Changes

I won't remove it, but some clarification is needed as to why this was added.  I'm assuming this is about secondhand smoke and restrictions on smoking in public, because I seriously doubt anyone on CP thinks that smoking itself is not harmful.  I know there's debate as to where the line on smoking restrictions versus rights should be drawn (i.e. is it child endangerment to smoke in a car with kids as passengers?), but as to the science of whether smoking is harmful or not?  I thought that was settled long ago, and is not considered junk science by anyone including the tobacco companies (who focus on a smoker's informed-right-to-choose instead). --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 11:20, 21 July 2008 (EDT)

I won't remove it, but some clarification is needed as to why this was added.  I'm assuming this is about secondhand smoke and restrictions on smoking in public, because I seriously doubt anyone on CP thinks that smoking itself is not harmful.  I know there's debate as to where the line on smoking restrictions versus rights should be drawn (i.e. is it child endangerment to smoke in a car with kids as passengers?), but as to the science of whether smoking is harmful or not?  I thought that was settled long ago, and is not considered junk science by anyone including the tobacco companies (who focus on a smoker's informed-right-to-choose instead). --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 11:20, 21 July 2008 (EDT)

I was referring to the Liberal desire to turn those who smoke in public into criminals on the basis of junk science, as Milloy describes on his site. Actually Milloy has a long history of things to say about the tobacco industry. It'd be interesting to see him give a talk. [[User:MikeR|MikeR]] 11:16, 22 July 2008 (EDT)

I was referring to the Liberal desire to turn those who smoke in public into criminals on the basis of junk science, as Milloy describes on his site. Actually Milloy has a long history of things to say about the tobacco industry. It'd be interesting to see him give a talk. [[User:MikeR|MikeR]] 11:16, 22 July 2008 (EDT)

 

:I see your point, but is this a topic that CP wants to take a pro-smoker-rights position on?  I'm not a scientist, but it seems the verdict is in that smoking itself is harmful.  When I breathe in the secondhand smoke of those around me, it burns my eyes and makes me cough, and this still happens outdoors if they're in proximity or the wind blows that way.  I'm also not fond of my clothes smelling like an ashtray after visiting the homes of smokers.  It may be possible, then, to question the ''specific degree'' of harm caused by secondhand smoke, but given that at a minimum it's irritating and affects bystanders who choose not to smoke, restrictions on smoking in public are well-justified and not a "war against smokers".  This isn't a Liberal cause, it's just everyday people who choose not to smoke not wanting to be irritated by those who do.  --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 12:03, 22 July 2008 (EDT)