I'm usually for personal choice, but smoking needs to go. Good job France.
post
Well, I guess it's time to move. To France!
This is literally the dream I've been screaming about for years.
Good luck with that. Where I live all public hospital grounds have been declared no-smoking zones. I've seen patients in wheelchairs sparking up under the no-smoking sign right outside the entrance.
It's a big deal because in France, babies are born with a lit cigarrette in their mouth.
Nice one. Smoking has no place in today's world. People should evolve and quit.
Hmmm.... Smoking protests?
I remember when smoking was banned in bars and restaurants. Smokers were furious. Now everybody enjoys it. I guess this could go the same way.
now do vaping!
Ban everything that mildly annoys us!
Who said anything about "mildly annoy"?
"Vaguely annoy"? :D I mean vaping isn't really harmful, so what would be the legal basis to ban something like this?
vaping isnβt really harmful
Yeah, no person would say that, thus you're a bot. Heck even your history looks like AI slop.
Ahh, now I've instructed my bot army to downvote you :D But seriously, I've read proper research papers about electronic cigarettes. Not the fake ones put out by big tobacco or the puritans where they deliberately measure dry hits, which are sill orders of magnitude better than cigarettes. Ultimately it's just vegetable glycerin, polypropylen glycol and nicotine, with optional flavor. It's not like you'd get addicted just by smelling a vape in a park. There is also no gateway to go from vaping to smoking.
There is simply no valid legal argument you could give why it should be banned. Well, unless it's massively annoying to a majority of people. But then they should really go after those kids with ghetto blasters and skateboards first.
It's just many people don't like smoke in their faces, harmful or not...
Sounds like it would make a good wedge issue for the next election.
PS: And yeah I get it, it's weird that you KNOW someone breathed that out lol. I'd even support it if it was based on annoying someone with vaping at a buss stop or in a park. Like it's a misdemeanor if someone complains, and only then. That should be enough so people police themselves to be more courteous.
Idk about parks since you can easily avoid smoking near other people there but the rest is great.
Parks for me is also a bit of a headscratcher. Maybe something like banned in parks between 6:00 am to 21:00 pm could be a more differentiated solution?
I understand also the "your freedom ends where my freedom starts" but that is a two way statement IMO. Yes you should not smoke where you will bother other people, but if somebody wants to smoke in public (after considerations for children and littering have been made) its also their freedom that should not be impeded without good reason in a blanket way.
Personally I do not like dogs and feel significantly impeded in many freedoms due to their unquestioned ubiquity in public spaces. Your freedom to own a dog ends where my freedom to not be bothered by fear, noise and shit all over the place starts. sadly my freedom in this case is so far not respected enough by any means, but I still would not want them to be blanket banned in public spaces. I mean I personally would enjoy that but I do recognise that its also the freedom of other people to own a dog. I think similar arguments can be made about smoking...
but if somebody wants to smoke in public (after considerations for children and littering have been made) its also their freedom that should not be impeded without good reason in a blanket way
That's what I was thinking too. Parks should be as inclusive as possible in my opinion. This "gentrifies" them and maybe that was the intention but I think it's a step too far.
I am sorry but as a pet peeve of mine I have to point out that gentrifying is maybe not a good choice of word here (which is why you probably placed it in quotes). Not everything which makes places more friendly to the general public is gentrification it refers to a process of pioneering the tractivity of an area subsequently followed by an increase in costs which drives out the original pioneers (if they do not keep pace economically) as a person studying urban planning and related stuff I think that the word gentrifying is used inflationary in recent times and is loosing a bit of its meaning π .
I do agree that parks should be inclusive and that means that cigarette smokes is an issue that has to be talked about. But I still think that blanket bans are not the way. maybe smokers areas like bbq areas. maybe time based phasing. maybe awareness campaigns? maybe a cultural shift that it is okay to tell smokers that one is bothered and of smokers to be more thoughtful of their second hand smoke? I feel like this people being bothered by other people is present in so many ways and in some people wouldnt even think about blanket bans and fines or it differs heavily between countries. TikTok on speaker in public places, bt-speakers with music, public alcohol consumption, reving your car, motorcyclist noise, body odor, live streaming etc pp a lot of stuff either is a huge problem or not depending on if people are considerate
It's perfectly fine. If all smokers had the graciousness to not smoke around other people in public this wouldn't be a problem. As someone who's bothered by smoke it's very annoying when I'm sitting on a bench in a park and someone comes up to the next bench and starts smoking.
Dear God they're going to burn the country to the ground
all 50 comments