Smoking vs Drinking

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by subterranean

Any statistical data to support the "small percentage of illegal behaviour" statement, Virg?

---

Try this web site for drug related crime in the US. A lot of crime is drug related. Even if drugs were legalized, crime would still be a problem. We wouldn't be given away drugs for free, and since there will be no free market, prices of recreational drugs plus taxes will be high. Criminals will still have to steal to support habits. Just see how high the prices of cigarettes have gone; why would drugs be lower?
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/dcf/contents.htm

I think smoking is a slow form of suicide. But, I think if people want to smoke, they should be able to.

Smoking causes health problems and people who smoke get sick more often. And if you work somewhere and someone in your group insurance smokes, then their habit drives up the price of health insurance for everyone else (or so they say...).

Bad habits cost money. Where I live, we have these shopping cards and when you go to the store you have to give the clerk your shopping card when you pay, which has a bar code that enables them (who is them?) to keep a record of your name and address and what you buy so that you can get the sale price of the item. If you don't have the card you have to pay the regular retail price, which is ridiculously marked up in my opinion. So, if you buy cigarettes or beer on a regular basis, it seems like a record of that could be kept with your shopping card (or am I just being paranoid?).

I was reading a business textbook last year and it seemed to indicate (to me at least) that your shopping habits could impact how you much you pay for life insurance among other things.

But I don't like cigarettes because they are so nasty. My only objection to cigarettes is they stink. When you smoke in your house, your house smells and everyone who goes to your house leaves smelling like cigarettes. Cigarettes get in your hair and your hair smells and your breath smells.

My parents smoked like crazy when I was growing up and I would go to school and open my backpack and this horrible smell of cigarettes would come out of my bag when I unzipped it to get my books.

But, still I think people should be able to smoke or drink if they want to, but I don't think the products should be marketed.

And as far as alcohol goes, some people can drink in moderation and some can't. And I don't know why anyone would go around driving after having a drink (or five). But they say talking on a cell phone impairs your ability to drive a car also, so should they pass a law that states you can't talk on the phone while driving?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

1. More than 50% of the people have at least a mild drink every so often, but cigarette smokers are about 1/3 the population here in the US, so they are a minority. The power of a majority to make laws against a minority, despite minority protections, are part of the democratic system.

---

That, friends, is what we call tyranny of the majority.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

What I worry about is codifying it into our culture as acceptable behavior. I think that in the long run will be disasterous for society. So I'm willing to accept the crime and small percentage of illegal behavior. As long as we codify it as morally wrong, it will not be absorbed as a cultural rite.

---

Just because it's legal, it doesn't make it socially acceptable. Alcohol is legal, but alcoholism will lose you your job. It's legal (in most places) to marry your second or third cousin but you would be ostracized. Tobacco is legal (at least until the nanny-state takes that away too), but I have friends who have been excommunicated for indulging in it. It works the other way too: it is illegal to drive 55 in a 50 zone, but I doubt anybody considers it a serious moral transgression. It is illegal to download music without paying royalties, but nobody particularly cares (except Metalica). Marijuana is illegal, but (and this is the tricky bit) most people don't consider it immoral, or at least no more immoral than drunkeness. Laws, particularly laws that are completely unenforceable, do not dictate what people do and do not think is immoral.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shalot

And as far as alcohol goes, some people can drink in moderation and some can't. And I don't know why anyone would go around driving after having a drink (or five). But they say talking on a cell phone impairs your ability to drive a car also, so should they pass a law that states you can't talk on the phone while driving?

---

I don't know why someone would drive around after drinking either but the fact is, lots do. It impairs judegment and coordination, and is extremely dangerous to the other people as well as the driver. Driving while using a cellphone is also dangerous. A car is a potential danger, and needs to be handled with caution. If someone is driving along yakking on their phone then they really are not paying attention (or using proper caution) to their driving and innocent people could suffer from that inattention. As a point of fact, driving while on the phone is illegal in several countries as well as some states in the US, the data is here.

If people enjoy drinking and/or smoking, than that is their business. I don't like being around smoking because I have allergies and I can't breathe that in. I think both are habits that are best avoided, but there is at least some health benefits to a moderate intake of alcohol (some of the same benefits can be obtained from other food sources, such as different types of fruits and nuts, thus drinking is NOT a necessary thing). I can think of no such benefits that tobacco provides, even in a very light smoker...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark F.

I advocate legalising all drugs as that's the only way the state can control the quality of the products and reduce traffick linked crime.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark F.

I know what you mean, but people who want to do drugs are going to find them anyway, might as well make sure the danger is reduced as much as possible. In countries where pot is legal, people don't smoke much more than in other countries. Well, tourists do, but not the locals.

I'm sorry, I'm just not an idealist.

---

Actually I agree with you I aalso think they should legaliseprostituion if for no other reson than why should they be getting state benifits and avoid taxes when they are making money too?mind you thats a statement that always gets me odd looks I guess itt becasuse everyone assumes becaue of the way I dress Im going to be a quiet meek sort of person..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shalot

But they say talking on a cell phone impairs your ability to drive a car also, so should they pass a law that states you can't talk on the phone while driving?

---

well they have in egypt and there is very little laws to do with driving there also a heft fine I think £1000 if your spotted on the phone in the uk.

Personally I cant wait until they bannsmoking in public entirly because IM sick of getting amouth full of smoke while walking to uni I was also burned once when I was little by someone carrying a lit cigerrette. But then again drunk people annoy me too, and since I have never done either I guess most people would ignore me. both my parents smoke and over the years I have tried dozens of ways to get them to quit Btw hiding /tossing the cigereets and breaking the ash tray just doesnt work. my mum quit for 3 years but then my went on a round of weddings in a summer and by the end of it ( she hates weddings she was smoking again.

Incidentally, Cuppa, I care about music getting stolen. It's the fact that no one else seems to care that forced me to stop complaining about it. There are generally two things in common between those who steal music, in my experience. 1) happiness is an right -- so far, so good. 2) several gigabytes worth of black-market music is important to my happiness. Ohh, dear. Of course, that's not the topic at hand.

The topic at hand is whether smoking or drinking is the worse evil. One impairs the body's ability to function at the most basic level -- prevents oxygen from getting to the body, prevents blood from being pumped at full efficiency, prevents body heat from being redistributed properly, and eventually prevents the heart from beating. On the other hand, we have a substance derived from the fermentation process (also known as "rotting") that impairs the ability to move and think properly, temporarily stunts emotional functionality, removes inhibitions as well as memory (convenient), and seems to make tiiiiime slooooow dooooown.

We might as well be comparing which to prevent happening again first, the Holocaust vs. the Spanish Inquisition.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nightshade

Personally I cant wait until they bannsmoking in public entirly because IM sick of getting amouth full of smoke while walking to uni I was also burned once when I was little by someone carrying a lit cigerrette. But then again drunk people annoy me too, and since I have never done either I guess most people would ignore me. both my parents smoke and over the years I have tried dozens of ways to get them to quit Btw hiding /tossing the cigereets and breaking the ash tray just doesnt work. my mum quit for 3 years but then my went on a round of weddings in a summer and by the end of it ( she hates weddings she was smoking again.

---

Drunk people are fun to watch, stumbling around the streets, falling down and vomiting all over themselves.

I've decided not to pass my driving liscence, not because I'm an ecologist mind you, it costs about 1000 dollars in France and a car just seems like too much expenses to me. So I'll continue to drink but I won't be a public danger.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scheherazade

So why has the society become more permissive towards drinking? Why is it OK to have beer and other alcohol commercials on TV but not cigarettes?

---

It is smoking in the Pakistan towards which people are more permissive. In fact, many people use Huqqas and Cigarettes.

Drinking is totally banned over here, but sadly, some people drink illegaly and drink so much that they loose their senses and the next morning, such kind of news comes in our newspapers and more stuff like this:

"Jameel Bin Mustafa, due to heavy drinking, physically abused his wife or divorced her."

Well, in Pakistan, mostly, drinking and smoking is common among men. And I think that the percentage of women smoking and drinking will be less than one percent.

Personally, I am against both smoking and drinking as they are very addictive, and can cause a great harm if done on a larger scale.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cuppajoe_9

Just because it's legal, it doesn't make it socially acceptable. Alcohol is legal, but alcoholism will lose you your job. It's legal (in most places) to marry your second or third cousin but you would be ostracized. Tobacco is legal (at least until the nanny-state takes that away too), but I have friends who have been excommunicated for indulging in it. It works the other way too: it is illegal to drive 55 in a 50 zone, but I doubt anybody considers it a serious moral transgression.

---

You are correct, on both counts, which tells me that we would not be able to predict whether drugs would be socially acceptable if legalized. I know for certain that it would not be socially acceptable if they remained illegal. Plus, the studies I've heard of predict that there would be more use if drugs were legal. Now whatever your position is (except if you're a passionate drug user), one has to say that's a bad thing for society.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobinHood3000

Incidentally, Cuppa, I care about music getting stolen. It's the fact that no one else seems to care that forced me to stop complaining about it. There are generally two things in common between those who steal music, in my experience. 1) happiness is an right -- so far, so good. 2) several gigabytes worth of black-market music is important to my happiness. Ohh, dear. Of course, that's not the topic at hand.

---

You know, it isn't the topic at hand, but I think it relates. I think downloading music illegally is wrong as well...I wonder if the parents of the people who do this ever told them stealing is wrong? It costs like what...99 cents to download a song? If you have a computer, internet access and something like an iPod to put the song on after you download it, then cries of poverty ring a little hollow at this point.

Anyway....I can't speak for other areas but in Massachusetts smoking in public areas has been banned for several areas, and I put a link in my previous post to US states and countries that either partially or fully ban cellphone use while driving. When I hear people complain about how their "rights" have been violated by this it makes me a bit annoyed. Sure, it is a person's right to talk on a cellphone or smoke....just don't endanger other people by YOUR choices. (btw, I mean "you" in a broad general way) Same goes for drunk driving. Get drunk all you wish, just don't try hurting other people. It seems to me that a lot of people who are so concerned with THEIR rights don't seem to realize that other people have rights as well....a right to safety and to also to health being pretty important in my book...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kathycf

You know, it isn't the topic at hand, but I think it relates. I think downloading music illegally is wrong as well...I wonder if the parents of the people who do this ever told them stealing is wrong? It costs like what...99 cents to download a song? If you have a computer, internet access and something like an iPod to put the song on after you download it, then cries of poverty ring a little hollow at this point.

Anyway....I can't speak for other areas but in Massachusetts smoking in public areas has been banned for several areas, and I put a link in my previous post to US states and countries that either partially or fully ban cellphone use while driving. When I hear people complain about how there "rights" have been violated by this it makes me a bit annoyed. Sure, it is a person's right to talk on a cellphone or smoke....just don't endanger other people by YOUR choices. (btw, I mean "you" in a broad general way) Same goes for drunk driving. Get drunk all you wish, just don't try hurting other people. It seems to me that a lot of people who are so concerned with THEIR rights don't seem to realize that other people have rights as well....a right to safety and to health being pretty important in my book.

---

Drunk drivers who kill someone are beginning to be charged for murder around here. I believe that is appropriate. No one at this point can claim that they didn't know their driving abilities are impaired after drinking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

Drunk drivers who kill someone are beginning to be charged for murder around here. I believe that is appropriate. No one at this point can claim that they didn't know their driving abilities are impaired after drinking.

---

I agree, I think that second degree murder is an appropriate charge. I don't think first degree would be an option, but my grasp on that part of law is tenuous at best. I wish my state was stricter than it is...there are many repeat offenders. There is just no excuse for this.

I believe that smoking and drinking are personal choices and should not be outlawed by any government at any time. The reason that there is such a problem is because kids in schools hear all their lives, "Alcohol and cigarettes are bad very very bad." When they grow up and stop repeating and believing everything they hear, they are curious about both. What needs to happen is that society needs to take away the mystery about cigarettes and alcohol.

I concede that there are health problems with both and that they are addictive. But how many people do you know, who when told not to do something, throw their hands in the air and swear not to do the forbidden?

I have smoked and drank before. After trying both I came to a conclusion: I don't like the taste of cigarettes and alcohol is no big deal for me. My father told me, "I don't care if you try stuff. But if it controls your life, that is when you are going to have problems."

To this day I have never again smoked. I drink on occasion, but I do it moderately. I don't like the idea of losing control and not being able to remember what happened the next day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobinHood3000

Incidentally, Cuppa, I care about music getting stolen. It's the fact that no one else seems to care that forced me to stop complaining about it. There are generally two things in common between those who steal music, in my experience. 1) happiness is an right -- so far, so good. 2) several gigabytes worth of black-market music is important to my happiness. Ohh, dear. Of course, that's not the topic at hand.

---

I agree, incidentally, but out opinions are in the minority, which is my point: you cannot legislate people into thinking something is or is not moral.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kathycf

I agree, I think that second degree murder is an appropriate charge. I don't think first degree would be an option, but my grasp on that part of law is tenuous at best. I wish my state was stricter than it is...there are many repeat offenders. There is just no excuse for this.

---

First degree murder means there is premeditated intent. Second degree murder means that there is intent, but no premeditation. Neither of these applies to drunk driving. Manslaughter is the heftiest conviction that can be given to somebody who kills somebody else while driving drunk (provided that there is no apparent intent to harm). It should be pointed out that manslaughter still ammounts to a fairly large number of years in prison, particularly for repeat offenders.

That's the way it works in Canada, anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

You are correct, on both counts, which tells me that we would not be able to predict whether drugs would be socially acceptable if legalized. I know for certain that it would not be socially acceptable if they remained illegal.

---

No, you don't. The point is that among the people who do use drugs, using drugs already is socially acceptable. Among the people who consider drugs to be socially unacceptable, there are few drug users. This has little to do with the law.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

Plus, the studies I've heard of predict that there would be more use if drugs were legal. Now whatever your position is (except if you're a passionate drug user), one has to say that's a bad thing for society.

---

There are much, much worse things for society. A ludicrously large prison population, gang war over drug-dealing territroy and an enormous money-pit beurocracy to try (and fail) to control the sale of drugs spring to mind. I would trade all those things for easier access to Puff the Magic Dragon for some college kids any day.

Just to get this out of the way: I don't consider myself a 'passionate' drug user, but I've taken a moderate amount drugs in the past and I will probably continue to take a moderate amount of drugs in the future. I'm not proud of this (or ashamed, by the way), but if you're going to bring my personal habits in to this, you might as well know them.

Virgil,

Do you think that the US government ( or any other government ) is caring about the health of the people ??? This is why the taxes are so big in smoking and drinking? Especially in smoking. They dont care about you and me, if we will die the next day. They just collect money from the taxes. ( all governments everywhere)

Evi