[UNTeMac]

Ok, here's one for you guys.

400,000 people die every year from smoking related diseases. Tobacco, when used in its intended manner (i.e. smoking/dipping) addicts the user due to the nicotine content. Just ask a longtime smoker who has tried to quit. Some might say that alcohol causes more deaths. Well yes, irresponsible use of alcohol (i.e. drinking then driving a car or excessive consumption.) But, tobacco, if used continuously , will most likely be the cause of an early and painful death.

Now, without going into the logistics of enforcing tobacco restrictions (b/c it'd be impossible) or the impossibility of legislation due to lobbyists and without flaming me What do you think?

[ 04-09-2002: Message edited by: UNTiMac ]

[juanvaldes]

not bad.

[Camera God]

sounds good....I just hate the smell of the smoke

[siegzdad]

Making it illegal would be next to impossible. But I do agree that it is dangerous -- not only to those who smoke it, but to those who are around it. My great aunt lived in the middle of nowhere -- no factories, no power lines, or the latest flavour of the week cause, and died of lung cancer having never smoked a cigarette. But her husband smoked 3 packs a day...

"They didn't know it causes cancer at the time." Fine, but you can't say that anymore.

Anybody who smokes in this day and age knows it is bad for their health.

Personally, I think they should make everyone who buys cigarettes sign a waiver of liability every time the buy a pack... Better yet, make 'em sign one for every cigarette they smoke.

[Sealobo]

Sooner or later smoking will become illegal. But then i guess it won't happen within the next 100 years.

[driven]

As much as I *HATE* smoking and I *HATE* it when folks smoke around me, or even in the same ZIP code as me, these people have to wise up and realize that they are killing themselves.

If you make a case that the government has to take care of these folks because they are too stupid to take care of themselves then I won't go for it. I don't view the government as big mommy.

Now, if you want to make it illegal to smoke outside of their own little homes (as in a 2nd hand smoke public health issue) then I might be convinced.

[nonhuman]

Personally, people smoking doesn't really bother me that much. But, I would have no problem with it being illegal in public buildings and public transportation, basically any enclosed space that is under the direct supervision of the government. The government should not be able to outlaw it in restaurants, hotels, homes, or any other private place, it should be up to the proprietors of those places to decide whether or not they want to allow smoking. It should not be illegal to smoke outside, because it doesn't really affect other people. It should only be illegal in public places where smoking actually causes a health risk to other people.

[UNTeMac]

Originally posted by driven:
<STRONG>As much as I *HATE* smoking and I *HATE* it when folks smoke around me, or even in the same ZIP code as me, these people have to wise up and realize that they are killing themselves.

If you make a case that the government has to take care of these folks because they are too stupid to take care of themselves then I won't go for it. I don't view the government as big mommy.

Now, if you want to make it illegal to smoke outside of their own little homes (as in a 2nd hand smoke public health issue) then I might be convinced.</STRONG>

Agreed, except that these people (at least for the most part) started smoking maybe to try it or what have you but the addiction part of it makes it extremely hard to stop if not nearly impossible for some heavy smokers. Doesn't that remove some of their free will from the equation?

I'm sure I'll have some smokers mad at me for that one, but I bet a few who smoked for awhile and managed to quit will know what I'm talking about. Nicotine is a powerful substance.

[sek929]

Number of Marajuana Related Deaths every year - 1000
Number of Tobacco Related Deaths every year - 400,000

Yet pot is illegal

(Don't ask me to provide a link for the pot deaths thing, I saw it a while back on CNN or some news channel, it could have been 2000, I'm not sure, either way it pales to the deaths causes by tobacco)

Now Tomacco is ok in my book

[ReggieX]

In Toronto, new anti-smoking laws were passed last year regulating smoking in bars and restaurants. One nasty side effect is that a lot of the smaller restaurants that allow smoking have been pretty much taken over by the smokers! Half a metre of dead air doesn't stop much, now does it?
The other stupidity associated with this is that any place that allows smoking isn't allowed to have minors (under 19, the legal drinking and smoking age) there! 16 and want to take your high school sweetheart for a nice meal? DENIED

[UNTeMac]

Originally posted by nonhuman:
<STRONG>The government should not be able to outlaw it in restaurants, hotels, homes, or any other private place, it should be up to the proprietors of those places to decide whether or not they want to allow smoking.

&lt;snip&gt;

It should only be illegal in public places where smoking actually causes a health risk to other people.</STRONG>

That seems contradictory, any closed space where second-hand smoke can concentrate is a health risk to citizens, whether public property or not. Since smoking is so widespread in establishments throughout the country, private citizens don't have much of a choice (i.e. boycotting not viable)

Remember, we're talking in theory here. I know this is probably next to impossible to legislate.

[Sealobo]

My father (in Hong Kong) would not come and visit me (in Toronto) because he couldn't survive not being able to smoke on the plane. That sucks.

I should sue the tobacco company for indirectly causing my dad not being able to travel to the other side of the planet to see his son~! I really miss my dad you know? I might have a depression and develop to some sort of mental problem... I think i have a good chance for getting a few millions bucks as compensation.

[BRussell]

Yeah, smoking is the number 1 cause of death in the US and I believe most industrialized countries. (Infectious diseases are still the leading causes of death in the developing world, I believe.) Not even the number 1 preventable cause, but the number 1 cause of all deaths. It underlies most of the biggest killers, which are cardiovascular disease (heart attacks, strokes, etc.) and cancers.

Here are two other possibilities:

1. Make drugs illegal to sell, but not illegal to use.
If people want to kill themselves, that's fine. I just don't like people profiting from it. If you want to grow your own and smoke it, that's fine, as long as you don't sell it. Take the marketing incentive out of it. Don't put the users in jail, put the dealers in jail.

2. Get rid of the income tax, and institute a national sales sin tax.
Make the sales tax only apply to stuff that's bad for you - you can sell anything you want (drugs, tobacco, unsafe products, etc.), but the regulation would come in the form of very high taxes on stuff that's deemed harmful. That way, if you want to smoke, drink, eat Big Macs, buy cars without seatbelts, etc., you can, but it'll cost you. It's your choice.

[Justin W. Williams]

Originally posted by sealobo:
<STRONG>Sooner or later smoking will become illegal. But then i guess it won't happen within the next 100 years.</STRONG>

I doubt it. The Government makes money off the cig. companies. They don't make crap off the Marijauana industry: just the terrorists do.

edit

[sek929]

Originally posted by BRussell:
<STRONG>Yeah, smoking is the number 1 cause of death in the US and I believe most industrialized countries. (Infectious diseases are still the leading causes of death in the developing world, I believe.) Not even the number 1 preventable cause, but the number 1 cause of all deaths. It underlies most of the biggest killers, which are cardiovascular disease (heart attacks, strokes, etc.) and cancers.

Here are two other possibilities:

1. Make drugs illegal to sell, but not illegal to use.
If people want to kill themselves, that's fine. I just don't like people profiting from it. If you want to grow your own and smoke it, that's fine, as long as you don't sell it. Take the marketing incentive out of it. Don't put the users in jail, put the dealers in jail.

2. Get rid of the income tax, and institute a national sales sin tax.
Make the sales tax only apply to stuff that's bad for you - you can sell anything you want (drugs, tobacco, unsafe products, etc.), but the regulation would come in the form of very high taxes on stuff that's deemed harmful. That way, if you want to smoke, drink, eat Big Macs, buy cars without seatbelts, etc., you can, but it'll cost you. It's your choice.</STRONG>

I find your ideas fascinating and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

I agree about everything you said, spot on man. If I wanna grow a pot plant, in my own greenhouse, for my use (I never have, or will sell pot) why should that be illegal? I am using my own money for something that is for my own enjoyment, its like a videogame except natural.

That said if I have a balloon of Heroin, and I wanna shoot up till my arm falls off, thats my own choice, should I be thrown in jail for it? Nope. Plus if you nab all the dealers you can most of harmful drugs people couldn't make themselves (coke, heroin, LSD) would slowly fizzle out. While the stuff you can grow yourself (Opium, Shrooms, Pot) would be legal to have and use, as long as you have no intent to sell, sounds good to me. And hey lets take it even further. Make it illegal to be on public property and smoking pot, or anything else. Limit its use to private and self-owned areas. No problem with that.

The gov could make alot of people happy, and also make the drug trade smaller by letting people use within their own discretion. I mean If I could grow my own legally, then I would stop going to dealers, as I know alot of my friends would. It just makes sense.

Or maybe I am a dreaming fool, oh well.

[nonhuman]

Originally posted by UNTiMac:
<STRONG>

That seems contradictory, any closed space where second-hand smoke can concentrate is a health risk to citizens, whether public property or not. Since smoking is so widespread in establishments throughout the country, private citizens don't have much of a choice (i.e. boycotting not viable)</STRONG>

Boycotting is always a choice. You don't have to go out to dinner. It's entirely possible to cook for yourself, have something delivered, or go to a drive-through. And if smoking weren't illegal in restaurants, and non-smokers started not going to restaurants that allowed smoking, some restaurants would stop allowing smoking to cater to the people who want that.

The same applies to other kinds of establishments as well. Market pressure is the key to having businesses work the way you want them to, not legislation.

[ 04-09-2002: Message edited by: nonhuman ]

[Drizzt]

2. Get rid of the income tax, and institute a national sales sin tax.
Make the sales tax only apply to stuff that's bad for you - you can sell anything you want (drugs, tobacco, unsafe products, etc.), but the regulation would come in the form of very high taxes on stuff that's deemed harmful. That way, if you want to smoke, drink, eat Big Macs, buy cars without seatbelts, etc., you can, but it'll cost you. It's your choice.

This one won't work for sure..
It has been tried in Quebec, and the result was higher black market activity..

The part one I like.. my idea is drugs show be legal, so that the quality of it get higher, and the crap in the streets disappear..

Cigarettes are an exception because it is legal crap.. Government should take care of drug production/selling to those who want some.. it would generate an income, would get rid of the black market/organized crime and still would not hurt the society as a whole...

[driven]

Originally posted by UNTiMac:
<STRONG>

That seems contradictory, any closed space where second-hand smoke can concentrate is a health risk to citizens, whether public property or not. Since smoking is so widespread in establishments throughout the country, private citizens don't have much of a choice (i.e. boycotting not viable)

Remember, we're talking in theory here. I know this is probably next to impossible to legislate.</STRONG>

It's totally viable.

It's very easy to avoid stores that allow internal smoking, or to avoid restaurants that don't have a sizable non-smoking section (or go to a non-smoking restaurant!)

I also avoid airlines that allow smoking on international flights.

Not hard at all.

[driven]

Originally posted by sealobo:
<STRONG>My father (in Hong Kong) would not come and visit me (in Toronto) because he couldn't survive not being able to smoke on the plane. That sucks.

I should sue the tobacco company for indirectly causing my dad not being able to travel to the other side of the planet to see his son~! I really miss my dad you know? I might have a depression and develop to some sort of mental problem... I think i have a good chance for getting a few millions bucks as compensation. </STRONG>

Or he could fly one of the other countless number of airlines that don't allow smoking on their international flights.

[Mediaman_12]

Originally posted by driven:
<STRONG>

Or he could fly one of the other countless number of airlines that don't allow smoking on their international flights.</STRONG>

Surely you mean DO ALLOW smoking?
he said his dad can't survive/face the long flight WITHOUT having a smoke.

And yes Smoking sucks royally. I have worked in several small offices where the management smokes (yes we do have workplace smoking laws in the UK, but try telling your management, if they themselves smoke) so my coligues will also smoke (if they are smokers). I now have an entirely different set of clothes for work (smart casual not suits) that all stink as if I smoked. I dare to think what this is doing to my lungs.

[ 04-09-2002: Message edited by: Mediaman_12 ]

[kidtexas]

The thing I find amazing sometimes is the number of college age kids who pick up smoking, even though they know how bad it is for them. I always noticed it was mostly women too...

[Justin Belisle]

Originally posted by nonhuman:
<STRONG>Personally, people smoking doesn't really bother me that much. But, I would have no problem with it being illegal in public buildings and public transportation, basically any enclosed space that is under the direct supervision of the government. The government should not be able to outlaw it in restaurants, hotels, homes, or any other private place, it should be up to the proprietors of those places to decide whether or not they want to allow smoking. It should not be illegal to smoke outside, because it doesn't really affect other people. It should only be illegal in public places where smoking actually causes a health risk to other people.</STRONG>

I think Ottawa is one of the first and only cities in North America where it is totally illegal to smoke in any public building weather it's government-owned or not. Luckely for the smokers they could just take the 5 minute drive across the river.

[ringo]

This kind of law would be as enforceable as our current drug laws, that is, not at all. People would smoke in apartments with black curtains and burn incense to cover the smell.
People would buy the patch on the black market to sustain their need while at work. Tobacco farmers would grow in their basement and get filthy rich selling the now illegal substance.

[Sealobo]

Originally posted by driven:
<STRONG>

Or he could fly one of the other countless number of airlines that DO allow smoking on their international flights.</STRONG>

For what i know, no transcontinental flight from N.A. to Asia allows smoking in the cabin.

[Patrick]

Originally posted by hayesk:
<STRONG>

No, but isn't it illegal to smoke in public places in California? Here in Ottawa, smoking was banned in the workplace - including bars, restaurants, and yes, even bingo parlours - last year. It's great - I can go out now without having to suck in that awful stuff.</STRONG>

I bet they're following our lead. A number of years ago we passed an initiative to make smoking in bars and restaurants illegal (smoking at outside tables is fine, though). And as far as I know, it made smoking in the workplace is illegal also, since for bar and restaurant workers they're the same. I take it for granted now, but last time I was out of state visiting relatives in Vegas, I couldn't stand being in many restaurants and casinos. And I still remember being in places here where the smoke cloud over the non-smoking sections was only slightly less dense than that of the smoking ones. It's like a joke I've seen in various places:

"Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having a peeing section in a swimming pool."

[tooki]

Originally posted by sek929:
<STRONG>Number of Marajuana Related Deaths every year - 1000
Number of Tobacco Related Deaths every year - 400,000

Yet pot is illegal

(Don't ask me to provide a link for the pot deaths thing, I saw it a while back on CNN or some news channel, it could have been 2000, I'm not sure, either way it pales to the deaths causes by tobacco)
</STRONG>

Actually, it's generally argued that there are no deaths from marijuana at all.

And as for whether use and/or sale of drugs should be legalized: I don't do drugs, but I don't think either should be illegal. Why? Sale of drugs should be legal because that way we largely remove the criminal element of drug sales. It would also allow for regulation, so that we reduce the risk of drugs laced with god-knows-what. This doesn't mean that we should make it unrestricted (e.g., there should be age limits, and limits on the amount of a purchase). And of course, they should be heavily taxed.

As for whether use should be legal, I think so, since everyone who uses drugs is doing so at their own risk -- it shouldn't be up to someone else to decide.

Besides, if we were to eliminate the War On Drugs, the billions (!) of dollars saved would allow for some kick-ass drug treatment programs, as well as some major urban renovation projects.

I also think that we should significantly lower the drinking age (for example, to allow parents to gradually introduce their kids to alcohol), so that by the time they go off to college (where alc flows like water), they'll know how to handle it responsibly.

tooki

[ 04-09-2002: Message edited by: tooki ]

[goatnet]

I completely agree with outlawing smoking in public places. I'm even a smoker.

How about we start outlawing children in public places too. I'd appreciate a quiet evening out with friends, relatives, and romantic acquaintances. There's nothing more rude then listening to little Johnny screaming his head off while I try to enjoy myself at a nice eatery. It may sound rude, but I can deal with other's smoking all over my grilled swordfish. Yet it's acceptable for "mature" adults to drag misbehaving children out to innappropiate places.

Suck it up, you continue to enjoy our second hand cancer, we'll let Johnny bleed your 401k and lounge around the house until he's 35.

[Mac Zealot]

Look, I'm sick and tired of this issue over and over.

If you want to smoke or drink, or use substances to make yourself feel 'better' than so be it. Any crazy things that happen to you or your death are your problem not mine and you can go to hell as far as I'm concerned.

I'm tired of people thinking everyone else is responsible. ANYONE WHO GETS SICK OR DIES FROM USING THSE STUPID F***ING THINGS DESERVED IT BECAUSE THEY WERE SO F***ING IGNORRANT TO DO IT IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!!!!!

You know damn well you'll pay for it when you smoke a cig, or drink alcohol, now get with it ok?!

[tooki]

I agree!

I also think that smoking while driving with your windows open should be banned -- I HATE it when I'm merrily driving along and then a whiff of smoke wafts in my open window (or through the air intake)... I'm not even safe in my own car!

The other thing that needs to be made illegal is to have cellphones turned on in cinemas, theaters, restaurants, churches, etc. It amazes me how many people will leave the ringer on, and then answer any calls that come in, no matter where they are. GRRR!

tooki

[RAzaRazor]

What bothers me more than the smoke itself is the butts.

Why is it that smokers think they have the right to throw their butts out the car window when they are done?
I wouldn't throw a gum wrapper or paper cup out the window, and if I did do it in front of another car with a smoker, they would get pissed at me.

There is a reason that every car has an ashtray. Put the dam thing in there and empty it out properly when you get where you're going!!

This particularly pisses me off as someone who rides motorcycles. You ever catch someones ash with your face, or have the sparks from their butt fly all over you? IT SUCKS!
Makes me want to pull infront of them and let some pocket change fly into their windshield...


What amazes me is the number of butts I find around the yard here at my apartment complex. (Smoking is not allowed here.) I go out and pick up garbage that blows in or the more annoying people in my building toss. I never fail to find less than 100 butts everytime I do this. No-one in my building even smokes! Where does all this crap come from??

[vmarks]

The question I have for those who would create additional legislation is,

Who are you, to say you should be able to control everyone else?
Who are you, that you should take away everyone else's ability to make an adult decision?

When you take away an adult's ability to make a choice (by only limiting them to the choices you approve of) you take away their responsibility.

We keep hearing about how we have a crisis, adults who don't take responsibility for their actions- but if you've vacated their responsibility by only permitting only one *true way* then you've caused the problem you hope to alleviate.

If you prohibit smoking, where do you stop? Do you tax fatty foods, and outlaw those in public as well? Do you outlaw colas and sodas, or tax them heavier? Hot dogs? After all, one thing leads to another. Have we learned nothing from the repealing of the 18th amendment?

Now, did you know that there are farmers whose sole income is tobacco crops? Did you know that recent developments of cross-breeding tobacco with tomatoes yields a natural anti-anthrax drug?

Outlaw cigarettes, and you'll have to outlaw tobacco. Outlaw tobacco, and you'll take away people's livlihood and the beneficial medical uses I refer to above. -- All because you want to impose authoritarianism, a nanny-state, upon us.

I don't smoke, and I don't much like smoking in my proximity- but none of that gives me the right to take the right to smoke away from those who choose to, none of that gives me the right to make a long-lived family-grown crop illegal, and none of that gives me the right to eliminate the health benefits delivered by that crop.

[MikeM32]

The reason tobacco kills more than marijuana is because (as far as I know) people don't smoke 20 or more joints per day. Most smokers (myself included) average like a pack per day I.E. 20 cigarettes. Increased inahaling of the smoke/tar is mainly what kills. And yes the nicotine is addictive, but it doesn't bear the strong narcotic effect that even 1 joint bears.

But like with marijuana, making tobacco illegal isn't going to "stop" it. Like any narcotic or addictive substance people will find a way. They already tried to prohibit alcohol in the late 20's early 30's, and it just caused even more crime.

Here's the other thing about it. Say we go and make tobacco illegal, if we do that does anyone seriously think marijuana has a snowballs chance in hell of becoming legal then? While it may be true that marijuana doesn't kill as many people, it's "arguable" whether it's addictive, and it certainly does bear the effects of a strong narcotic. You also have to realize that the average marijuana smoker may smoke 1 joint per day, whereas the average cigarette smoker usually "can't" just smoke 1 cigarette per day.

If marijuana became legalized, it could then be mass produced, sold in large quantities for less and people would smoke more of it. Then you'd see deaths from marijuana use rise from where they are now. Here's some facts about what the increased use of THC may cause. Tetrahydrocannibinol (THC) is (in simplest terms) the narcotic element of marijuana.

I'm all for the legalization of marijuana and that's why making tobacco illegal would be a very very bad move. There'd just be too many people saying "oh we can't have people inhaling smoke and getting stoned too". Then we'd also have to say goodbye to alcohol I'd think.

I just get tired of people justifying marijuana use by bashing tobacco useage. If all things were equal they'd both kill just as easily, albeit in different ways.

Mike

[ 04-09-2002: Message edited by: MikeM32 ]

[MikeM32]

Originally posted by RAzorRazor:
What amazes me is the number of butts I find around the yard here at my apartment complex. (Smoking is not allowed here.) I go out and pick up garbage that blows in or the more annoying people in my building toss. I never fail to find less than 100 butts everytime I do this. No-one in my building even smokes! Where does all this crap come from??

Smoking is not allowed in a housing unit/apartment complex?!? That's a new one on me. I suppose it's legal if it clearly states in the ad for rental that it's "not-negotiably" a non-smoking apartment. I'm not certain how it would apply in larger "units" where there's over say 6 individual dwellings/units. Common sense just says if the place is a 100 unit building or apartment complex there's like no way you're going to keep the smokers out.

I know it'll be a cold day in hell before I'm told I can't smoke in my own place.

Mike

[ 04-09-2002: Message edited by: MikeM32 ]

[aperfectnoone]

thing is smoking doesnt really kill other people,just yourself and thats your choice,let people smoke if they want,if that makes them happy,then let them do it,it doesnt hurt you. drinking can harm other people.

[MadMacs]

[sek929]

Originally posted by MikeM32:
<STRONG>The reason tobacco kills more than marijuana is because (as far as I know) people don't smoke 20 or more joints per day. Most smokers (myself included) average like a pack per day I.E. 20 cigarettes. Increased inahaling of the smoke/tar is mainly what kills. And yes the nicotine is addictive, but it doesn't bear the strong narcotic effect that even 1 joint bears.

But like with marijuana, making tobacco illegal isn't going to "stop" it. Like any narcotic or addictive substance people will find a way. They already tried to prohibit alcohol in the late 20's early 30's, and it just caused even more crime.

Here's the other thing about it. Say we go and make tobacco illegal, if we do that does anyone seriously think marijuana has a snowballs chance in hell of becoming legal then? While it may be true that marijuana doesn't kill as many people, it's "arguable" whether it's addictive, and it certainly does bear the effects of a strong narcotic. You also have to realize that the average marijuana smoker may smoke 1 joint per day, whereas the average cigarette smoker usually "can't" just smoke 1 cigarette per day.

If marijuana became legalized, it could then be mass produced, sold in large quantities for less and people would smoke more of it. Then you'd see deaths from marijuana use rise from where they are now. Here's some facts about what the increased use of THC may cause. Tetrahydrocannibinol (THC) is (in simplest terms) the narcotic element of marijuana.

I'm all for the legalization of marijuana and that's why making tobacco illegal would be a very very bad move. There'd just be too many people saying "oh we can't have people inhaling smoke and getting stoned too". Then we'd also have to say goodbye to alcohol I'd think.

I just get tired of people justifying marijuana use by bashing tobacco useage. If all things were equal they'd both kill just as easily, albeit in different ways.

Mike

[ 04-09-2002: Message edited by: MikeM32 ]</STRONG>

As with anything moderation is the key. Given I could smoke 20 joints a day, I don't want to, hell I barely smoke 3 times a week (I've gone a couple weeks now actually). It may be mentally addictive when consumed in large quantaties and for many years but it is not nearly as addictive as nictotine.

Smoking cigs should not be outlawed but it is of course not needed in many areas, I HATE how most smokers (not trying to over-generalize here) think the world is their ashtray, its ****ing disgusting.

I disagree that If it were legal the death toll would rise, I mean, whats stopping people now? if you've been to a campus lately you'll see kids smoking pot almost as freely as cigs, I think if it did become legal less **** would go down since now kids don't have to do stupid **** not to get caught with it. Like the ol "bone ride" where you are smoking and driving a car at the same time, as to not get caught by either parents, or cops. Thats really dangerous, you space out something fierce while driving and smoking, making it legal to chill on your porch and toke up would probably make alot less accidents related to it.

I think if anybody wants to do any substance thats their choice and I have no right to tell them not to. As long as it does not affect another human being (that doesn't want the effect of course) its ok in my book.

I don't hate smokers, and I don't mind being around smoke, my eyes get a bit irriaded but hey, thats life, everyone can't warp to fit your needs, and I don't expect it to.

I say everyone join in harmony bongs, cigars, and Cigs in hand, and be happy and friendly towards eachother. This animosity towards certain people's lifestyle's is childish.

[TNproud2b]

Who cares about smokers in the workplace?

We need to kill those SOBs that stink up the entire room with their microwave popcorn.

Good grief...I'd rather smell body odor or three-month-old kitty litter than the wretched stench that eminates from those popcorn bags.

PS - that ain't real butter.

[chris_h]

Originally posted by Mac Zealot:
If you want to smoke or drink, or use substances to make yourself feel 'better' than so be it. Any crazy things that happen to you or your death are your problem not mine and you can go to hell as far as I'm concerned.

fvck you too, buttpope.

---

Okay, listen up, here's the dealio:
NONE OF YOU FVKERS HAVE ANY SAY IN WHAT I DO IN MY OWN APARTMENT.
I'm only 20 and I drink vodka. I've also been known to smoke weed.
Don't like it? PISS OFF ASSLICKER.

Go join the fvcking taliban if you think you have any right whatsoever to tell me I can't do things to myself that you don't like.

Most of you (americans) wouldn't know FREEDOM if it kicked you in the balls and pissed on your grandmother.

[Face Ache]

I liked happy chris better.

[BRussell]

Originally posted by vmarks:
<STRONG>The question I have for those who would create additional legislation is,

Who are you, to say you should be able to control everyone else?
Who are you, that you should take away everyone else's ability to make an adult decision?

When you take away an adult's ability to make a choice (by only limiting them to the choices you approve of) you take away their responsibility.

We keep hearing about how we have a crisis, adults who don't take responsibility for their actions- but if you've vacated their responsibility by only permitting only one *true way* then you've caused the problem you hope to alleviate.</STRONG>

But what about the personal responsibility of the sellers? Why are you exempt from personal responsibility if you market and sell stuff to people?

If you spill coffee on yourself - you're an idiot and should take personal responsibility. But if you're a corporation that keeps coffee way too hot despite knowing that it can cause serious burns - that's OK.

If you smoke and get lung cancer - you're an idiot and should take personal responsibility. But if you're a corporation that puts cancer-causing agents in an addictive wrapper and markets it to kids - that's OK.

Basically, you're saying that corporations can do what they want, and it's up to consumers to make the right choices.

But how far can you take this logic?

If corporations aren't responsible for selling stuff that kills people, why are thieves and murderers held criminally responsible?

If you get robbed, why should the robber be held responsible? It's your personal responsibility to defend your home and belongings.

If you're murdered, shouldn't you have had personal responsibility for defending yourself? If you're dumb enough to get killed, then that's what I call taking personal responsibility.

I say let's get rid of all the laws against hurting others! Free-for-all everyone! Beat up people you don't like. Don't worry, you won't be punished, just say your victim should have worked out more and needs to learn some personal responsibility.

Rape your neighbor - if she can't defend herself, she needs to learn some personal responsibility!

[driven]

Originally posted by sealobo:
<STRONG>

For what i know, no transcontinental flight from N.A. to Asia allows smoking in the cabin.</STRONG>

JAL did as of three years ago. (Before I started racking up miles on NWA).

I'm not sure if they have since dropped the practice.

[driven]

Originally posted by tooki:
<STRONG>I agree!

I also think that smoking while driving with your windows open should be banned -- I HATE it when I'm merrily driving along and then a whiff of smoke wafts in my open window (or through the air intake)... I'm not even safe in my own car!

The other thing that needs to be made illegal is to have cellphones turned on in cinemas, theaters, restaurants, churches, etc. It amazes me how many people will leave the ringer on, and then answer any calls that come in, no matter where they are. GRRR!

tooki</STRONG>

I've overheard full conversations in the bathroom stall next to me.

[danbrew]

Jesus. Thank you for looking out for my welfare as I'm too fat, dumb, and happy to do so for myself.

But what about the personal responsibility of the sellers? Why are you exempt from personal responsibility if you market and sell stuff to people?

Perhaps because we all know the addictive properties of smoking. We've known for at least the last 20 years that smoking is harmful. Hell, if you had a brain, you could have figured it out a few hundred years ago... hmmm... let's see, you're lighting a substance on fire and inhaling it into your lungs. Figure it's a few hundred degrees and it makes you cough and hurts your eyes. Unless you're a complete moron, you know that smoking is bad for you.

But let me make that choice, ok?

If you spill coffee on yourself - you're an idiot and should take personal responsibility. But if you're a corporation that keeps coffee way too hot despite knowing that it can cause serious burns - that's OK.

No, it's not ok. That just means we have a screwed up jury system -- perhaps composed of people like those here at MacNN who think they know what's best for the sheeple.

If you smoke and get lung cancer - you're an idiot and should take personal responsibility. But if you're a corporation that puts cancer-causing agents in an addictive wrapper and markets it to kids - that's OK.

Give us some example of marketing to kids, please. And what about the responsibility of the parents?

The rest of your analogies just don't apply to marketing a legal product and the right of the individual to choose, so I won't debate those points.

[BRussell]

Originally posted by danbrew:
<STRONG>quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
But what about the personal responsibility of the sellers? Why are you exempt from personal responsibility if you market and sell stuff to people?
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Perhaps because we all know the addictive properties of smoking. </STRONG>

But you didn't address my question, all you did is reiterate that people should know better, which I haven't argued against. Of course people should educate themselves and make the right choices. But my question was how that absolves others, like tobacco companies, of trying to kill people.

You didn't address my analogies to common criminals, but to me, that's the crux of the issue. Tobacco companies are like the mugger waiting in the dark alley - if you're stupid enough to make the choice to walk in the dark alley, doesn't the mugger have the right to kill you? Why not? Anyone with half a brain knows that dark alleys are bad for you.

You're arguing that we should be allowed to kill stupid people. No?

Give us some example of marketing to kids, please.

Some quotes from internal RJR documents that were made public in recent trials:

�Evidence is now available to indicate that the 14-18 year old group is an increasing segment of the smoking population.� RJR-T must soon establish a successful new brand in this market if our position in the industry is to be maintained in the long term.�� (�Planned Assumptions and Forecast for the Period 1977-1986� for RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company, March 15, 1976)

�This young adult market, the 14-24 group,�represent[s] tomorrow�s cigarette business.� As this 14-24 age group matures, they will account for a key share of the total cigarette volume� for at least the next 25 years.� (Presentation from C.A. Tucker, Vice President of Marketing, to the Board of Directors of RJR Industries, September 30, 1974)

�To ensure increased and longer-term growth for the Camel Filter, the brand must increase its share penetration among the 14-24 age group which have a new set of more liberal values and which represent tomorrow�s cigarette business.� (1975 Memo to C.A. Tucker, Vice President for Marketing, RJR)

�Today�s teenager is tomorrow�s potential regular customer, and the overwhelming majority of smokers first begin to smoke while still in their teens � The smoking patterns of teenagers are particularly important to Philip Morris.�� (1981 Philip Morris internal document)

Good night.

[UNTeMac]

Well, I was hopeful for this topic at first but it has degenerated (with a few exceptions) into "I hate smokers because..." or "I'll smoke whether you like it or not"

Back to my original point...I'm saying that nicotine is an extremely powerful addictive substance. Sure it's your choice to try smoking and even smoke regularly in extreme moderation, but once you're addicted, that takes your unrestricted free will out of the equation. That's what I think makes tobacco a substance that shouldn't be allowed. Again, nevermind the logistics of enforcement...I'm simply talking about ideology.

Maybe that will steer this discussion back to the road I started it on.

[ 04-10-2002: Message edited by: UNTiMac ]

[Demonhood]

i haven't read the entire thread, so i'll just reply to the above post.

Originally posted by UNTiMac:
Back to my original point...I'm saying that nicotine is an extremely powerful addictive substance. Sure it's your choice to try smoking and even smoke regularly in extreme moderation, but once you're addicted, that takes your unrestricted free will out of the equation. That's what I think makes tobacco a substance that shouldn't be allowed. Again, nevermind the logistics of enforcement...I'm simply talking about ideology.

Ok, but doesn't one have the free-will to start smoking in the first place? And, since most of the above posts (from what i've read) state that people now know what the full effects of nicotine/tobacco are, they should know better. So if you start smoking, you are accepting the risk of becoming addicted. It's like those long-winded user agreements for software. You know it says not to steal it, abuse it, use it to break into government servers, etc... These are things that you know without having to read it. Smokers know what they're getting into. By opening up that pack and lighting up, you're agreeing that becoming addicted is a possible byproduct of your actions.

Besides, lots of things are addictive. Alcohol is pretty addictive. Not as addictive as nicotine, but still. So where do we draw the line? Fatty foods? People enjoy the pleasure of a good meal. Americans are overweight. If we taxed junk food (like we do with cigarettes), maybe people would eat better.
It's not the role of the government to tell us what we can/cannot do with our bodies. Sure, they've made it their role, but it shouldn't be. People make their own decisions. So yes, there should be special laws to protect people (especially the children of these people) from second hand smoke, illegal activities committed under the influence (yes, killing people while high on crack is still murder and still punishable under those laws), etc..

{edit - because mistakes are made, even with OmniWeb autocorrect}

[ 04-10-2002: Message edited by: Demonhood ]

[Jim Paradise]

Smoking's banned in public areas in my city and it is *very* nice. Back in highschool we used to have what was called the smokehole... just a place outside where kids could smoke and that was fine because it was outside, no one was dinning or anything, and wasn't in some cramped area so generally you weren't really smelling or inhaling too much, if any, second-hand smoke depending on where you were. However, simple foods such as donuts *taste* better in the evening when they haven't had a few people smoking all day in a restaurant and that smoke sort of lingers on the food... and it's quite nice not to have someone force cancerous poison into my lungs when I don't want it there or when I'd much rather smell my food than a cigarette.

If people want to smoke, hey, their choice... do it outside, in your home, car, etc... but in public places it's great not to have smoking allowed. Everything feels all that much more cleaner and I already do enough shyte to my body with poor foods that I don't need my lungs destroyed second-hand styles.

*rambles.......*

Sorry, tired... blah. Don't want to demonize smokers at all. I'm just happy that in public places here smoking's illegal because things seem all that much more clean.

[malvolio]

Originally posted by sealobo:
<STRONG>My father (in Hong Kong) would not come and visit me (in Toronto) because he couldn't survive not being able to smoke on the plane. That sucks.
</STRONG>

Tell your father to buy a nicotine patch. It'll keep him from having cravings during the flight.
When I was in the hospital for surgery a few years back, I asked for (and was given) a daily patch, since it was a no-smoking hospital.
And yes, nicotine is very addictive. It's much easier to give up booze or weed.

[I Bent My Wookiee]

Wow sek929. TWO awesome Simpsons quotes in one thread! Nice job!