New York poised to ban smoking in Central Park, Times Square - Polidicks

[QUOTE=RBM11;27923634]No I was not calling smokers junkies just the ones in this thread whose addiction greatly impacts their ability to understand science No, only the ones who expect to be able to light up anywhere without people getting annoyed and then get pissed off at those who expect to not smoke around them, especially when it smells like shit and can be harmful. Yes I am because it's funny.[/QUOTE] I don't think wanting to smoke in a park is unreasonable

[QUOTE=Zeke129;27923676]I don't think wanting to smoke in a park is unreasonable[/QUOTE] Finished editing right after you posted. I don't think its unreasonable and I don't think it should be banned, it's just my personal opinion that it shouldn't be done near others in a park if they don't want you to. The smoker is the one causing the smoke so it's unreasonable for them to expect the nonsmoker to not get annoyed or the nonsmoker to go somewhere else. [editline]7th February 2011[/editline] FYI to everyone I wasn't posting to support a public park ban I was posting to refute bullshit like this: [quote=Pepin;27885588][B]Second hand smoke has no likely hood of causing danger. The majority of research done shows that second hand smoke has no impact on a person's health.[/B][/quote] And HumanAbyss, an otherwise rational poster who backs up his arguments with facts and research, agreed with this statement. Hence why I called everyone junkies. How is this any different than a heroin addict going "it's not harmful it's helping me!" while living on the streets in a box?

You can take the smoking out of New York but you can't take the New York out of smoking :cop: No wait.. what?

Cars emit exhaust, they don't drive in the park. You go to a park for fresh air.

[quote]“There is a lot of research that the cigarette butts are highly toxic to aquatic creatures,” he says. “It is not just all about second-hand smoke.”[/quote]

$50 fines? The relief will be worth it.

Genius! Make something legal to buy but practically illegal to use :v:.

[QUOTE=RBM11;27923768]Finished editing right after you posted. I don't think its unreasonable and I don't think it should be banned, it's just my personal opinion that it shouldn't be done near others in a park if they don't want you to. The smoker is the one causing the smoke so it's unreasonable for them to expect the nonsmoker to not get annoyed or the nonsmoker to go somewhere else. [editline]7th February 2011[/editline] FYI to everyone I wasn't posting to support a public park ban I was posting to refute bullshit like this: And HumanAbyss, an otherwise rational poster who backs up his arguments with facts and research, agreed with this statement. Hence why I called everyone junkies. How is this any different than a heroin addict going "it's not harmful it's helping me!" while living on the streets in a box?[/QUOTE] Because for the most part, the research doesn't show that. It certainly doesn't show that it's the 100% cause of anything, most of those studies don't eliminate the variables in peoples lives and just throw it down on smoking.

[QUOTE=Badunkadunk;27924236]Cars emit exhaust, they don't drive in the park. You go to a park for fresh air.[/QUOTE] Might make sense if central park was domed off and had air conditioning

I dont hate smokers but I dont wont there smoke to ruin it for the rest of us and hey it might get them to quit.

[QUOTE=imasillypiggy;27927599]I dont hate smokers but I dont wont there smoke to ruin it for the rest of us and hey it might get them to quit.[/QUOTE] terrible logic

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;27927369]Because for the most part, the research doesn't show that. It certainly doesn't show that it's the 100% cause of anything, most of those studies don't eliminate the variables in peoples lives and just throw it down on smoking.[/QUOTE] Can you show me one of these studies? The problem with pinning the blame on smoking is that human trials are unethical so all variables can't be eliminated. Look at the study I posted twice now about how the incidence of heart attacks went down 25% right after a smoking ban in public places. The town was studied a year and a half prior along with neighboring towns and a sharp decrease in heart attacks was noticed after the ban. Most variables were controlled that would actually have an effect? Also how do you explain the consensus among essentially all scientists and scientific organizations I posted in the list earlier? I'm sorry but I place my faith in the researchers on this one. Is there something wrong with admitting second hand smoke is bad for you? Honestly is it going to kill you to accept the evidence as being valid?

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;27927613]terrible logic[/QUOTE] Hey I didnt know not wanting to smell smoke or help stop asthma was illogic? or the spread of cancer of course (but it seems you dont think 2nd hand smoke could do that)

[QUOTE=RBM11;27927648]Can you show me one of these studies? The problem with pinning the blame on smoking is that human trials are unethical so all variables can't be eliminated. Look at the study I posted twice now about how the incidence of heart attacks went down 25% right after a smoking ban in public places. The town was studied a year and a half prior along with neighboring towns and a sharp decrease in heart attacks was noticed after the ban. Most variables were controlled that would actually have an effect? Also how do you explain the consensus among essentially all scientists and scientific organizations I posted in the list earlier? I'm sorry but I place my faith in the researchers on this one. Is there something wrong with admitting second hand smoke is bad for you? Honestly is it going to kill you to accept the evidence as being valid?[/QUOTE] I'll accept it's damaging in significant amounts. That smoking ban? it's likely that's how it happened, but correlation =/= causation. I accept it's bad. What now? I'm still going to smoke. I don't feel bad about it. [editline]7th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=imasillypiggy;27927700]Hey I didnt know not wanting to smell smoke or help stop asthma was illogic? or the spread of cancer of course (but it seems you dont think 2nd hand smoke could do that)[/QUOTE] You suddenly have a right to the air? It's everyones air. Also, I'm sure it can in some circumstances. Reliably? Even in the majority of cases? no.

Smoking pollutes too.

[QUOTE=Kab2tract;27927723]Smoking pollutes too.[/QUOTE] If your reason for banning smoking is "pollution" you're barking up the wrong tree.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;27927706]I'm sure it can in some circumstances. Reliably? Even in the majority of cases? no.[/QUOTE] Yes but its also damaging to the people around you and while its illegal to poison someone. Its not if its a little bit over a long period of time. And some I know more then 1 person who got asthma from 2nd hand smoke and while yes smoking is worse then being by people every now and then that do smoke there is solid evidence that 2nd hand smoke can cause cancer just like 1rst hand.

[QUOTE=imasillypiggy;27927819]Yes but its also damaging to the people around you and while its illegal to poison someone. Its not if its a little bit over a long period of time. And some I know more then 1 person who got asthma from 2nd hand smoke and while yes smoking is worse then being by people every now and then that do smoke there is solid evidence that 2nd hand smoke can cause cancer just like 1rst hand.[/QUOTE] You need to learn to write. If you're native to the english language, I don't care if you're using your phone keyboard, you need to learn to write better. It's damaging? Ok, outlaw cars. Industrial pollution. Those are all far much worse. Yeah? And I know people who've lived with smokers all their lives and have no such health concerns. [b]It's. Not. The. ONLY. Cause.[/b] So stop fucking acting like it is.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;27927732]If your reason for banning smoking is "pollution" you're barking up the wrong tree.[/QUOTE] Okay, there are no benefits to smoking. The "relief" is probably mostly from the withdrawals being stopped. Aside from "relief", it costs people lots of money in various ways including: health in long-term, harming children/fetuses, the people buying the cigarettes (though it does support the people selling). Reckless smokers can cause fires, and litter their cigs all over the place, defiling a city's air (though there are much worse things, including automotives) and ground. It causes slowness in workplaces for "smoke-breaks" if it is needed in excess to normal breaks. I think that bannings like these are necessary, and that governments should start programs/supplying products for people to quit. I know people will be like, "But it's their bodies!" Yeah, it is, but it DOES harm other people in multiple ways. [editline]7th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;27928008]You need to learn to write. If you're native to the english language, I don't care if you're using your phone keyboard, you need to learn to write better. It's damaging? Ok, outlaw cars. Industrial pollution. Those are all far much worse. Yeah? And I know people who've lived with smokers all their lives and have no such health concerns. [b]It's. Not. The. ONLY. Cause.[/b] So stop fucking acting like it is.[/QUOTE] Yeah, but it is an unnecessary cause. Also, just because a couple of people live a very long time whilst smoking, they could've probably lived longer, and better, if they weren't. My grandma is 75, and she smoked probably 1/3 of her life, she felt the best when she wasn't smoking, and then started again. But now her lungs are falling apart and she is suicidal.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;27928008] [b]It's. Not. The. ONLY. Cause.[/b] So stop fucking acting like it is.[/QUOTE] But it is a major cause if not the main especially when it comes to many forms of cancer. Cars are different because they are needed its wanted even if the want is pretty high. There are a few people I know who quit smoking because of the anti smoking laws as well. And like I said before I don't want me or my future children have to share the effects of smoking even though they don't smoke. Even though im not going to say we should ban smoking or anything.

[QUOTE=imasillypiggy;27927819]Yes but its also damaging to the people around you and while its illegal to poison someone. Its not if its a little bit over a long period of time. And some I know more then 1 person who got asthma from 2nd hand smoke and while yes smoking is worse then being by people every now and then that do smoke there is solid evidence that 2nd hand smoke can cause cancer just like 1rst hand.[/QUOTE] You really need to take your opinion and throw it out the window. Right after that, take a class that teaches you how to make an argument. Then maybe take a class that teaches basic reasoning. But before all of that maybe you should take English 101. The research done on second hand smoke indicates there is no danger in open areas and there is no danger from short term exposure. There is some research to indicate that long term and heavy exposure could cause some ill effects, but these studies are more questionable because they do not take certain factors into consideration. It'd understandable to say that there are risks to long term and heavy exposure to second hand smoke, heavy meaning that you are exposed to it a lot, just not passing a few random smokers on the streets every once in a while. Personal stories is the worst kind of evidence you can use. It proves absolutely nothing with the claims you are making. And no, there is little to no solid connection between cancer and 2nd hand smoke. There are certainly some studies that show a link, but those make up the minority and the majority show no connection.

[QUOTE=Kab2tract;27928117]Okay, there are no benefits to smoking. The "relief" is probably mostly from the withdrawals being stopped. Aside from "relief", it costs people lots of money in various ways including: health in long-term, harming children/fetuses, the people buying the cigarettes (though it does support the people selling). Reckless smokers can cause fires, and litter their cigs all over the place, defiling a city's air (though there are much worse things, including automotives) and ground. It causes slowness in workplaces for "smoke-breaks" if it is needed in excess to normal breaks. I think that bannings like these are necessary, and that governments should start programs/supplying products for people to quit. I know people will be like, "But it's their bodies!" Yeah, it is, but it DOES harm other people in multiple ways. [editline]7th February 2011[/editline] Yeah, but it is an unnecessary cause. Also, just because a couple of people live a very long time whilst smoking, they could've probably lived longer, and better, if they weren't.[/QUOTE] Hah. Yeah, prohibition. You just proved your stupidity to me, thanks bro. Now I know to never take you seriously. [b]Prohibition of any form just makes things worse. Leave me my ciggarettes, my body, and my rights and whatever other drugs I choose to do out of the prohibition argument if you want to be taken seirously. Prohibition can never work. And never will[/b] It harms people in multiple ways? Yeah? Why am I unharmed? Why are all the people i know that lived around smokers in fine health? [b]oh yeah, you're ignoring any other variable in favour of blaming it on your fucking agenda[/b] [editline]7th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=imasillypiggy;27928140]But it is a major cause if not the main especially when it comes to many forms of cancer. Cars are different because they are needed its wanted even if the want is pretty high. There are a few people I know who quit smoking because of the anti smoking laws as well. And like I said before I don't want me or my future children have to share the effects of smoking even though they don't smoke. Even though im not going to say we should ban smoking or anything.[/QUOTE] We don't need cars. We want them. Honestly, talking to you is like grating my face with a dull cheese grater. Learn to write, no more excuses. You're just lazy, and your arguments are even lazier, they're literally the shit kids think up. It's a major cause? How the fuck did you get that out of what I said? Yeah, smoking can cause cancer. But one wiff of it in open air does NOTHING TO YOU.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;27928171] wiff of it in open air does NOTHING TO YOU. [/QUOTE] yea and smoking one cigarette doesn't kill you either. But over time it can and does harm people. I dont want other people to get effected because 1 guy wants to smoke. Sure smoke when you are alone or not next to many people but when you smoke in a crowded place many other people will also have to deal with it. Also sure we want cars but you understand the difference in necessity between a car and having to smoke. If you knew you were going to go to a crowded place then get your fix before then and if you cant not go an hour without a smoke then you have a problem.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;27928171]Hah. Yeah, prohibition. You just proved your stupidity to me, thanks bro. Now I know to never take you seriously. [b]Prohibition of any form just makes things worse. Leave me my ciggarettes, my body, and my rights and whatever other drugs I choose to do out of the prohibition argument if you want to be taken seirously. Prohibition can never work. And never will[/b] It harms people in multiple ways? Yeah? Why am I unharmed? Why are all the people i know that lived around smokers in fine health? [b]oh yeah, you're ignoring any other variable in favour of blaming it on your fucking agenda[/b] [editline]7th February 2011[/editline] We don't need cars. We want them. Honestly, talking to you is like grating my face with a dull cheese grater. Learn to write, no more excuses. You're just lazy, and your arguments are even lazier, they're literally the shit kids think up. It's a major cause? How the fuck did you get that out of what I said? Yeah, smoking can cause cancer. But one wiff of it in open air does NOTHING TO YOU.[/QUOTE] His arguments aren't great, but all you seem to use is Bold tags and ramble about how you are fine, and how the smokers around you are "fine", though they probably aren't internally.

[QUOTE=imasillypiggy;27928327]yea and smoking one cigarette doesn't kill you either. But over time it can and does harm people. I dont want other people to get effected because 1 guy wants to smoke. Sure smoke when you are alone or not next to many people but when you smoke in a crowded place many other people will also have to deal with it. Also sure we want cars but you understand the difference in necessity between a car and having to smoke. If you knew you were going to go to a crowded place then get your fix before then and if you cant not go an hour without a smoke then you have a problem.[/QUOTE] You're like the left glaber, really, you are. Your point? How much does? You have no clue, and no one else does, and it's [b]STILL A VARIABLE[/b] that you can't isolate. You know shit all. No, you don't understand the fact a car isn't a fucking necessity. Our way of life is not a "necessity". We don't need cars. We lived for how many years before them? (We had cigarettes and tobacco for years before that). A car is no more a neccessity than a smoke is. And again, pure ignorance. Normally, if you're a smoker, smoking once, then going out for the day isn't how it works.

Good, that shit makes me sick and they shouldn't be smoking in Central Park anyway

[QUOTE=Kab2tract;27928387]His arguments aren't great, but all you seem to use is Bold tags and ramble about how you are fine, and how the smokers around you are "fine", though they probably aren't internally.[/QUOTE] His arguments aren't great but I am fine? I've been to the doctor, i do live in a first world country, I know how my body is, and if my friends aren't lying to me either, so are they. it's a fucking variable and you're putting your agenda on it. Yes, second hand and first hand smoke is bad in some degree. And your argument about prohibition? Yeah, that's still stupid. [editline]7th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=overdoom;27928400]Good, that shit makes me sick and they shouldn't be smoking in Central Park anyway[/QUOTE] It makes you sick because you work yourself into this self imposed sense of anxiety.

Can you make a real point? yes I know you don't "need" a car or anything for that matter but you wont get fired if you can't smoke for an hour and that wasn't even my main point. My main point is that one man smoking hurts many people around him and you keep on saying all this well we are not certain that smoking causes this or that junk without any backing. Really if statistics show that people who are around people who smoke get things like asthma then its pretty safe to say that being next to a person who smokes causes it.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;27928406]His arguments aren't great but I am fine? I've been to the doctor, i do live in a first world country, I know how my body is, and if my friends aren't lying to me either, so are they. it's a fucking variable and you're putting your agenda on it. Yes, second hand and first hand smoke is bad in some degree. And your argument about prohibition? Yeah, that's still stupid. [editline]7th February 2011[/editline] It makes you sick because you work yourself into this self imposed sense of anxiety.[/QUOTE] It makes people sick because it is smoke.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;27928406]It makes you sick because you work yourself into this self imposed sense of anxiety.[/QUOTE] Or its because smoking has toxins and causes coughing or perhaps the smoke part of smoking.