

>
> > Smoking has
> > the stigma and it's industry has lost power. For alcohol and cars
> > this is not (yet) the case.
>
> Yep. I agree. Is this an argument against the appropriateness of
> bringing such restrictions in?
>
If you are of opinion that living dangerous is allowed to a certain extent
than yes it is against it because of inconsistency reasons. What I
originally meant with the stigma is that it may shift opinions towards a less
well founded opinion. The opinions on smoking become more based on commercials
and anti-smoking campaigns than true scientific evidence. Cigarettes kill!
(they do to some extent but such statement is not really nuanced) The
scientific foundation may not back up the ban. The smoking stigma, however,
might do it. The stigma is bad in a way that people do not relativate the
effects of smoking like they do with other things.
I don not agree that fining people who drive too fast is enough. It obviously
does not help (backed up with research. increasing fines would not help) and
there is no need to have a car which can drive too fast. You can not use this
potential of a fast car unless you want to break the rules (this is not the
case for carrying cigarettes with you). Actually, in the Netherlands, people
can get fined if they are riding a motor scooter (only theory license needed)
which is able to drive faster than the maximum speeding limit.
Current thread (29 messages):
|
Home · Drink Recipes · Bookstore · Barstore · Handbook · Web Index · Feedback
Copyright © The Webtender.
About | Disclaimer | Privacy policy