The Dangers of Smoking Cigarettes

[Moonbear]

Piping in classical music seems to be the way to go:

Halt, or I'll play Vivaldi!

With its audience dwindling, classical music finds new cachet — as thug repellent. It can't be what Bach & Co. had in mind.

By Scott Timberg, Times Staff Writer

In the 1982 movie "Fitzcarraldo," a white-suited Klaus Kinski, playing a 19th century rubber baron, steams down a Peruvian river, blasting Caruso on his gramophone toward the damp, dark rain forest and its hostile natives. The phonograph becomes a symbol of the character's attempt to civilize the wilderness — and of his mad obsession to build an opera house in the jungle.

As odd as it sounds, this very technique has been used lately all over the English-speaking world — only not as a civilizing strategy but as a way of banishing ruffians, drug pushers and ne'er-do-wells. To clear out undesirables, opera and classical music have been piped into Canadian parks, Australian railway stations, 7-Eleven parking lots and, most recently, London Underground stops.

Continued at: http://www.calendarlive.com/cl-ca-musichurts13feb13,0,6238299.story

 

[franznietzsche]

Piping in classical music seems to be the way to go:



Continued at: http://www.calendarlive.com/cl-ca-musichurts13feb13,0,6238299.story

That's awesome.

I'll keep that in mind whenever those normal teenagers start bugging me.

 

[honestrosewater]

I agree- people who drive their cars where I want to walk and breathe are rude. And everyone who drives a car is nasty and suicidal.

 

[Monique]

Cars serve another purpose than smoking

 

[honestrosewater]

Cars serve another purpose than smoking

Smoking can serve purposes too. Anyway, driving and smoking are both dangerous and legal under certain restrictions.
I don't understand how someone can complain that some smokers are disrespectful of others and, in the same breath, say smokers shouldn't be allowed to smoke inside any building other than someone's home or even come near others if doing so offends them. Smokers must respect the wants of nonsmokers, but nonsmokers needn't respect the wants of smokers? That makes sense to you?

 

[Andy]

Why should a non smoker go out of their way to accomadate the needs of a smoker?

 

[honestrosewater]

Why should a non smoker go out of their way to accomadate the needs of a smoker?

And why should a smoker go out of their way to accommodate the needs of a nonsmoker? Why should anyone go out of their way to accommodate the needs of a anyone else? I suppose one reason would be that they want to cooperate with each other. Heck, maybe they even believe people deserve to be treated fairly.

 

[russ_watters]

Smoking can serve purposes too.

Such as?

I don't understand how someone can complain that some smokers are disrespectful of others and, in the same breath, say smokers shouldn't be allowed to smoke inside any building other than someone's home or even come near others if doing so offends them. Smokers must respect the wants of nonsmokers, but nonsmokers needn't respect the wants of smokers? That makes sense to you?

Um, yeah. Think about it this way: if you have 50 people in a smoking section and 50 people in a non-smoking section of a restaraunt, how many non-smokers are affected if one non-smoker goes into the smoking section? How many non-smokers are affected if one smoker goes into the non-smoking section?

If I'm hard-up for a table, sometimes I'll choose to sit in the smoking section. I choose to expose myself to smoke for the sake of getting a table. But a smoker cannot choose to sit in the non-smoking section because that circumvents the choice of the 50 people sitting in that section.

Yeah, its an inherrently unequal situation, and you're now on the short end of it (until recently, non-smokers were on the short end of it) . Sorry, but that's just too bad. That's what happens when you do something that is inherrently unhealthy and which society has deemed has no redeeming value (such as that little redeeming value that cars have...transportation).

And why should a smoker go out of their way to accommodate the needs of a nonsmoker?

Choice. Whether or not you smoke is your choice. Therefore, it is you who must make the sacrifice if you want to make that choice. Since I have no choice, your choice is not allowed to affect me. That's how rights work.

I'm sure you'll want to bring cars back into it: what if my driving a car kills a pedestrian accidentally (no drinking involved). My choice to drive, right? Yes, but its also the pedestrian's choice to be on the road.

 

[Monique]

I don't understand how someone can complain that some smokers are disrespectful of others and, in the same breath, say smokers shouldn't be allowed to smoke inside any building other than someone's home or even come near others if doing so offends them.

Ok, suppose: you are sitting in a restaurant having your diner and I come and sit next to your table.

I grab into my pocket and I take out a lighter and a stick of incense, and start burning the incense in the restaurant next to the table you are sitting at. Would you suggest that you would not be bothered, and you would continue to enjoy your diner?

How about, I come into the restaurant and I sit down at the table next to you and I take out a ghetto blaster and start listening to a CD of Skunk Anansie. Again, that would be perfectly ok?

 

[Evo]

Smoking can serve purposes too. Anyway, driving and smoking are both dangerous and legal under certain restrictions.
I don't understand how someone can complain that some smokers are disrespectful of others and, in the same breath, say smokers shouldn't be allowed to smoke inside any building other than someone's home or even come near others if doing so offends them. Smokers must respect the wants of nonsmokers, but nonsmokers needn't respect the wants of smokers? That makes sense to you?

Yes, that makes perfect sense. It's because smoking isn't necessary, it's a nasty, foul smelling practice that affects everyone near them. Because it affects other people, the smoker needs to make sure that they do not affect others that don't wish to breath smoke. If a person can't sit through a meal without smoking, they have a very serious problem. Smokers should not impose their problems on others.

I tell you what, I'll let someone smoke next to me as long as I can keep spraying Lysol at them. Hey, it's my right to get a couple of cans and spray them non stop in the face the whole time their smoke is in my face, right?

 

[Monique]

I tell you what, I'll let someone smoke next to me as long as I can keep spraying Lysol at them. Hey, it's my right to get a couple of cans and spray them non stop in the face the whole time their smoke is in my face, right?

yeah, I've thought that that before too, lol

 

[Andy]

Sounds like a good idea to me!

 

[juvenal]

Smoking can serve purposes too. Anyway, driving and smoking are both dangerous and legal under certain restrictions.
I don't understand how someone can complain that some smokers are disrespectful of others and, in the same breath, say smokers shouldn't be allowed to smoke inside any building other than someone's home or even come near others if doing so offends them. Smokers must respect the wants of nonsmokers, but nonsmokers needn't respect the wants of smokers? That makes sense to you?

Smoking actually works better in some cases than caffeine in keeping you awake when you're driving. I don't know why - but it really works. If you find yourself having to drive from point A to point B and you're dead tired - smoke a cigarette or two - it may save your life. I'm serious. (Yes - I know- pull over to the side of the road, take a nap, blah, blah, blah).

 

[Moonbear]

I'm sure you'll want to bring cars back into it: what if my driving a car kills a pedestrian accidentally (no drinking involved). My choice to drive, right? Yes, but its also the pedestrian's choice to be on the road.

I'll even take this a step further. If that driver swerves onto the sidewalk, where pedestrians have every reason to expect they will be safe to walk without being in the middle of car traffic, then that driver is held responsible for every injury or death he/she causes.

If someone is sitting in a non-smoking section, where the non-smokers have every reason to expect they will be in a smoke-free environment, and a smoker walks in and lights a cigarette, do you see them taking any responsibility of ensuring they will cover the medical bills of any non-smoker who now develops a smoking related illness? What do you do for the asthmatic who spends the rest of their evening at the hospital because they were exposed to smoke where they had every reason to expect they had chosen a smoke-free place to visit?

If I walk up to an establishment that offers no non-smoking section, and clearly is a venue where smoking occurs (such as a bar), I do not ask the smokers to accommodate me, I make my choice to not enter that establishment. If I do choose to enter, I know what to expect and can't complain about the environment. On the other hand, if an establishment clearly states "No Smoking" at the entrance, I fully expect the smokers to make the same decision upon entering. They can either choose to enter anyway and abide by the no smoking policy, or they can choose to leave and find someplace that permits them to smoke.

In Monique's case, this is her home. She's not telling people not to smoke in their own entryway, but is asking them not to smoke in her own entryway, so that her non-smoking home doesn't stink of smoke. It would be no different if I stood at the doorway to your home and decided I really needed to spray myself with copious amounts of some cheap perfume so that the perfume odor began to coat your entryway and permeate into your house. You would have every right to ask me to stop spraying perfume or to ask me to leave (or even have me forcibly removed for trespassing if I persisted despite you making it clear I was not welcome; if you are not home when I am doing this, a large sign stating so would suffice, which is what Monique has done by posting a No Smoking sign).

Not only are they standing there to smoke, they are littering her property with cigarette butts and other trash. If you're going to smoke outdoors, don't litter the streets with your cigarette butts. Find a proper place to dispose of your trash.

 

[brewnog]

Smoking actually works better in some cases than caffeine in keeping you awake when you're driving. I don't know why - but it really works.

Yes, but I was almost run into once by some woman while she tried to smoke, talk on her mobile and apply lipstick simultaneously whilst driving.

Having a stick of tobacco burning at 700 Celcius whilst driving is a distraction, I wish anyone guilty of this the joy of crashing into a tree.

 

[motai]

How about, I come into the restaurant and I sit down at the table next to you and I take out a ghetto blaster...

 

[Monique]

Not only are they standing there to smoke, they are littering her property with cigarette butts and other trash.

An improvement: I woke up this morning and there are no sigarette buds! Now there's just an empty banana and tangarine peels lying in the entrance Maybe it's just a hungry person who stole fruits from the fruitstore next door and took the first hide-out..

*edit* yep, there's someone sleeping on my doorstep now at 1 in the afternoon life in the city..

 

[Wardw]

Smoked from 14-21. gave it up 23 years ago as it interfered with my voice as I was heavily into singing, but I must admit, the smell of good Borkum Riff pipe tobacco still hits a button somewhere deep within me, pity the taste is never equal to the smell.
But coffee... who could live without it, I can't even make it in the morning unless I've had one first.
Are pipes worse that cigarettes??

 

[brewnog]

Are pipes worse that cigarettes??

Depends if you prefer mouth cancer or lung cancer.

 

[Wardw]

They'll both get you in the end

 

[Monique]

With lung cancer you won't be able to breathe, with mouth cancer you won't be able to eat. It's the way you go that matters

 

[juvenal]

I wonder if fat and ugly people should not be allowed to go into public since they offend my visual sense. And wear Speedos while mowing the front lawn - something I saw in Hungary. (I remember reading a story a few years ago about a town in Italy that banned fat women from wearing bikinis at the beach).

 

[spender]

Soon the idiots gona make smoking tobacco a crime,I already get bad looks from people when smoking outside.
Actually one breaths in 100x more poison from car fumes, than from smoking.

 

[Moonbear]

Soon the idiots gona make smoking tobacco a crime,I already get bad looks from people when smoking outside.
Actually one breaths in 100x more poison from car fumes, than from smoking.

Well, that's why I don't go sucking on tailpipes or running the car with the garage door closed either.

 

[Moonbear]

I wonder if fat and ugly people should not be allowed to go into public since they offend my visual sense. And wear Speedos while mowing the front lawn - something I saw in Hungary. (I remember reading a story a few years ago about a town in Italy that banned fat women from wearing bikinis at the beach).

The difference is we're not complaining about looking at people smoking cigarettes, but by being forced to breathe their smoke. Those overweight people aren't forcing you to eat their food, there's no second-hand food consumption. They are only endangering themselves. As for the choice to mow one's lawn while wearing a speedo (aside from ), that's just plain stupid. I even try to avoid wearing shorts to mow the lawn because you never know what the lawnmower is going to kick back at you (definitely wear sturdy closed-toe shoes, not sandals...just in case).

 

[spender]

Walk more often and you will see(smell) what I mean.Soon idiots going to blame smog on cigarette smokers, I guaratee it.

 

[spender]

The difference is we're not complaining about looking at people smoking cigarettes, but by being forced to breathe their smoke. Those overweight people aren't forcing you to eat their food, there's no second-hand food consumption.

Smell of junk food is overwhelming everywhere, if one wants to go shoping to the mall or take break at the food court, person is forced to breath in that skunky junk food odour,who knows how many poisons and carcinogens are contained in it.?

 

[honestrosewater]

Gee, thanks for the hostility, but I prefer sarcasm. I guess no one got the part about cooperating and treating each other fairly. I certainly think it's disrespectful to blow smoke in someone's face and fair to require that certain places be smoke-free - and I never said otherwise. Anyway, I think this "discussion" is bad for my health- my blood pressure is high enough already.

 

[Moonbear]

Gee, thanks for the hostility, but I prefer sarcasm. I guess no one got the part about cooperating and treating each other fairly. I certainly think it's disrespectful to blow smoke in someone's face and fair to require that certain places be smoke-free - and I never said otherwise. Anyway, I think this "discussion" is bad for my health- my blood pressure is high enough already.

I don't think anyone has been hostile in response to your post, just pointed out that it didn't pertain to Monique's situation because we're talking about her property where she does have the right to a smoke-free environment if she requests it.

 

[Andy]

Origionally posted by spender
Soon the idiots gona make smoking tobacco a crime,I already get bad looks from people when smoking outside.
Actually one breaths in 100x more poison from car fumes, than from smoking.

Do you mean that say a mechanic is going to breath in more toxins than a smoker? The modern car has very clean exhaust fumes.