You are conflating two different problems here imo - Choosing one but not (mostly equally harmful) another thing to restrict, and government banning something as a way of restricting freedom Regarding first one - I don’t are a problem here, everything else can be addressed after this one, but even if it’s not, it’s still a net positive, I don’t understand your argument here naming this policy bad because it doesn’t do all or nothing Regarding ban as a restriction of freedom - banning something just lies on the far scale of taxing something - i.e. the more you tax something, the less people can afford it (tax is always passed onto consumer), so at some point only rich people can afford to smoke which is even worse than ban imo There’s a benefit in additional money from taxes, sure, but tobacco is already taxed quite a lot so this is nothing revolutionary, and the more taxes on something the less revenue from it at some point (considering that less and less people can afford it) Banning it from the certain age and not for everyone is obviously to not make existing smokers suffer and make younger population healthier Some things just should be banned, like murder for example, when there’s no benefit from that thing to anyone at all You would agree that products with lead or coke in in should stay banned and not be sold, right?

Yeah instead of genociding people in other countries they genocide people in their country

I’ve seen this picture used in some pro-China instances, I don’t think it’s a useful statistic in a slightest. It can just as well show how indoctrinated people are in China (and it in fact does by looking at a second graph, it’s comical to claim that China is a democracy)

Going 35 vs going 30 on collision increases chances for pedestrians to die by up to two times btw

Yeah such an American take lol

In EU I would be glad that anyone going over speed limit is fined, even 1kmph, these rules are there so drivers don’t kill pedestrians. If someone is afraid to be fined for going 1kmph over limit, just slow down a bit

like who in their right mind would want to actually do either of those things?

Me, for starters, and many other people. Previous poster was just talking about how it’s better to be able to actually walk between towns (even if distances are unrealistic), instead of being forced to fast travel because it’s much more interesting and immersive, not sure how did you miss this point

Problem is “why now”, but also comparison to username field is not really valid - username is actually useful, what’s the point of birth date apart from age verification? You need some kind of username to converse to fellow engineers, birth date is completely unnecessary for that

Not arguing for or against the gulag point but this graph doesn’t prove anything apart from the fact that in 40s-50s there were medical advancements that reduced mortality rate of prisoners (duh) Proof that works here would be number of prisoners in gulag per capita for example (which would paint completely different picture btw)

One argument I heard about him throughout the years is that he is just afraid of retaliation so he dogwhistles instead but in this day and age nobody who is actually a nazi or conspiracist hiding it anymore and they are not getting any repercussions…

I wouldn’t assume that he supports any of the book content just from having it on the bookshelf. You are not a nazi for having Mein Kampf on the bookshelf (worst example I can think of and it would be uncomfortable at most). If all you have on bookshelf is nazi/conspiracy propaganda though then it’s another topic

Not sure why is he lunatic, but he definitely apologised for and acknowledged what he’s done multiple times