NationStates Jolt Archive

Whereas,

The use of tobacco, particularly the smoking of it, is harmful not only to the user but to the people around him/her,

Whereas,

The people being harmed by this secondary smoke do not deserve to be harmed by it for they are not choosing to smoke tobacco, they are simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time by being near someone who is smoking tobacco.

Be it resolved that,

Smoking tobacco in any public constructions (which simply means constructions not meant only for residence) is illegal.

Also,

Smoking in public arenas or places of gathering is also illegal.

Therefore,

The use of any tobacco product is only allowed in the privacy of your own home or another private home whose owner allows it.

(proposal currently on page 16)

I know you changed the definition of public constructs partly because of my comment, now I feel you need to go just SLIGHTLY the other way.


Smoking tobacco in any public constructions (which simply means constructions not meant only for residence) is illegal.



Smoking tobacco in any public constructions (which simply means constructions not meant only for residence) is illegal.

Further, smoking tobacco in any construct meant for residence is only legal if the owner of the construct permits it.


This way, the rights of the homeowner (and landowner for apartments, etc) are guaranteed. Otherwise, I like it.

It's been done before (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=372386) ... and before (http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=363343) ...
You'll get my cigarettes only when you pry them from my cold, dead, stinking, yellow-stained fingers.

Do what you want with your nation's air quality. Ours is fine. Tobacco is one of our better exports, and the UN shouldn't be sticking its fragrance-challenged nose into our business practices.



... Are you still here? * blows smoke in Ambassador's face *What if the smoke you are generating drifts across the border to another country? That would make it more of an international issue :}When you muzzle those gas guzzlers of yours that foul our air, which we keep clean via nuclear-generated, grid-powered, electrical vehicles, then perhaps you'll have an argument. If we stood a Frisbeeterian on every inch of border soil with a carton of butts and a propane lighter, we still couldn't pollute beyond about 50 feet of your territory. It's a specious argument, and you know it.

Since folks don't seem to appreciate the humor value of my first comment, I guess I'll have to explain for the slower members of the audience. I'm a smoker. I don't like having secondhand smoke in my face. I don't smoke in my own home or office. I don't light up on trains and elevators. There are even polite signs scattered about public places, and designated smoking areas in almost all of our workplaces. But it's NOT LAW in Frisbeeteria, because we are a civilized people.

It's not an international issue. It's not a national issue. It's not even a local issue. It's a PERSONAL issue, dammit. We don't need you to legislate away rudeness. We know enough not to shit where we eat. We don't need a nanny national government to tell us that. We most assuredly don't need a UN government to tell us that. We can figure it out on our own.The simple fact is this is a national issue. Case closed.
Nah. The simple fact is that not enough of us want it voted on to Approve it.

Location: Page 1
Status: Approvals: 38. Lacking Support (requires 100 more approvals)

Now THAT'S case closed.

Whereas,

The use of tobacco, particularly the smoking of it, is harmful not only to the user but to the people around him/her,

It's no more harmful than the sludge your factories put in the air, the physical damage caused by increased hydration of your ecosystem due to hydrogen-powered vehicles, the amount of gas fumes consumed by the average person in nations that still use gasoline in cars, the poisons most nations destroy their drinking water with in the name of purification, or even the poisons and drugs the average person pumps into their body from both medication and sustenance attempts.

In other words, your people poison themselves far worse than you imagine without having smokers around. Smokers are not even really that big a source of air pollution, and no evidence suggests that second-hand smoke is as great a cause of cancer as claimed when compared to the far more prevalent, and far more toxic, pollution that fills breathing air in the average city.

Whereas,

The people being harmed by this secondary smoke do not deserve to be harmed by it for they are not choosing to smoke tobacco, they are simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time by being near someone who is smoking tobacco.

Change "tobacco" to any of over one thousand poisons a person can have in their system at any time just from breathing. You seriously think legislating only one of them is that damned important? Just have your citizens smoke cleaner tobacco then.

Be it resolved that,

Smoking tobacco in any public constructions (which simply means constructions not meant only for residence) is illegal.

Why is this necessary? And, more importantly, why do you fixate on a minor item polluting your atmosphere when there are far more important items to deal with?

Also,

Smoking in public arenas or places of gathering is also illegal.

Therefore,

The use of any tobacco product is only allowed in the privacy of your own home or another private home whose owner allows it.

See above, plus add in that I really see no excuse for this particular discrimination. In addition, you're forcing smoking to be legal in nations that have banned it, which has the result of making it more prevalent than it already is.

I'll just reply with this.
http://bak42.notworksafe.com/images/NationStates/UNCards/nationalsovereighty.jpg