• dismalnow
    link
    fedilink
    01 year ago

    And when the government can effectively prevent massive amounts of benzene from going into the air, they are more than welcome to work on the trace amounts of nicotine.

    • @AnalogyAddict
      link
      7
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s not a zero sum. You can be against both.

      That argument sounds like someone whining about car accidents while setting themselves on fire… one does not make the other okay.

      • dismalnow
        link
        fedilink
        3
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        One is clearly worse, can be stopped, and isn’t bullshit.

        The other is whiny bullshit, and your analogy sucks.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        11 year ago

        But people aren’t against it. They are against cigarettes and vaping because they don’t like them. Alchohol? Totally fine. Pills? Goochie. Caffeine? Can’t live without it. And if it’s a matter of smell, then when are we making not showering illegal? Also, axe body spray, perfumes, incense, and any other form of non-consensual smells?

        These things will never be banned because people like them. The same argument applies, but it doesn’t get railed against because they don’t bother you.

      • dismalnow
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        It’s about ease of enforcement. If you can’t enforce a law, it’s bullshit lip service.

    • Th4tGuyII
      link
      fedilink
      -21 year ago

      You’d be right, but those trace amount of nicotine are often going straight into our faces for the crime of being downwind of someone smoking/vaping without a care in the world.

      Health effects aside, I’d appreciate not having to breath in or smell other people’s second-hand smoke/vape.

      • sacredbirdman
        link
        fedilink
        3
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        There’s more nicotine in your average pasta sauce than you’ll absorb by following a vaping person for an hour. I know you’re talking about a principle… but it’s not a very strong argument.

        • Th4tGuyII
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          Okay, assuming that’s true, when I eat pasta with sauce, the person next to me doesn’t end up ingesting my pasta sauce.

          When you smoke/vape, the people are forced to inhale your exhaust as they breath (which we don’t really get a lot of choice in doing).

          It’s like saying because you got an X-ray you shouldn’t worry about bathing in the sun for too long.

          • sacredbirdman
            link
            fedilink
            11 year ago

            You missed the point. More accurate would be: because you watched TV for an hour you shouldn’t worry about someone shining a flashlight on you. That’s the level of consequences we’re talking about and it sounds ridiculous when someone blows them out of proportions. Maybe we should start worrying about anal residue too because people are farting outside.

        • Th4tGuyII
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          It does go both ways, but saying “my body, my right” when what you’re doing has a physical, unhealthy effect on the people around you I’d argue is more selfish than my wanting you to stop.

          Imagine if people just stood outside of buildings constantly coughing and spluttering germs at you whenever you walked past. You’d want them to stop, no?

        • Th4tGuyII
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          I’d argue the people blowing their exhaust onto passers by are more selfish, considering the passers by don’t get a choice in breathing, but sure I’m the selfish one.