Article: New smoking rules not well received

[2012]

You have no business telling another adult to stop smoking.

I love this game, this is the part where someone goes:

"You have no business telling another adult to stop <insert crime here>"

How about... theft? It isn't hurting anyone.
YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS TELLING ANOTHER ADULT TO STOP STEALING YOUR STUFF!
How about the ironic bit (b_crazy might not understand this one, luckily no-one asked for his advice on the matter):
YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS TELLING ANOTHER ADULT WHAT THEIR BUSINESS IS!
Or how about something topical in the threads... sex with a 4 year old?
YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS TELLING OTHER ADULTS NOT TO HAVE SEX WITH 4 YEAR OLDS!

But that would only lead to a response to a facepalm and a comment along the lines of "you are comparing rape to smoking..." - which obviously I'm not.

It's not my job to wag my finger at smokers and lecture them about the dangers of smoking or tell them they're obviously idiots or selfish because they don't live their lives entirely in service to someone else's desires for them.

Here you are waging your finger and lecturing, telling people what they can or cant say on public forums.

[b_crazy]

I love this game, this is the part where someone goes:

"You have no business telling another adult to stop <insert crime here>"

How about... theft? It isn't hurting anyone.
YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS TELLING ANOTHER ADULT TO STOP STEALING YOUR STUFF!
How about the ironic bit (b_crazy might not understand this one, luckily no-one asked for his advice on the matter):
YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS TELLING ANOTHER ADULT WHAT THEIR BUSINESS IS!
Or how about something topical in the threads... sex with a 4 year old?
YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS TELLING OTHER ADULTS NOT TO HAVE SEX WITH 4 YEAR OLDS!

But that would only lead to a response to a facepalm and a comment along the lines of "you are comparing rape to smoking..." - which obviously I'm not.



Here you are waging your finger and lecturing, telling people what they can or cant say on public forums.

Well done, you have mastered the art of talking gibberish.

Enjoy your life.

[2012]

Well done, you have mastered the art of talking gibberish.

Enjoy your life.

Again, I don't remember asking for your advise on the matter... (you really aren't good at living your own rules, but that's why you are the epitome of irony right?)

[Boris Becker]

i am a smoker but don't smoke in my car or house.

i agree no smoking in public areas. i don't want to inhale second hand smoke. i smoke away from other people. i also do not drop my cigarette butt on the floor. i squish it out and make sure i put it in a bin. i can't stand it when smokers do this, they just drop their cigarette butts on the floor. if i go to a restaurant where there is a smoking or non smoking area, i always choose the non smoking area. i don't want to smell of cigarette smoke. i smoke vogue slims, very mild cigarettes.

'tis a unicorn Wow a considerate smoker

[noxibox]

yet seem to be ok with "I hope you all get cancer and die"

Really?

I have no business giving my experiences and opinions and explaining them on these forums

"telling people to stop smoking"

I'm not really against smoking as I'm an ex-smoker myself but what if you don't want your kids to always see people smoking in fear of them also picking up the habit later in life?

For gambling and drinking you have to go to places that have an age restriction so it helps children avoid those things until they are old enough to make a mature decision. With smoking thou it seems to catch people while they are really young and by the time they are an adult the habit has already been formed.

Will banning smoking in public help in this regard?

Why would it help? We have age restrictions that don't allow children to gamble, buy alcohol or cigarettes. Nothing that really stops them from seeing drinking, gambling or smoking either in public or private. But anyone who tells me they're worried about their children seeing something and doing it in spite of lifelong parental influence is saying they have no faith in their own impact on their children. And if whatever they're doing is an act of rebellion is it really going to matter whether they've seen people doing the same activity?

Ultimately wanting to protect children by hiding the world from them is a very nasty slippery slope. A dangerous game that will ultimately blow up in our faces.

[noxibox]

i smoke vogue slims, very mild cigarettes.

Amusingly so-called mild cigarettes may well be the worst ones to smoke.

It's amazing the justifications the addicts have for their addictions.

They don't really need justifications.

The other thing people here seem to ignore is that this law came from the executive (minister). It's not the executives place to create laws in the first place, it's the function of the legislative (parliament). There is a separation of powers between the executive, legislative & judicial to protect the people from an abuse of power. This is enshrined in the constitution, highest law of the land. What happened here is one section of government overstepping it's mandate/bounds and it's illegal to start off with. Should this new law be brought before the constitutional court it will most likely be declared null & void.

But yeah, we should probably ignore this as well.

I think many people would like that all bypassed, so the executive can run amok.

Um. But so what? Marijuana smokers don't have designated areas to smoke. What makes you so special?

Now maybe you'll see the issue. You're a substance abuser that wants to be treated differently from other substance abusers.

They're generally users. They shouldn't get special treatment though, we should put an end to the persecution of all drug users.

The thing is, law makers can't always just do what's best for it's citizens due to backlash from those that don't see the benefit. So they go for the easy targets first. Smoking is a much easier target than alcohol.

That's because there is no real benefit.

And really does anyone believe humans would suddenly stop seeking mind altering substances?

That's a statement that you can't prove. We're one of the most obese countries in the world, so I could argue that obesity is also a strain on the health system. Yet I don't see any calls to ban McD's or Steers.

Don't tempt these nutters.

Heroine


Heroin

Both of those should be legal.

There is a clear, known option to allowing people who like nicotine to use it without any need to burn any leaves, but no sooner has that option become available and increasingly popular than we have calls for bans. The attacks on smoking are simply a manifestation of a much bigger problem. One that is slowly eating away at society.

One of the first things you notice when walking into the airport after landing in SA is that waft of putrid smoke filled air drifting around.

That is obviously not cigarette smoke.

Here in Aus (and I think Ireland was the leader on this), you cannot smoke in any public area.

Yes, Australia is definitely becoming a world leader in nanny state stupidity. I think they may even be managing to outdo those old hands the British.

It is illegal to smoke in your own car when there are kids in it...it is no use asking people not to do it because smokers don't care, you have to make it illegal.
It is illegal to smoke in any public open space (parks, football fields etc) where there could be kids, even if there are no signs.

Both silly laws.

BTW, we are also about to introduce 'plain paper packaging'. In other words every pack will look exactly the same -brown- with no distiguishable branding or advertising on it. The only 'advertising' on it will be the grotesque health warnings.
The big cigarette companies squealed and screamed, court challenges etc--tough luck

I'm still not sure why the tobacco manufacturers really cared. The packaging isn't particularly important.

the govt just passes more laws to cover any loop holes in constitution.

How very fascist dictator of them.

Yet smoking is much more of a burden on the health system than the money generated from taxes.

That's going to be very hard to prove.

Why are Saffers so reluctant to move with the times? You knock the govt - as you should - when they are corrupt etc, but you also knock them when they drag society into the first world look after their citizens and save the country money.

Why though would we want to follow a bad trend from overseas? The Australian government has shown a strong desire to increase it's control of citizens lives. Not something we should want to emulate. If our government wanted to save some real money they'd legalise prostitution and currently illegal drugs. They could also start taxing religious organisations.

[Nicodeamus]

No no, do not tax religious organizations, rather partition to have our tax rates the same as religious organizations.

[WilD_CaT]

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. – C. S. Lewis

[2012]

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. – C. S. Lewis

Coming from an extreme anglican (C.S Lewis), I find that quote rather funny.

[2012]

Amusingly so-called mild cigarettes may well be the worst ones to smoke.


They don't really need justifications.


I think many people would like that all bypassed, so the executive can run amok.


They're generally users. They shouldn't get special treatment though, we should put an end to the persecution of all drug users.


That's because there is no real benefit.

And really does anyone believe humans would suddenly stop seeking mind altering substances?


Don't tempt these nutters.


Both of those should be legal.

There is a clear, known option to allowing people who like nicotine to use it without any need to burn any leaves, but no sooner has that option become available and increasingly popular than we have calls for bans. The attacks on smoking are simply a manifestation of a much bigger problem. One that is slowly eating away at society.


That is obviously not cigarette smoke.


Yes, Australia is definitely becoming a world leader in nanny state stupidity. I think they may even be managing to outdo those old hands the British.


Both silly laws.


I'm still not sure why the tobacco manufacturers really cared. The packaging isn't particularly important.


How very fascist dictator of them.


That's going to be very hard to prove.


Why though would we want to follow a bad trend from overseas? The Australian government has shown a strong desire to increase it's control of citizens lives. Not something we should want to emulate. If our government wanted to save some real money they'd legalise prostitution and currently illegal drugs. They could also start taxing religious organisations.

Between yourself and Wild_cat, it's coming across in a sentence as:

"It is not place of others to tell me what I can or can't do".

Being serious now, doesn't this view point just encourage lawlessness? Couldn't this type of thinking to justify any 'lawless' action?