So does anyone smoke cloves?Follow

Drugs can be harmful to others, just like alcohol and many other things can.
It's not a matter of what the law says (which should have minimal restrictions on almost anything); it still makes sense to say that drugs can harm people other than yourself.

Edited, Sep 23rd 2009 12:49pm by Kirby

And, again, this is still no less or more controllable than the unintended effects of alcohol, sex, or religion. I'm not sure how listing examples of the ways smoking can hurt other people indicate that it must.

Who knows? I couldn't make glass clear even with the help of Billy Mayes.

I used to smoke them often through the 1980's. My brand was Kritek. Then Md. banned them around 1990 due to the deaths of some people who were smoking them while they had pneumonia. At least that is what my memory recalls.
I would still light one up occasionally if I was out of state and could by a pack or folks had them at the Renn Faire.

Md. is trying to outlaw the flavored cigars as well. They tend to be used by marijuana smokers.

This is an excellent job of selectively choosing the effects of potentially dangerous habits, and of blatantly ignoring other effects which would quite clearly and obviously show a disparity.

For example: "I can choose not to have sex with someone"

This is false. We have an entire classification of and means for punishing the effects of non-consensual sex. To a smaller extent, we have a classification and means for punishing people who force smoke on you.

Besides, it's not categorically correct that a person can waltz up to you, start smoking, and force you to go elsewhere. Many, many locations have enacted public bans and restrictions on the means of employing cigarettes, to the extent that you'd more or less have to go out of your way to get into a situation where someone is smoking, probably infringing on their privacy more than they will to you.

And these distinctions are really beside the point. As Nexa said, restrictions on the use of things are perfectly reasonable, and I agree, but banning certain types of cigarettes simply because a child might be more drawn to them if they taste nice is an inconsistent application of our ethical principles which are already in place, precisely: these sorts of things are okay to do so long as you do them properly. I mean, again, why not ban mixed drinks; they taste a lot more appealing to children than shots do. It's not proper of me to serve one to a child, and I can get punished for it, but screwdrivers themselves are not banned, and I should be able to have one if I'm legal to drink any other kind of alcohol.

Banning a certain type of cigarette, or sex act (hi sodomy laws!) is no longer a regulation on the function of the action, not a prescribed way of how or why or when to do it, but a condemnation of the existence of the action itself, in which case there is really no reason not to ban @#%^ing every(smoking)thing.

Edited, Sep 23rd 2009 7:13pm by Pensive

Yes, in the most amazingly oblivious way.

In moral degree? Yes

In category? No.

***



I won't ask you to explain, because if you felt like it, you'd have done so, but I will express that it is viscerally irritating to hear that.

Edited, Sep 23rd 2009 8:37pm by Pensive

Is anyone a Cure listening,sexually confused 19 year old boy with a penchant for gloomy, pseudo-goth?

Oh wait, Codyy. I bet Codyy is outraged.

I love the smell of irony in the morning. Smells like... Victory!


I'd repeat my oft stated warning that when you put people in power specifically so they can impose restrictions on things you don't like (wealth, religion, pollution, etc) in a way which better serves the common good, you should not be surprised at all when they eventually get around to imposing restrictions on things you do like (or at least don't dislike) in the pursuit of the same goal. It's pretty naive to think that the "cause" will stop short of the things you care about...

I am almost positive that he was cleverly taunting gbaji.



It's not irony if you expected it to happen you dunce.

Edited, Sep 23rd 2009 9:35pm by Pensive

Don't you get it Sweetums? First we tax the rich, then they ban clove cigarettes, then freedom of the press will be eliminated :P

You know it's conservatives that ban vibrators in Alabama. That's a cause I care about. How do you explain that?

A shop in Texas was once raided for having the audacity to sell "obscene devices." Of course, it was in one of those parts of Texas nobody cares about.