Oh pplleeaasseess… give it a rest.
Is there any reason on this earth to accommodate ANY addict and their additions? What’s next, “Crack Rooms” for crack addicts? You smoke because you can’t quit. I have a limited amount of sympathy for you and draw the line at enabling you and your habit. I also find that being forced to breathe your leftovers is as disgusting as your habit. You claim you smoke by choice, I say you smoke because you must, you can’t help it. That is the nature of addition.

Smokers deserve the same respect, rights and privileges as everyone. The primary issue at hand is that smoking is on it’s way out, and has been for several years. This trend began when it was learned that smoking contributed negatively to various health conditions, most of which involve the respiratory and cardiac functions.

We also understand that tobacco has addictive properties, and that education does not result in the cessation of tobacco intake by a large number of the population. As a result policies and laws have gradually been introduced to reduce this phenomenon. If it weren’t for the huge profits behind the tobacco industry it would probably have just been eliminated altogether.

We prioritize the rights of the individual in the USA, even to the point of supporting self-destructive behavior. However, we also support the majority rights as well as health care knowledge. I recommend that people smoke at home if they want, there’s no reason to take this behavior to school or work with you.

Bottom line: I have a right NOT to smoke and smokers FORCE me to smoke every time they light up around me. That is why there are designated areas, because smokers disregard my rights and wishes and force me to SMOKE their damaging offings. Smokers have the right to smoke – no doubt about it – but not at the cost of MY RIGHT NOT TO SMOKE. I’m sorry if smokers have to stand in the sun, etc. but they stood in the sun before we banned smoking. They smoked all the way to class and back. They smoked outside every entry way to every building on campus. They smoked in every nook and cranny on this campus with total disregard for any one else’s right NOT to smoke! So now smokers need to smoke if a few designated ares so that we can avoid that smoke if we so choose. I mean no disrespect to smokers, I just have no intention of smoking their 2nd hand smoke any longer and thank goodness the U finally did something about it! Can we stop pretending that 2nd hand smoke is harmless? Can we stop pretending that non-smokers are just being unreasonable? It’s a deadly choice – to smoke – can we just honor the right of non-smokers to NOT SMOKE, allow the smokers their designated areas and just and move on?

I think my right to breath fresh clean air is more important than a smokers right to do potential harm to themselves. I want to be healthy to raise my child and who will do that if I die of second-hand smoke!!!!! And I think UNM should do more because smokers just smoke all over anyways, they should be fined for smoking in front of entrances, I HATE smelling like their nasty smoke!!!!

When you’re finished persecuting the smokers, stop and think of what the author of the article suggested. That all of us should be careful of imposing rules that take away the rights/limit the choices of others. let’s look at a couple of things that some people think are annoying and imagine that someone decides to eliminate these as well:

1. SKATEBOARDS. They tear up the property, they’re dangerous, they account for untold amounts of dollars spent in emergency rooms, they endanger people on sidewalks, walkways, and over 35% of injuries are to people not even riding the boards. They should be banned from campus.

2. SODA. Numerous studies have proven that carbonated soft drinks are one of the leading causes of obesity. If we are to do our part as a community to overcome the raising healthcare costs, why aren’t we eliminating these dangerous drinks from the campus. Who needs them. I prefer water anyway. Why don’t we eliminate any carbonated soft drinks from campus machines, dining rooms, and the SUB as well. Remember these things are filling up our trash containers, they are spilled or dumped out all over the campus and they bring cockroaches, ants, and ruin the enviroment. PLUS the containers they come in are usually the biggest offenders of the recycling rules. The styrofoam and plastic cups live in trash centers for centurys. A good place to start would be to eliminate all food or drinks or snacks from all classrooms. Not only would we reduce costs of cleaning up other people’s mess, but our furniture would last longer, and we’d pay more attention in class.

You might be looking at what I’ve written and laughed, you might have been offended, and maybe you’re thinking of writing back and telling me to F^&*-off. That’s okay, but just remember these are the same arguments the non-smokers used to make OUR campus smoke-free. Whose next? Think it can’t or won’t happen to you?? Just try and imagine how many people on this campus smoke. How much influence did they have? There are alot of things that other people do that offend me, but that doesn’t mean that I have the right to tell them they can’t live their life, or make their own lifestyle choices.

mateo

I HAVE A RIGHT NOT TO SMELL FLATULATIONS (farts). These can impair my thinking and cause me to be nauseated.

We need to also ban farts on campus.

What else? Where do we draw a line cry babies?

We should also impose heavy fines and/or jailtime for those that fart. I don’t like it and I don’t like to smell like it.

It amazes me more and more when I read all of these comments and realize that the majority of non-smokers are running their mouths like villagers with pitchforks.

I have seen the majority of smokers bring forth a constant argument that is rational and logical for the UNM community:

- If there are 12 designated smoking areas, then there should be 12 clearly marked smoking areas –

How difficult is this concept for you people? You want to whine and cry about smokers and their smoke? Why don’t you point your frustrations and your voices towards the university and have UNM live up to its end of the deal?

It is not an argument that there will be people who break the rules and it is completely ignorant to think otherwise. People murder people everyday, there will always be people breaking the rules. However, I guarantee that there will be much more compliance with the smoking ban once the designated areas are marked.

The majority of smokers who have voiced their opinions about this matter have all said that they do not mind a designated area. However, where do you non-smokers expect them to smoke if it is not properly designated?

You all act like smokers are scum who just don’t care about anyone else. Some definitely are, but some of you obviously are as well.

It is a sad day for this university when the future leaders of New Mexico are screaming about their children being alone because their parents died of second-hand smoke…

Good job throwing a red herring into the argument Jennifer. Now, if you will excuse us, we will try and get back to a serious debate with valid points. If you would like to remove the extreme outliers from your argument, then maybe you can step up here with the adults and talk about this rationally.

Thank you, TZ, for bringing this discussion back to the issue at hand. There is no question that smoking and second-hand smoke are unhealthy. The University policy is meant to limit this hazard for people who choose not to smoke as we work toward a 100% tobacco-free campus. It was wise for UNM to devise a plan to phase out smoking by having designated areas that decrease over time. It is completely illogical for UNM to not announce or post the locations of these designated areas. Due to the poor implementation of this policy, more smokers are likely to smoke in non-designated areas and non-smokers are more likely to be forced to breathe in second-hand smoke (see Dane Smith Hall as a case in point). How is this achieving the goal of a healthier campus?

Gee dAMIAN, if farts WERE hazardous to your heath (like passive smoke) and IF farting WAS a CHOICE that other people made that measurably harmed you (like passive smoke), and IF farts could be easily eliminated (like cigarette smoking), we might take you seriously instead of dismissing your childish petulance (or was that flatulance?) ALL human beings pass 1.8 liters of gas per day, and that gas is NOT carcinogenic, nor is passing gas voluntary. Unlike smoking, passing gas is not a choice but a normal body process.

Gee Mateo, I’m not sure how skateboards and soda FORCE harm on other people AGAINST THEIR WILL. I mean besides the obvious liability if skateboarders were to physically harm bystanders, these items do not FORCE innocent people to be exposed to harmful caustic chemicals. If you want to drink a soda at the next table from me, no harm, no foul. If you want to skateboard all around campus, just don’t hit me and I could care less. HOW ARE THOSE SIMILAR to the proven dangers of passive smoke? Let’s stop pretending that non-smokers are over-reacting here. Passive smoke is a VERY REAL DANGER, not just to the smoker but to bystanders. I have no pitch fork in hand as I say this: I just don’t want to smoke. PERIOD. I don’t want to be forced to breath second hand smoke.

The solution is very simple: don’t smoke around anyone who doesn’t smoke. That doesn’t imply that smoker’s are scum or any of the other silliness thrown around here today. It’s stating the fact that when smokers smoke around non-smokers they are violating non-smokers rights. So, either don’t smoke on campus or use the designated smoking areas. If you can’t find a designated area, DON’T SMOKE. Now why are all the smokers going to get upset at this? Because they are addicted and the idea that they might be without that addiction, even for a little while, is upsetting. How do I know? I used to smoke. But did I EVER smoke around non-smokers? NO, NOT EVER!!!!!!! Why, because I honored their right NOT to SMOKE! Was it a bear? Sometimes it really sucked. I really believed that though I had made the choice to smoke, I had no right to force my choice upon others. I don’t think that smoker’s rights outweigh mine.

When the smoker lights up, they are changing the status quo.
The smoker has the responsibility – as the one changing the status quo with a dangerous and potentially deadly product – to NOT impose their choice on others. I suppose that asking people to take responsibility for their actions is never easy but quite frankly, we (as a society) may soon quit ASKING and just legally REQUIRE that they do. If smokers can’t or won’t police their own behavior, then perhaps outlawing cigarettes won’t be far behind. I’d hate to see it get to that, but I’m afraid we’re heading in that direction. As I’ve said repeatedly, I defend to the death your right to smoke but I refuse to give up my right NOT TO SMOKE in the process!

Passing gas vs. smoking. Apples vs. oranges, I say.

First off, you must also take responsibility on this. That is, if you don’t want to be around a smoker, WALK AWAY! Your health is your own responsibility, not that of the random smoker. Of course smokers should respect the right of non-smokers to not breathe their smoke (which has already passed through their lungs and left the detritis you’re so worried about behind), but that does not mean your responsibility for your own health goes away. It’s all about respect, after all, and smokers deserve as much as you do.

At one time, smoking WAS the status quo. Therefore, it was non-smokers that changed the status quo. I am old enough to remember this.

Outlawing cigarettes is a nifty idea….until you remember what happened when the government banned alcohol in this country. That was the beginning of the upsurge in organized crime. And it made the majority of the country into lawbreakers as well, because you just can’t successfully legislate things like that. Besides, where would it end? Would we next see a ban on high fat/high salt foods? Soft drinks? (all that sugar and caffeine, y’know). Remember, the same argument you make re: tobacco could also be applied to those things: the taxpayer has to foot the bill for other peoples pleasures and resulting (possible) health problems. It’s called a slippery slope. You should have learned that by now.

For the record, I smoked for 31 years before I quit in 2000. Because it was affecting my or my child’s health? No. Because it got too expensive. My son has no lung problems, and runs track for Special Olympics, winning gold every year (he’s 29). My lungs are sound enough to pass the heart/lung stress test given when you’re placed on a transplant list (mine’s for a liver; disease medically caused) If smoking was bad for ALL people, I should be a wreck. My lungs should be cloggy and burned black. I’m not a wreck, my lungs are now and always have been fine, and my dr. tells me that were it not for a funky liver, I’d be one of the healthiest 61 year old women he treats. BTW, my husband still smokes, outside the house (to protect our collectibles) and he’s also healthy as a horse, save the radiation poisoning from facial cancer treatment (industrial degreaser, not smoking). Therefore, I do not believe that tobacco causes cancer in all people, but only in those with a pre-disposition to the disease.

I am completely opposed to the creation of a smoking ban on the campus, and the creation of designated smoking sites. You’re outside. The wind blows here, a lot. You’re not all that affected by other’s smoking while they walk across the plaza by the Zimm. I can see not smoking inside the building, to save wear and tear on the building, but not allowing smoking outside? Patently rediculous! Designated smoking sites hit me in the same way designated protest sites did; it’s an abrogation of rights for doing something that is not only legal but also Constitutionally protected.

Many of us are tired of the micromanagement of what we do on our own time, in a publicly funded university. I speak not only as an alumnus but also as a campus visitor…who doesn’t smoke.

Oh, but I can’t concentrate on an exam when I am inhaling flatulence, can you? Do you not have control over yours? ANd if I lit them on fire you would be in for some REAL hazards to your health.

The fact of the matter is, passing by some smoke is hardly harmful to your health. It is no more harmful than the exhaust fumes from a car along with a number of other things that the public is exposed to.

Quit taking yourself so seriously and give it a break.

does all this mean that we can finally outlaw all sexual activities, too? The outcome of sex (kids) cost more, smell worse, scream, and generally annoy me a lot more than any second hand smoke. Oh, I’m sorry…that’s a right, isnt it. Wonder when that right is going to go away too.

I’m still trying to figure out when the smoke-free campus we were promised became a smoking smoke-free campus.

Kevie Kevie Kevie…
Read the policy, dude, and you will find the answer. Smoking areas will be phased out over time…
Here is a link: http://www.unm.edu/~ubppm/ubppmanual/2250.htm
Educate thyself so you don’t look so ignorant.

Despite worldwide wars and conflict, global warming, the economy, world hunger among many calamities that effect humanity and the Earth, it is refreshing to see UNM tackling the important issues – I’m regarding their ban of smoking on campus. Although there is proof of the dangers of second-hand smoke, remember that these studies are in regard to non-smokers inhaling second-hand smoke indoors and in close quarters. But years ago when smoking was banned throughout the world in restaurants and bars, that turned out not to be enough for the anti-smoking advocates. They care about us smokers so much, that they now are taking our right to smoke completely out of our hands. It makes sense, because I guess, in their opinion, if we are stupid enough to smoke, then we obviously can’t make decisions for ourselves.
If this is the new modus operandi in our society, then I think that we should all start making other decisions for other people, in order to keep UNM ‘healthy.’ So here are a few things that I really shouldn’t be concerned about, but I will anyway, because just like the anti-smokers, I really have nothing better to do.
1) Caffeine:
If an individual drinks 5-10 pots of coffee a day, then they could seriously damage their prostate, liver or kidneys. Also, the energy drinks are darn-near chemically toxic, causing an unhealthy ‘crash’ a few hours after the individual drinks them, coupled with a huge caffeine content. (Also consider that someone could spill their coffee on somebody and seriously burn somebody else.)
2) Drugs: Sure, illegal/illicit drugs are already banned from UNM, but many prescription drugs have peripheral health detriments and intense side-effects. Although they only affect the people that take them, I think that it is the school’s duty to completely ban them. This includes anti-psychotics and anti-depressants. The student who is schizophrenic may flip out, but never mind that – we know what’s good for them, right?
3) Cell Phones:
Although studies are inconclusive (just like second-hand smoke studies), we do not know yet if cell phones are beaming cancer-causing energy into our heads, so naturally, we need to take them away from everyone on campus. Besides, I have had the notion that when passing somebody talking on a cell phone, that their conversations, which bleed outward (like second-hand smoke) are having detrimental health effects on my ears.
4) Food: Actually, society and the FDA have already started with this one. For example, legislatively forcing food businesses to serve healthier food. Although I am 6’7 and weigh about 50 lbs., I have to accept being served crappy food because obese people can’t control themselves. No insult intended for obese adults – I personally think they should be able to eat as much cholesterol and fat as they want – it is the government that feels that their diets should be controlled.
5) Water:
I was once asked if water could hurt somebody. Well, in fact, last summer a radio station (107.9 KDND) in Sacramento, CA held a water drinking contest, the prize being a Nintendo Wii. A contestant actually overdosed on water and died. This is enough to make me state that perhaps we should ban water from the UNM campus?
There are many other things that we should take away from other adults that although they don’t affect anyone around them – they hurt the individual and it seems that the school and the state know what is best for us, right? Things such as paper (paper cuts), exercise (sprained ankles, shin splints), and religion (war and racism). Heck, I figure that if we are going to mandate our personal choices then it should be even across the board, and not just focused on smokers.
J.A. Graves

I was most amused at Mona’s observation of the trash and cigarette butts on the ground.

The trash is sad and nasty, and I can see that being of annoyance to anyone… but the cigarette butts… that’s the fault of the smokers. If they were extinguished in a better manner (than dropping on the ground as is clearly the habit because that’s where she observed them), then they would not be on the ground, affending the aesthetics of this designated smoking area.

Take responsibility for the fact that you are contributing to the state of your own environment, and if it is a problem, encourage your peers to do something about it.