this post was submitted on 07 May 2025
202 points (79.9% liked)
[Locked] YUROP
2529 readers
1 users here now
A laid back community for good news, pictures and general discussions among people living in Europe.
Topics that should not be discussed here:
- European news/politics:
- Ukraine war: [email protected]
Other casual communities:
Language communities
Cities
Countries
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- https://feddit.dk/
- [email protected] / [email protected]
- [email protected]
- https://lemmy.eus/
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- https://foros.fediverso.gal/
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- Italy: [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- Poland: [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The smoke definitely is too much for me, at least.
It was the worst part about living in China, too. Can't go anywhere public without just being overwhelmed by the stench of cigarette smoke because everyone is a smoker.
When I once told a coworker I didn't smoke, they thought I had some sort of condition. Like people couldn't even imagine it was just a preference.
German here, albeit not a (tobacco) smoker. The only places where you can lawfully smoke nowadays are public spaces and specifically designated areas on private properties, which are also physically separated from the non smoking areas.
There are also some Kneipen (roughly equivalent to pubs) which allow smoking anywhere inside, catering to the smoking demographic; although those tend to be frequented by older people who are used to smoking while having a drink. Well there are also the alternative places which definitely have a younger clientele, some allow it anywhere some don't (and have a designated area outside as most other places do).
Ultimately though I believe we have a fair compromise going; and i am always taken aback by people being zealously anti tobacco anywhere, with no regard for individual liberties. Who then throw up their hands when I ask for a ban on personal cars.
Because smoking anything in public is always intruding on everybody else's right to not have an increased risk of lung cancer. And it smells horrible. I'm fine with smoking in areas where everyone has consented to it, but public spaces like outdoor seating in restaurants aren't that.
That's why driving cars is unconscionable. Especially near schools. Giving lung cancer to children so you can go zoomies is selfish and evil.
You are not owed clean air in public spaces. You are not owed air free of unpleasant smells. Your freedom ends where mine begins.
If you really care about unhealthy things you inhale, why aren't you spending your time ranting against car ownership? Emissions and tire wear produces magnitudes more harmful particles you inhale every day than being in the general vicinity of someone who smokes.
Naturally you could also ask a smoker to stand downwind from you at the bus stop, or even to not light up in the first place. But the smoker has just as much rights to the public space as you do.
If we try to regulate what smells you might encounter outside there are so. many. things I'd want gone as well because they make me feel sick to my stomach. Perfumes, foods, sweaty asses. Burps and farts.
I understand how annoying public smoking can be, I live essentially next to three bars. Not a weekend evening goes by without some fuckers smoking under my window, forcing me to close it.
But I still support their right to do so (see first paragraph).
Clean air should be a human right. That should include pollutants from smoking, pollutants from automobiles, and pollutants from industry and commerce. It's not a question of one or another.
Lack of clean air is one of the biggest markers of social inequality, and it demonstrably leads to higher rates of respiratory illnesses and earlier deaths for lower-income people who are often forced to live and work in polluted environments with unclean air. It takes a toll on the body over time.
Even just seeing statistics like how asthma rates among children have decreased in places that have banned the sale of gas stoves...like, it shouldn't be a debate. Whatever people want to do to their own lungs, fine, but given that air is shared by everyone, it should be permitted only in private, where no one else is sharing the same air. It's not about whether one has a right to smoke or drive wherever they want, but whether one has the right to infringe upon the right of others. The right to health.
What gave you the idea that I support our current car-centric infrastructure? I don't, for multiple reasons clean air being one of them. But that's not an issue that can be addressed with one law, smoking in public is.
Exactly. And if your freedom to enjoy a public space requires you to impact the enjoyment and health of others that's where your freedom ends.
I suppose we generally agree but have different priorities regarding what is "impacting other people's enjoyment and health".
E: if we agree on no emissions period in public spaces I'm game. I would still tackle cars first and foremost before I'd go after the last public smokers in the country.
Prohibiting smokers is vastly easier than redesigning cities and and convince people to invest trillions in public transportation ... are you really that dense?
... Do you think smoking does the same damage as cars
No. But its a problem we could fix while tackling a bigger problem.
You say those words but I don't think you really understand them. It's a declaration of negative rights, i.e. others aren't allowed to do something to you. Freedom of speech is such a right in the US as it requires the government to not infringe upon it. This is in contrast to positive rights, e.g. the right to healthcare where somebody has to do something in order to provide the right to others. Read up at https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_and_positive_rights
What it absolutely doesn't mean is: I am allowed to take away your rights by doing whatever I want. We're talking about smoking, but it could just as easily be pandemic prevention measures (if you were antivax or antimask because muh freedoms, let me know and I won't waste any more of my time), or shooting a gun into the air (others don't have the right to not have bullets randomly raining down on them /s). My freedom to not get shot (i.e. life) doesn't end where your freedom to shoot begins. That's called murder (or manslaughter etc). I'm not saying it's the same magnitude as smoking, just using an example to make the situation clearer.
🤓
What's that supposed to say?
He’s mocking you, probably because you sound like Nestle saying access to clean water isn’t a human right.
Fair, ignoring the reality though. Way too many people have no access to clean water, or air, or food, or housing, or safety.
Bitching about the occasional second hand smoke whiff when moving about outside - while there are an insane amount of cars emitting exhaust fumes, rubber particles; factories churning out pollution, and so forth doing far worse to your health every day - is a little like being mad about too much sodium in your industrial runoff tainted drinking water.
The point being, there are much more imminent and important battles to fight for clean air (and water, and all the other things any human should have) than to impede on the unhealthy habit of your fellow peasants in my opinion.
You argument here is just whataboutism.
Yes other sources of air pollution exist and they have little to no bearing on the acceptability of smoking and second hand smoke.