Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Chris T
In which case I don't understand your objection. We agree that smoking and secondary smoke are both injurious to health. There is a body of opinion that says it is therefore common sense to reduce the exposure of the general population to such smoke by banning it in all public places (with certain exceptions in England). You apparently are objecting that there is no direct evidence that this solution will address the problem adequately enough to justify the upheaval it will cause. The contrary view is that the problem is so big, any improvement is worth having, and that the statistics do indeed demonstrate that is is a big problem.
|
Finally somebody has at least correctly acknowledged my argument
Quote:
|
Russ very succinctly put it earlier. There is no direct evidence that a very hard boot in the nuts would cause you, specifically, great pain (I'm assuming that no-one has ever afflicted you in such a way). Does that mean you're happy for the law of common assault not to apply to your goolies until such time as you're satisfied it should? Or does common sense tell you that if it hurts, it hurts, and it's logical to play safe and enjoy legal protection?
|
Although I see the point the analogy isn't that good. There is direct evidence as most of us have either been hit in some capacity in this area or seen it happen to somebody else. There is of course the survival instinct that makes us protect this area when the situation arises. But i'm starting to feel a little pedantic.
Ok Ok I will admit that I have at times played the devil's advocate. I am not that stupid to know that smoking and indeed passive smoking can cause serious illness, but alas, stupid enough to smoke.
I do hope that soon I will be able to give up and maybe this ban will in some way help.
However what I have been trying to do is question the effectiveness of this ban in tackling the problems associated with passive smoking and especially the effects on children. (And at times look at other areas that will be affected such as social isolation). I am still not so sure what the actual effects of this ban will be in tackling this problem. What I suggested in a previous post was that we should focus on the overall culture of smoking so that people esp. children do not feel the need to take up the habit in the first place. Again, I don't know how effective this ban will be in this area.
If I am still smoking when the ban takes effect I will of course not inflict my smoke on others, which I agree is rude and inconsiderate. I still contend that as a society we are becoming more fearful and obsessed with risk and I don't know how healthy this is. But thanks for the debate, esp. Chris T, Clarie and Russ D
