Article: http://www.theage.com.au/news/health/no-smoking-just-toking-for-dutch/2008/06/24/1214073221338.html
No cigarettes. But you can still smoke a joint in public. More proof that the Dutch are awesome.:thumbsup:
Thoughts?
No smoking, just toking for Dutch
- Thread starter tubuler
- Start date
Article: http://www.theage.com.au/news/health/no-smoking-just-toking-for-dutch/2008/06/24/1214073221338.html
No cigarettes. But you can still smoke a joint in public. More proof that the Dutch are awesome.:thumbsup:
Thoughts?
Just got back from my annual pilgrimage to the dam... this won't change my toking, *coughs* I mean smoking habits next year 
I think that's bullshit.
it's a personal liberty issue, if you are going to let people consume one substance that is not good for them, why ban another on the same relative scale?
the smoke is still going to be bothersome to people that don't like inhaling smoke, and they are also going to get a contact high. wtf?
I say ban public smoking of cigs, pot, crack, meth, whatever. all of it.
stay home and get high, that's cool with me.
it's a personal liberty issue, if you are going to let people consume one substance that is not good for them, why ban another on the same relative scale?
the smoke is still going to be bothersome to people that don't like inhaling smoke, and they are also going to get a contact high. wtf?
I say ban public smoking of cigs, pot, crack, meth, whatever. all of it.
stay home and get high, that's cool with me.
most people coming to the coffeeshops visit it to smoke. It is not like you can get any coffee in those shops lol
Very good post, calpoon. While the negative aspects of marijuana may sometimes be overstated, I think it is safe to say that comparing one joint to one cigarette, marijuana smoking is at least as unhealthy to the smoker and those around them as cigarette smoking is. And in that, I am not taking the contact high into account. I assume that because people don't often smoke joints as frequently as cigarettes, the Dutch government sees them as less of a problem to others.
I agree with calpoon, banning all public smoking would be the best policy.
Here's an article I found interesting.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn3039-cannabis-smoking-more-harmful-than-tobacco.html
Don't get me wrong, I think cigarettes and marijuana should both be legal. Just want to point out the health risks of marijuana smoking.
Last edited:
There may not be enough studies but there is no evidence pot smoking causes cancer or anything like that really.But I am against smoking bans at least outdoor ones.Enclosed spaces is of course different and a ban is fine.
EDIT: Just saw your link Senob,not sure I buy it as some in the story didn't.While pot smoking has some risk for sure I guess ,there will always be some propanganda spread about such things too.In "reefer madness" it made people homicidal crazies lol
And it does seem a little wierd to allow one but not the other supposedly totally legal one.Pot vs cigarettes
EDIT: Just saw your link Senob,not sure I buy it as some in the story didn't.While pot smoking has some risk for sure I guess ,there will always be some propanganda spread about such things too.In "reefer madness" it made people homicidal crazies lol
And it does seem a little wierd to allow one but not the other supposedly totally legal one.Pot vs cigarettes
Yeah, I didn't post the link right away. I also would like to see an article more recent than 2002. So the article does say that smoking marijuana results in 50% more of two certain carcinogens into the lungs. However, these may not be ALL the carcinogens that are at stake here, that are contained in either cigarettes or joints. I tried and failed to find a decent article comparing the danger of "second-hand smoke" from joints vs. cigarettes. That's unfortunate because such an article could be much more appropriate to considering the reasons and merit behind banning public smoking.
Facetious
Moderated
^ Exactly ^ :thumbsup:
Much of what the far left distributes as "the sky is falling scenarios" cannot be proven either way.
There's very few things in this world that I believe need to be banned and smoking isn't one. Leave it up to the bar or restaurant proprietor.
Universal bans are too overreaching ! The last thing that I want on my hands is a runaway govt.! Give them an inch and they'll have you under an autocracy before you know it.
Much of what the far left distributes as "the sky is falling scenarios" cannot be proven either way.
There's very few things in this world that I believe need to be banned and smoking isn't one. Leave it up to the bar or restaurant proprietor.
Universal bans are too overreaching ! The last thing that I want on my hands is a runaway govt.! Give them an inch and they'll have you under an autocracy before you know it.
I said above: "banning all public smoking would be the best policy." However, I just meant that policy would be best for the current situation for the Dutch, as in, "If you want to ban one, you might as well ban them all." I actually generally agree with Facetious and Friday, that there should be no public smoking bans at all, at least for outdoor areas. Indoor areas, as Facetious also mentioned, smoking legality should be determined by the owner of the facility.
Last edited:
The Hang up with is the workers and forcing them to be exposed.Hey I'm a smoker but see the problem indoors.And it's not ok to say if they want to work there its a risk they have to assume.
The can choose to work their or not, Im sure there are enough workers out their that wouldnt mind working in that environment. The non smokers can work in the non smoking bars :dunno:
why don't you just stay home and smoke? it's a privilege not a right, and it's kind of lame that smokers expect other people should have to put up with their bullshit. it's called respect. I do things that other people might not like, but I don't force them to be subjected to it.
I don't mind it personally, i'm a non-smoker, but I have friends that do. They ask me if I mind if they smoke and I say that I don't, and I appreciate that instead of just assuming or not caring.
let me put it this way, you can't drink in public, so why should you be allowed to smoke?
I don't mind it personally, i'm a non-smoker, but I have friends that do. They ask me if I mind if they smoke and I say that I don't, and I appreciate that instead of just assuming or not caring.
let me put it this way, you can't drink in public, so why should you be allowed to smoke?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_smoking#Current_state_of_scientific_opinion
^ Exactly ^ :thumbsup:
Much of what the far left distributes as "the sky is falling scenarios" cannot be proven either way.
All other things being equal, non-smokers who are exposed to second hand smoke are more likely to develop cancer. This isn't something someone pulled out of their ass on the Freeones forum -- it's observable.
What exactly does any of this have to do with being left or right wing anyway? Almost every time you disagree with something where there's scientific consensus (and acceptance across the political spectrum in this case!) this accusation of rampant far leftism appears...
I agree with calpoon and senob to a certain extent. However, I don't think that smoking marijuana in a "coffeeshop" that is specifically intended to be a place where people come to get stoned should be banned. If non-smokers don't want to be around second-hand smoke then they shouldn't go in to one of these shops.
As far as the health effects of smoking marijuana goes. I think they are just as real as the health effects of smoking tobacco. That's why vaporizers are becoming more popular. Because they release the active ingredients of the marijuana without releasing the carcinogens that are created by the combustion of the plant material during smoking.
As far as the health effects of smoking marijuana goes. I think they are just as real as the health effects of smoking tobacco. That's why vaporizers are becoming more popular. Because they release the active ingredients of the marijuana without releasing the carcinogens that are created by the combustion of the plant material during smoking.
Synthmesc_Droog
Closed Account
^ Very true Tubular. I totally agree and I couldn't have said it better myself. Vap's are the way to go :thumbsup:
Petra
Cult Mother and Simpering Cunt
Plain and simple, the smoke shops will adapt.
Personally, I can't say I'm sorry. If anything, all the people who never ate out because they didn't want to sit in a cloud of smoke at dinner will probably start eating out a little more. There is nothing more disgusting than having to smell ciggarette smoke over your food and have some asshole blow it on you the entire time and walking out smelling like an ashtray.
Personally, I can't say I'm sorry. If anything, all the people who never ate out because they didn't want to sit in a cloud of smoke at dinner will probably start eating out a little more. There is nothing more disgusting than having to smell ciggarette smoke over your food and have some asshole blow it on you the entire time and walking out smelling like an ashtray.
