Smoking & Weed

I tried to make a search to see if there was already a topic on this, but couldn't find anything on the first 5 pages of seach results. There being so many topics including the word though, could mean it's discussed a lot anyway.

So, I've taken note that in the U.S., a lot of states have gone towards legislation of marijuana. In my country, they go the other way. They've just decided to ban smoking cigarettes in public facilities and at public transport stations. Train stations, air ports etc. Before the ban was inside pubs, and before that again on airplanes. Marijuana was never allowed.

My two cents, is that I completely support the ban of all types of smoking. I really do. Why? Because it invades my personal space. If I am forced to inhale the smoke of others, I react similarly to someone stepping right up into my face. It's uncomfortable, and I have to move away. In some spots, that's troublesome, like when waiting for a bus in pissing rain, and someone lights up a blunt right next to you. Other times, I just get annoyed by the lack of respect from someone lighting a cigarette, fully well knowing that someone else will feel bad from the smell and the smoke cloud, threatening to enter your lungs too.

So what about drinking? Shouldn't they both be banned because they are toxic substances? Personally, I don't think so. If there was a way to inhale all the smoke, without breathing it out, and without the tip of the cigar burning, I would have no issue with it. Go ahead, kill your lung function. It's your own choice, I probably can't stop you. However, smoking is invasive on others. I don't have a choice but to accept the passive smoking, whereas you have a choice not to drink.

About marijuana, it's not poisonous. Sure, it smells like shit, but I am in no direct danger from it. The main issue with marijuana, compared to alcohol, is that people smoke it every day and reduce their brain function momentarily. Just as I get annoyed by drunks when sober at day time, I get annoyed by people who are high. Also, in certain areas (*cough* Amsterdam, I'm looking at you *cough*), the stench of marijuana is so dense, that once again, the invasive argument counts. I'll be able to get high, just by my mere presence. That's way worse than drinking imo. For a tool bag that lights up weed everyday, is no better than an alcoholic in my mind.

If you care so much about environmental "vapors", unwitting participants, and "human health".....does that mean you want to ban things like coal mining, natural gas fracking, and high fructose corn production?

"Smoking & Weed" is a pretty broad category. Your OP isn't addressing the depth of the category, or any health-related specifics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kazuha Vinland

I tried to make a search to see if there was already a topic on this, but couldn't find anything on the first 5 pages of seach results. There being so many topics including the word though, could mean it's discussed a lot anyway.

So, I've taken note that in the U.S., a lot of states have gone towards legislation of marijuana. In my country, they go the other way. They've just decided to ban smoking cigarettes in public facilities and at public transport stations. Train stations, air ports etc. Before the ban was inside pubs, and before that again on airplanes. Marijuana was never allowed.

My two cents, is that I completely support the ban of all types of smoking. I really do. Why? Because it invades my personal space. If I am forced to inhale the smoke of others, I react similarly to someone stepping right up into my face. It's uncomfortable, and I have to move away. In some spots, that's troublesome, like when waiting for a bus in pissing rain, and someone lights up a blunt right next to you. Other times, I just get annoyed by the lack of respect from someone lighting a cigarette, fully well knowing that someone else will feel bad from the smell and the smoke cloud, threatening to enter your lungs too.

So what about drinking? Shouldn't they both be banned because they are toxic substances? Personally, I don't think so. If there was a way to inhale all the smoke, without breathing it out, and without the tip of the cigar burning, I would have no issue with it. Go ahead, kill your lung function. It's your own choice, I probably can't stop you. However, smoking is invasive on others. I don't have a choice but to accept the passive smoking, whereas you have a choice not to drink.

About marijuana, it's not poisonous. Sure, it smells like shit, but I am in no direct danger from it. The main issue with marijuana, compared to alcohol, is that people smoke it every day and reduce their brain function momentarily. Just as I get annoyed by drunks when sober at day time, I get annoyed by people who are high. Also, in certain areas (*cough* Amsterdam, I'm looking at you *cough*), the stench of marijuana is so dense, that once again, the invasive argument counts. I'll be able to get high, just by my mere presence. That's way worse than drinking imo. For a tool bag that lights up weed everyday, is no better than an alcoholic in my mind.

---

I was on the fence about banning smoking in public, but I'm leaning towards it because of that misery my girlfriend, who has asthma, has to go through every time she inhales by accident.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

If you care so much about environmental "vapors", unwitting participants, and "human health".....does that mean you want to ban things like coal mining, natural gas fracking, and high fructose corn production?

"Smoking & Weed" is a pretty broad category. Your OP isn't addressing the depth of the category, or any health-related specifics.

---

Not really, but I would like for them to stay stationary and regulated, so that we don't all of a sudden see a coal mine pop up on the inside of a public facility where people wander every day. Smokers are mobile, adding another dimension to invading your privacy, because you cannot necessarily choose to just not go there. As for the polution being airborne over a large radius, I sense that humanity should do their best to limit these outlets as well as they can, because a polluted environment certainly isn't desireable, nor non-regulated by law. Eliminating these outlets to a zero, is difficult in the lack of other replaceable resources, but eliminating smoking to a zero doesn't rally swing the same way.

Sorry, I have no idea what you're talking about. :confused: If you want to address human health...."smoking" is the tip of the iceberg. If you want to address breathing, then you should include things beyond tobacco or marijuana.

Tip of the iceberg? Compared to what? Sometimes I feel as if this forum has an attitude, that you cannot address thievery, because compared to murder, it's just the tip of the iceberg. Are you questioning smoking's relation to lung disease? Cancer? COPD? Or questioning that passive smoking has any effect? Clearly they are related to and a great diminisher of human health. Smoking, for every non-smoker, is an unwanted exposure of chemicals leading to aforementioned risks.

As for breathing, again.. why is it not allowed to address the issue, without putting the entire world order up there at the same time? Smoking is a huge issue. Name examples of things relevant, yet is not mentioned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Sorry, I have no idea what you're talking about. :confused: If you want to address human health...."smoking" is the tip of the iceberg. If you want to address breathing, then you should include things beyond tobacco or marijuana.

---

Those are the topics he wanted to talk about, so why not let him talk about them? If someone wants to start a focused discussion, they should be allowed to. Please GGT, stop derailing every thread you're in. Let other people talk about the things they want to too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wraith

Those are the topics he wanted to talk about, so why not let him talk about them? If someone wants to start a focused discussion, they should be allowed to. Please GGT, stop derailing every thread you're in. Let other people talk about the things they want to too.

---

Okay, I'm up for that. Does that mean I can't pose questions?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kazuha Vinland

Tip of the iceberg? Compared to what? Sometimes I feel as if this forum has an attitude, that you cannot address thievery, because compared to murder, it's just the tip of the iceberg. Are you questioning smoking's relation to lung disease? Cancer? COPD? Or questioning that passive smoking has any effect? Clearly they are related to and a great diminisher of human health. Smoking, for every non-smoker, is an unwanted exposure of chemicals leading to aforementioned risks.

As for breathing, again.. why is it not allowed to address the issue, without putting the entire world order up there at the same time? Smoking is a huge issue. Name examples of things relevant, yet is not mentioned.

---

Your'e right. This forum has an "attitude" that keeps people away. I'm sorry if my post contributed to that mentality.

But in that vein....we should be willing to talk about Human Health and Public Policy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Your'e right. This forum has an "attitude" that keeps people away. I'm sorry if my post contributed to that mentality.

But in that vein....we should be willing to talk about Human Health and Public Policy.

---

Then start a New Thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

If you care so much about environmental "vapors", unwitting participants, and "human health".....does that mean you want to ban things like coal mining, natural gas fracking, and high fructose corn production?

---

Those things are necessary to keep human society functioning, smoking isn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kazuha Vinland

About marijuana, it's not poisonous. Sure, it smells like shit, but I am in no direct danger from it. The main issue with marijuana, compared to alcohol, is that people smoke it every day and reduce their brain function momentarily. Just as I get annoyed by drunks when sober at day time, I get annoyed by people who are high. Also, in certain areas (*cough* Amsterdam, I'm looking at you *cough*), the stench of marijuana is so dense, that once again, the invasive argument counts. I'll be able to get high, just by my mere presence. That's way worse than drinking imo. For a tool bag that lights up weed everyday, is no better than an alcoholic in my mind.

---

There's evidence that long-term effects of marihuana may very well be permanent (who'd have thought!). Especially for youths whose brains are still in development.

As for alcohol, there are currently articles in our big newspapers about FAS - which means that as soon as you discover you're pregnant, alcohol should be off-limits to you completely. There's no known safe dosage and as a result, FAS is actually more common than Down Syndrome (which has an incident rate of 1 in 1000. FAS has an incident rate of up to 8 in 1000, depending on the study. I included the qualifier "up to" because FAS is actually under-diagnosed).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kazuha Vinland

I tried to make a search to see if there was already a topic on this, but couldn't find anything on the first 5 pages of seach results. There being so many topics including the word though, could mean it's discussed a lot anyway.

So, I've taken note that in the U.S., a lot of states have gone towards legislation of marijuana. In my country, they go the other way. They've just decided to ban smoking cigarettes in public facilities and at public transport stations. Train stations, air ports etc. Before the ban was inside pubs, and before that again on airplanes. Marijuana was never allowed.

---

That's not really the opposite direction, AFAIK in the USA most places also ban smoking in a number of places. The issue with marijuana is legalising it for personal use, at home, etc., which is disconnected from whether smoking (tobacco with or without other stuff) in public.

Quote:

---

My two cents, is that I completely support the ban of all types of smoking. I really do. Why? Because it invades my personal space. If I am forced to inhale the smoke of others, I react similarly to someone stepping right up into my face. It's uncomfortable, and I have to move away. In some spots, that's troublesome, like when waiting for a bus in pissing rain, and someone lights up a blunt right next to you. Other times, I just get annoyed by the lack of respect from someone lighting a cigarette, fully well knowing that someone else will feel bad from the smell and the smoke cloud, threatening to enter your lungs too.

So what about drinking? Shouldn't they both be banned because they are toxic substances? Personally, I don't think so. If there was a way to inhale all the smoke, without breathing it out, and without the tip of the cigar burning, I would have no issue with it. Go ahead, kill your lung function. It's your own choice, I probably can't stop you. However, smoking is invasive on others. I don't have a choice but to accept the passive smoking, whereas you have a choice not to drink.

About marijuana, it's not poisonous. Sure, it smells like shit, but I am in no direct danger from it. The main issue with marijuana, compared to alcohol, is that people smoke it every day and reduce their brain function momentarily. Just as I get annoyed by drunks when sober at day time, I get annoyed by people who are high. Also, in certain areas (*cough* Amsterdam, I'm looking at you *cough*), the stench of marijuana is so dense, that once again, the invasive argument counts. I'll be able to get high, just by my mere presence. That's way worse than drinking imo. For a tool bag that lights up weed everyday, is no better than an alcoholic in my mind.

---

I don't disagree about second hand smoke, which is why I don't mind the smoking bans we have in place, especially the ones about smoking in public buildings*. Then again, if I want to smoke in my personal space, that's equally none of your business, though I don't oppose taxes on them to recoup for the extra expenses for public health**. I do however thing you exaggerate the smoking outside in the open air - for starters, most smokers are considerate enough not to smoke right next to you and blow it in your face, but tend to stand away to smoke. At that point the smoke is diluted enough that it's really just a smell thing (or if low pollution bothers you, shouldn't we also ban, say, hummers? Sure, we need cars, but we don't need every type of car. You could also make public transportation mandatory and ban cars from city centers). Then again, if smell counts, I'd also like to ban excessive perfume use that invades my personal space, or bad BO. Also, unless you lock yourself in a tight, closed space with someone smoking, there's no way in hell you're getting high on fumes from someone who smokes near you. Also, I live in the Netherlands, and the country is not covered in a cloud of 'marijuana stench' (aside from coffee shops, but if you mind the smell you should stay away from those anyway), people generally don't light a blunt up next to you at the bus stop (aside from the fact most people don't smoke blunts but joints here, blunts is more of an American thing ;) ). Smokers who do are assholes, and should be told off, yes. But if you stand right next to the smoking area of, say, a train station (it's banned everywhere else on the station), just move your own ass instead of complaining, the sign's there for a reason.

Further I think about alcohol the same was weed, if you use it recreationally that's up to you, but if it interferes with your life, then it's probably a smart idea to cut down.

* Although to be honest the way it was put into legislation here always bugged me, they based the law on employee protection, which is fine except most bars I know, all the people working there smoked. Would have been more honest if they based it on public health from the start. And there is an argument to be made that a bar should have the right to choose to be a smoking bar, and let the customers avoid the place if they mind it, but I also see why that's not the case.

** Though it's a bit arbitrary to have that on, say, alcohol and tobacco, but not on unhealthy food, considering the healthcare problems that causes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flixy

....
* Although to be honest the way it was put into legislation here always bugged me, they based the law on employee protection, which is fine except most bars I know, all the people working there smoked. Would have been more honest if they based it on public health from the start. And there is an argument to be made that a bar should have the right to choose to be a smoking bar, and let the customers avoid the place if they mind it, but I also see why that's not the case.

** Though it's a bit arbitrary to have that on, say, alcohol and tobacco, but not on unhealthy food, considering the healthcare problems that causes.

---

Agreed. :up:

Kazuha, I was suggesting that "Smoking & Weed" aren't mutually exclusive. Marijuana can mean THC oil-infused edibles, medications in liquid or pill form, or vaporizers that don't have any second-hand smoke. Sure, you can "ban" all smoking but not make a dint in marijuana usage.

If you want to compare weed to alcohol's effects (on brain function or organ health), then include all pharmaceuticals. Many OTC allergy or sleep meds can cause drowsiness, confusion, impaired motor function. Long-term use can cause liver or kidney damage even in teetotalers, and patients under 'physician supervision' aren't immune.

If you're concerned about "impaired judgement" that harms other people, how would you legislate against Stupid? :bulb:

But most of those other medications are prescription only..

We don't have to point to substances to excuse teh Stupid, do we?

If so, then physicians have some explaining to do. They routinely prescribe medications that put the user in precarious situations.