Let's just ban smoking

[The Brain]

A couple? No. A couple hundred? Yell yeah.

[Maximus]

In my opinion it should be treated as a matter of consent. If you have several adults sharing a house and one of them starts smoking for whatever reason, presumably the others can leave. If you have a child residing with their legal guardian, however, they don't legally have that option and therefore smoking in that residence should be illegal.

Similarly, in public housing presumably people are there because they have few options. It's a weaker case than with the minors because they legally have the option to leave. This would be similar in my opinion to workplace smoking: one has the right to leave, but realistically one often does not have that option.

[crazy canuck]

In my opinion it should be treated as a matter of consent. If you have several adults sharing a house and one of them starts smoking for whatever reason, presumably the others can leave. If you have a child residing with their legal guardian, however, they don't legally have that option and therefore smoking in that residence should be illegal.

Similarly, in public housing presumably people are there because they have few options. It's a weaker case than with the minors because they legally have the option to leave. This would be similar in my opinion to workplace smoking: one has the right to leave, but realistically one often does not have that option.

That is pretty much the basis for the law here.  For example if a strata (condo/town house/coop complex) creates a bylaw (through a vote of all unit owners) that all units will be non smoking then no smoking will be permitted.

[The Minsky Moment]

Evidence indicates you are wrong . . .[The Netherlands] has become the entrepot of crime. 

What is the evidence of that?
State Dept seems to think it is quite safe with negligible risk of violence and the stats back that up.

[alfred russel]

In my opinion it should be treated as a matter of consent. If you have several adults sharing a house and one of them starts smoking for whatever reason, presumably the others can leave. If you have a child residing with their legal guardian, however, they don't legally have that option and therefore smoking in that residence should be illegal.

Similarly, in public housing presumably people are there because they have few options. It's a weaker case than with the minors because they legally have the option to leave. This would be similar in my opinion to workplace smoking: one has the right to leave, but realistically one often does not have that option.

The problem is that second hand smoking hazards are largely a myth. Not in the case of a kid growing up in a home with parents smoking inside, but my chances of getting lung cancer because I used to eat in non smoking sections of restaurants containing smokers was never raised in a manner that was measurable in any statistically significant study. You aren't going to get cancer because your next door neighbor smokes cigarettes.

I recently saw a cigarette warning label "Smoking seriously harms you and those around you." It is great that we force warning labels on cigarettes, but a pity that with so many problems caused by cigarettes we can't stick to ones that are factually sound.

[Josquius]

The current system of taxing it to death and making it out to be thoroughly uncool seems to be working out fine.
How's that cannabis ban doing meanwhile?

[Razgovory]

Evidence indicates you are wrong . . .[The Netherlands] has become the entrepot of crime. 

What is the evidence of that?
State Dept seems to think it is quite safe with negligible risk of violence and the stats back that up.

I believe there has been several public cases of sexual slavery and organized crime smuggling drugs.  I don't think they attack tourists, that would be bad for business.

[Tonitrus]

In my opinion it should be treated as a matter of consent. If you have several adults sharing a house and one of them starts smoking for whatever reason, presumably the others can leave. If you have a child residing with their legal guardian, however, they don't legally have that option and therefore smoking in that residence should be illegal.

Similarly, in public housing presumably people are there because they have few options. It's a weaker case than with the minors because they legally have the option to leave. This would be similar in my opinion to workplace smoking: one has the right to leave, but realistically one often does not have that option.

Agreed...especially for public housing.  Heck, it can be argued that even without other people involved, smoking inside a dwelling, especially a multi-unit complex, causes material damage to the whole complex and should be allowed to be excluded.

In theory, I think one could apply that to condos/association rules as well...which would be a fun stir to see indignant smoking condo owners go apeshit about their private property rights.

[Malthus]

Reminds me of my house-hunting days ... We gave each house we looked at a nickname: one of them was "cigarette house" - it was awesome how stinky that place was.

[Valmy]

If we outlaw x it will profit outlaws is not a good argument.  Since X can be pretty much anything, even things we really should ban.

It is a true statement. Something to bear in mind when banning things.

[Ed Anger]

Reminds me of my house-hunting days ... We gave each house we looked at a nickname: one of them was "cigarette house" - it was awesome how stinky that place was.

I liked those whose walls were brown from all the nicotine.

[11B4V]

 
http://firsttoknow.com/photos-disgusting-effects-years-smoking-apartment/