Drew Community

Drew Community (https://community.drew.edu//index.php)
-   Announcements & General Discussion (https://community.drew.edu//forumdisplay.php?f=7)
-   -   Response to Acorn article, "Smoking Battle on Campus Lights Up" (https://community.drew.edu//showthread.php?t=1318)

04-26-2008 05:44 PM

Response to Acorn article, "Smoking Battle on Campus Lights Up"
 
While no one is arguing with Messrs. Richlin and Wnorowski's repeated and emphatic point that cigarettes are detrimental to health, their insistence that this reason is sufficient for the banning of the sale of cigarettes from the Drew bookstore is unfounded. I'm sure their fellow students are very appreciative of these two crusaders' desire to mother them and metaphorically slap them on the wrist when they are naughty, but sadly this duo is not a moral authority and is showing undue self-importance with their stern, glowering attempts at "benefiting" the student body.

Edit:
Mr. Wnorowski has explained to me that he is not, in fact, actively pursuing this ban. He tells me that this "crusade" is being carried out exclusively by Mr. Richlin.

04-26-2008 06:40 PM

I completely agree.

Andy A. Benavides 04-26-2008 06:50 PM

I agree with the first guy but not the second... he's a d-bag

04-26-2008 09:50 PM

ok so i dont know who these anti-smoking crusaders are, but i do know one thing: smoking makes you look cool. The only reason anyone would want to ban smoking is because they are so atrociously uncool, that they feel like they need to make everyone else less cool, just so they will have an easier time fitting in. im going to go smoke 3 cigarettes in my mouth at the same time, and i guarentee i get at least 3 phone numbers before im done.

04-26-2008 10:03 PM

josh...you made my day.:p

04-27-2008 02:31 PM

hahaha, I assure you, students of Drew that this thread is no more than a personal vendetta, and an immature one.

04-27-2008 05:18 PM

hahaha, I assure you that the post sandwiched between my posts is canoodling with the person who created this thread. Sexually canoodling no less.

Mr. Richlin is my roomy, and if you're gonna talk trash about him, then you're talking trash about me, and I'll be damned if I let you talk trash about me.

04-27-2008 06:09 PM

I have one more comment.

To say that cigarettes do not affect others is pretty commonly accepted to be untrue. Second hand smoke is bad for anyone, and if people are forced to deal with it, then smoking becomes not just the concern of the users. Now, let me give an analogy. Drew does not encourage the use of homophobic slang on campus, yet many ignorant people still choose to use such words at their discretion. The similarity between this and smoking is that although Drew cannot force people to stop smoking, much like they cannot force people to realize how incredibly insensitive they are. They can at least do their best to not endorse it.

04-27-2008 06:32 PM

I agree with post #1, and I think if Mr. Richlin was truly interested in the health and saftey of the student body, his platform would be to encourage the bookstore to sell anti-smoking products such as patches and gum, or ban smoking entirely, not just the sale of cigarettes. Banning the sale of cigarettes would only greatly inconvenience his fellow tuition-paying adults who have every right to make personal choices about their health, including to smoke.

04-27-2008 08:21 PM

Back to the main argument presented, it was even stated in the original article:
"I'm not trying to get smoking banned on our campus. I want our school to be a more healthy campus, and just not for me."

To interpret the second sentence as "not selling cigarettes will make people smoke less" is hopeful, but not necessarily true. An addict will go down to the advertised two-minute-away drug store, and alas, people will continue to smoke these elsewhere-purchased cigs at Drew.

To interpret it as "Drew moving to promote healthier habits" is probably more like what was meant. Which is a desirable and reasonable thing. However, doing so through this course of action makes less sense than simply doing what was already suggested and providing anti-smoking products (which is actually a really good idea and something I would support). This action satisfies the statement without taking away or restricting the legal choice of the adult individual.

And yes, that second hand smoke. It's gross, it's detrimental to others. It's also virtually non-existent outdoors. Because smoking is a more deviant behavior than a common one on this campus (as the survey shows), its occurrence is limited to that small percent. Most importantly, it's all outside, as smoking indoors is illegal in New Jersey. It's worth mentioning that cigarette smoke is lighter than air and dissipates quickly. So unless one is actively hanging around someone who is smoking, they will probably not come into contact with second hand smoke at Drew.

Don't flame me too hard, just wanted to put my two cents in :[. Or dollar, rather. Sorry for the length.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:40 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.5.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Drew University is not responsible for the content of posts made on this site. All posts and comments reflect the opinion of the author.