• Z3k3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Ahh I think you mean like the old idea of smoking break rooms, which sure everyone in there is by choice and accepts any risk.

    I dont think your analogy of driving a car fits as driving has utility it reminds me of my yank friends arguing we should allow guns or ban knives because to do otherwise is hypocritical or something

    • TWeaK@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Ahh I think you mean like the old idea of smoking break rooms

      Yes pretty much. This was discussed and rejected in the UK when the smoking bans came in, however other places in Europe implemented indoor smoking just fine. As vaping is a lesser harm than smoking, and in particular vapors don’t linger like smoke does, it should be easier to implement. But UK politicians wants to maintain a hardline ban in spite of any rational reasoning.

      I dont think your analogy of driving a car fits

      It was just the first thing that came to mind, which is why I threw in cycling as well. Cycling is often done for recreation rather than utility, but does still carry risk to others nearby. Cars also pollute, though, which is a similar harm to smoking, yet people are against outright banning combustion vehicles. It generally boils down to “I do it, and I shouldn’t be banned, but I don’t do that other thing so that should be banned.”

      For the record I don’t even smoke, in fact tobacco smoke makes me feel sick. But I don’t think people should be outright prohibited, not when a reasonable compromise can be reached.