Smoking regulations need to be further enforced at MSU

Man, you probably breathe more carcinogens just walking along the sidewalk from cars as you do briefly walking by some smokers outside your dorm. I know it is a policy to be 25 feet away, but it really isn’t worth the time for the police to write a ticket for someone. Just chiiiiiilll.

On a side note, banning smoking across campus is the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard.

I don’t smoke but I don’t agree with banning smoking on campus. Even though this is a somewhat serious health issue for the overall community, I do believe that smokers have a right to do their thing. Also, if you take a look, smokers at MSU go in groups and are not dispersed. So, its like they are all in one place.

Banning on campus smoking is just a PR move that will otherwise benefit the Medical School in other institutions by getting more donations and grants.

So, as dangerous as smoking is lets keep MSU’s current policy and let the people that want to smoke, well, smoke.

Thank God that butterpile will be at the back of the line for an organ transplant (if he/she should ever need one) due to lifestyle choices.

And banning smoking across campus is the best thing that ever happened.

Since smokers don’t care about their bodies they are not going to care about anyone else’s and abide by the 25 foot rule.

Smoking, which Mr. Obama claims to have just quit, just shows how STUPID Michigan and DEMOC-RATS are.

Smoking brings early DEATH. It accounts for as much as 15% of U.S. health care costs — $200,000,000,000.00.

http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?tid=10298&ttype=2

Yet — Mr. ex-smoker President wants to RAISE THE TAX BURDEN to pay for “universal health care.”

HOW DUMB! TO PAY FOR SMOKING’S DAMAGE — EVEN IF YOU DO NOT SMOKE?

DUMB, DUMB, DUMB! DEMOC-RATS!!

Cancer Boy-
Who do you think pays for smokers health care now? We either pay for it with Medicare taxes or we pay for it in higher health care cost and premiums. When people talk about Obama raising taxes on business, they said those taxes are passed down to us the same is true of those who smoke. The book you linked to said as much.
That’s why I get annoyed with people who say smokers have a right to smoke. Well, that “right” results in my insurance costing more, spreads cancer to non-smokers and makes insurance unaffordable for others. So let’s balance your right with my right not to have to pay for your stupidity.

They Don’t Care-

Obviously, that is the point. But it shouldn’t matter whether smokers don’t care about the law. It is the law. This article suggests ways that we can help enforce it and we should enforce it because I don’t care if smokers think they have a “right” to smoke. I actually do have a right not to smoke with them.

I have to believe that BUTTERPILE IS CANCER BOY is some kind of bizarre performance piece.

I agree that the smoking is a problem. I spend a lot of time working in Fee Hall, and there is one door right outside a stairwell that people are always sitting next to and smoking. That stairwell always reeks of smoke when they are there. I often have to walk around the building to avoid that door. The smoke is so bad there that I have to hold my breath. Sadly, my service dog can’t hold his, and he coughs when we walk through such an area.

Another bad area on campus is the library entrance.

the police have a duty to enforce laws, but they are too busy sitting on shaw trying to catch an undergrad going 5 over to give them a ticket.

also, im in favor of banning smoking in all bars and restaurants. ive moved to a state that doesn’t allow smoking, and all the bars are still busy. when you go home you dont smell like smoke at all, and you dont feel like you’ve spent the last couple of hours in a gas cloud. its weird coming home now and walking into a bar because you can tell theres a big difference right away

I can’t believe people even still smoke, but that’s another issue. I believe people have the right to slowly poison themselves to death if they want to, just do it away from sane people. Why do smokers have the right to create a gauntlet of second hand smoke right outside of buildings that everyone has to walk in and out of? You have your right to smoke, I should have the right not to breath that garbage in.

Not to mention all the cigarrette butts that get tossed on the ground.

Ban smoking on MSU’s campus. I’ll get in my car and drive off campus to smoke between classes. The greenhouse gases and NOX and every other chemical coming out of my tailpipe will be waaayyy better for you and the Earth than my cigarette smoke…

I agree with Dave. It makes me angry to have to walk through that crap, and then stink like a smoker for the rest of the day. Smokers are so inconsiderate it’s astounding. Not to mention the way they litter all over with their rancid cigarette butts. Disgusting.

Matt-

Why don’t you stop being a complete idiot and just quit smoking? Why should the 80% of us who don’t smoke have to smell the bad habit of the 20% who do smoke? And even worse than the smell is the increase risk of cancer for the nonsmokers. You have no conscience.

I don’t understand why smokers even want to defend their case when they know that what they are doing is harming themselves and the people around them. It seems like a big joke.

There should definitely be a smoking ban imposed on campus. I don’t care if you have to drive onto Grand River to smoke because this is a democracy and the majority’s decision should be upheld.

In many states in the U.S. we legally require people to wear motorcycle helmets when riding. In one of the deciding cases that determined this law it was cited that people do not have the right or freedom to refuse to wear a helmet because most American citizens are such that we are unlikely to leave someone lying bleeding on the side of the highway. It was mentioned in this case that it is an inconvenience to others and is an expense to all because some citizens decide to be irresponsible.

Carly- I love you. I want to make babies with you.

I honestly don’t think a few smokers smoking in the stairs really affect people that much. I mean smoke can be nasty but I have the feeling that the people behind this whining do it more out of moral righteousness. Honestly, you receive more carcinogens, as someone said, from cars driving past the sidewalks than a few dudes killing themselves outside your building. Geez people. What next, are you gonna ban people from using cars?

Amir-

You are wrong. I admit that I whine about cigarette smoke. But it’s not out of concern for the environment. And it’s not out of concern over exposure to carcinogens (I just don’t spend that much time in places that allow smoking). I dislike encountering cigarette smoke because it’s disgusting. It stinks! Plus, I never know when exposure to cigarette smoke will trigger an asthma attack that will inconvenience me (at the least!).

It’s like driving by a dead skunk in the road. It’s not really hurting most people, but they still don’t like it. It violates the senses, and most people wish that it wasn’t there.

thats such a dumb reason. most people in saudi arabia probably dont like women to show skin. what if most people (unfortunately i am the minority) think that fake tanned women look like carrotcakes- should there carrotcake faces be banned from the public?

Matt, if smoking were banned on campus you would really get in your car and drive off campus to smoke a cigarette? Exactly what is your IQ?

You people have to be some of the biggest babies that have ever graced the comments pages. I don’t smoke, but I realize that walking by smoke for 1.5 seconds doesn’t make you smell all day, won’t affect your health, definitely isn’t going to give you cancer, and won’t trigger an asthma attack. People like you are the reason this country is becoming such a sissified nation of litigious, selfish, weak morons. Grow up.

http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/secondhand_smoke/index.htm

For those who think “only a little won’t hurt”, here’s the CDC’s website on “There is No Risk-Free Level of Exposure to Secondhand Smoke”:
http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/secondhandsmoke/factsheets/factsheet7.html

Read. Think. Then post.

Hey Dave,
Read. Thought. Post – Nowhere does it say walking by secondhand smoke for a couple of seconds will cause any harm. It says “brief”. “Brief” isn’t very scientific, so until you provide me with an duration of exposure and a frequency of exposure, your argument is invalid.

Boo Hoo –
“1.5 seconds…won’t affect your health…definitely isn’t going to give you cancer” – This is much more unsubstantiated than my argument. Any argument that smoking does not cause harm in any amount will quickly prove to be a waste of time with a simple Literature search in primary journal index. You should truly not be attacking this article’s argument in this way; I’d suggest taking another route because you’re not going to get very far.

Furthermore, the article also suggests that the smoke from people smoking within 25 ft delivers smoke into the classrooms multiple times throughout the day in Fee Hall via the doors and windows, so your “1.5 seconds” no longer applies.

Please provide evidence that a smoker’s choice to smoke only affects the smoker, EVEN IN OUTDOOR AREAS. Good luck.

Can these altruistic arguments the author makes transcend to other social problems – such as car pollution and fast food?

I’m not attacking the article. I also don’t want secondhand smoke inside buildings, and am all for a 25 ft rule. My argument is with people that are complaining about walking past smoke outside (asking for a campus-wide ban on smoking). There is no solid evidence that suggests that a few seconds of exposure to secondhand smoke a couple times a week in an outdoor environment will cause any harm. So, my evidence is that there is no evidence contrary – just vague generalizations in journals that say “brief exposure”. Moral of my story is that I don’t agree with the, “I don’t like it, so banish it completely” approach to a solution (to any problem).

Boo Hoo –

You should really check you sources, not just say something because you think it’s right. The results of the smoking ban in New York City suggests that there IS harm being done to the patrons of a community which allows for smoke even in outside areas – warranting a just complaint from those who want a ban on campus.

See the article below or do your own search to find further evidence, because just one article doesn’t make a difference.

Comprehensive New York Ban = indoors. People in New York still smoke outdoors. You seem to keep missing that all-important indoor-outdoor thing. I don’t think you really undestand how an enclosed area has a dramatic effect on air flow and particle distribution.

Smokers outdoors ignoring smoking rules = smoke indoors. You are in agreement with the notion that smokers should not be allowed to smoke within the 25 ft radius. So that’s all well and good.

But what if this law is not enforced – which it isn’t and probably won’t be even with articles like this? Why not go one step further and eliminate the problem; eliminate a burden that is only causing destruction of health. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network has shown that City-Wide and Business smoking bans have in fact influenced people to quit smoking – which has a resounding affect on health care costs.

Dave – I can agree with both of those points (ignoring smoking rules and health care costs). However, my feeling is that people are gonna partake in a myriad of things that affect their health negatively (eat poorly, smoke, play sports, mine coal, etc) and I’m trying to be a bit more realistic with the argument than some of these other posters. I think a 25 ft rule can, and should be, enforced.

“Walking by smoke for 1.5 seconds … won’t trigger an asthma attack.”

Really? You sure about that? You want to try out my asthma for a day and report back to me?

Kristin – I can actually smell your BS, as it has traveled from you, through your computer, over the internet, and out through my computer. You say, “Plus, I never know when exposure to cigarette smoke will trigger an asthma attack that will inconvenience me (at the least!).” If that 1.5 seconds of walking by a smoker had ever triggered an asthma attack, you would have said that it had happened. If you’d like, I’ll send you a link to a plastic bubble supplier so you can walk around all day without being exposed to anything harmful in our environment. Enjoy the swine flu.

Your indifference for doing good is hurting my heart, Boo hoo, and probably Kristin’s and others’ who wish this world to be a better place and try everyday to make it so. There are ways to side-step the real issues by adding things like a la carte health care or 25 ft rules. I do not believe this sends the right message – ‘you can buy your way out of bad choices’. The consumer might think he/she can simply pay more for bad cholesterol or smoking, but this cuts back on subsidization of health care for other burdens which plague the world.

God would be very angry with this letter. God allows people to choose their habits and what they would like to do with their life. Tobacco is an important part of the economy, and is a natural product put on this planet by God. Smoking should be encouraged by doctors as it brings in millions of dollars of profit to the health care system on a yearly basis.

Ug. The comments are boggling. Glad I didn’t do my undergrad here.

MSUCHM — Did you seriously mean to say that God, the creator of life, would be angry that his children wanted to preserve their health? You need to reevaluate your principles.

Look it up.

If people don’t care about their own body, fine with me, and the doctors should be happy they get to treat (and charge!) for conditions ranging from cancer to COPD and emphysema and such, but seriously, the fact that people can get all these conditions from just inhaling second hand smoke sort of pisses me off. I think “God” also gave us clean air, and grass and trees and poppy plants.. and carbon that is the basis for so many many drugs that people decide to inject, inhale or stick in crazy places… it’s amazing what humans can corrupt, really.

It’s fine if people want to smoke, but when it starts to affect the lives of others by indirectly forcing them to inhale their secondhand smoke, then you are infringing upon the rights of others. It’s not fair to tell someone that they cannot smoke, so let them smoke and do their own bodily damage on their own time and own space. When a person smokes in a public venue, other people do not have the option of not inhaling that smoke.

As a fellow COM student and a pregnant one, I can honestly say that my rights were infringed every time I walked into the stairwells and sat in the classrooms near those entrances. I am paying a lot of money to get my education and I don’t appreciate having to smell someone else’s disgusting smoke that was not just hurting the smoker, but also myself and my developing baby.

As a fellow COM student and a pregnant one, I can honestly say that my rights were infringed every time I walked into the stairwells and sat in the classrooms near those entrances. I am paying a lot of money to get my education and I don’t appreciate having to smell someone else’s disgusting smoke that was not just hurting the smoker, but also myself and my developing baby.

I hate it when I walk by down the hall and someone “Fluffs” in front of me. It is gross and adversely effects my health by making me feel sick. Numerous journals have proven “Fluffing” may adversely effect the health of the “fluffer” and those around them… aka. “the fluffees.”