Why do people hate cigarettes so freaking much?

[Lesane]

Again, it's quite different, by drinking alcohol you don't affect your surroundings. By excessive drinking you do, but man, it's not problem of alcohol that if you consume it in wast amounts you will fuck up your consciousness.

As long as smokers keep their smoke away from me and my stuff (again, i had roommate who smoked, and often i found my clothes smelling like cigarettes, it was very annoying and at some point we've got in fight)

It IS a problem of alcohol. Drinking excessive amounts of coke, water, juice or whatever doesn't affect your state of mind at all. Only alcoholic drinks do. You're really understating the amount of drinks you have to take to get to the stage of tipsy, at which point your mind is already slightly affected and the road to more shots or glasses already became a lot easier. That's one of the problems, alcohol consumption easily snowballs (so does smoking though). There's a reason why you get fined for drunk driving even if you just consumed a beer or 2-3. Your mind is already affected at that point, however slightly.

If a smoker separates him/herself from others and consumes the cigarette away from others, all the health risks are his/hers. If an alcoholic would do the same thing, i.e. walk outside the lounge/bar and drink and then go back in, the effects of alcohol can get that person into fights, can cause him/her to step in a car while drunk and all kinds of other shit. I am 100% positive alcohol has killed more people than regular smoking, when we're talking about the people who didn't actually consume it and just happened to be near the person who did. You can blame it all on the person who is drinking the alcohol, but the same person consuming cigarettes instead of alcohol wouldn't get into a fight or drive someone to death... at least not directly influenced by his/her consumption of cigarettes, while with alcohol this WOULD be the case.

I'm not saying alcohol should be banned, but at the very least it deserves the same stigma that smoking has received (no commercials, and warning labels).

[Charge me Doctor]

Yes it does. It isolates smokers from the rest of the world and removes any economical impact we have on society. Allowing for bars and restaurants to once again permit smoking doesn't mean that ALL bars and restaurants will permit smoking. You'd still have your non-smoking places to go to and we would have ours.

You can't eradicate smoking but you can isolate it so it has less/no impact on anyone else but the smoker. But that isn't being done, society is trying to eradicate smoking completely and that right there is a lost cause.

The problem i see here that smoking is so integrated in society that it's very hard to enforce such laws. People are still ignores non-smoking areas, people tend to smoke outside (and even in public transport) and no one gives a shit.

[diddle]

Not true.

http://www.no-smoke.org/getthefacts.php?id=13

The comparison would be more apt if the fart was constant, intentionally done, more toxic and visible.

Not that secondhand smoke isn't very harmful, but it hardly kills. Have you seen that South Park episode with Rob Reiner?

From the article you posted:
"Throughout the years, the science of secondhand smoke has driven the secondhand smoke policy engine from separate smoking and nonsmoking sections to separately ventilated smoking rooms to 100% smokefree environments. We now know that 53,800 people die every year from secondhand smoke exposure. This number is based on the midpoint numbers for heart disease deaths (48,500), lung cancer deaths (3,000), and SIDS deaths (2,300) as calculated in the 1997 California EPA Report on Secondhand Smoke. And children are at significant risk to many acute and chronic diseases as a result of secondhand smoke exposure."

Their method is incredibly unreliable, and does nothing to prove that second hand smoke kills. They lie and mislead because it is a righteous cause, which I understand. That's why nobody has ever found a specific case in which someone undoubtedly died from second hand smoke, they just take vague associations and label it as such.

[mvaliz]

Yes it does. It isolates smokers from the rest of the world and removes any economical impact we have on society. Allowing for bars and restaurants to once again permit smoking doesn't mean that ALL bars and restaurants will permit smoking. You'd still have your non-smoking places to go to and we would have ours.

You can't eradicate smoking but you can isolate it so it has less/no impact on anyone else but the smoker. But that isn't being done, society is trying to eradicate smoking completely and that right there is a lost cause.

I have no idea how the hell you came to that conclusion. Particularly the "economical impact"?

Has it ever occurred to you that many more people now go to bars and clubs BECAUSE they removed smoking? I know that for a fact, because myself and my friends are ones that now do go to bars when they banned cigarettes.

I think banning them pretty much isolates smokers from the rest of the world, don't you? They can always smoke at their homes while the rest of the world (who are a LOT more numerous than smokers) can go to public places and spend our money.

[Ateista]

Here is my problem with smokers, not smoking (if you want to do that nasty smelling shit, that is your right), is a lot of you smokers (not all) are rude assholes that think they're entitled to smoke where ever the fuck they want. I can not count how many times I've had to almost throat stomp some asshole smoker after asking them to politely to move while they were blatantly smoking in a designated non-smoking area, then proceed to get belligerent with me.

If you want to fill your lungs with nasty carcinogens and smell like a sweaty nutsack, more power to you; just do it in designated smoking areas. And if there isn't one? Move your fucking carcass away from public.

Yeah...

[Mic_128]

Society is trying to eradicate smoking completely and that right there is a lost cause.

Why not? It's working. Less and less people are doing it, it's not 'cool' anymore, and has gained a negative social connotation. Couple that with advertisement and product placement being illegal, and countries developing 'plain packaging' for them in scientifically unappealing colours coupled with hideous photos of diseases caused by smoking on the boxes, they're definitely hurting.

It's true though that eradication will never happen, as 3rd world governments will be needing the money from tobacco industries, but it's not likely to stop shrinking just yet.

And smoking resteraunts and bars are pretty unlikely to return, as everyone who works there would need to be a smoker, or sign a waver to stop staff from suing when they get whatever cancers and illnesses caused by constant passive smoking during work hours .

[mvaliz]

Not that secondhand smoke isn't very harmful, but it hardly kills. Have you seen that South Park episode with Rob Reiner?

/snip

Have you seen anything that contains, you know, real science and studies that is not a comedy-based cartoon?

And yes, I've watched it - it has NOTHING to do with reality nor the actual dangers cigs present. The SP episode just talked about lifestyles with people choosing to relax with a cigarette, with South Park taking the reverse stance not out of a belief, but out of pure ridiculous humor and lampooning extremists.

[Lesane]

The difference between alcohol and cigarettes is that if you use each one according to how they're made and intended to be used, only one results in harm. It's that simple. You can kill yourself and others with water too, but that still doesn't warrant the negative stigma that a product which is categorically harmful does.

To kill yourself or others with water (as a product) requires premeditation. Alcohol doesn't. A "fun night out" with a bunch of drinks can snowball into a stabbing or a car crash fueled by the intoxicating effects of alcohol. I have never heard of a car crash or a fight caused by someone who drank too much water.

[diddle]

Have you seen anything that contains, you know, real science and studies that is not a comedy-based cartoon?

And yes, I've watched it - it has NOTHING to do with reality nor the actual dangers cigs present. The SP episode just talked about lifestyles with people choosing to relax with a cigarette, with South Park taking the reverse stance not out of a belief, but out of pure ridiculous humor and lampooning extremists.

It was a single pop culture reference, not the entire basis of my opinion. Secondhand smoke is harmful, but nobody has ever died specifically because of secondhand smoke. Seems you ignored everything in my post except for the SP reference

[Deleted]

lol reading this thread it reminds me of the anime sekai seifuku bouryaku no zvezda ep3
http://www.animehere.com/sekai-seifu...episode-3.html

[Charge me Doctor]

It IS a problem of alcohol. Drinking excessive amounts of coke, water, juice or whatever doesn't affect your state of mind at all. Only alcoholic drinks do. You're really understating the amount of drinks you have to take to get to the stage of tipsy, at which point your mind is already slightly affected and the road to more shots or glasses already became a lot easier. That's one of the problems, alcohol consumption easily snowballs (so does smoking though). There's a reason why you get fined for drunk driving even if you just consumed a beer or 2-3. Your mind is already affected at that point, however slightly.

If a smoker separates him/herself from others and consumes the cigarette away from others, all the health risks are his/hers. If an alcoholic would do the same thing, i.e. walk outside the lounge/bar and drink and then go back in, the effects of alcohol can get that person into fights, can cause him/her to step in a car while drunk and all kinds of other shit. I am 100% positive alcohol has killed more people than regular smoking, when we're talking about the people who didn't actually consume it and just happened to be near the person who did. You can blame it all on the person who is drinking the alcohol, but the same person consuming cigarettes instead of alcohol wouldn't get into a fight or drive someone to death... at least not directly influenced by his/her consumption of cigarettes, while with alcohol this WOULD be the case.

I'm not saying alcohol should be banned, but at the very least it deserves the same stigma that smoking has received (no commercials, and warning labels).

We all have to be responsible for what we put in our body. People who drink alcohol knows about how it affects your mind, and if you feed tipsy you need to stop. Never drive when you drink, ever, I agree that drinking drivers should be fined even for 1 beer.
If you can't take drinking responsibly, then don't fucking drink.

You made wrong comparison, if "an alcoholic" (you do understand meaning of this word by the way?) drinks at home, he should stay at home. If he drinks at bar, he should order a taxi to bring him home. That's why you usually drink after you did all your duties and you don't need to go anywhere else.

And i'm sure that car crashes and all this shit happen not only because of drunk drivers, even sober drivers can crash a car or hit a man while driving. And it can happen that sober driver was smoking (1 hand driving, which is illegal iirc) while doing so. Without actual statistic (which is impossible) that would exclude these coincidences we can't judge it like this.

Well again, my whole argument falls apart if we add "irresponsible person" instead of regular person. But hey, it's alcohol that makes us irresponsible, right?

I can tell the same about smokers, i've met only one person who asked me "do you mind if i'll smoke?".

[docterfreeze]

They offer no benefit, they are poison, and they are expensive as hell.

Also they poison people who didn't even smoke via second hand.

Alcohol is pretty much the same. I think after cigarettes are finally outlawed, alcohol will follow.

[mvaliz]

Why not? It's working. Less and less people are doing it, it's not 'cool' anymore, and has gained a negative social connotation. Couple that with advertisement and product placement being illegal, and countries developing 'plain packaging' for them in scientifically unappealing colours coupled with hideous photos of diseases caused by smoking on the boxes, they're definitely hurting.

Exactly, rebranding the Cig in society helps deter people from it.

It kinda reminds me of a great story I heard about the King of Prussia. When the wave of women's lib happened in Prussia, the king was forced to face a problem - women in Prussia no longer wanted to wear veils over their faces, but the men INSISTED that their wives and women should always wear veils in public as part of their heritage/culture/religion.

So, the King had to figure out a way to allow women to stop wearing veils and to get men to accept it, and he did it with the most ingenious law passed ever.

The King issued a public mandate that it was MANDATORY that all prostitutes have to wear veils over their faces. ^_^

[sil3ntearth]

Smoked for 5 years and quit before my daughter was born last year. At first I hated that other people seemed to treat me like I was the scum of the earth because I choose to slowly kill myself. After a while I just stopped giving a shit what anyone thought and enjoyed my deliciously terrible habit.

Aside from wanting to be healthier for my daughter when she gets older another reason I quit is because of all the trash I was throwing on the roads. True, I could have found a better method of disposal but those required me to do more than throw it out of my car window or flick it on the ground.

I've always been a fan of letting people do what they want even if it means potential death unless it means blatantly hurting someone else (which I don't believe smoking does especially with how far from everyone smokers tend to be with current laws in most states). Let smokers be. As long as they aren't blowing the shit in your face I don't see a valid reason to be upset. I can think of a lot of stuff people do on a daily basis that piss me off more than smelling like crap.

Sooner or later they'll all die anyway.

[Demona3]

I personally don't like to choke on other people's smoke while trying to eat or breathe. Also, I definitely don't want my kids around it.

[zhero]

Not that secondhand smoke isn't very harmful, but it hardly kills. Have you seen that South Park episode with Rob Reiner?

From the article you posted:
"Throughout the years, the science of secondhand smoke has driven the secondhand smoke policy engine from separate smoking and nonsmoking sections to separately ventilated smoking rooms to 100% smokefree environments. We now know that 53,800 people die every year from secondhand smoke exposure. This number is based on the midpoint numbers for heart disease deaths (48,500), lung cancer deaths (3,000), and SIDS deaths (2,300) as calculated in the 1997 California EPA Report on Secondhand Smoke. And children are at significant risk to many acute and chronic diseases as a result of secondhand smoke exposure."

Their method is incredibly unreliable, and does nothing to prove that second hand smoke kills. They lie and mislead because it is a righteous cause, which I understand. That's why nobody has ever found a specific case in which someone undoubtedly died from second hand smoke, they just take vague associations and label it as such.

you're taking a comedy show over a scientific study?

[Crackleslap]

Because they're disgusting, smell like shit, and so do smokers too. I don't want to breathe that toxic shit into my lungs.

[diddle]

you're taking a comedy show over a scientific study?

I reference something, and it's like people are blind to everything after it.

[docterfreeze]

Also that third ad is pretty true, even though it is a bit exaggerated. When a smoker goes out to smoke is it because they chose to, or because they are forced to by their addiction?

[Durantye]

Smoked for 5 years and quit before my daughter was born last year. At first I hated that other people seemed to treat me like I was the scum of the earth because I choose to slowly kill myself. After a while I just stopped giving a shit what anyone thought and enjoyed my deliciously terrible habit.

Aside from wanting to be healthier for my daughter when she gets older another reason I quit is because of all the trash I was throwing on the roads. True, I could have found a better method of disposal but those required me to do more than throw it out of my car window or flick it on the ground.

I've always been a fan of letting people do what they want even if it means potential death unless it means blatantly hurting someone else (which I don't believe smoking does especially with how far from everyone smokers tend to be with current laws in most states). Let smokers be. As long as they aren't blowing the shit in your face I don't see a valid reason to be upset. I can think of a lot of stuff people do on a daily basis that piss me off more than smelling like crap.

Sooner or later they'll all die anyway.

Well to be honest you could've been getting the smell on your daughter's clothes and even in her lungs, unless you smoked outside ONLY, but since you've stated that you smoked while driving which I assume means your kid was in your car that was affecting them. Not to mention what if you had contracted lung cancer, your daughter would've had to deal with losing their parent at an early age, clearly you stated you quit but leaving them alone simply isn't a good way to combat the negatives.