to do with treating smokers?

Gary Cox72 said:Alright, looking at exhaust fumes, you’ve got a point—they are definitely harmful. But honestly, vehicle usage has its own kind of "justification," 😁, in the sense that cars are absolutely essential in this day and age for moving people and freight. When it comes to smoking, though, what exactly is the benefit?

I see. So basically, if it feels good, we just tolerate it? But what about children's health? Why is there such a massive outcry about that, yet silence elsewhere?

That is precisely my point regarding the discrimination of one group over another.

If both automobiles and smoking are detrimental to our health, then logically, both should be prohibited; otherwise, we are simply practicing discrimination. The only way a ban on smoking wouldn't be seen as discriminatory is if cigarettes were outlawed entirely as a product—something akin to Prohibition. Now, that would be an interesting spectacle to watch.

Anthony Kim18 said:And why on earth would they need to...

Because where I live, it's actually required by law😁 so deal with it if you can't handle the truth😬

Jamie Newman40 said:So, basically, if it pleases them, they can just tolerate it. But what about the health of our children? Why isn't anyone speaking up about that?

That is precisely my point regarding the discrimination of one group over another.

If both cars and smoking are harmful to health, then both should be banned; otherwise, we're looking at pure discrimination. The only way a smoking ban wouldn't be considered discriminatory is if cigarettes were made illegal entirely, similar to Prohibition. I'd certainly enjoy watching that unfold...

Now you've gone too far with those silly comparisons.👎 What actual benefit does anyone get from smoking cigarettes?

Or why didn't you compare cigarettes to wood or coal-burning stoves?😱

Smokers have always discriminated against non-smokers...👎 so now you're just experiencing the discrimination yourselves.😬

Jamie Newman40 said:I’m not talking about accidents; I mean car exhaust emissions.

Once people start having their mouths directly against an exhaust pipe, I suspect it will be banned...😁

jadetiger10 said:I honestly think they won't start banning things until people have mouths positioned right next to those exhaust pipes.😁

Look, if you pull into the garage properly, shut the door behind you, start your engine, and just wait there, it’s fine.

It's much better than sharing that same cramped space with a smoker who's going through an entire pack of Marlboros.

Which would you actually prefer?