209
The science is clear. So why can’t governments agree on vaping?
(www.politico.eu)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 Jul 2023
209 points (100.0% liked)
politics
25002 readers
2396 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
It's the drugs going into air that other people have to breathe, or behavior while under the influence that endangers other people that's the problem.
The danger of passing a cigarette on the street pales in comparison to urban pollution, poorly regulated restaurants, and even household cleaners for the number of toxins you expose yourself to. Worrying about second hand smoke outside makes as much sense as worrying about malaria from a mosquito while you’re trapped in a cage with lions.
Not when you're allergic. And even when you're not, I've only met one smoker who realizes how awful they smell and tries to mitigate it.
You do realize this is a hugely fallacious argument, right?
their body their rulez. stay inside if you are a bubble boy ~~~~
Stay inside if you insist on indulging in a disgusting habit. I'm not stopping you from destroying yourself, but no one should have to suffer for your stupid choices.
But smoking in public is intrinsically selfish, so I should know better than to debate it with a smoker. Nothing would convince you to have a little courtesy and class.
They literally just turned the argument around on you and you call them a bigot. Doesn't that make your argument bigotry?
You understand that the guy they're replying to literally described them as "Bubble Boy" for being allergic to smoke?
As @dragonflyteaparty said, if them turning the argument back around is bigotry, doesn't that make the guy they replied to a bigot?
All that dangerous behavior like snacking relentlessly and laughing at dumb jokes, what horror! Also edibles have no secondhand smoke to inhale.
More like car accidents, second hand lung damage in children of smokers, and overdosing.
I'm not talking about just marijuana, but you definitely come across as insecure about it.
OD on cannabis?
The conversation was about vaping, and for those who struggle with reading comprehension, I clearly stated I was talking about more than just cannabis.
thats why vape is KING safe children
No.
https://www.uhhospitals.org/blog/articles/2020/12/secondhand-smoke-and-secondhand-vaping-both-bad-for-kids.
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.
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.
One is clearly worse, can be stopped, and isn't bullshit.
The other is whiny bullshit, and your analogy sucks.
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.
It's about ease of enforcement. If you can't enforce a law, it's bullshit lip service.
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.
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?
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.
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.
You're breathing the same air they are, whether you can see it or not...
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.
you are one selfish bastard huh
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.