<p>
</p>
<p>The average bear did not smoke.</p>
<p>Even back when I was in high school, smoking was considered an uncool thing to do by most students at the school, so there was no significant peer pressure to smoke. Granted, this was in California, not a tobacco-growing state where pro-smoking attitudes may have been more common.</p>
<p>ucbalum:</p>
<p>I probably could have worded it better. I didn’t mean that everyone smokes in high school. What I meant was that virtually every smoker started as a teenager, usually before high school. For example, I smoked my first cigarette the summer before 7th grade.</p>
<p>There is no conception that smoking that first awful cigarette at age 12 can set in motion an inevitable chain of consequences that leads to a life of smoking all day, every day, until it kills you…</p>
<p>People hate me for calling smokers junkies. But, I can’t stand euphemisms like “nasty habit”. Those euphemisms are part of the problem, IMO. It’s a drug addiction, plain and simple, and the people trapped by it are junkies. They need a fix so bad they’ll pick up a half smoked cigarette out of an ashtray and smoke it.</p>
<p>In a perhaps non-intuitive way, finally understanding that being a smoker is leading a junkie life, from one fix to the next, makes it much easier to quit. Once you understand the reality of the trap, you stop with the nonsense like, “I enjoy smoking” and “I need a cigarette to relax” and all the other litany of junkie lies.</p>
<p>It also gives you the road map for quitting the easy way. You stop using nicotine, get it out of your system (couple of days), ride out the physical withdrawal (2 to 4 weeks), and make a commitment to never take another puff – exactly the same approach you would use to stop shooting up heroin or drinking.</p>
<p>Are all smokers addicted and despaerate? Unless they are, I don’t see it any different from needing a cup of coffee to get going or a glass of wine to enjoy a meal.</p>
<p>A cup of coffee or a glass of wine won’t kill you, if consumed for years and years.</p>
<p>^Actually, they could.</p>
<p>I have this question for smokers? Why do you feel that it’s acceptable to litter our roads and private property with your disgusting cigarette butts. Smokers become belligerent with me when I ask them not to litter my private parking lot with their butts. Amazing.</p>
<p>Ohio, not all smokers do that. Just saying.</p>
<p>^True. Also would you rather have chewing gums littered?</p>
<p>I don’t like smoking tobacco, I am very sensitive to smells & I have asthma.
But I do not think nicotine addiction is any more damaging to myself & the planet than our societies other addictions for instance to corn syrup beverages packaged in aluminum cans.
Of course I live somewhere that indoor smoking is banned & I know very few people that smoke cigarettes. If I lived with a higher % of smokers, like in France or Japan, I might complain more.</p>
<p>The US until recently subsidized both those industries. We love our smokers because we are a Puritanical society & it makes us feel benevolent to tax the hell out of them " for their own good".</p>
<p>
[Business</a> | Nicotine Added To Cigarettes, Legal Brief Says – Philip Morris Statements To Congress Contradicted | Seattle Times Newspaper](<a href=“Page not found | The Seattle Times”>Nicotine Added To Cigarettes, Legal Brief Says -- Philip Morris Statements To Congress Contradicted | The Seattle Times)</p>
<p>[For</a> some students, Tulane smoking ban is a breath of fresh air | wwltv.com New Orleans](<a href=“http://www.wwltv.com/news/local/For-some-students-Tulane-smoking-ban-is-a-breath-of-fresh-air-202802271.html]For”>http://www.wwltv.com/news/local/For-some-students-Tulane-smoking-ban-is-a-breath-of-fresh-air-202802271.html) Tulane is going tobacco-free.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>All daily smokers are addicted and desperate, yes. There are people who can smoke every once in a while and not get addicted (so far). There are also people who can play Russian Roulette and not get killed (so far).</p>
<p>Are you saying there aren’t recreational smokers, 2-3 cigarettes a day?</p>
<p>jym, I think Tulane is overdoing PC. That’s another thing I find objectionable, PC for PC’s sake.</p>
<p>Always a fan of campuses going smoke-free. Many (maybe most) people don’t listen to the 20-25 ft away from the doors rules on campuses and therefore we have to walk through clouds of smoke while just trying to exit buildings. It sucks. If people would actually abide by those distances, I’d be less supportive of smoke-free campuses.</p>
<p>Really? How big a fraction of college students are smokers? How often do you encounter such inconvenience?</p>
<p>^Students smoke in a sheltered area under an overhang just outside my office window. The ventilation system is bad, or the building isn’t well sealed, but when they are out there, you can smell cigarette smoke in my office - and not just mildly. I have to shoo them away at least once a day on days that I work. It’s rather obnoxious, frankly. I’m hoping with the weather warming up that they won’t be there as often.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes. That’s exactly what I’m saying. Someone who smokes 2 to 3 cigarettes a day is drug addict. And they are probably smoking more than 2 or 3 a day and hiding it (maybe even from themselves).</p>
<p>I dont think Tuland is doing this to be “PC”, Igloo. Here’s the article from the school paper [Tulane</a> Senate bans tobacco - The Tulane Hullabaloo : News](<a href=“thehullabaloo.com”>thehullabaloo.com)</p>
<p>How many kids at Tulane smoke? The article doesn’t say what motivated them. A lot happened in the past to discourage teens and general public from smoking. I don’t really see many smokers any more and hardly inconvenienced by them. So why so much hostility? I can’t help feeling this is a case of the majority picking an easy target. Don’t we have a bigger problem?</p>
<p>Don’t know where you are picking up “hostility”, other than in some places directed at the smokers. Are you a smoker? Would understand if the posts here might seem personal to you, but they are not meant to be (IMO).</p>
<p>Someone on the Tulane thread said that there were, unfortunately, in his perspective, a fair number of smokers. Don’t know if this is students alone or students and staff, or how many that truly represents. I do not think that the school is doing it “for PC sake”, as you suggest.</p>
<p>Maybe the word hostility is misplaced. I was calling the effort to totally eradicate them hostile. Same for PC sake, more like jumping on the bandwagon? Taking up a cause for the super majority is a bit comical. That is assuming it is a tiny minority who smoke in college campuses as I’ve seen. Certainly it is possible at Tulane, there may be a far greater smoking population. It would help if we have a stat. Is it 10%, 50%?</p>