Quote:
|
Originally Posted by raveneye
It's more than a health issue. It's a health issue in which unwilling people have their health compromised, due to behavior that can easily be stopped without any hardship whatsoever. I'm less concerned about banning a behavior that harms others needlessly than banning a behavior that harms only the user in privacy.
|
Please explain the last statement. From the way I am reading it, you would rather ban smoking in private than public.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by raveneye
Drinkers don't force other people to drink, by virtue of being in public.
|
Actually, I thought
retsuki03's analogy was pretty good.
When drinkers drive drunk, they put every person they are near in immediate danger, public or private. The family that is killed by a drunk driver didn't have drinks forced on them, they had a several thousand pound vehicle, manned by a drunk, forced on them.
And....anyone that has been in an accident with a drunk driver has "their health compromised due to behavior that can easily be stopped without any hardship whatsoever".
What about the kid beaten and abused by an alcholic parent? Would you say that "their health [was] compromised due to behavior that can easily be stopped without any hardship whatsoever".
Sounds very parallel to me.....drinking should be banned because of the risks/dangers it inflicts on the unwilling in society.......oh yeah, we tried that.
Edit: Jinx