this post was submitted on 30 May 2025
598 points (98.5% liked)

World News

47169 readers
2360 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] frog_brawler@lemmy.world 12 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (3 children)

I thought everyone in France smoked, including the kids, no?

I gave mine nicotine patch from age 5.

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago

all the more reason. what's the point of banning something if no one's doing it

[–] Enoril@jlai.lu 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

In cliché world yeah.... But in reality, not so much. 😀

It been years... no... decades that smoking have nearly disappeared around me - including in the office.

I work with hundreds of people and the amount of people smoking can fit one hand. 25 years ago, i needed more than 2 hands to count them. And in my family, nobody starting at my parents generation and younger smokes.

Same story with wine during lunch. 25 years ago, it was several bottles each day at lunches.

Today, no more wine bottle and the trend started since easily 15 years now. Only for big occasion and the quantity have decreased a lot.

People drink more beers now. But far less than wine.

[–] Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world 10 points 6 days ago

I like these laws but also I want to smoke in some places. I'd love a return of places like cigar lounges and whisky bars

[–] HugeNerd@lemmy.ca 10 points 6 days ago

LOL like here in Montreal I see people smoking right next to the "No smoking within 3 meters" or whatever sign.

[–] Aggravationstation@feddit.uk 4 points 6 days ago

Whether its actually enforced or not will be the question. I went to Disneyland Paris 7 years ago, there were signs everywhere saying smoke only in designated areas but there were people smoking all over and none of the staff seemed to care.

[–] Disaster@sh.itjust.works -2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

On-and-off smoker here (mostly off)

In my experience, nicotine is great for moderating rage and resentment. It can help in bad situations and also provides a space where one can effectively shut distractions out and enter a somewhat meditative state to work on issues. It performs this task very, very well.

It is not the same as "just taking a walk" or "standing outside". Absent-mindedly smoking provides a different experience. I am envious of people who can go to the park and get the same kind of effect out of it, but for a raft of different reasons I can't reach the same experience.

I know smoking damages nearly every part of your body. I know it's addictive. I know many smokers aren't considerate of others, and blow smoke all over people downwind, in through windows and leave cigarette butts everywhere. I know wildfires start from improperly extinguished butts. I am not one of those people, and take pains to enjoy a cigarette where I will impact as few people as possible. And when my life looks up? I quit, because I don't need it anymore, and it serves no useful purpose.

Unfortunately, there seems to be less and less room in the world to create the kind of space where one can take a few minutes such as this. And that I think is the crux of the resistance here.

We keep asking for more out of everyone, and usually to no benefit for themselves. We keep making organizational decisions which result in people feeling stressed, angry, resentful, and then in turn quite deliberately fail to understand when people pick up a vice that is harming them... and then try to ban that behavior, or sanctimoniously tut away that they are somehow selfish for wanting a break from it all for five damned minutes.

There's so many different instances under which this theme plays out. I doubt this law will be enforced evenly, and it seems predictably authoritarian and counterproductive like many substance control laws. We can't stop people stuffing a bunch of plants into a pipe, or into a paper wrapping and smoking it. It's simply too easy to do, and it provides too much utility as a temporary respite from life for people to stop.

Want to solve it? Try finding ways of making life less terrible for the critical mass of people so that they won't feel a need to smoke. And even then some still will, maybe out of spite, addiction (medical/psych treatment could be offered?) or downright contrarianism; but maybe few enough that it won't matter. That's the hard, and proper, fix for this. Smoking cessation drives are quite effective, as well as reasonable limitations on where one can smoke, and I think that is a fine policy balance.

I think cigarettes, especially manufactured ones, should be available and taxed appropriately for the healthcare burden they will produce later in life. Everyone should be aware of the health considerations in no uncertain terms. I think it's appropriate to limit smoking around areas where at-risk populations live and congregate (incl. Children), and the rest really has to be allowed to work itself out in the ad-hoc grey area loosely defined as "Community", "Consideration", "Conscience" and "Respect".

The Law is too heavy handed a tool to be expected to succeed here.

Anyway, I'm sure they've already thought about all of this and discussed it at length. Just like taxing older diesel cars without considering the consequences to folks the rural south who were unable to afford new vehicles.

[–] iglou@programming.dev 3 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

The problem is that inconsiderate smokers are actively hurting the health of the people suffering from their inconsideration. Passive smoking is a thing, and it has long term consequences.

So while it sucks for the individual freedom of considerate smokers like yourself, banning public smoking protects a lot of people who get their health damaged by what is in my experience in France most of the smokers. And protection is one of the purposes of the law.

[–] termaxima@programming.dev 105 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (14 children)

“To protect children” is a stupid reason, but banning smoking anywhere outside of your own home, or spaces expressly dedicated to it, on the other hand, is how it should always have been.

[–] boughtmysoul@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago

Replace “children” with “non-consenting people” and you’re getting close. Children are the most non-consenting people in society and deserve special protection accordingly.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] SW42@lemmy.world 48 points 1 week ago (45 children)
load more comments (45 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›