Bhutan Bans Public Smoking

This is going too far. Seems like more 'rulers' are into the fascism thing. While we know smoking is obviously not good for you, people should atleast have the choice! I mean, i don`t allow smoking in my house, the smoke bothers me too much, but if someone is outside having a smoke, so what? There are bigger fish to fry when it comes to pollution and air quality. In certain public places that are indoors, fine, i can see the ban on smoking as justifiable, because other people shouldn`t have to inhale it if they don`t want to. As for bar owners, I don`t think they should be forced to ban smoking. Let`s have some choice here. Obviously, you`d get some bar owners that would allow it, while others wouldn`t. At the same time, if i went to visit someone who was a smoker, I`d never have the nerve to tell them that they couldn`t smoke in their own house.

---
Dave Ruston

I don't know Dave...usually I agree with you, but honestly...

I used to smoke cigarettes and I know that the entire time I did smoke I felt like garbage. It's a killer, and it's addictive. People don't really have a choice once they are addicted. Also, let's not forget about our friends the 'corporations.' You know "the workers slave, the rich get more"???

I think that Tobacco companies have been getting away with murder for too long! It's an unjustifiable market to have, look at where smoking is going up in large %'s, thrid world countries. Why? Because American tobacco companies need a new market of uninformed smokers. Maybe you should take a look at who owns the tobacco companies, and see how many of them also make food, own media outlets, etc.

Don't you think that health care would be better if we stopped giving our freshly donated lungs to 60 year old lifetime smokers? They (people with smoking related diseases) are a strain on the health system!

It's like treating someone for a Russian Roulette injury as far as I am concerned.

---
"Those who would sacrifice a little Liberty for more Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -Benjamin Franklin

also...

"Nicknamed "Shangri-La," it has some of the world's toughest environmental laws. As much as 60 per cent of the country is covered in virgin forest, some of the last such forests in the world.

Bhutan ruled in 1995 that 60 per cent of the country must remain covered in forest, with 26 per cent set aside as protected areas."

It would seem as though the leaders intentions here are good, and isn't that supposed to be encouraged?

---
"Those who would sacrifice a little Liberty for more Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -Benjamin Franklin

As the saying goes, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions". Prohibition doesn't work, and taking away people's freedom of choice is not a good solution. Keeping them from being sold seems valid to me, but prhibiting all smoking does not.

---
Jesse

Modernity for these people might bring some short-term benefits, but in the long term it might destroy their long-held traditions and values. Perhaps it is a bit extreme, but it's an attempt to protect itself from a sea of modernity without moral values. Look what TV has done to the West, kids get values from it, it's the new parent. And you know sometimes monarchies guided by the interest of the people are more beneficial than democracies.

Despite what you may say about freedom of choice, or censorship, it is an industry of death. It affects me, you, your family, and you friends. People are dying left right and center. I for one shun smokers and do it to their face. Everytime I walk by someone smoking and I can smell the smoke I say aloud "hey, didn't you hear smoking causes cancer." What do you usually hear in response? "I am trying to quit." Where's my freedom of choice to not have to smell that garbage?

If you're against bombs, and the manufacturing of bombs, because they are a destructive violent tool, then how is smoking any better. Just for the record, I am not against 'smoking' all together. Just the manufactured 25 sticks in a box kind. If you want to grow some tobacco, roll it up and smoke it casually that's fine. It's the smoke break every 15 minutes, coughing when you wake up, 2 packs a day mentality that I am against.

It's not freedom of choice: With the ad campaigns, peer pressure, addiction, and accepted convienience.

IMHO of course!


---
"Those who would sacrifice a little Liberty for more Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -Benjamin Franklin

Well I sure do not support a facist police state just because some people are too stupid to quit smoking.


"Despite what you may say about freedom of choice, or censorship, it is an industry of death."

It is a personal choice. The state has no business telling people what they can or cannot consume. I am an ex-smoker and I do not like being exposed to second hand smoke yet I will not advocate the curtailment of other peoples rights to choose for themselves. It is not my business.

" It affects me, you, your family, and you friends. People are dying left right and center"

How exactly is this any worse than the cancers caused by environment pollution? Increased background radiation? Should we declare war on smokers but leave the major industrial polluters alone?

If you own a car you are a hypocrite. I do not want to inhale CO and partially burnt hydrocarbons from your car but I have NO CHOICE. It really annoys me when anti-smoking ZEALOTS hop into their SUV...

"I for one shun smokers and do it to their face. I for one shun smokers and do it to their face. Everytime I walk by someone smoking and I can smell the smoke I say aloud "hey, didn't you hear smoking causes cancer.""

Do you ever get beaten up? I know some smokers you can shun that will beat you senseless for sticking your nose where it does not belong. Hey, didn't you hear? It's a free country...until people (health nazis) like yourself ban everything.

"What do you usually hear in response? "I am trying to quit." Where's my freedom of choice to not have to smell that garbage? "

The olfactory offensiveness does not stink anywhere near as much as your attitude. It is very selfish.


"If you're against bombs, and the manufacturing of bombs, because they are a destructive violent tool, then how is smoking any better."

Do you think that people who get bombed actually choose that? Smokers choose to ingest poison. 'Trying to quit' is a lame way of not doing it. "I am trying, that is enough." I don't think anyone should smoke either but people who choose it are being educated as to why it is bad so they can make their own decision. Having the state make it for them is contrary to freedom.

"It's the smoke break every 15 minutes, coughing when you wake up, 2 packs a day mentality that I am against. "

No, you are advocating a total ban. Obviously your basis for your opposition is how it affects you and not the smokers. It is not enough for you that they have been pushed out into the cold. It is not enough that they have been taxed into oblivion.

"It's not freedom of choice: With the ad campaigns, peer pressure, addiction, and accepted convienience."

What a crock. The only ad campaigns are those of the Government discouraging people from smoking. Tobbacco advertising has been banned almost every medium. When was the last time you saw a commercial for ciggarettes on TV? The early 1970s???

"IMHO of course! "

Your O is definately not H.

I agree that its an industry of death. No question. And that`s why I say, sure, ban it in some public places. But I too cannot support a fascist policy. Yes, addiction sets in, but its still a choice to quit or not to quit, however hard it sometimes is. So if someone lights up outside, or in their own home, I think that`s their business, and nobody else`s. Just like smokers should respect your choice to ban it in your own home. I used to smoke, and quit, and it`s ten years since i had a puff. But I don`t suddenly look down on people that smoke.

---
Dave Ruston

I may have miss understood but isn't this a third world country? Would it not be better for the people there to be using that money for food rather than cigarettes? It may be that the king is trying, like a good parent, to care for his subjects? It's a matter of place and time. What works here may not work there.Even here in Canada I have seen children go hungry and the parent still smokes.

"Well I sure do not support a facist police state just because some people are too stupid to quit smoking." <br />
<br />
Facist police state? Thanks. Thanks for being absolutely over the top! Yes, yes, that's me, facism for everyone. <br />
<br />
"The state has no business telling people what they can or cannot consume." <br />
<br />
They do already. So why not tobacco? It's too big for them to touch. <br />
<br />
"I am an ex-smoker and I do not like being exposed to second hand smoke yet I will not advocate the curtailment of other peoples rights to choose for themselves. It is not my business." <br />
<br />
What about your rights as a nonsmoker? If you think that just because you are not smelling the smoke you are not breathing it in, I would suggest that you do a little reading on how much of the air that is recycled, from other people's lungs, that you breathe. <br />
<br />
"How exactly is this any worse than the cancers caused by environment pollution? Increased background radiation? Should we declare war on smokers but leave the major industrial polluters alone?" <br />
<br />
Yes, I am saying let's forget about the major polluters . If this was an article on pollution then: yes, I would be right there with you. But, is this not a type of air pollution? Kids with smoker parents being born with asthma...I heard David Suzuki say yesterday..."People being born with asthma is like a canary in a mine shaft, telling us that the air is not safe to breathe." <br />
<br />
"If you own a car you are a hypocrite. I do not want to inhale CO and partially burnt hydrocarbons from your car but I have NO CHOICE. It really annoys me when anti-smoking ZEALOTS hop into their SUV... " <br />
<br />
I don't drive. In fact I don't have my license, and I don't believe in driving, I take an electric street car to work, or I rollerblade in the summer. I can make the lifestyle changes that are necessary to sustain our environment, thank you very much smart guy. <br />
<br />
"Do you ever get beaten up? I know some smokers you can shun that will beat you senseless for sticking your nose where it does not belong. Hey, didn't you hear? It's a free country...until people (health nazis) like yourself ban everything." <br />
<br />
Health Nazi? Thanks, that's such a nice thing to say . No I don't get beat up. My smart mouth has kept me going for years, and my track star legs have kept me alive. Actually I find it quite easy to outrun old smokey lungs. <br />
<br />
"The olfactory offensiveness does not stink anywhere near as much as your attitude. It is very selfish. " <br />
<br />
Why is it selfish? I think it is quite the opposite. I don't think it's 'cool' to smoke, 'smart' to smoke, or anyone's 'right' to sell cigarettes for profit, because they kill people. So why would I, being the good friend to the people that I am, stand outside keeping my buddies company while they, and I (indirectly), contract cancer of some sort? <br />
<br />
"I don't think anyone should smoke either but people who choose it are being educated as to why it is bad so they can make their own decision. Having the state make it for them is contrary to freedom." <br />
<br />
Are they being educated? By who, their parents, grandparents, and friends who all smoke. Yeah I bet at lunch in front of the high school everyone who is bumming a smoke is also being told that it is bad for them. Also, not to stereotype or anything here, but I personally have noticed a correlation between smoking and poverty, and between poverty and a lack of education. <br />
<br />
<br />
"No, you are advocating a total ban. Obviously your basis for your opposition is how it affects you and not the smokers. It is not enough for you that they have been pushed out into the cold. It is not enough that they have been taxed into oblivion." <br />
<br />
No, I am not. If you want to grow your own tobacco, roll it up and smoke it fine. Do it. I don't think that marijuana should be banned, being rolled up and smoked occasionally --- but I would oppose a complete legalization, because then some company somewhere is going to make it so your joints "go down smooth." As for being pushed out into the cold. I suppose by your logic that the pregnant women, elderly, and children, should be outside eating their lunch in the winter because the 'poor smokers' fingers are too cold to light their lighters? Oh, and the taxes, that's what our 'facist police state' did to the smokers to try and get them to quit. Why add taxes to them? Well for one, it would bring down the costs of health care by funnelling some of those taxes into the health care system, that is clogged up with dirty lungs and asthma etc. <br />
<br />
"What a crock. The only ad campaigns are those of the Government discouraging people from smoking. Tobbacco advertising has been banned almost every medium. When was the last time you saw a commercial for ciggarettes on TV? Te early 1970s???" <br />
<br />
What a crock indeed. Magazines, horse and car races, tennis matches, clothing etc, etc. What do you think sponsorship is? Advertising. Also, I did see the du marier open on TV as recent as 2001, did du maurier stop selling cigarettes? <br />
<br />
<a href="http://airspace.globalink.org/tennis_shame.html">http://airspace.globalink.org/tennis_shame.html</a> <br />
<br />
"Your O is definately not H." <br />
<br />
Well to each their own O, am I right? When everyone's O realises how stupid it is to smoke for a lifetime, then maybe we will have some changes. The only reason I have decided to get so passionate about this is because most of the cigarette companies, still, do not admit that smoking causes cancer. Just for an example, my significant other was telling me the other day that she has a friend in her office that thinks smoking doesn't cause cancer. Trained proffesionals, that think cancer is only a hereditary disease! <br />
<br />
Just for the record: If there was a police state, the cigarette companies would have more power not less. As we all know, politics is the business of politicians and business men, business men who lobby, business men who lobby for less laws against smoking. So please don't say that it would be a police state with a smoking ban, because it would be quite the opposite. <br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<p>---<br>"Those who would sacrifice a little Liberty for more Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -Benjamin Franklin

Cigarettes - proving that assisted suicide is already legal in Canada!

<a href="http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/LondonFreePress/News/2004/12/03/763199.html">http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/LondonFreePress/News/2004/12/03/763199.html</a> <br />
<br />
--another example of how much cigarette companies love the idea of being regulated.

Well that`s just it! Big brother already has too many stupid rules, so why add more? Meanwhile, it`s ok for people like Conrad Black or Jane Stewart to steal large amounts of money! This is fascism. Plain and simple. Same with cameras on street corners. What the hell for? These eggheads that are born with silver spoons in their mouths want to pass these ridiculous laws when there are far more important things to tackle. Now Charest, loser that he is, wants to ban poutine in schools. What kind of an idiot even thinks of such a bonehead thing! And McGuinty, wanting to force bicycle riders and rollerbladers to wear helmets, when there isn`t a helmet on the planet to fit his egghead. These people actually convince themselves that passing these stupid laws are flickers of brilliance, when in fact, they have no common sense, because they can`t even relate to the general public! But try to save health care, well, gee, that`s different. Suddenly, spineless geeks like Charest and McGuinty have no fortitude. These idiots must be getting a big rock of crack or something along with their monetary reward from their corporate masters, because I can`t believe how out to lunch these politicians are!

---
Dave Ruston