PlanetCrap 6.0!
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (2) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
T O P I C
No fags allowed
January 8th 2001, 23:06 CET by Andy

This BBC story reports that Dr David Kessler of the US Food and Drug Administration has called for the American tobacco industry to be dismantled, with companies only allowed to continue as supervised suppliers to existing "cigarette addicts". No marketing would be allowed and sales must only cover costs.

The proposals are made in Kessler's book, A Question of Intent: America's Struggle Against A Deadly Industry, which details a five-year investigation of the tobacco industry by the FDA.

So, a simple yes/no question: Should cigarettes be banned and tobacco treated as a prescription drug?

And of course, the not-so-simple question: Why?
C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: No fags allowed

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
#1 by "Creston"
2001-01-08 23:15:21
crestonmerritt@home.com
I totally agree with this. We shouldn't ban cigarettes since all that will do is cause a bunch of kids to kill each other over rights to distribute yet another illegal drug. However it is wrong to allow Tobacco companies actively running around getting new people hooked to help the bottom line. However this will not even begin to happen for awhile because George W. Bush is pro-tobacco.
#2 by "iddqd"
2001-01-08 23:17:24
iddqd@microsith.com
<b>[</b>Andy::0<b>]</b>
<quote>
So, a simple yes/no question: Should cigarettes be banned and tobacco treated as a prescription drug?
</quote>
No. If people want to kill themselves by smoking, let em. People will learn eventually. Every smoker I've ever talked to has either tried quitting before, or desires to quit eventually.
<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#3 by "None1a"
2001-01-08 23:25:39
none1a@home.com
<b>Andy</b> (#0):
<quote>So, a simple yes/no question: Should cigarettes be banned and tobacco treated as a prescription drug?

And of course, the not-so-simple question: Why?</quote>

No, Why it because yet nother drug to add to the problems with the others. We now know all the infomation (well excluding a few thigns that could be more clear) about the dangers so any people starting now are doing so out of there own choice. The second problem is that a law writen banning cigarettes would be writen much like current labeling laws are (exempting Cigars).

Here's the thing that really ticks me off, most tabacco companies have tryed to develop cigarettes with lower tar and that produce little or no second hand smoke, yet they are banned from releaseing them because they are new tobacco products. <i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#4 by "PainKilleR"
2001-01-08 23:29:17
painkiller@planetfortress.com
<b>iddqd</b> (#2):
<quote>No. If people want to kill themselves by smoking, let em. People will learn eventually. Every smoker I've ever talked to has either tried quitting before, or desires to quit eventually.
</quote>

And most of those people never will. While I don't agree with the idea of banning tobacco and treating it like a prescription drug (mostly because it won't do any good and will increase the cost of cigarettes), I do realize that as it is most smokers (myself included) are not going to quit, and the main reason it's so hard for people to quit smoking is because the cigarettes are readily available. People that become addicted to drugs have the option of disassociating themselves from everyone they know that can get drugs for them, and that's the way many people successfully quit using drugs. With cigarettes, as long as you can come up with the money, you can go down to any corner market and buy a pack. If you can't come up with the money, it's usually fairly easy to find someone that will be willing to give you a cigarette if you ask.

I guess if you asked alcoholics that have problems quitting they'd probably tell you pretty much the same thing. My social life is majorly impacted by the fact that I avoid places that sell or are centered around the sale of alcohol in order to make it easier for myself to remain a non-alcoholic. I still have a drink now and then with a large meal (usually those large meals that go with holidays like Christmas and Thanksgiving) or when I'm on business trips, but in general I go for months without a beer or a shot, and on those occasions that I do drink, it tends to be very little (maybe one beer with a meal, maybe a couple of drinks on one or two nites of a business trip). Considering that I drank by the 12-pack or by the fifth when I was in high school and my first year of college, it's close enough to quitting for me.

-PainKilleR-[CE]
#5 by "SteveBauman"
2001-01-08 23:31:29
steve@manic-pop-thrills.com
No. If people want to kill themselves by smoking, let em.

What if they're killing me with their cigarette smoke?

(Cue the car pollution debate.)

People will learn eventually. Every smoker I've ever talked to has either tried quitting before, or desires to quit eventually.

Of course they're not being helped by the companies placing chemicals designed to increase the addictiveness of tobacco in their cigarettes...

By the way, great headline.

Oh, but to answer your question, no, I don't think cigarettes should be banned. What would Hollywood actors do with their hands in movies? They wouldn't be able to shoot those smoke-filled rooms! It would be horrible!
#6 by "Ergo"
2001-01-08 23:35:38
stu@dsl-only.net
Bad idea. The US tried a little thing called Prohibition back in the 1920s and it proved to be a successful tool for making people like Al Capone and the Kennedys into multimillionaires.

If people want to drink, shoot smack, snort cocaine, or smoke cigarettes, they will--regardless of the legality.<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#7 by "iddqd"
2001-01-08 23:39:15
iddqd@microsith.com
<b>[</b>SteveBauman::5<b>]</b>
<quote>
What if they're killing me with their cigarette smoke?
</quote>
I usually go out of my way to avoid cigarette smoke. Very few of my friends smoke and those who do have learned to not smoke around me. I try to avoid places filled with smokers (holy shit, anyone been to Disneyland lately?). In California it is already illegal to smoke in restaurants, so thats not a problem anymore. Anyway, my point is that I doubt the amount of smoke I am exposed to in my daily life will cause me many health problems. Do you all find it hard to avoid secondhand smoke?

<quote>
Of course they're not being helped by the companies placing chemicals designed to increase the addictiveness of tobacco in their cigarettes...
</quote>
Well, I mean eventually people will learn not to start smoking in the first place. I did.<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#8 by "DukeNukem"
2001-01-08 23:43:47
scottm@3drealms.com
Cigarettes are undeniably bad for one's health.  They are undeniably addicting, even proven to be more addicting than many hard drugs.  And, again undeniably, the vast majority of people who start smoking do so before the age of 15, and do so not because it taste good, but because of the image and rebel coolness associated with smoking at that young, weak-minded age.

I'd be for allowing smoking if it could be enforceably banned until the age 18, at which point most people who started at a younger age would have the sense not to start at 18 or older.  (Ask anyone who smokes in their 20's or 30's or older, and they'll tell you they wish they had never started.)

So, my answer is that because smoking cannot be reasonably enforced/stopped until the age of 18, it should be banned because we have under 18-year-olds making horrible decisions to smoke as a result of peer pressure and other misguided youthful reasons.

With rare exceptions, smoking doesn't do anyone any good.  It's a pointless drug.  And worse of all, it just stinks!  Forget the second-hand smoke health issues -- I'm much more worried about the outright stinch of cigarette smoke.  Something smokers themselves have become used to, but to non-smokers might as well be greasy farts.

Honestly, I'd hate to be a smoker.  They must feel like outcasts, being banned to smoke from so many locations, and having to smoke outside on freezing days, they spend enough money to retire rich if they'd spend the money burned in cigarettes instead in a mutual fund, and they're almost surely shortening their lives and giving themselves a much greater chance of dying painfully, going through more surgeries, dying of cancer, and so on.

I mean, is smoking worth all the negatives?!  What does it give you in return, besides smelly clothes?

Okay, off my anti-smoking soapbox.  ;-)

Scott Miller
#9 by "szcx"
2001-01-08 23:45:01
nedocze@hotmail.com
I usually go out of my way to avoid cigarette smoke.

I wish smokers would go out of their way to not smoke around other people.  I also wish I could go out of my way to not have to foot their bill when they're dying from emphysema in some hospice.
#10 by "asspennies"
2001-01-08 23:45:22
asspennies@somethingawful.com
What an absolutely <b>brilliant</b> idea.  Already struggling with the black market it inadvertently created for all manner of illegal drugs, the US decides to create an even LARGER black market for cigarettes.  

This has to be officially the dumbest idea of the millenium so far.<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#11 by "szcx"
2001-01-08 23:47:01
nedocze@hotmail.com
That second wish was uncalled for... can I have that wish back, Genie?
#12 by "iddqd"
2001-01-08 23:49:30
iddqd@microsith.com
<b>[</b>szcx::9<b>]</b>
<quote>
I wish smokers would go out of their way to not smoke around other people. I also wish I could go out of my way to not have to foot their bill when they're dying from emphysema in some hospice.
</quote>
Yeah, I wish those things too, but the fact is most people are either inconsiderate or just oblivious. I find that most people comply if you ask them to put out their cigarette or move someone else. Sure, you get some dirty looks, but fuck em. Not my fault they smoke. As for the taxes, I am in total agreement with you there.<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#13 by "Andy"
2001-01-08 23:50:51
andy@meejahor.com
<b>SteveBauman</b> (#5):
<quote>
By the way, great headline.
</quote>
Are you being sarcastic? :-)
#14 by "PHroot"
2001-01-08 23:52:03
david.h.hanratty@alcatel.com
shoudn't be banned, what else would i do while waiting for everyone else to die in counterstrike?

i don't think the UK government could do without the tax brought in by overpriced tobacco products, even though it costs the NHS millions to treat people with smoking related diseases......hmmm  what was my point again?
#15 by "1"
2001-01-09 00:00:56
primer55@g33k.net
Ban them. End of story.

_1!
#16 by "iddqd"
2001-01-09 00:02:13
iddqd@microsith.com
<b>[</b>1::15<b>]</b>
<quote>Ban them. End of story.
</quote>
Woo! Supporting evidence is highly overrated anyway.<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#17 by "PainKilleR"
2001-01-09 00:16:10
painkiller@planetfortress.com
<b>PHroot</b> (#14):
<quote>i don't think the UK government could do without the tax brought in by overpriced tobacco products, even though it costs the NHS millions to treat people with smoking related diseases......hmmm what was my point again?</quote>
I don't think the US government (or at least the state governments) could survive without it either. At least here in California, the state government makes more money off of each pack of cigarettes sold than the tobacco companies.

<b>iddqd</b> (#12):
<quote>Yeah, I wish those things too, but the fact is most people are either inconsiderate or just oblivious. I find that most people comply if you ask them to put out their cigarette or move someone else. Sure, you get some dirty looks, but fuck em. Not my fault they smoke. </quote>

I like the dirty looks I get when someone wanders into the area where I'm smoking, as if they couldn't see it before they wandered by me, or as if I don't go out of my way to make sure I'm not in a high traffic area most of the time. Fuck 'em, I'm outside, I'm not between the normal points A and B, walk in a straight line next time or pay a toll for breathing my valuable smoke.

<b>szcx</b> (#9):
<quote>I wish smokers would go out of their way to not smoke around other people. I also wish I could go out of my way to not have to foot their bill when they're dying from emphysema in some hospice.</quote>

I happen to know only a small number of people that smoke, and most, if not all, of them do go out of their way not to smoke around non-smokers. Maybe it has something to do with age and the fact that most of the people I know grew up knowing that smoking was dangerous to your health and wasn't 'cool'. In fact, I should've copied part of Scott's post, because I don't think I know anyone that started smoking because it was cool. The cool people were all non-smokers anyway, fuck 'em. As for footing people's bills, well, I don't believe in public health care that goes to the extent of trying to save people that will die of cancer. I already pay more for Medicare than I do for my own health insurance, anyway, so if someday I end up using Medicare, I'm the one that paid for it.

-PainKilleR-[CE]
#18 by "Kallisti"
2001-01-09 00:23:04
kallisti@uswest.net
I guess it goes to show that having a "Dr." in front of your name doesn't necessarily mean that you are aren't a <b>complete dumbass</b>.

Ooooh, dismantle the industry. Oh sure. That worked <i>so well</i> in the past, didn't it?

I don't think I want this guy taking my tonsils out, either.<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#19 by "fingo"
2001-01-09 00:26:14
fingo@graffiti.net
I heard this from somebody recently.  Apparantly a country (do not remember name, may have been Netherlands but not sure) came up with a very good drug campain.  They looked at their statistics and international statistics on illigal drugs, and realized that a ban would be imposible, somebody would still sell illigal drugs.  So they came up with a great idea: They legalized drugs, but witha  catch.  They had a monopoly on the market by only athorising the government to give out the drugs.  If you were an addict, every day  before work/school you would go to a government clinic and get your shot/smoke/whatever.  They had proffesional doctors administrating the drugs, so you were not in danger of overdose, unpure drug, or catching aids from a used needle.  First off this created less danger of using drugs, most deaths because of drugs occur due to bad administration of drug (read overdose) or impure drugs.  Also this caused a stop to black market drugs which are worse to health because the government can afford to sell drugs at low enough prices so that there would be no reason to buy illigal drugs.  This also stopped people killing each other for drugs or money to buy drugs.<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#20 by "fingo"
2001-01-09 00:29:31
fingo@graffiti.net
Oh and Andy I see you dont hang out with the cool kids these days.  I was expecting a gays in the millitary post ;)  <i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#21 by "szcx"
2001-01-09 00:53:03
nedocze@hotmail.com
If the US wants to drastically reduce smoking, why not take advantage of the rampant homophobia?  Mandate that all cigarette advertizing must refer to the product using the British term, 'fag'.  Malboro Fags, Camel Fags, you get the idea.  Watch how quickly the teen smoking rate drops then.
#22 by "Intaglio"
2001-01-09 00:54:22
eric@gurutech.org
iddqd said:
If people want to kill themselves by smoking, let em. People will learn eventually.

Only problem is that when someone smokes they're essentially killing everyone around them.
#23 by "PainKilleR"
2001-01-09 01:02:56
painkiller@planetfortress.com
<b>Intaglio</b> (#22):
<quote>Only problem is that when someone smokes they're essentially killing everyone around them.</quote>

Wouldn't it be great if all advertising worked as well as anti-smoking advertisments?

-PainKilleR-[CE]<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#24 by "szcx"
2001-01-09 01:05:29
nedocze@hotmail.com
Wouldn't it be great if all advertising worked as well as anti-smoking advertisments?

gamers.com needs banner ads of cowboys playing Quake.
#25 by "fingo"
2001-01-09 01:08:01
fingo@graffiti.net
gamers.com needs banner ads of cowboys playing Quake

Combatsim.com needs an immage  of a cowboy hiting his privates with a BFG.
#26 by "SteveBauman"
2001-01-09 01:11:08
steve@manic-pop-thrills.com
Are you being sarcastic? :-)

Moi? Never! It IS a great headline...

If the US wants to drastically reduce smoking, why not take advantage of the rampant homophobia? Mandate that all cigarette advertizing must refer to the product using the British term, 'fag'. Malboro Fags, Camel Fags, you get the idea. Watch how quickly the teen smoking rate drops then.

Wow, that's so freakin' brilliant... and regretfully would probably work.
#27 by "spackbace"
2001-01-09 01:11:28
brian@cc.gatech.edu
they should legalize mary jane and ban cigarretes.  that would rux.

oh and i've always wondered, so can one of you nasty smokers answer this question : why DID you start using them?  do they actually make u feel high or something?  i dont know why ANYone would start, except for the whole image-i'm-cool thing.  Hmm, i'm trying a new substance and it's making me puke the first 4 times i try it.  Gosh I think i'll just keep on doing it cuz surely it will get better!

or is it just that you feel like shit whenever you're not smoking (once you're addicted over that whole puking-constantly phase)?
#28 by "1"
2001-01-09 01:16:40
primer55@g33k.net
Woo! Supporting evidence is highly overrated anyway.
I'd rather not repeat something other people have said and "yeah I agree with so-and-so" feels quite cheesy.

_1!
#29 by "Ergo"
2001-01-09 01:16:51
stu@dsl-only.net
Well, I quit smoking over a year ago, but I started smoking when I was in college in order to counteract the sleepy effects of alcohol when I was out partying. That, in turn, led to a 12-year smoking addiction that I only recently kicked.<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#30 by "PainKilleR"
2001-01-09 01:22:24
painkiller@planetfortress.com
<b>spackbace</b> (#27):
<quote>oh and i've always wondered, so can one of you nasty smokers answer this question : why DID you start using them? do they actually make u feel high or something? i dont know why ANYone would start, except for the whole image-i'm-cool thing. Hmm, i'm trying a new substance and it's making me puke the first 4 times i try it. Gosh I think i'll just keep on doing it cuz surely it will get better!

or is it just that you feel like shit whenever you're <I>not</I> smoking (once you're addicted over that whole puking-constantly phase)?</quote>

The number one reason I started smoking and continue smoking is because it made me feel relaxed. It got rid of that feeling that I wanted to kill every fuckwit that had something to say that I didn't like to hear. Then again, with age that feeling doesn't come along as often anyway.

The image thing is either a myth or a byproduct of the past. I don't know anyone that actually believes it's cool to smoke, and I didn't know anyone that did when I started back in 1992 when I was in high school.

I've never puked because of smoking, even the first few times I tried it. I do remember that at first, if I smoked more than one cigarette in a time period of a few hours, I did feel pretty bad. Most of that stopped when my dad quit smoking, though, thereby leading to one of the secondary reasons that I started smoking (second-hand smoke most of my life, addiction before I even started). I probably could've quit if I had decided to when my dad quit, but I didn't, and I went up to a 3pack a day habit within a month of his quitting. I've been about a pack a day smoker for the last 5 years, though.

When I'm not smoking (more like when I haven't had a cigarette for a few hours) it's not that I feel like shit, just that I feel like something's missing, and I tend to be quicker to anger. I usually end up spending a lot of time trying to find something to do and eventually find my way to the store to get another pack.

-PainKilleR-[CE]<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#31 by "Speed"
2001-01-09 01:34:28
speed@pandora.be
fingo : The Netherlands haven't completely legalised soft drugs.

Situation in The Netherlands : One is allowed to use soft drugs (weed, cannabis, shit, ...), one is allowed to have a small amount of soft drugs, and coffee shops (they don't really sell coffee) are allowed to sell soft drugs and have a small amount of soft drugs in stock.

The problems : coffee shops aren't allowed to actually BUY soft drugs, and their stocks are sold when 3 customers come by (if they would have only the legal amount of stock)

I find that a bit hypocrit of the Dutch government.
In Belgium the government is talking about a similar way of acting : one is allowed to have 5 grams of soft drugs for own use, but one is not allowed to sell of buy the soft drugs (???)

Personally my opinion on this is the following : soft drugs should get completely legalised. They were legal before WW1, and only became illegal after the cigarette industry started to see weed and variants as a competitor because anyone can grow the plants at their house and smoke it. The cigarette companies started pushing alot of money into a contra-cannabis campain, pushing governments to ban cannabis (especially in the US).
Everyone knows what happened : the cigarette industry won and cannabis was illegal in the whole world.
Cannabis is proven to have healthy side-effects (they seem to be one hell of a tranquillizer, having good effects on Multiple-Sclerosis patients, and havind less side-effects than f.i. morphine) and if the government would just sell it through local pharmacists or let people grow their own plants in their houses, alot of illegally made money would disappear.

The problem with this is that this should be discussed in a worldwide way, and the cigarette companies really don't want that to happen. Especially countries where they have alot of influence (like the US, and especially with Bush-types in the main seat) will do everything to hold this legalisation back.

Then for the main topic : Bull shit. Bringing cigarettes into the law as illegal is crazy and will make that the criminals have another lucrative way of earning their money (like others have said already).
Next to that, again the big cigarette companies will never allow this, and they have more than enough influence to not make it happen (again certainly with Bush-types in the US government)

Speed
Fragland.net
#32 by "iddqd"
2001-01-09 01:39:50
iddqd@microsith.com
<b>[</b>PainKilleR::17<b>]</b>
<quote>
I like the dirty looks I get when someone wanders into the area where I'm smoking, as if they couldn't see it before they wandered by me, or as if I don't go out of my way to make sure I'm not in a high traffic area most of the time. Fuck 'em, I'm outside, I'm not between the normal points A and B, walk in a straight line next time or pay a toll for breathing my valuable smoke.
</quote>
Yeah, I didnt mean to generalize there. The few smokers who light up as they are walking through a busy traffic area blowing smoke all over and leaving a trail behind for you to breathe as you walk down the sidewalk behind them usually just dont notice they are doing it. Point it out to them and they usually stop. Like I said, the worst I've gotten are dirty looks. I dont run around the side of buildings finding people who are smoking and asking them to move or anything. As long as you are aware of where you are and who you are affecting while you smoke, I have no problem.<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#33 by "PainKilleR"
2001-01-09 01:47:50
painkiller@planetfortress.com
<b>Speed</b> (#31):
<quote>Personally my opinion on this is the following : soft drugs should get completely legalised. They were legal before WW1, and only became illegal after the cigarette industry started to see weed and variants as a competitor because anyone can grow the plants at their house and smoke it. The cigarette companies started pushing alot of money into a contra-cannabis campain, pushing governments to ban cannabis (especially in the US).
</quote>

What would be more interesting is if the cigarette companies would only realize that they're the only ones that have the largest jump to begin manufacture and distribution of marijuana-based cigarettes. If they could see the potential for profit and see the posibility of not looking like the bad guys going into it, it would probably be a gold-mine for them until government studies start exposing the same problems with smoking marijuana that they've exposed with tobacco. I personally don't like the idea of people being able to walk into the same places I'm buying cigarettes and buying marijuana cigarettes over the counter, but at the same time, the reasons that the government used for banning it were almost entirely fiction.

 There is a lot to be gained from legalizing it, but at the same time the government would have to put money into campaigns for responsible use just like they have with alcohol, and a new set of laws would have to be applied or existing laws strengthened to cover driving under the influence and everything else (I realize that for many people driving under the influence of marijuana probably isn't that big of a deal, especially compared to driving under the influence of alcohol, but it can be problematic, and shouldn't be condoned).

-PainKilleR-[CE]<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#34 by "Speed"
2001-01-09 01:52:08
speed@pandora.be
<i>Painkiller :What would be more interesting is if the cigarette companies would only realize that they're the only ones that have the largest jump to begin manufacture and distribution of marijuana-based cigarettes. If they could see the potential for profit and see the posibility of not looking like the bad guys going into it, it would probably be a gold-mine for them until government studies start exposing the same problems with smoking marijuana that they've exposed with tobacco. </i>

This would indeed be a good thing, but I spoke about the problem for this already. The cigarette industry will never want to do this because they will not make money out of this for the simple reason that making marijuana-based products legal will mean that anyone can grow the plants and smoke their own crops (which is impossible with cigarettes)

Speed
Fragland.net
#35 by "iddqd"
2001-01-09 01:54:03
iddqd@microsith.com
<b>[</b>Speed::34<b>]</b>
<quote>This would indeed be a good thing, but I spoke about the problem for this already. The cigarette industry will never want to do this because they will not make money out of this for the simple reason that making marijuana-based products legal will mean that anyone can grow the plants and smoke their own crops (which is impossible with cigarettes)
</quote>
Yeah, but not everyone wants to. You can grow your own corn right now, but do you still go to the store and buy corn when you want it?<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#36 by "Speed"
2001-01-09 02:00:34
speed@pandora.be
There's a difference in growing corn and growing marijuana, isn't there ?
A cannabis plant is pretty easy to grow and it doesn't cost much to keep (so I heard - my cousin is with the narcotics-police) while growing you own corn isn't so easy and costs more (you can't grow corn in your living room, can you ?)

Speed
Fragland.net
#37 by "PainKilleR"
2001-01-09 02:00:39
painkiller@planetfortress.com
<b>iddqd</b> (#35):
<quote>Yeah, but not everyone wants to. You can grow your own corn right now, but do you still go to the store and buy corn when you want it?</quote>

Exactly, it's far more convenient to go get a pack of pre-rolled marijuana cigarettes than deal with growing marijuana yourself. Not to mention getting the space to do it and using the proper heat lamps and whatever other techniques you'd need to get the type of marijuana you want to grow in your climate. Marijuana grows wild on the side of the freeways in Nebraska, but it doesn't grow wild in California (at least no part of Cali that I've been to).

-PainKilleR-[CE]<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#38 by "PainKilleR"
2001-01-09 02:03:14
painkiller@planetfortress.com
<b>Speed</b> (#36):
<quote>A cannabis plant is pretty easy to grow and it doesn't cost much to keep (so I heard - my cousin is with the narcotics-police) while growing you own corn isn't so easy and costs more (you can't grow corn in your living room, can you ?)
</quote>

People only grow marijuana in their closet because they're afraid of black helicopters and there's a good chance that it'll die if they grow it outside and don't pay attention to keeping it from the frost and the cold nite air. The same problems come with growing corn, except that no one would bother growing corn in their closet because they don't have a reason to (and you'd generally need more plants in most cases to keep your family fed with corn than to keep your pot habit going).

-PainKilleR-[CE]<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#39 by "None1a"
2001-01-09 02:29:33
none1a@home.com
<b>szcx</b> (#9):
<quote>I wish smokers would go out of their way to not smoke around other people. I also wish I could go out of my way to not have to foot their bill when they're dying from emphysema in some hospice.</quote>

A lot will try not to smoke around known non-smokers. However I've seen some self righous non-smokers go out of their way to go into areas where people are alowed to smoke then bitch about it. Another thing is that the laws are not well thought out most of the time, for example here in Fort Wayne we've got a 100 foot law (no smokeing with in 100 feet of a doorway into a place of busieness), the problem is that the laws still applies even if the door was put in place as a ext for smokers to get to the smokeing area (you also can't smoke in a tabacco shop).

The second you I agree with totaly, with one provision. Any one that's started smokeing after the warning labels where in place should eat the cost on their own, people that started before that should have the bills payed by the tabacco company (you'd end up paying a bit more for some foods since many tabacco companies also own food companies as well). Also the tax on tabacco product was supposted to be used for education of health cost (not like it really went there).

<b>Intaglio</b> (#22):
<quote>Only problem is that when someone smokes they're essentially killing everyone around them.</quote>

Then go and smack the FDA around for not allow the development of cigarette to lower the amount of smoke put out.

<b>spackbace</b> (#27):
<quote>oh and i've always wondered, so can one of you nasty smokers answer this question : why DID you start using them? do they actually make u feel high or something? i dont know why ANYone would start, except for the whole image-i'm-cool thing. Hmm, i'm trying a new substance and it's making me puke the first 4 times i try it. Gosh I think i'll just keep on doing it cuz surely it will get better!</quote>

To relax mostly. And I have never puked from a pack of cigs (ok I can see it if your first pack ended up being a stale one).
<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#40 by "paul"
2001-01-09 02:34:33
pbullman@webhitzone.com
GIVE ME A BREAK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Our Society has become a wishing well of self proclaimed heroes. Nowadays we all know what's best for everyone else. My friends, that IS NOT freedom. Freedom is the ability to allow one to screw up provided he or she does not harm another for as long as he or she wants.

Every man is a government unto himself. Every man has the right, the fundamental birth right, to do whatever harm, or lack there of, to himself as he likes. I thought we grew up from the Divine Right of Kings/Government arguement.

It's really so simple.. too..

- Paul
#41 by "paul"
2001-01-09 02:37:43
pbullman@webhitzone.com
iddqd:

Yeah, but not everyone wants to. You can grow your own corn right now, but do you still go to the store and buy corn when you want it?


That's because of supply and demand. It's cheaper to just purchase corn from people who grow a lot of corn. If we legalized common sense again, things like pot would be dirt cheap at the market

- Paul
#42 by "TomC"
2001-01-09 02:41:02
tc10@st-andrews.ac.uk
*hides brimming ashtray under desk...
*runs from argument he knows he'll lose, since he's had it with damn-near every one of his non-smoking friends and still can't damn well quit...

;-)
#43 by "paul"
2001-01-09 02:42:25
pbullman@webhitzone.com
Ergo:

Well, I quit smoking over a year ago, but I started smoking when I was in college in order to counteract the sleepy effects of alcohol when I was out partying. That, in turn, led to a 12-year smoking addiction that I only recently kicked.


And do you blame someone else for your habit? Since you seem to have common sense, I doubt you do, but these control perverts seem to think you can blame everyone else but yourself for anything.

I think I am going to drive my car on a busy walk way down town. Why? Because my car does not have a warning stating "Do not drive onto busy walk ways down town." I purchased a car from them, and they know that if I drive my car on a busy walk way I could hurt many. They chose not to warn me.

- Paul
#44 by "TomC"
2001-01-09 02:43:30
tc10@st-andrews.ac.uk
Seriously though - smokers are pretty close to pariah in many, many places, and I can see smoking before long being considered alongside alcoholism and the like - a dirty secret that nobody talks about. Of course I'm going to say that tobacco shouldn't be banned, and I can back it up any way I please, but unless I were a non-smoker, anyone can riposte that 'of course you'd say that - you're an addict yourself'. All I can do is shrug my shoulders and keep trying to quit.
#45 by "szcx"
2001-01-09 02:44:24
nedocze@hotmail.com
thus proving that the best kind of logic is wacko-logic.
#46 by "paul"
2001-01-09 02:46:46
pbullman@webhitzone.com
SteveB:

What if they're killing me with their cigarette smoke?


Ask them to stop. If they do not, exercise your free speech and start talking to them about the most boring topic you can think of. Or just move somewhere else.
#47 by "PainKilleR"
2001-01-09 02:49:24
painkiller@planetfortress.com
<b>paul</b> (#46):
<quote>If they do not, exercise your free speech and start talking to them about the most boring topic you can think of</quote>

The evils of smoking's a good nomine for 'most boring topic you can think of', especially to someone that's just trying to get their fix.

-PainKilleR-[CE]<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#48 by "WarrenMarshall"
2001-01-09 02:50:26
warren@epicgames.com
PainKilleR (#30):
(second-hand smoke most of my life, addiction before I even started).

I must be incredibly resistant to addiction then because both my parents smoked for most of my life.  My Dad quit and went back a few times (he's off for good now), but my mother always has.  My grandmothers did and my older brother too ... but somehow I never felt the desire to take it up.

Then again, I've made it a point to avoid anything that might be potentially addictive ...  I don't smoke, drink or do drugs ... I don't purposely avoid caffeine, but I don't drink coffee ...

Not that it's helped me remain healthy or anything.  :P

---

Warren Marshall
Level Designer/Programmer/Corporate Shill
Epic Games (www.epicgames.com)<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#49 by "WarrenMarshall"
2001-01-09 02:52:43
warren@epicgames.com
paul (#40):
Our Society has become a wishing well of self proclaimed heroes. Nowadays we all know what's best for everyone else. My friends, that IS NOT freedom. Freedom is the ability to allow one to screw up provided he or she does not harm another for as long as he or she wants.

You've heard of second hand smoke, yes?

---

Warren Marshall
Level Designer/Programmer/Corporate Shill
Epic Games (www.epicgames.com)<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
#50 by "PainKilleR"
2001-01-09 03:15:30
painkiller@planetfortress.com
<b>WarrenMarshall</b> (#48):
<quote>I must be incredibly resistant to addiction then because both my parents smoked for most of my life. My Dad quit and went back a few times (he's off for good now), but my mother always has. My grandmothers did and my older brother too ... but somehow I never felt the desire to take it up.
</quote>

Well that is the one major difference, I did start smoking before my dad quit, and the desire to start was more out of curiosity than anything else. I was always the kind of person that would try most things at least once. The addiction wasn't really noticable until my dad quit, at which point my smoking greatly increased. If I hadn't started smoking before my dad quit, I don't think I would've noticed the difference either. The only reason I noticed is because I went from what was essentially a 2-3 cigarette a day habit to a 3 pack a day habit in maybe 3 months time, and part of that may just have been because of the fact that I had just started, but I was really taking in a lot more nicotine before my dad quit than I was immediately after he quit.

Of course, my dad was a pack a day smoker, and most of that smoking he did at home (he smoked maybe 3-5 cigarettes a day at work, but chain-smoked once he got home). My mom quit smoking before I was born, and then started up again when I was 10 or 11, about 2 years after my parents split up.

-PainKilleR-[CE]<i><b></b></i><i></i><i></i>
C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: No fags allowed

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
P O S T   A   C O M M E N T

You need to be logged in to post a comment here. If you don't have an account yet, you can create one here. Registration is free.
C R A P T A G S
Simple formatting: [b]bold[/b], [i]italic[/i], [u]underline[/u]
Web Links: [url=www.mans.de]Cool Site[/url], [url]www.mans.de[/url]
Email Links: [email=some@email.com]Email me[/email], [email]some@email.com[/email]
Simple formatting: Quoted text: [quote]Yadda yadda[/quote]
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (2) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
There are currently 0 people browsing this site. [Details]