Tobacco-growing Kentucky's largest university bans all smoking, tobacco use on campus

[onehandle]

Source: AP

LEXINGTON, Ky. - The largest university in the tobacco-growing state of Kentucky and home to a tobacco research center is banning all smoking on campus.

The University of Kentucky imposed a strict tobacco-free policy Thursday that applies everywhere on the sprawling campus in Lexington. It includes chewing tobacco, pipes, cigars and snuff as well as cigarettes and expands a 2006 ban on smoking in buildings and within 20 feet of buildings.

Read more: http://www.startribune.com/nation/70488622.html

[imdjh]

1. So the tobacco research center can't have tobacco?

[jsamuel]

2. they can have it, they can't smoke it

[imdjh]

3. I wonder when they will get around to banning spreading STD's.

[Winterblues]

40. It is supposed to be a place of "higher learning" how does tobacco relate to that?

In fact tobacco usage is sort of the exact opposite of striving for more intelligence.

[WriteDown]

4. You can't even chew it!

Wow.

[imdjh]

6. Have you ever noticed the stains on the concrete in a gas station? They aren't oil.

Oil comes up with the powerwashing. Those stains are chaw.

[WriteDown]

8. That's why you need a good spit cup...

Or spitless tobacco. Snus is great.

[paulsby]

14. for those who doubt the slippery slope, this is a great example

there's no second hand smoke argument for chewing tobacco. imo, it's disgusting that a public university has banned the use of a legal product (as much as i abhor smoking in particular, and tobacco in general) anywhere on campus. especially in a dorm room, for example. smoking? sure. but CHEWING tobacco?

[hughee99]

16. Call it a hunch, but only the smoking will really be enforced...

It's next to impossible to crack down on chew. If you do it in your room, who's going to know? It will take all of about 5 seconds for students to go out and get a can of tobacco-less mint chew, empty it out, and put actual chew in there. As long as you spit in a cup, who's going to hassle you? If they ask, just show them the mint chew tin.

[paulsby]

17. that's likely true

i am against abhorrent laws that infringe on liberty, though. even if they are only sporadically enforced. fwiw, i think that sporadically enforced laws are worse in many respects, because they are open to selective and punitive selective enforcement. that's a bad thing.

[JonQ]

18. The justification for banning smoking:

second hand smoke kills. The justification for banning chew: it's icky.

Does anyone still believe that the people pushing these incremental restrictions on tobacco use have anything other than a complete ban in mind as their ultimate goal?

[onehandle]

22. Smoking also destroys property, causes some non-smokers severe allergic reactions...

...and cigarette butts are the #1 most polluted item in the world.

A complete ban is unlikely, but the smoking in public days are numbered.

And besides causing addiction and cancer, chew is just plain icky. A vast majority would wrinkle their nose at the very thought.

There is no positive justification for tobacco use.

It becomes more socially unacceptable with every passing moment and nothing will stop that.

[JonQ]

25. But it doesn't harm those not choosing to injest it

that was the one effective argument for cigarette bans: they can be shown to harm others who are not choosing to smoke.

I have no problem letting adults kill themselves as they see fit, but when it harms others then there is concern.

But chewing tobacco is harmless to others. Look at it this way: fast foods are very bad for the health of those individuals who choose to imbibe them, but harmless to others. They produce morbidly obese individuals that are unpleasant to look at. Shouldn't those be banned so that we don't have too look at such things?

[onehandle]

29. Sorry. Society puts 'chew' in the same family as cigarettes. nt

[JonQ]

34. Then the health of those around a person using nicotine

should no longer be used as an issue as that is not the primary concern anymore, apparently. Stopping the use of tobacco regardless of its effect on others is not the main issue, so we are moving towards an irrational prohibition that will end poorly (as they always do).

I see this as a lose lose situation.

Eventually though it may force enough people to quit that states will begin to challenge these bans, they afterall rely heavily on the taxes raised through tobacco sales. And they aren't exactly swimming in revenue right now.

[hughee99]

36. They do?

Professional baseball players can't smoke, but they can chew. If my rights end at your nose, where do chew and one's nose interact?

[WriteDown]

27. First off....

Tobacco smoke is NOT AN ALLERGEN. Second off, if we are banning icky things now than I've got a whole list. Like mayonaisse to start.

[onehandle]

28. Fine. Lets call it a poisonous irritant.

Happy?
____________

Cigarette Smoke Allergy: An Overview

Cigarette smoke contains a number of toxic chemicals and irritants. People with a cigarette smoke allergy may be more sensitive to cigarette smoke than others, and research studies indicate that smoking may aggravate allergies.

Smoking does not just harm smokers but also those around them. Research has shown that children and spouses of smokers tend to have more respiratory infections and asthma than those of non-smokers. In addition, exposure to secondhand smoke can increase the risk of allergic complications such as sinusitis and bronchitis.

Symptoms of Cigarette Smoke Allergy
Common cigarette smoke allergy symptoms include:

Burning or watery eyes
Nasal congestion
Coughing
Hoarseness
Shortness of breath presenting as a wheeze.

http://allergies.emedtv.com/cigarette-smoke-allergy/cigarette-smoke-allergy.html

[WriteDown]

30. It is definitely an irritant...

The article fails to state how something that is not an allergen can cause an allergy.

[alfredo]

42. When I eat Mayonaise around you, you are not subjected to

consuming my mayonaise.

Tars in smoke builds up in the ventilation systems by capturing dust. Over time it decreases the airways. That was one reason they banned smoking in airplanes. Those tars and the captured dust added, in some cases, as much as 500lbs to the airplane. That cut profits by reducing the amount of cargo and passengers. It also increased fuel costs.

When I owned a commercial janitorial company I had to charge more to companies that allowed smoking due to the extra work involved in cleaning up smoker's messes. Windows had to be cleaned more often and tar is difficult to clean off windows and computer screens.

[WriteDown]

44. I believe most of the outrage is directed

toward the ban on chewing tobacco.

[alfredo]

45. You know a good portion of the gun powder used by Howitzers

was fouled with tobacco juice. Workers weren't allowed to smoke so they chewed. Instead of spitting onto the floor, they'd spit in the mixing vats. They'd also get a good whiff of ether. I worked for Union Carbide for a bit.

[sasquatch]

5. That's bullshit

[imdjh]

7. I wonder if they will ban smoking pot on campus. nt

[alfredo]

11. Eat brownies instead. 16th Century European History is better when fucked up.

[onehandle]

12. I think you can assume that pot would be included in public smoking bans in a heartbeat...

...if it was ever legalized.

[imdjh]

13. This is not a public smoking ban, it's a total ban.

[JonQ]

19. If that were to happen

perhaps some people would reverse their opinion on the whole "ban cigarettes everywhere because they're evil" argument.

[skypilot]

43. I brought up this very point...

...in a smoking thread a while ago. Unfortunately, since the ban in question was in California, the whole thread got moved to the California forum and then died shortly thereafter.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=141&topic_id=33208&mesg_id=33242

[alfredo]

9. there used to be tobacco redriers across from campus. When they were

in use, you could barely breathe. It was horrible. You could get your nicotine fix just by standing in from of admin.

Today some addicts are protesting the move. They came off like spoiled brats.

[WriteDown]

10. It will be very interesting when this moves to MJ in the coming years. nt

[get the red out]

15. Other Universities to come

Two other Kentucky universities are going to be banning smoking soon as well. One of which is Univ of Louisville.

So, wonder what happens with the tail-gaters at the UK - Tenn game in a couple of weeks? War at Commonwealth Stadium before the game even starts?

I don't smoke but this is a bit heavy handed IMO. I think it is more for image than anything.

[defendandprotect]

20. Sanity reigns at Kentucky U -- !!

[WriteDown]

21. Let's ban a few other legal substances....

How about chocolate and soft drinks. Think of the dent that could be made in obesity!

[onehandle]

23. If people were spewing chocolate and soft drinks in public...

...that habit would be frowned upon pretty quickly. I would predict bans.

If I walked down the street swinging nunchucks and randomly striking people I would be arrested.

Shall I go on?

There are a lot of things that are bad for you. Kill yourself with them if you wish, but keep them out of my space.

[WriteDown]

24. So where is the ban on gum?

People are always spitting it everywhere. I have yet to be spewed upon by someone with chewing tobacco. Now that there are many spitless varieties, the possibility is even less.

[onehandle]

31. I was addressing smoking.

And as I indicated upstream, 'chew' is placed in the same category and subjected to the same treatment by society.

I didn't write the rules.

[Arctic Dave]

37. Singapore bans gum. They also cane little shits for spray painting graffitti.

[JonQ]

26. I notice quite a few empty coke/beer cans

on the side of the road, along with empty fast food containers and gum. No one seriously proposes bans on these items.

'If I walked down the street swinging nunchucks and randomly striking people I would be arrested.'

Because you would be physically harming them. Who is physically harmed when one person chooses to chew tobacco, other than that one person?

[onehandle]

32. See #31. nt

[Katya Mullethov]

41. And global warming

Just imagine the amount of CO2 that is released by opening soft drink cans every day .

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our fourth quarter 2009 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[truthisfreedom]

35. That's interesting.

More power to 'em.

[Arctic Dave]

38. One reason I could see them banning chew is that waterless urinals and such get clogged from it.

Could be a maintenance reason.

[tammywammy]

39. There's no smoking or any tobacco products allowed where I work

I do smoke, so on my lunch break and my afternoon break (I don't take a morning break), I drive down the street to a parking lot where I can smoke and throw away the butt. Where I work, there's a building of another company (same industry) between a couple of the buildings. It's a machine shop, I believe, I've never been in there, and it's union. You can always tell when it's break time, because that company as well doesn't allow smoking on property. They walk down to almost the street, where it's technically off company premises to smoke. Oh and both companies, you cannot smoke in your vehicle in the parking lot either, it's no smoking on property period.