re: LSU to Ban Smoking on Main Campus Next Fall

My only problem is with the smokers who dump their ashtrays out at stop lights or intersections and leave a pile of butts against the curb. Even the trashy people who just drop the one butt on the street at a stop light. If I were a cop, I would cite them every time I saw it occur. I have no problem with the smokers who are considerate of others and don't trash a place up.

Great news! Smoking is disgusting.

quote:

---

My only problem is with the smokers who dump their ashtrays out at stop lights or intersections and leave a pile of butts against the curb

---

That's disgusting and I've never seen anything like that. I am glad I haven't.

I actually think the policy is confusing as hell because a) It doesn't seem enforceable since they aren't giving citations and b) It really does allow rent-a-cops to be dicks, if they so choose (and knowing the people who want to be rent-a-cops, most will choose to be dicks) even if it isn't enforceable.

However, getting up in arms about smokers' rights is always one of those OT quirks that makes me laugh.

ETA: I won't be in Baton Rouge at any point for the application of the rules, but I do feel bad for future generations of men who won't be able to get slut identification tip-offs by seeing the women who light up. Especially in cold weather when you can't see lower back tattoos, it will be a lot tougher for most guys now.

I refuse to apologize for my 8" penis.

quote:

---

You're comparing fricking in public to smoking in public? I'm not condoning blowing smoke in someone's face, but do you really think that there's a lack of air outside so that someone is going to be harmed by a smoker catching a smoke outside?

---

There's plenty of room in the quad for people to bump uglies. Who would it harm?

quote:

---

Why can't there be principles you stand by no matter if it affects you or not?

---

So you'd support public fornication at LSU right? Anyone who always stands by the flawless, simple concepts of personal liberty and freedom should.

All I can say is that if the personal liberties of future generations are in the hands of the OT, Lord help them all. I won't be here, but if there's mercy to be had, maybe I can get a TV in the clouds to watch people come to grips with how they actually fricked themselves ever so gradual so the only time they came to grips with it was when it hit them square in the face.

I have never smoked and feel strongly about not breathing in other people's smoke. My parents were heavy smokers and I developed a strong antagonism to the practice. With that said, this policy is crazy. I am on the LSU campus every day and almost never come in contact with tobacco smoke, and I am very sensitive to it. This is a policy in search of a problem. If you are a nonsmoker, you have to work hard to be exposed to tobacco smoke at LSU.

There are LSU faculty and staff who are heavy smokers and who do not have the option of just stopping, and I am sympathetic to those individuals so long as they are not bothering me. I know several people who are addicted to tobacco but are very respectful smokers--that is, they make every effort to keep other people from being exposed to their smoke. It is disrespectful to those individuals to impose this ban on them, particularly when they are not harming others. Do I wish that they would quit? Sure. But I should not be able to impose my preferences on others when they are not bothering me.

A few other observations:

1. The Nazi who pushed this policy, Judith Sylvester, is not solely interested in protecting others from second-hand smoke. She is opposed to smoking on campus because she is willing to impose her views on the behavior of others. For JS, smoking is an evil that results in all kinds of health problems (duh!), and she is prepared to tell others that they may not engage in behavior that has negative health consequences. My suggestion: when she comes up to smokers to give them one of those pamphlets, they should tell her to mind her own fricking business.

2. There are all kinds of behavior that have negative health consequences. Is food Sylvester's next target? After all, all of the great food and drink that individuals ingest on campus has negative health consequences, so by all means we should have an unhealthy food ban at LSU. Let's make LSU a vegetables-only campus!

3. The good news is that it appears that this new policy does not carry with it any penalties (such as fines). Smokers who are behaving respectfully to others can continue to smoke without fear of facing an economic sanction.

quote:

---

2. There are all kinds of behavior that have negative health consequences. Is food Sylvester's next target? After all, all of the great food and drink that individuals ingest on campus has negative health consequences, so by all means we should have an unhealthy food ban at LSU. Let's make LSU a vegetables-only campus!

---

That's actually not very far off either I'd say, and yet it demonstrates the enormous difference between encouraging people to make better personal choices and forcing your will upon them because you think you know what's best for them.

And don't be fooled. I guarantee you that people will see this happen soon enough, foods banned. It's. Coming, and guess what? People will embrace it as a good idea too.

They just never get it. Not until it's too late.

The RNR building had signs in classrooms that said no smoking or dipping in the classroom when I left 3 years ago

Does wolfing down a value meal harden the arteries of everyone around you?