Judge John Hodgman - Cigarettiquette

Episode Date: September 12, 2012

YOUR ATTENTION, PLEASE: This episode contains some talk that may not be appropriate for children, including discussion of smoking and drug use. Robert brings the case against his friend Bradley, who's given up tobacco cigarettes for e-cigarettes. The electronic cigarettes are technically allowed where "real" smoking isn't -- so where is it "appropriate" to smoke them?

Hi, it's me, Judge John Hodgman. The court case you're about to hear contains some adult themes, including cigarette smoking, injection of drugs between the toes, electronic opium pipes, and special relations between Ginny Weasley and Harry Potter. Honestly, it's not any of it much worse than what I just said out loud. But if you have kids, you may want to, you may, you know, the court is always a court for a general audience skewing towards adulthood. But if you have kids in the back of the car, you may want to skip to another episode. Welcome to the Judge John Hodgman podcast. I'm bailiff Jesse Thorne. This week, a case of cigarette-a-cat. Robert brings the case against his good friend Bradley. Bradley, in an attempt to quit smoking, has substituted electronic cigarettes for the use of real tobacco-filled

cigarettes. He'll smoke the e-cigarettes whenever they're technically allowed. Robert worries about the appearance of the smoke and thinks Bradley should show more discretion when e-smoking in public places, whether they're hanging out at a sporting event or a concert. Who is right and who is wrong? Only one man can decide. Please rise as the Honorable Judge John Hodgman enters the courtroom. I can't see you, but I know you're here. I feel it. You've been hanging around since I got here. I wish I could see your face. Just look into your eyes and tell you how good it is to be here,

just to touch something. Here, that's cold. That feels good. Here, to smoke, have coffee. If you do it together, it's fantastic. But feels good. Here. To smoke. Have coffee. If you do it together, it's fantastic. But you're not here. I'm here. I wish you were here.

I wish you could talk to me. Because I'm your judge. Jesse, swear I'm in. Please stand and raise your right hands. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing so help you god or whatever i do do you swear to abide by judge john hodgman's ruling despite the fact that the only thing he smokes is salmon yes i did in the occasional pork shoulder judge hodgman you're on thank you very much Often I will shove a salmon into a pork shoulder. It's called a pork shoulder. And then I wrap it all in a piece of bacon.

Robert, you bring the case against your so-called friend. Smoky or non-smoky as the case may be. What is the problem, Robert? Well, basically, I mean, this all came about when we were at a Chicago fire game. And what is that? Just a bonfire that you go and watch? It's the Chicago soccer team.

Oh, I was going to say Major League Soccer, weren't you? And I did, yes. Does every game start with a cow kicking over a bucket pretty much just to get things burning yeah what happened in the chicago fire was that bucket full of fire and the cow kicked it over and it said everything on fire was it like full of wildfire like in game of thrones how was it how was the cow kicking over the bucket important in some way? Yeah, apparently

Miss O'Leary, her cow was in the barn. I don't know. There's various stories, but her cow was in the barn and somebody was in there and it kicked over a lantern. Oh, kicked over a lantern. Okay, that makes sense. I apologize. I must have misheard it. Now I know which one of you is the

true Chicago Ann. Wrong, but okay. Oh, I've ordered. Keep it down over there, Oak Park. Where are you from, Bradley? Born in Chicago, raised in Miami, and moved back to Chicago a little over 20 years ago. And Robert, where are you from? a little over 20 years ago. And Robert, where are you from?

I was born in South Carolina, moved to Texas, moved to North Carolina, and now I'm here. The true Chicago for the past 25 minutes. Just long enough to learn what the cow kicked over. Oh, guys, by the way, this is a terrible miscarriage of justice

on my part. I forgot. To offer a summary judgment to the one or both of you that couldn't name the specific piece of culture that i paraphrased as i as i burned into the courtroom my best guess was the film ghost okay that's not it very very just your best guess for everything? Very intriguing.

Interesting guess. Go on. Go on then, Carolina. I was going to say the movie Coffee and Cigarettes. Oh, also an interesting guess. The Jim Jarmusch film Coffee and Cigarettes that has been evolving for 35 years or whatever. Exactly. coffee and cigarettes that has been evolving for 35 years or whatever. Exactly.

In, in, in many ways you are both right, but in the most important way, you are both wrong. What else is new? It is Peter. It is one of Peter Fox,

many monologues from wings of desire by Vim vendors in which he speaks to the, the angel who wants to become human. Peter Falk plays, well, I don't want to spoil it, but he plays, spoiler alert, it's 30 years old, this movie. Peter Falk is an angel who has become human, and he's speaking to an angel who wants to be human. And he's explaining the beauties of tactile existence and mortality, which is what the angel is about to choose. And one of the things he chooses was, uh, uh,

smoking, uh, cigarettes and drinking coffee. And when you do it together, it's fantastic. A line, which I can personally credit for keeping me smoking five years after I should have stopped every time I thought I should give this up, but no, wait.

Peter Falk said, living on Earth and being mortal and dying is fantastic. Now that I'm 41 years old and I've seen my share of death, unfortunately, I know that's not true, but it's still a pretty good movie. Now, Robert, you were saying that Bradley, a soccer fan and Chicagoan, goes to these football games and pretends to smoke cigarettes. Is that correct? Some of it. I would say I'm the soccer fan. He happened to be my guest at the game that day. Right. To express his contempt for this dumb sport. Exactly. I think he was doing it as a sign of you know contempt yeah contempt basically yeah exactly there's no need to improve on what i

said uh so yeah we were at the game and so we are i i would say at this game we're a second row in the stands um and he he pulls out his e-cigarettes and starts puffing away at it. Right. And, uh, I didn't say anything at the time. Right. Um, but later on, why would you bother? Why would you bother? Because no one else was there.

Cause it was a soccer. There was quite a few people there. Sure. Um, who were they? Who were they playing by the way? What was the name of the other team? Was it another terrible natural disaster? Was it the New Orleans Katrinas or something?

I believe it was Worth Logo and MLS. That would have been the Columbus Crew, if I'm not mistaken. The Columbus Crew. Thank you very much. Let's just choose that as one time when I did not choose my words carefully, and I apologize to the survivors. Judge Hodgman, I believe that the Bay Area team is the San Jose Quakes. Is it really?

It is, yes. Well, that was 1989. It may just be a blanket rule in Major League Soccer. It has to be a terrible natural disaster. Well, I do apologize to those who survived and family members of those who did not survive Hurricane Katrina, and I do apologize for that. But what was the name of the other team, the Columbus Crew?

Yes. Right, because they are, what, rowers? Is that what it is? Is that what it is? Why is their logo the worst designed logo in sports? You got to see it. It looks like three guys with, like, turtle hats on trying to look cool. It's terrible.

It looks like Devo. They look like uh columbus it's not good oh yeah it's yeah it's weird it looks like it looks like a logo for a bad chain restaurant stew mulligans hand forged stews it's like three dudes three dudes in hard hats what is that what is it what is the reference to here was there to here? Was there a hard hat fad in Columbus? Is it an industry in Columbus? I wouldn't know. You wouldn't know.

All right. Well, Colombians. I'm a Chicago guy. Write in and let me know. So your friend bothers no one because there's no one there. Okay. By bringing out his. No, no.

I'm sorry. Complete your whole thing. there's no one there okay by bringing out his no no i'm sorry complete complete your whole thing so later on i i say to him you know uh i kind of felt uneasy with him smoking this i mean or quote unquote smoking this uh e-cigarette uh at the game just because uh smoking is not allowed in the stands and i just felt that uh it could have been misrepresented by either security or other fans or children. So I just said to him, I think there's a time and a place, even though you're supposedly supposed to be able to smoke these whenever, there should be some stipulations on when you can actually smoke them. Did anyone complain? No, not at the time, no.

Okay. And is it an indoor stadium? Is it a large stadium? It's outdoor. It is large. It's about 25,000 capacity. Okay. It's. It's about 25,000 capacity. Okay. It's an outdoor, it's an outdoor stadium with 25,000 capacity. Correct.

And approximately 35 seats were filled. And does this happen a lot in Bradley's life that he's, that he's now explain, explain Bradley, would you explain please, in as much detail as you feel helps your case uh what an e-cigarette or a cigarette is to uh to the podcast listening audience yes i'd be happy to um it's an e-cigarette rather than a cigarette um but you know pronounce it however you like uh it it has a cartridge on it and a battery. The cartridge is filled with liquid that contains water and a nicotine gel. The battery, when you suck through it, serves to heat this up so that what you're doing is the quote-unquote smoker is drawing in water and nicotine. What you breathe out then is a water vapor.

It's odorless, harmless, drifts away, et cetera, et cetera. For someone. These are stipulations of fact that it's odorless and harmless, but that we don't. Yes. All right. This is, this is, I, I, you know, I don't, I've never been close enough to smell one of these things.

What I, what I'll certainly stipulate as fact is that the second hand vapor being nothing but water vapor is indeed harmless and other it's simply water vapor water vapor and your halitosis presumably agreed yes agreed that could be dangerous outside of that though it's harmless robert well it's not robert what uh have you smelled can you smell this vapor can you smell this vapor? With his halitosis aside, I would say there is a slight, I mean, it would have to be indoors. He does, I allow him to smoke it in my house. And there is a slight odor.

It's a sweet smell, actually. But I mean, it's nothing overpowering like cigarette smoke. And have you done a controlled experiment where you compared it against a placebo vapor coming out of his mouth? No, no, I haven't. All right. So you would say that you detect. So would it be fair to say that? I mean, Robert is a smoker, so he's aware of the cigarette smoke thing.

Well, wait a minute. What? I'm sorry. I forget order. What? Robert is a smoker? Indeed. Well, then, Robert, you can't smell anything.

There was a period of about nine, ten months that I had quit smoking. Ladies and gentlemen of the journey, could I ask Robert if he could possibly smell this freshly peeled grapefruit? Three feet away? No, I rest my case. You can't smell over podcasts, Robert. In any way, it's not grapefruit. It's a Satsuma. Bailiff Jesse, is it Satsuma season yet?

Not yet, sir. Then you have caught me in a lie, sir. I have no citrus here. Robert, you smoke cigarettes? At the moment, yes, I do. At the moment. How dare you? It's yes or no.

Yes or no. Do you? Yes. Yes, I do. All right. And what brand do you smoke? Oh, are we allowed to buzz market on your show? I'm not.

I don't know the rules. You know what? If someone smokes cigarettes, I need to know what they smoke. I'm not. Believe me. Believe me. I am not buzz marketing self-murder devices. I smoke camels.

Camel cigarettes. Okay. Camel whites. Do they still make those? No, I smoke camels. Camel cigarettes. Okay. Camel whites. Do they still make those? No, I wouldn't know. I'm going down a little cancerous memory lane here of my smoking and how many do you smoke?

Per day? Well, okay. No, per hour. Per day, I would say um oh like six okay and how long have you smoked for uh since i was 18 and what is your age 30 oh really you're 30 years old all right well this is and it's been off and on. I've taken a year off here, nine months off here.

That's about it. Twice. Right. You took a little break. You took a little vacation. Yeah. And are you immortal? No. Do you have a mutant-like healing factor a la Wolverine? No, not at all.

All right. That's fine. Just wanted to get to the facts there. But you cannot smell or taste anything. So therefore, your stipulation that it has an odor, I think, is pointless. But I would also say at the same time, though, Bradley, your assertion that the vapor, as it goes into your lungs and or goes out of your lungs, is harmless. What is that based on the packaging something no it's based on research that i've done um an article that i'm looking at

right now that was printed a year ago in the american journal of preventive medicine um again what i'm saying is that the second hand vapor thank you it's harmless thank you for coming prepared sure well objection your honor i i have to say that there have been studies. Objection to my thanking him? No. Stand by. Overruled. Objection on what he said. Overruled. Bradley, do you have a relevant citation to give to this court regarding the harmlessness of the exhaled halitotic vapor? I can give you the title of the article and the print and online source. Please, a relevant citation, a relevant quote is what I'm looking for, actually.

Oh my gosh, a relevant quote. You know what, here's what we're going to do. I would have to scroll back a page and I wasn't prepared to do that. I apologize. Stand by. We're all going to take a moment here. Okay. And we're back.

Bradley, what have you found with regard to secondhand smoke in your life? What I have found is a quote on web md that does say that uh for smokers electronic cigarettes may satisfy nicotine cravings they can be used in non-smoking areas and they may have less of the harmful chemicals that are in cigarette smoke right and that's what i have found but that's uh that they turn liquid nicotine into a vapor that you inhale and that's what gets exhaled but that's not that's not a quote from from the the the american the journal for preventive medicine or whatever it was it is not that article we used a bunch of different information and the general topic was a survey

on e-cigarettes not specifically on what i was so you're saying so so basically your stipulation is the Internet tells you that e-cigarettes may be used in spaces where they are not prohibited. That's what that's what you're saying. It says they could be used in non- understanding, on United slash Continental airplanes. That's true. And I also understand that in New Jersey, I believe they've been banned also in non-smoking areas. I do believe that that's the case. I think it's wrongheaded, but I believe that's the case. But you may be surprised to learn that the Internet is not entirely accurate all the time.

All right. So we're going to leave it as an open question as to what harm, if any, the exhaled vapor might cause. Now, I can tell you that the Columbus crew, according to thecrew.com, buzz marketing for soccer. to thecrew.com. Buzz marketing for soccer. The Columbus crew was named by Columbus resident Luis Orozco

after a month-long contest to suggest the name in which Luis Orozco was the only entrant. This is according to the crew.com. It's not WebMD, but I don't know. And as far as, as far as I can tell, their, their, their, their, their logo is a dare to be massive, which we don't, we don't know.

There, there isn't enough podcast tape in the world to go over all of this stuff. And Robert, did you enjoy your cigarette? Yes. All right, very well. So you're saying that we don't know really whether the secondhand smoke or the secondhand vapor, as it were, is harmful. But I think it stands to reason that it is essentially an exhaled water vapor. And that it is probably,

and I will say that I've seen these things in action. In fact, I feel like I've seen more and more of them recently in airport lounges and I think on one train in Europe, maybe one train here and around. And I have not noticed any odor myself, nor did I get cancer within a day. So that is my own anecdotal evidence. Now, I would say also, though, they tend to freak me out.

Because when I see people inhaling on these things, they're a little bit longer than regular cigarettes. And instead of burning red on the end, they tend to burn blue or green and it makes me feel like i'm in a terrible science fiction movie where smoking has been replaced with this which in fact is reality and then i start thinking that we're in a well that reality is a terrible science fiction movie uh so that i find them to be i find them to be weird and unsettling because i've gotten used to not seeing people put white sticks to their mouths and suck in public places and non-white stick clubs. And also they have this weird glow to them that makes me feel as though I'm in a rejected scene from Blade Runner. Why do you smoke these things, Bradley?

Because they make you look cool? Well, you know, honestly, that's actually part of my issue with them. cool? Well, you know, honestly, that's actually part of my issue with them. They don't make me look cool because of people like Robert who tend to look at them as some sort of weird, strange thing that shouldn't be done, et cetera. No, I think I agree with you on the Blade Runner thing. They make me look kind of like some robotic freak, I have a feeling. However, they really are a whole lot better for my health than smoking cigarettes. I mean, I smoked from age 18 until April. So, and I haven't smoked since. So that's why I smoke these things. They have worked. I can hear it in your voice too. Bradley, how old are you? Yes. I'm 40. I'll be 45 later this month.

You'll be 45. So you've got 15 years of smoking on your friend, Robert. That's right. All right. And so you quit, well, you stopped smoking, burning cigarettes in April. That's right. All right. And so you quit, well, you stopped smoking, uh, burning cigarettes in April. That's right. And you're maintaining nicotine addiction using the, uh, this,

uh, nicotine, uh, delivery device, right? Correct. And you prefer this over the nicotine gum or patch as a, as a nicotine delivery device because.

Well, I've tried them both. Uh, neither for me for this period of time. But have you done them at the same time? This actually, to me, still feels like smoking. It feels like I'm actually not giving up what I had to give up previously. And what I gain in return, you know, for not stinking, for not killing myself, is more than worth the tradeoff.

So, yeah, for me, this has worked far better than the gum or the patch. So you're willing to look like a doofus in order to not kill yourself. Absolutely. I am willing and I do look that way. Especially, I got to tell you, one of my little white sticks is actually a purple stick. Imagine that. It is almost the diametric opposite of smoking itself in which you are willing to kill yourself in order to look cool. Right. You're not killing yourself, but you look like a complete dork. It's almost exactly correct.

It is almost like a retroactive punishment for ever smoking cigarettes in the first place. Yeah, I'll take it. Yeah. Yeah. But I would say that you should, I mean,

you know, there is contradictory information out there. Even my own research, uh, suggested there's contradictory information out there with regard to the safety of these devices in terms of conveying any carcinogens. Now look,

common sense would suggest it's got to be much less than burning paper and tobacco leaves and the other chemicals that are in a regular cigarette. But the reality is that the FDA has not tested these things up down and around town. They've only been in common use in the United States, um, for the past five or six years. Um, there, uh, the, I, I would suggest that anyone who even consider using these things, uh, proceed with, uh, with caution and they're taking, uh, uh, any risks that they would take if they put some chemical into their body that they don't know a lot about. Is that fair to say, Bradley? It is fair to say.

Having done a good deal of research myself, what seems to come out is that while there may be certain health risks associated with this, they are not comparable to the health risks associated with smoking cigarettes. Any number of doctors or organizations have attested to that fact, if nothing else. Yeah, and I don't want to demonize propylene glycol. It's generally regarded as safe, et cetera, et cetera. But, you know, there are chemicals going into your body, including the drug nicotine, which has its own health effects. And, you know, I think you are trading off one set of health potential risks for another set. And I agree with you that it is a reasonable person would conclude that the

set of risks associated with e-cigarettes is most likely considerably less than traditional cigarettes, but it's still early days for this stuff. I just want to say that to anyone who might be listening, because a lot of the concern out there is that these will be attractive to children. And let me just say, and the people might take them up believing they're completely harmless. When the facts are still being evaluated, you should take reasonable caution. And my own research in forcing my children to smoke electronic cigarettes is not complete yet. Not to mention the fact that you still end up getting the nicotine and becoming or remaining a nicotine addict. So, I mean, that's important. It's not like these are healthy. They're just healthier than smoking regular cigarettes. So if no one is complaining, Robert, why do you care if Bradley

smokes in your precious soccer stadium? It has nothing to do with the health ramifications for Bradley. You know, I could care less what he does to his body. My only thing is that it's a call for common decency. If somebody was sitting in front of me in the stands blowing bubbles, I mean, blowing bubbles in the stands, it's not... Blowing bubbles in the stands. There's no specific regulation against blowing bubbles in the stands in fire, fiery stadium of Chicago, right? Exactly. I mean, if people are setting fires, that's fine. But if people are blowing bubbles and stuff like that, I would get upset and I would be like, hey, cut it out.

Stop blowing bubbles in front of me. It's distracting me. Whether it's harmful to me or not, that is not the question. But disruptive things, if I may, happen at sporting events all the time. Waves, beach balls being tossed around, cheers in support of your athletic team being yelled. Particularly at the soccer game. Yeah, face painting. Actually, people playing soccer. Very disruptive of the entire experience. How do you answer that? I would say if it's supporting the team.

What could be more in support of the team, the fire, than smoke? Well, if he was smoking a real cigarette, if he was actually burning something, it would be all right. But he's not. He's faking the funk, and I don't like it. Jesse? Deploy piehole shutting, please, Bailiff Jesse. Shut your pieholes. Now, was that really you, Jesse, or do you just have a sample machine now to say that?

Yeah, I got one of those 360s. It also does some different sounds from what's that movie with Mike Myers? Yeah, baby. You know what I'm talking about. Bradley, let's get back on track here for a second. Yes. Would you blow bubbles in the stadium just for your own amusement? I suppose I would.

I don't see why not. It's not something I tend to do habitually, though. Would you feel happy if someone were blowing bubbles directly behind you in a stadium? You know, I'm kind of a bubble fan, so I don't think it would bother me a whole heck of a lot. Bradley, you're lying. Okay. You are under oath, sir. You are under oath. Of course you would be bothered if someone was consistently blowing bubbles over your head the entire time you're trying to enjoy fantastic soccer. I don't care what a fan of bubbles you are. The question is, this is your chance to defend that your halitosis vapor is in no way as intrusive as, say, bubbles.

Because this is a very compelling argument, as far as I'm concerned, that Robert raised. Well, here's my thing. argument as far as I'm concerned that Robert raised. Well, here's my thing. Whether it be intrusive or not, and I would say that it's not, as water vapor, it blows away a lot quicker than cigarette smoke does. It's not like it harms anyone's enjoyment of the game. It's not like they can't see through it. On top of that, there is no prohibition against it. It is not smoking. There is no fire. There is no flame. And I would argue that if more people were to use these things, which can be truly helpful health-wise out at a soccer game or at a bar or wherever it might be. These aren't damaging. They're not harmful. They don't bother someone else's enjoyment of the game. They attract a

little bit of attention to my friend, Robert, maybe, and that's his problem, not mine. These are good. All right. Well, again, I just have to stipulate there is a real issue here. If I were you and if I were arguing your case, I would stay specifically to the facts that they're not prohibited, right? They are minimally invasive to anyone else around. There is no significant evidence that secondhand vapor from it is harmful, and it's certainly less invasive than cigarette smoke itself. And it is your personal choice to put this into your body. Turning it into a public health policy issue, I think really does not do your case particular service here, because I do not, with no offense to you, and I'm glad you've stopped smoking

traditional cigarettes, I do not necessarily want to be out here in my courtroom giving you a soapbox to buzz market nicotine addiction via electronic cigarettes or to say this is not harmful and in fact a good thing when, I'm sorry, it's still an issue of some scientific debate. Now, I don't think it's meaningful scientific debate, or I should say, I don't think the risks are very meaningful, but I don't think that you want to put yourself in a position where you are buzz marketing e-cigarettes on my podcast, because that's not going to help me think well of your, in your favor, because now you're really asking me to balance not just personal choice, but also public health issues. And you're inserting that into the debate,

which is, I think you can tell something I clearly feel pretty strongly about. Understood. In all honesty, I mean, I feel rather strongly about it myself, not suggesting that these things are harmless, but suggesting that if they can help folks to stop smoking, then they should be more welcomed than they presently are. That's my only suggestion. Not that they're harmless, not that I'm trying to market them. I just know for me, it's actually helped me to quit smoking and not die to have another cigarette. Sir, sir. I certainly appreciate that you are not, just so that we're clear, I know that you are not actually buzz marketing cigarettes, but I do take issue with someone who is not a research scientist

who's been working on this for a while, making health claims about this product. I am typically someone who really feels much like, uh, much like, uh, your good friend, uh, Robert does. I don't care what garbage you put into your body, even if it's a less potent garbage or a million times less potent garbage than the other garbage garbage is going into our bodies all the time. Toxins are going into our bodies all the time through simply by eating and breathing and living in cities and even living in the country. You know, it doesn't, I get it. And I do believe in personal choice and personal, personal ways of killing oneself. Okay. I think you're right. You're going to do better on these e-cigarettes than otherwise,

but I don't, I don't feel entirely comfortable with turning your argument because I don't think it's a winning argument with me, your judge in from a, I want to enjoy myself this way and I'm not harming other people into more people should be doing this. That's not a position. That's a position you may take and I appreciate that you're taking it, but it's not going to help your argument with me. And I just want to be very clear to the people who are listening. That is not my position in this case, because I do think people need to make very aware decisions about the stuff that they're putting into their bodies, whether it is actual cigarettes or whether it is a cigarette replacement that is still, and as I say, reasonable people,

I think we'll agree, this is a much better thing to be putting into your body. But I'm not a doctor. And I don't know that you are either. So I'm just going to stipulate that. Bradley, when are you going to quit electronic cigarettes? I don't know yet. At this point, what's going on in my life, it's amazing that I'm not going back to smoking regular cigarettes. So for right now, I'm very much sticking with these. We'll see how long it takes me to get off. I presume you're referring to the trauma of my yelling at you. Yeah, it's rough on me, Judge.

I apologize. It's okay. I'll be all right. You picked the wrong day to quit sniffing glue. I understand. That's the way it works. A lot of wrath. A lot of judicial wrath about what? I don't know. In any case, but I want to clarify here that right now, whatever your claims, whatever your public health claims for this product, right now you are using it as a nicotine replacement, right? And that's a little bit, it's a nuance, but I think it's important to note that to what degree they're effective as a

smoking, well, I guess you could say they are technically, definitely a smoking cessation aid, but you are replacing your delivery for nicotine in a way that is probably more helpful to you and certainly less invasive to others. And I do think that if it is truly a step to stop smoking, terrific. Even if it's not, you have your right to do that. I mean, there is a stigma to smoking overall that has grown up, except in a few cases, I would say not inappropriately in this country. And there are definitely places where smoking right now is considered to be very much taboo, where it wouldn't have been even 10 or 20 or 30 years ago. But, Judge, here's the thing.

If I smoke a cigarette around smokers, at least the smokers will think I'm OK. Now with these, no one thinks I'm cool. I think I have everything that I need to make my decision. I'm going to go into chambers and inject heroin between my toes in the privacy of my own chambers. I will be back in a few moments. Please rise as Judge John Hodgman exits the courtroom. Robert, you're bringing this case. Why is it any of your business? I am one of those people that it bothered. I am one of those people in the stands that I was talking about. If I was bothered, then guess what? Other people might be bothered as well.

So I think I'm speaking for everyone else that had to hold their silence because they didn't want to look like the jerk. Bradley, why are you bothering your friend? I'm not bothering my friend. I'm just using my e-cigarette and exhaling water vapor. Why? You're not bothering your friend. He just said he was bothered. That's sort of like throwing a football at someone and it hits them in the face and saying, hey, I didn't hit his friend. I didn't hit him in the face. The football hit him in the face.

Oh, hey, he probably should have had his hands up then. I mean, I'm not doing anything illegal, wrong, unjust, bothersome to anyone except for him because he happens to be the one sitting next to me and doesn't want to deal with the undue attention. That's all. Bradley, what do you think your chances are in the case? At this point, pretty minimal. Please rise as Judge John Hodgman re-enters the courtroom.

Guys, I feel fantastic. How do you feel? Feeling great. Okay. Robert. Yes. Let me ask you, there's one question that I forgot to ask before I left the courtroom. Do you have a butt? Do I have a butt? Yeah.

Oh, yeah. Okay. Because it's about to get kicked, my friend. Oh. Yeah, I know. Surprising, right? The reality is that I applaud Bradley for, first of all, quitting what we call traditional or non-electronic or steampunk cigarettes, analog cigarettes, which are really, really, really, really bad for him. And you, by the way, Robert, I'm going to yell at you about that, Robert, because you make your own choices in life. Robert, because you make your own choices in life. These are choices that I think,

as Bradley was intimating, have profound effects on public health in general, which costs everybody money and that sort of thing. Although I think that Bradley was probably saying that in order to feel more normal smoking e-cigarettes, trying to get everyone to smoke these things. But the reality is, he is absolutely right, that this is a product where the risk is almost certainly, whatever the risk is, it is less than cigarettes. I think any reasonable person can agree. But even if that were not the case, let's separate that for a second of unsettled science. The risk that he is taking into his body, he is taking into his body himself. into his body, he is taking into his body himself. And the risk that he is putting out of his body is minimal in the form of water vapor, largely odorless, probably not damaging, and essentially aesthetic at worst. That is to say, he looks like a weirdo. He looks like a kind of a scuzzy robot from the future. He looks like he's smoking in places where people have not been allowed to smoke for a while. And it is jarring and strange to look at. And I don't think it looks good personally.

No one can prevent you from dressing badly at the soccer game and looking like a crazy person, so long as you are within a certain parameters, I should say, wearing pants, just as no one can prevent you from doing something else that makes you look uncool, like going to a soccer game. And therefore, until there are laws that suggest otherwise, Therefore, until there are laws that suggest otherwise, I see no problem with Bradley smoking his electronic cigarette at the soccer game. Now, how is this different from other vices? And how can you apply that to other places? Because I presume that Bradley and you occasionally go out together and separately to places that are not soccer games. Most vices that are legal at this time, the most intoxicating vices that are legal,

are prescription drugs and alcohol. And in both cases, the only thing that you put out while you take these things in is perhaps, if you are injudicious, obnoxious behavior, right? And meanness. In this case, there is a distinct difference between an e-cigarette and, say, having a drink, even though they might both be legal. The e-cigarette does put out a vapor of some kind and while we i think common sense commonsensically agree that this vapor is pretty minimal in its invasiveness to other people you should not necessarily ask people around you to breathe everything that is going into your body if you are putting something into your body people should not necessarily be forced to breathe everything that is going into your body. If you are putting something into your body,

people should not necessarily be forced to breathe the air that is coming out of your body. This is a simple rule of flatulence. If you are in a proximity to such a person that you would not fart audibly in their presence, I would encourage you to think twice, Bradley, before e-cigaretting. A soccer stadium, I don't think there's a bad deal. I don't think, I don't think it's a, you know, in the roar of the crowd, you could probably get a fart off there pretty easily. You know what I mean? In the mumble of the soccer crowd. But in an airplane, and I think you've already said you won't smoke in an airplane. I really would encourage you not to do that in an airplane. Because I think that that's not just an issue of looking bad.

I think it's also an issue of confusing the person sitting next to you as to why there is a vapor coming out of your mouth. And any reasonable person, if asked, do you mind if I use this electronic device that causes a vapor to come out of my mouth and I breathe it all around you? use this electronic device that causes a vapor to come out of my mouth and I breathe it all around you, will probably say, yeah, no, I would prefer that you not. If I have a choice, I would prefer that you not. I suppose you could ask, but you'd really have to ask everyone around you. I think that in close enclosed quarters where you would not be able to fart openly or even discreetly, I would encourage you in this new world of sigillectricate to refrain in open areas such as a large airport concourse where smoking is not allowed, where traditional smoking is not allowed, in bars and restaurants. Again, would you fart there? Yes, then great. Would you fart there? No, maybe not now. Maybe go outside and fart.

fart there? Yes, then great. Would you fart there? No, maybe not now. Maybe go outside and fart. But until other laws are developed or until other scientific evidence is put forward that suggests that it is more harmful to other people, until then, I think you are free to light up your weird blue glow stick anywhere that you are strong enough, sir, to endure the hardship of people looking at you and wondering what is wrong with you. Personally, I think you should consider getting ready to abandon nicotine altogether because it has its own health effects, but I do applaud you putting away the burn sticks as I will applaud anyone who might be listening when they finally decide to grow up and put away the burn sticks. Robert, are you still there with your butt getting kicked?

Yes, it's been stamped, stamped out like a cigarette butt. You know what it's like now to be making the choice to hurt your body and enjoy the pleasure of it because you know what? Coffee and cigarettes together are fantastic. Peter Falk no longer lives. I don't know if he died of cancer, but you know what I'm saying. As long as you confront your own mortality and appreciate that you're doing something that's bad for you, you can choose to do whatever it is,

but you are right. You appreciate better probably than most the social stigma that goes along with putting the toxins into your body and then putting toxins out of your body. And so you are restricted. Putting the toxins into your body and then putting toxins out of your body. And so you are restricted. Perhaps you are projecting and wish to put on Bradley the same restrictions you feel as a smoker, even though he is now free and clear and into a world of Blade Runner-like futurism.

But you cannot. but you cannot. And I encourage you to consider whether smoking is, smoking to look cool at the benefit of your own health is as good a trade-off as e-smoking to look dumb to the benefit of your own health. This is the sound of a gavel. Judge John Hodgman rules, that is all. Please rise as Judge John Hodgman rules, that is all. Please rise as Judge John Hodgman exits the courtroom.

Robert, how are you feeling? I feel it was a fair judgment. I liked the whole fart analogy, if you can fart there. I mean, that seems like a good measuring stick. Bradley, how about you? I'm very pleased with the ruling. I think the judge was fair. I absolutely agree with the fart statutes.

They seem to make sense. So I'm pleased with the way everything went, including kicking Robert's butt. Robert, Bradley, thanks for joining us on the Judge John Hodgman podcast. Thank you so much. Yeah, but seriously, Bradley, get off the weirdo space sticks, okay? Yeah, I'll work on it. All right. Good luck.

Hello, I'm your Judge John Hodgman. The Judge John Hodgman podcast is brought to you every week by you, our members, of course. Thank you so much for your support of this podcast and all of your favorite podcasts at MaximumFun.org. And they are all your favorites. If you want to join the many member supporters of this podcast and this network, boy, oh boy, that would be fantastic. Just go to MaximumFun.org slash join. The Judge John Hodgman podcast is also brought to you this week by the folks over there at Babbel. Did you know that learning, the experience of learning,

causes a sound to happen? Let's hear the sound. Yep, that's the sound of you learning a new language with Babbel. We're talking about quick 10-minute lessons crafted by over 200 language experts that can help you start speaking a new language in as little as one, two, three weeks. Let's hear that sound. Babbel's tips and tools are approachable, accessible, rooted in real life situations, and delivered with conversation-based teaching. So you're ready to practice what you've learned in the real world, and you get to hear the sound. It's not just like a game that pretends to teach you a language. It's also not a rigid, weird, hyper-academic chore. It is an actually productive app that actually teaches you

while you are actually having a nice time. And you get to hear this sound. Here's a special limited time deal for our listeners. Right now, get up to 60% off your Babbel subscription, but only for our listeners at babbel.com slash Hodgman. Get up to 60 listeners, at babbel.com slash Hodgman. Get up to 60% off at babbel.com slash Hodgman, spelled B-A-B-B-E-L dot com slash Hodgman. Rules and restrictions apply. The Judge John Hodgman podcast is also brought to you this week by our pals over at Made In.

Jesse, you've heard of Tom Colicchio, the famous chef, right? Yeah, from the restaurant Kraft. And did you know that most of the dishes at that very same restaurant are made with Made In pots and pans? Really? What's an example? The braised short ribs. They're Made In, Made In.

The Rohan duck. Made In, Made In. Riders of Rohan Duck. What about the Heritage Pork Shop? You got it. Made in, made in. Made in has been supplying top chefs and restaurants with high-end cookware for years. They make the stuff that chefs need.

Their carbon steel cookware is the best of cast iron, the best of stainless clad. It gets super hot. It's rugged enough for grills or an open flame. One of the most useful pans you can own. And like we said, good enough for real professional chefs, the best professional chefs. Oh, so I have to go all the way down to the restaurant district in restaurant town?

Just buy it online. This is professional grade cookware that is available online directly to you, the consumer, at a very reasonable price. Yeah. If you want to take your cooking to the next level, remember what so many great dishes

on menus all around the world have in common. They're made in Made In. Save up to 25% this Memorial Day from the 18th until the 27th. Visit madeincookware.com. That's M-A-D-E-I-N Cookware.com. I like these improvements that you've made to your office, Judge Hodgman.

Yeah, you know, I thought I would put out a fainting couch and a bunch of old-timey Chinese vases and so on to complement my new electronic opium pipe. You also, it looks like you expanded the bathroom. That looks like an expanded bathroom to me. Is in her sinks. Who did you hire to do this work? Presumably you hired out of Columbus. Oh, yes. I hired the crew. Did they do a good job or? They did.

And, you know, the best part about it was there was an unfortunate incident where parts of the ceiling were caving in, but their heads were protected by their soccer helmets. Let's clear the docket. Okay. Here's something from David. My co-workers and I disagree about the intention of Ginny Weasley's birthday present. I...

Oh, God. Now I'm going to get emails from Harry Potter people because I said Ginny Weasley wrong. Ginny Weasley?. Ginny Weasley? No, that seems racist. Against both Italian and weasels. Yeah, it must be Ginny Weasley. Okay, so my co-workers and I disagree about the intention of Ginny Weasley's birthday

present to Harry Potter in Chapter 7, The Will of Albus Dumbledore, of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. I believe that Ginny simply wishes to give Harry a passionate kiss that he will remember as he leaves to destroy Voldemort. My friends argue that Ginny's real intended birthday present is to have intercourse with Harry, but Ron barges in and prevents it. I request an order acknowledging my correct interpretation. My friends request an injunction that prevents me from bringing up my point of view again. Thank you for writing in, fan fiction writer. I am, as you know, a trained literary critic with a degree from Yale University where we learned from Roland Barthes that the author is dead. And I know that's true because

I know Roland Barthes is dead. I saw his bones. They show them to you at Yale University in order to prove that we cannot truly judge authorial intention, even if the author, him or herself, says that they know what they intended. We only have this artifact, the text. It is sort of like a magical diary that you find in a bathroom. All you know is what is left for you. And all we do know from that text is that they kissed,

but did not have sex on the floor of the burrow, which or wherever they were, which I think, frankly, is probably just a fantasy in your weird fanfic mind, because it seems unlikely that it would happen in a young adult novel, even if Ron Weasley hadn't stopped it. hadn't stopped it. But in any case, we can never know for sure. I think all we have here is the text. And I would say, yeah, they kissed and that was probably it. So I will not give you your weird, provocative injunction. However, I do not have the text at hand at the moment here, which is incredibly irresponsible of me. So I will revisit this case. But only if you record for me this passage in your own voice, giving it whatever sexy overtones you want to make me understand that this is truly leading, truly trying to suggest the innuendo that Ginny and Harry were going to have a more intimate relationship than they had. had. Alternately, people who would like to argue the more chaste version can also record their own version of this passage and send it in. I'll listen to both and I'll determine which is more exciting for me to hear, I suppose. I'm interested. Can I hear them too? Yeah. I was really just thinking I would listen to myself while smoking my electric opium pipe.

Can we listen to them together? Hmm. Okay. It's good to together? Hmm, okay. It's good to have you back, Jesse. Hello, teachers and faculty. This is Janet Varney. I'm here to remind you that listening to my podcast, The JV Club with Janet Varney, is part of the curriculum for the school year.

Learning about the teenage years of such guests as The JV Club with Janet Varney is part of the curriculum for the school year. Learning about the teenage years of such guests as Alison Brie, Vicki Peterson, John Hodgman, and so many more is a valuable and enriching experience, one you have no choice but to embrace, because, yes, listening is mandatory. The JV Club with Janet Varney is available every Thursday on Maximum Fun or wherever you get your podcasts. Thank you. And remember, no running in the halls. If you need a laugh and you're on the go, try S-T-O-P-P-O-D-C-A-S-T-I-H.

Were you trying to put the name of the podcast there? Yeah, I'm trying to spell it, but it's tricky. Let me give it a try. Okay. If you need a laugh and you're on the go, call S-T-O-P-P-P-A-D-I. It'll never fit. No, it will. Let me try.

If you need a laugh and you're on the go, try S-T-O-P-P-P-D-C-O-O. Ah, we are so close. Stop podcasting yourself. A podcast from MaximumFun.org. If you need a laugh, then you're on the go. The Judge John Hodgman Podcast is a production of MaximumFun.org. Our special thanks to all of the folks who donate to support the show and all of our shows at MaximumFun.org slash donate.

The show is produced by Julia Smith and me, Jesse Thorne, and edited by Mark McConville. You can check out his podcast, Super Ego, in iTunes or online at GoSuperEgo.com. You can find John Hodgman online at AreasOfMyExpertise.com. online at areasofmyexpertise.com. If you have a case for Judge John Hodgman, go to maximumfund.org slash JJHO. If you have thoughts about the show, join the conversation on our forum at forum.maximumfund.org and our Facebook group at facebook.com slash Judge John Hodgman. We'll see you online and next time right here on the Judge John Hodgman podcast.