Mikah wrote:
I'm somewhat ambivalent about tobacco smoking bans indoors. It's probably a good thing in the long run. Though it irks me that the argument was won by panicky, shrill, militant not-around-me anti-smokers overblowing the dangers of second hand smoke with the now-familiar tool of "activist science". We now know, just as non-smoking related lung conditions are on the increase, that just walking around a city with heavy traffic does far more damage to your lungs than someone lighting up next to you. If only the same militants could get cars restricted in similar ways...
This!
Also, if smoking was banned overnight, you'd be surprised how many people would have to face the fact they used tobacco to mask their depression.
Tonacco contains MAO inhibitors, an old-school anti-depressant.
So, my guess is, the immediate reaction would be a near breakdown of society, followed by a wave of prescriptions for anti-depressants.
Hell, maybe the current rise of depression is linked to the drop in smokers - people visiting psychiatrists rather than picking up smoking.
Came across a statement by a child psychiatrist who said twenty years ago, kids got drunk or took other drugs when they were going through tough times - today, they harm themselves or try to commit suicide, and the numbers have skyrocketed, while the numbers for teenage drug use are going down.
So... If you want to ban something, ask yourself: is that thing merely a bad habit/addiction or is it a patch for some bigger problem, and what beast are you unleashing by banning the thing that's covering it...?
_________________
I can read facial expressions. I did the test.