2021-02-24 22:28:28

@50
yes but in at least California you can probably report them if they're not far enough from your building.  There are lots of local U.S. regs for this now.  Nothing country-wide, often nothing state-wide, but they're there.

My Blog
Twitter: @camlorn38

2021-02-24 23:56:48

Ghost,
Coffee can, however, cause heart problems down the road. It’s not totally harmless either. And, again, see above regarding assholes smoking around other people without consent, but that doesn’t mean the entire thing should be banned.

Thumbs up

2021-02-25 00:19:44

It does actually. Coffee can cause problems yes, but only to the drinker. Smoke affects others by its nature, therefore it should be totally banned in public places.

A learning experience is one of those things that say, "You know that thing you just did? Don't do that."

Thumbs up

2021-02-25 00:35:58

Hi.
@Jayde, I do agree that some police do go too far, but keep in mind that the media isn't telling you everything. These people aren't exactly innocent.
And as for smoking, it's your life so you do what you want. The only time I have a problem is if it's where others have to breathe it in.
And as for apartments, one of my grandmothers lives in a subsidized apartment in Pennsylvania, and my other grandmother lives in a 55+ apartment here in Florida, and both complexes have designated smoking areas.
At the place in Pennsylvania, my grandmother said that there are a couple people who are allowed to smoke in their apartments because they lived there before HUD took over and are grandfathered in

Thumbs up

2021-02-25 00:36:02

Yeah, second-hand smoke is a big problem.  It's not as bad as firsthand of course, but it's still really not great.

Also: cigarettes in moderation aren't really a thing.  Coffee in moderation is very much a thing.  And if you drink soda you get about as much caffeine, which is the primary active ingredient of coffee (maybe the only active ingredient, but I'm not 100% on that).  Broadly speaking people who are addicted to coffee, it's not really an addiction.  Most people could stop in a few days.  Also it's not really that bad anyway.  Yes coffee can cause problems, but red meat can cause colon cancer (really, the key word is correlate and there is a difference, but that's somewhat off topic).  Enough vegetables is chronic constipation no problem.  Going to the beach?  Hope you like your increased risk of skin cancer.  And so on.  It's not about absolute effect, it's about relative effect.

Don't compare cigarettes to other things.  There's some evidence that wine can help with things like Alzheimers, or there was.  It's possible it has been discredited.  There's nothing like that for cigarettes.  All they do is literally kill your lungs while hooking you so bad that even a couple in high school can make you a smoker for life.  If you're lucky.  if you're not lucky you get all sorts of cancer and things from it.

My point being: banning coffee is ridiculous because it's not worse than anything else, but this thread is headed in a "but really we should ban it because it's like cigarettes" direction.  No.  If you want to start making claims like this, better get rid of chocolate, soda, and tea.  There's definitely a blurry line between weak-willed people and addiction-causing substances, but caffeine is barely on the addiction side of that line--you have to be incredibly weak-willed to fall into that trap and be unable to get out, around the same level of willpower to eat less bread or whatever.  At least let's make claims that make sense: we should ban coffee because child exploitation, for example.

My Blog
Twitter: @camlorn38

2021-02-25 00:46:17

Agree with @55. Banning cigarettes won't help.
I mean, a lot of drugs like Marijuana are illegal in a lot of the United States, and technically everywhere at the federal level, but guess what? People still use it even in places where it's not allowed.
So, my point is that if banning drugs didn't work, what will banning cigarettes do?
A whole lot of nothing

Thumbs up

2021-02-25 01:28:56

Rich, you're right that in many cases, the media won't tell you everything. This is precisely why I dig.
However, in a lot of instances, all the relevant facts are there, so the "these people weren't angels" defense gets a little tired. The question I always, always circle back to the instant someone trots it out is this: "Okay, sure. Not an angel. Did this mean they should have died? If yes, it must have been pretty horrific. If not, it's irrelevant, and it's distracting from the problem".

Example:
Kurt Reinhold, a black father of two, forty-two years of age, was approached by two officers, ostensibly because he was jaywalking across a quiet street. One of these officers is known to have been against the stop, claiming the situation was "controlled". However, the other officer wanted to make the stop, so it proceeded. Officers approached Reinhold and told him he had been jaywalking. Reinhold can be heard growing loud and sounding both angry and frightened. I need to stress here that there was no APB on Reinhold, he was not a suspect in any other crimes, so the only reason to approach him was to bust him for jaywalking. Jaywalking in California holds a maximum fine of two hundred and fifty dollars, and officers apprehending someone for jaywalking are forbidden, by law, from using deadly force from detaining that suspect. After a heated verbal exchange, Reinhold attempted to flee. One of the officers tackled him bodily to the ground, and there was a struggle. At some point during the struggle, one of the officers shouted, "He's got my gun! He's got my gun!". Within ten seconds, two shots were fired, and Kurt Reinhold was dead. We do not have positive ID that Reinhold did in fact have possession of anyone's gun, by the way.
So let that sink in. First, ask yourself how many people are stopped by cops for jaywalking. Then ask yourself what cop in their right mind should be bodily tackling someone for trying to flee during a jaywalking stop when it's against the law. Do you mean to tell me that "he shouldn't have run" is going to be a credible reason to be shot by police? Over a lousy jaywalking fine?

This sort of thing, and in some cases far worse, happens far more than we'd like to admit. Sometimes, when a police officer shoots someone, it's kill or be killed; cops have occasionally stressful jobs, and sometimes find themselves in awful positions. But the ones that really make me angry are the ones where violence, or even the altercation itself, could have been avoided. Breonna Taylor shot to death in her home while she slept. George Floyd pinned for nearly nine minutes while he pleaded for his life. The Colorado family forced to lie face-down on hot blacktop for several hours during a mistaken traffic stop involving stolen plates. The nine-year-old girl from Rochester, NY, already handcuffed and secured in the back of a police cruiser, maced because she was "acting like a child" (the footage on this one actually made me cry, because it was recorded by police body cameras). And many, many more.

I'm not telling you this because I want to attack you or guilt you. I'm telling you this because whenever you bust out with some sort of "we don't know what else they did" argument, these are the people I think of. Please, if you want to talk about this stuff, that's well and good, but maybe think twice before cracking open this particular chestnut. For me, the only time such a remark is valid and useful is when we flat-out know that the cops were in a valid kill-or-be-killed situation. Anything else is just excuse-making, and that needs to stop.

Zack, thanks for pointing out the "coloured" thing to me. I had seen that, but frankly didn't exactly know what the distinction was. When speaking of South Africans, I'll be more mindful of that distinction in future.

RTT, the best thing you can do is be better. That's all. You don't have to feel awful or guilty or whatever. You're young, and while these thought patterns aren't a lovely thing, half the struggle is in recognizing that you might be dealing with them. And like I've said before, and will undoubtedly say again, everyone, no exceptions, will run up against something like this. You reacted pretty well, I'd say. Just keep on keeping on. Be honest with yourself and with the situation, that's all.

If I were to push for a coffee ban, it would be due to child exploitation, not addiction potential. I'm hooked on caffeine, but I could stop if I wanted to. I've done it before without much trouble save for a transient low-grade headache. And of course, exploitation doesn't just happen with regard co coffee. We'd have to change a whole ton of things, because let's be real h ere. The world over, most workers, including those in well-developed countries, are being exploited to some extent. It's a matter of degree, of course. Some exploitation is considered normal, while the more extreme forms of it are considered heinous.

Check out my Manamon text walkthrough at the following link:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/z8ls3rc3f4mkb … n.txt?dl=1

Thumbs up

2021-02-25 01:32:00

@Jayde, if you read my post, I did say that in some situations, the officers do go too far

Thumbs up

2021-02-25 01:38:40

To clarify some of my previous points, yes I completely understand how the addiction cycle of cigarettes/nicotine in general works. I’ve never actually smoked before, but I vape ELiquid with a relatively high nicotine content, which is just as bad, if not slightly worse. I also understand where you’re coming from re-, smoking in public places. My personal opinion is that it should be up to the institution(s) in question. If a place says that you shouldn’t smoke in there, you shouldn’t. End of discussion. I disagree completely re-, sales of all cigarettes should be completely banned however.

Thumbs up

2021-02-25 02:24:34

Yes, Rich, you did say that. But you also seemed to feel the need to qualify it with "but sometimes these people have done things we don't know about". If you've been around awhile, and I think you have, you've probably seen me refer to the "yeah but" defense. It's bad no matter when it's used, or where, or why. So all I'm asking is that you be a bit mindful of that going forward. That's it. I'm not trying to tear you apart.

In 2015, my girlfriend at the time was expressing outrage about Bill Cosby, since it had recently come out that he was in very hot water due to sexual assault allegations. Without thinking, I said, "My god, that's awful. But sometimes women lie about this sort of thing". Bad move. Because yes, it's true that women do sometimes lie about it, but there is a time and place to speak about that, and it wasn't then. My girlfriend pointed out that saying what I did made it seem like I was trying to soften Cosby's potential culpability. I wasn't thinking of it in those terms, but when she put it that way, I thought about it and realized she was right.
This is much the same, that's all. If the specific situation in question deals with a victim who put police in an impossible situation, then sure, talk about it. Otherwise, maybe don't.

Check out my Manamon text walkthrough at the following link:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/z8ls3rc3f4mkb … n.txt?dl=1

Thumbs up

2021-02-25 03:01:16

I am not saying let's not ban cigarettes.  I'm saying that banning coffee because it's like cigarettes is a very silly argument at best.

Existing smokers would go to the black market for cigarettes if it came to it, except that cigars and nicotine lozenges and patches exist and are able to deal with the addiction to a sufficient enough extent that that'd probably be a lot less than you'd think.  Nicotine itself has a mild positive effect, but that positive effect can be had from any of the aforementioned.  Net result: say that 25% of current smokers quit.  That alone is worth it.

But it stops new smokers.  New smokers are the problem.  No new smokers means smoking dies out in a generation and we're done with this stupid era of death sticks.

But, you say, won't all the new smokers seek out the black market?  And my response to you is this.  Weed and alcohol have positive effects.  You get buzzed or high or whatever.  Cigarettes don't.  You just went to the black market for a thing that tastes bad and doesn't do anything for you beyond what a glass of coffee can at best, and you spent some outrageous amount of money on it.  No one's going to do that.  I'm sure there'll be some idiots, yeah, but seriously breaking the law and spending a bunch of money for a thing that does less for your pleasure than buying a chocolate bar for $1? No.  That's not how that goes.  The black market will be almost entirely current smokers who can't quit.  Anyone else seeking out the black market will go for heroine or something, because even though that destroys your life it makes you feel good along the way.  I have a really low opinion of humanity as a whole, but "I break the law in order to actively die faster and get nothing for it along the way" is below even my estimation of people.

It's weird that this thread became about cigarettes in the first place, but it's also weird to me to see some people who previously seemed to have their heads on straight not thinking about what they're saying for more than 30 seconds at a time.  What is it about cigarettes that just make any sort of logical thought go out the window in order to make room for "we can't do anything but also all these other things are kind of like cigarettes so we should ban them too"?  It's certainly not only here.  I guess the cigarette companies really managed to market super well, given that they've hooked in far enough that that's the first plaeca people always seem to go.  Everyone here should find it at least a little bit creepy.

My Blog
Twitter: @camlorn38

2021-02-25 03:36:27

cigars and nicotine lozenges and patches exist and are able to deal with the addiction to a sufficient enough extent that that'd probably be a lot less than you'd think.

Nope. That's the short answer. They work for *some* people, but those people actually tend to be the exception rather than the rule.

Nicotine itself has a mild positive effect, but that positive effect can be had from any of the aforementioned.  Net result.

Serious question. Have you actually tried it before? Speaking mainly for myself here of course, but the research I've done tells me that I'm not alone here, the effects brought on by Nicotine are very, very different to that of literally any Caffeine based beverage you can think of. I like both, for different reasons, sometimes actually together, particularly in the mornings while I'm getting ready for school. Myself, I find that Nicotine helps calm me down and vastly increases my focus, as well as gives me a very different kind of Energy to that brought on by Caffeine. I'll admit, preparation is also a factor here. I can, quite easily, pick up my vape pen and have a puff on it, no boiling of water, poring, dealing with sugar, etc. NTM washing.
There's also something to be said for the activity itself. Of course this isn't really applicable in covid times, but there's just something about getting together with a group of friends, or a relative, and just having a smoke or vape or whatever. And, yes, I'm fully aware that this is what gets so many people into smoking, too.
In the end, I harm only myself. If I'm in a room with 1 or more other humans, I always take care to ask before vaping. If I'm told to go outside, that's fair enough. The majority of people I know are more or less the same.

Thumbs up

2021-02-25 03:46:33

I haven't, and I don't intend to.  But my boyfriend for a year used to be a heavy smoker, and his other boyfriend almost died of cancer from smoking cigars, and also there's my uncle who smokes, and my current friend who smokes--I'm aware.

My claim isn't that the various patches and things are perfect, my claim is that they're good enough for someone who cares enough to manage.  If the government said no more cigarettes that's a very good source of caring enough to manage.  But to be honest current smokers are a hard enough problem to address that if I was in charge of policy my primary consideration would be letting them to continue to smoke in peace somehow or whatever since new smokers is where it really matters.  Not that that's practical.

Nicotine isn't the problem.  Nicotine by itself is pretty safe from everything I've ever seen, enough so that the nootropics community is way into it.  Do all the nicotine you want.

My Blog
Twitter: @camlorn38

2021-02-26 04:55:09

I've herd many grate things about Perkins School for the Blind, you might want to check that out.

I was raised in hell
I made it out by myself
I was raised to bleed
Bad blood runs wild and free

Thumbs up

2021-02-27 00:21:22

A couple cigarettes will make you addicted for life? That's a new one. Also stop making it sound like it's impossible to quit. It, really isn't.

I used to be an aventurer like you. Then I took a knee in the arrow.

Thumbs up

2021-02-27 00:43:11

It is important to remember that even though you may personally have the sort of whatever-it-is to avoid getting addicted to a product which is specifically designed for that purpose, or someone you know may have, that's not universal.  Some people can avoid addiction and get off something addictive easily, but it's not a matter of willpower to do it, and many people do become addicted easily and won't be able to break the habit.  I wouldn't be dismissive.  I knew someone who hadn't smoked in 10 years but still needed nicotine and whose partner got cancer from it.  When push came to shove and he got super stressed literally due to his partner possibly dying from it, out came the cigarettes anyway.  The changes from cigarettes and nicotine are to some extent almost permanent.  How many people get hooked easily and can't get back off?  I don't know, doing that study would be unethical as hell.  But it does happen, we let it happen, selling addictive poison is legal.

My Blog
Twitter: @camlorn38

2021-02-27 01:10:06

Agreed with 65. It's definitely a good idea to understand the seriousness of withdrawal symptoms, though.

Thumbs up

2021-02-27 01:16:08

I'm not denying the negative affects. But if I wanna have a smoke by myself once in a while I can't see the problem. If people wanna bitch and moan about it then let them. I don't much care. I have been feeling a lot better mentally speaking since I started. And of course you are a dick if you smoke directly up someones face. Anyway I believe there was a threat about this very subject a while back.

I used to be an aventurer like you. Then I took a knee in the arrow.

Thumbs up

2021-02-27 06:52:04 (edited by Ghost 2021-02-27 06:53:04)

Well one of my relatives quit, probably took alot out of him. Another one couldn't abd still smokes to this day. That relative who quit is the only person I ever knew or heard of quitting. And I know alot of smokers.So my understanding based on my research and world knowledge is its extremely adictive.

A learning experience is one of those things that say, "You know that thing you just did? Don't do that."

Thumbs up

2021-02-27 07:37:45

Ya know even though we got super off topic here, I do appreciate that people are being pretty chill at least, that's really cool.  I thought about jumping in a few times but honestly pretty much all the points here are pretty good, whether I agree with them or not, which is refreshing.

Thumbs up