wewbull

Apart from the “Magna Carter Islands” bit… it’s kinda right.

Not ban. Regulate, like food. Have standards and enforce them.

Secondhand nicotine does you no harm. The reason cigarettes are so bad for you is that you’re smoking tar. That’s what makes the walls of a smokers home yellow, and what gives them cancer.

Nicotine is addictive, but largely harmless at the levels in cigarettes and vapes for the primary smoker. A secondhand smoker will be getting almost nothing. The problem with vapes is, I suspect, the flavourings. I’m aware of mounting evidence that they’re not harmless, but I think that’s only to primary vapers, not secondary.

I think that last point is an important one.

Banning things often does more harm than good. In your case “Nicotine Bad!” as a policy removes your options.

So regulate them and enforce it.

Oh boo hoo!

People being mildly annoying means they should be banned? Cigarettes were killing smokers and those around them. That’s the line for me. If your actions harm others, then it gets restricted.

Vapes are nowhere near that line. They just smell weird.

You know this, but nicotine isn’t the problem. It’s all the other crap in them.

Nobody is saying to you that blocking shouldn’t be available. They are saying to you that blocking large numbers of people to create a bubble is harmful to you and the wider community.

Hence blocking people who agree with a certain post is going too far. The action is too heavy handed for the “crime”. It would be a harmful feature. It’s"shooting people in the head for laughing at an edgy joke" levels of heavy handedness.

Is 20% faster than intel a step up, generation on generation?