Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > a smoking milestone

a smoking milestone (Page 3)
Thread Tools
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 11, 2006, 07:32 PM
 
If you want to ban it completely, here's what you do:

You raise the age of purchase by one year, every year.

That way it doesn't affect existing smokers while at the same time making it hard for newbies to start.
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 11, 2006, 07:48 PM
 
Is the legal age actually an effective deterrent in Britain? Because it's really not here.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 11, 2006, 07:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit
Is the legal age actually an effective deterrent in Britain? Because it's really not here.
No. But in ten years' time when you'd have to be 26 (and show ID) or twenty years' time when you'd have to be 36 to buy smokes, it would be.
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 11, 2006, 07:58 PM
 
No, I mean, I've never noticed that being under the legal age makes getting cigarettes anything but a little bit inconvenient.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 11, 2006, 08:15 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit
No, I mean, I've never noticed that being under the legal age makes getting cigarettes anything but a little bit inconvenient.
Yep, I got it. However, as the legal age increases, the inconvenience will increase. It's obviously not a "sharp" edge - there's always going to be a bit of fluff around the edges to start with, although it'll become sharper as the years progress (i.e. in 80 odd years it'll be completely illegal).

The only real problem with this approach is that a subsequent government might change the game. On the plus side, it doesn't bother existing smokers and it gives time for the tax restructuring to be gentle and organic.
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
SexySkirts
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 11, 2006, 08:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit
Is the legal age actually an effective deterrent in Britain? Because it's really not here.
Haven't you seen Clerks?

     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 11, 2006, 08:28 PM
 
Originally Posted by SexySkirts
Haven't you seen Clerks?
LOL

Can't wait for Clerks II this summer

-t
     
smacintush
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Across from the wallpaper store.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 11, 2006, 08:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by SexySkirts
The fact remains they still hooked her and got her addicted while they were cheating. The only reason people start smoking today is because there's a large group of people who already smoke, the only reason that group started was because when they were young there was a large group who already smoked, etc etc etc.

Seriously. Ban it completely for 10 years, then reintroduce it with all the health warnings. See if many people start.
Seriously, let's let the retards who smoke continue to kill themselves. It's their right and it's natural selection. Regardless of the actions of a corporation, banning is not the answer. Not even a temporary one.

The "cheating" as you call it, or lying or whatever is a separate issue than the one of what to do about tobacco NOW. If it is legitimate for todays smokers to blame BIG TOBACCO™ for their habit because they "cheated" and got a stranglehold on people, then it would be perfectly acceptable for BIG TOBACCO™ to blame someone else for what they have done, and so on and so on ad infinitum. You simply cannot pass the blame from the smoker to BIG TOBACCO™ unless you are willing also to let them pass the blame on to someone else. Where do you stop? The responsibility for a person's dumbass CHOICE to either start or continue smoking must rest solely on themselves alone.

The problem is that there really is NO PROBLEM here at all. Let them smoke. It is not for us to try to stop them or to "put it right". This is not 1940, we are in the heart of the information age. If they take up smoking it's their own stupidity.

Yeah, I know it's a waste of time for me to argue the case for personal responsibility. We truly are a culture of blame where it is almost COMMON SENSE to just pass the buck.
Being in debt and celebrating a lower deficit is like being on a diet and celebrating the fact you gained two pounds this week instead of five.
     
SexySkirts
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 11, 2006, 08:44 PM
 
K. I truly hope to design a deadly product that appears fairly harmless, then hook you and your family on it, then til you how deadly it is after you've been using it everyday for 10 years, and then tell you I put chemicals in my product that make it extremely addicting and hard to quit.

Then I'll laugh when you all die. And the sad thing is, people with an opinion like yours will continue to protect me and my evil products.
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 11, 2006, 08:50 PM
 
I've known cigarettes were deadly since I was 8 years old. This "tell you how deadly it is after you've been using it every day for 10 years" scenario does not exist anymore.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
smacintush
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Across from the wallpaper store.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 11, 2006, 08:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by SexySkirts
K. I truly hope to design a deadly product that appears fairly harmless, then hook you and your family on it, then til you how deadly it is after you've been using it everyday for 10 years, and then tell you I put chemicals in my product that make it extremely addicting and hard to quit.

Then I'll laugh when you all die. And the sad thing is, people with an opinion like yours will continue to protect me and my evil products.
BIG TOBACCO™ didn't "develop" a harmful product. in the beginning of the cigarette industry in this country it was simply a product that was grown on plantations and such. BIG TOBACCO™ didn't exist as BIG TOBACCO™ when cigarettes got a foothold, and the medical knowledge of the deleterious effects was non-existent. The "cheating" and lying you keep referring to happened AFTER smoking was already widespread.

Nevertheless, in reality I will always have people like you who always blame others for their own stupidity to protect me from the evil corporations, so it's all good.
( Last edited by smacintush; Jul 11, 2006 at 08:59 PM. Reason: edited for clarity)
Being in debt and celebrating a lower deficit is like being on a diet and celebrating the fact you gained two pounds this week instead of five.
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 11, 2006, 08:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by what_the_heck
That's not true.

RR is constantly picking fights and baiting, and then accusing people of following him around etc. Then he runs to the mods and cries like a little girl.

I don't have a problem with anyone dishing out, but you gotta take the heat as well.
RR is dishing out, but is whining if people retribute.

-t
I have not reported a single person other than you. Nice try turtle.

How was your time off?
     
SexySkirts
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 11, 2006, 09:13 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit
I've known cigarettes were deadly since I was 8 years old. This "tell you how deadly it is after you've been using it every day for 10 years" scenario does not exist anymore.
True. But my grandma started in the 40s. So did a lot of people who are now DEAD thanks to cigarettes.
     
SexySkirts
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 11, 2006, 09:15 PM
 
Originally Posted by smacintush
The "cheating" and lying you keep referring to happened AFTER smoking was already widespread.

Nevertheless, in reality I will always have people like you who always blame others for their own stupidity to protect me from the evil corporations, so it's all good.
Dude. I don't smoke. I just think it's pretty freaking assinine to blame people who got addicted to it when the cigarette companies intentionally hid all their research data and lied to the public. When it comes to people who STARTED smoking a long time ago, before all that crap was known, I'd say their healthcare rests purely on the tobacco companies.
     
smacintush
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Across from the wallpaper store.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 11, 2006, 10:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by SexySkirts
Dude. I don't smoke. I just think it's pretty freaking assinine to blame people who got addicted to it when the cigarette companies intentionally hid all their research data and lied to the public. When it comes to people who STARTED smoking a long time ago, before all that crap was known, I'd say their healthcare rests purely on the tobacco companies.
The cigarette industry didn't really get going in this country until the early 1900's, hard data on the harmful effects didn't come about until the 1960's which was long after cigarettes became popular. You really have no argument. It seems that you are hung up with the findings of the class action lawsuit involving BIG TOBACCO™ which tells me that you really don't understand how civil suits work.
Being in debt and celebrating a lower deficit is like being on a diet and celebrating the fact you gained two pounds this week instead of five.
     
LordOfSkirts
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 12, 2006, 12:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by smacintush
The cigarette industry didn't really get going in this country until the early 1900's, hard data on the harmful effects didn't come about until the 1960's which was long after cigarettes became popular. You really have no argument. It seems that you are hung up with the findings of the class action lawsuit involving BIG TOBACCO™ which tells me that you really don't understand how civil suits work.
Dude. You don't understand. If a company lies and cheats and gets you addicted to something, it is THEIR fault you are addicted.
     
smacintush
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Across from the wallpaper store.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 12, 2006, 12:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by LordOfSkirts
Dude. You don't understand. If a company lies and cheats and gets you addicted to something, it is THEIR fault you are addicted.
If that were true I'd agree, but history shows that although they seem to have lied, it was decades AFTER cigarettes became popular. Get a clue.
Being in debt and celebrating a lower deficit is like being on a diet and celebrating the fact you gained two pounds this week instead of five.
     
LordOfSkirts
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 12, 2006, 12:21 PM
 
Sure. But decades BEFORE they lied nobody knew abou the health risks assocatied with smoking NOR did anybody know about how addictive it was.

If you design a product.. say a ford pinto... and it is years that you're selling it and it starts blowing up and killing people, you deserve to be sued.
     
smacintush
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Across from the wallpaper store.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 12, 2006, 12:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by LordOfSkirts
Sure. But decades BEFORE they lied nobody knew abou the health risks assocatied with smoking NOR did anybody know about how addictive it was.

If you design a product.. say a ford pinto... and it is years that you're selling it and it starts blowing up and killing people, you deserve to be sued.
Number one, as I have said Cigarettes weren't "designed" by some evil company. Cigarettes are the result of an evolution of sorts in the use of tobacco. Cigarettes were around 200 years before any of the BIG TOBACCO™ companies were even thought of.

HARD EVIDENCE didn't come about until the '50's and '60's, but the suspicions and anecdotal evidence of the harm of smoking go back to hundreds of years.

In the 1500's King James I called tobacco "an invention of Satan". Here's a quote: "custome lothesome to the eye, hateful to the nose, harmful to the brain, dangerous to the lungs, and in the black and stinking fume thereof, nearest resembling the horrible stygian smoke of the pit that is bottomless"

In the 1600's public smoking was banned by the pope. In 1632 it was illegal to smoke publicly in Massachusetts. This was also the century that people started to really suspect it was bad for you.

1700's snuff is suspected to be linked to nasal cancer and more concern about the health risks os tobacco arise.

In the 1800's nicotine was discovered and concluded to be a dangerous poison. In 1858 fears about the effects on smoking on health first raised in The Lancet (a British medical journal).

In the early 1900's there was a small but growing campaign against tobacco with some states proposing banning it. In 1912 Dr I Adler is the first to strongly suggest that lung cancer is related to smoking. In 1930 Researchers in Cologne, Germany, make a statistical correlation between cancer and smoking.

Sorry, but you are wrong again.
Being in debt and celebrating a lower deficit is like being on a diet and celebrating the fact you gained two pounds this week instead of five.
     
sek929
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 12, 2006, 05:38 PM
 
Rob, I'm sorry to hear about your Grandma...but my Grandma is 83, has smoked since she was 13, and amazes her doctors on a yearly basis with how healthy her lungs are.

So, like everything, the situation is not as black and white as you present it.
     
sek929
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 12, 2006, 05:40 PM
 
Eating McDonalds on a daily basis will kill you faster than cigs.
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 12, 2006, 10:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by sek929
Eating McDonalds on a daily basis will kill you faster than cigs.
Not really. What if you had a salad with grilled chicken and went easy on the dressing and had apples for a desert?

Actually, after "Supersize me" came out a woman did just that and lost a lot of weight and became very healthy.

I know what you mean, but to say "McDonalds" is a bit generic.

BOT: I sympathize with smokers, it's a choice. But too much smoke causes migraine headaches for me. The bitch of it, is that I love the pubs, but I get a killer head ache after a few hours.
     
GodOfSkirts
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 12, 2006, 10:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader
BOT: I sympathize with smokers, it's a choice. But too much smoke causes migraine headaches for me. The bitch of it, is that I love the pubs, but I get a killer head ache after a few hours.

I'd like to cover myself in dog feces and go to a bar. If anyone complains that I smelled like **** I'd tell them that's how I feel about smoking. I'd need some sort of plastic suit and a ventilator to do it though.
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 12, 2006, 11:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by GodOfSkirts
I'd like to cover myself in dog feces and go to a bar. If anyone complains that I smelled like **** I'd tell them that's how I feel about smoking. I'd need some sort of plastic suit and a ventilator to do it though.
And the owner would be within his right to throw you out instantly. You don't quite get it do you? If you don't like the rule then don't do there. No one is forcing you to go to a bar.

If a bar owner wants to allow smoking he should be allowed to do so.

If a bar owner wants to NOT allow smoking he should be allowed to do so as well.

If a bar owner want to allow people named Robert Podell from Madison, Wisconsin to cover himself in dog feces he should be allowed to. I doubt anyone other than Robert Podell from Madison, Wisconsin would be in the bar. But there might be other complete nutjobs who'd hang with him I guess.
     
smacintush
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Across from the wallpaper store.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2006, 12:52 AM
 
Originally Posted by GodOfSkirts
I'd like to cover myself in dog feces and go to a bar. If anyone complains that I smelled like **** I'd tell them that's how I feel about smoking. I'd need some sort of plastic suit and a ventilator to do it though.
This post is a good example of the basis of all of your social/political viewpoints. Whatever YOU don't like you want banned, limited, etc. regardless of the rights of other people.
Being in debt and celebrating a lower deficit is like being on a diet and celebrating the fact you gained two pounds this week instead of five.
     
Gossamer
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: "Working"
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2006, 10:12 AM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader
And the owner would be within his right to throw you out instantly. You don't quite get it do you? If you don't like the rule then don't do there. No one is forcing you to go to a bar.

If a bar owner wants to allow smoking he should be allowed to do so.

If a bar owner wants to NOT allow smoking he should be allowed to do so as well.

If a bar owner want to allow people named Robert Podell from Madison, Wisconsin to cover himself in dog feces he should be allowed to. I doubt anyone other than Robert Podell from Madison, Wisconsin would be in the bar. But there might be other complete nutjobs who'd hang with him I guess.
Actually his DeviantArt page says Milwaukee
     
SkirtingTheBan
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2006, 10:59 AM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader
If a bar owner want to allow people named Robert Podell from Madison, Wisconsin to cover himself in dog feces he should be allowed to. I doubt anyone other than Robert Podell from Madison, Wisconsin would be in the bar. But there might be other complete nutjobs who'd hang with him I guess.
Actually Madison doesn't allow smoking at it's bars.

And AGAIN... Railroader, if you are MAN enough to take what you dish out, please give me your name and location so I can freely use it on these forums. Otherwise, PLEASE QUIT USING MY NAME AND LOCATION. I've asked you politely over 5 times now.
     
SkirtingTheBan
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2006, 11:00 AM
 
Originally Posted by Gossamer
Actually his DeviantArt page says Milwaukee
Kilbey is doing it just to try to piss me off. He's been warned about it, and I'll continue to report him.
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2006, 11:07 AM
 
Originally Posted by SkirtingTheBan
Actually Madison doesn't allow smoking at it's bars.

And AGAIN... Railroader, if you are MAN enough to take what you dish out, please give me your name and location so I can freely use it on these forums. Otherwise, PLEASE QUIT USING MY NAME AND LOCATION. I've asked you politely over 5 times now.
Just because you readily and freely give out personal information doesn't mean I have to. Do you really think I will do something completely foolish and stupid and give out that info? Keep asking, you're requests are falling on deaf ears.
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2006, 11:08 AM
 
Originally Posted by SkirtingTheBan
Kilbey is doing it just to try to piss me off. He's been warned about it, and I'll continue to report him.
And you'll draw attention to yourself and get banned again that much sooner.
     
SkirtingTheBan
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2006, 11:24 AM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader
And you'll draw attention to yourself and get banned again that much sooner.
We'll see.
     
Gossamer
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: "Working"
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2006, 11:26 AM
 
Actually I find it quite hypocritical of you to brag about not following posted rules of this forum and then expect Railroader to follow unwritten rules of etiquette.
     
SkirtingTheBan
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2006, 11:37 AM
 
You're entitled to your own opinion. But I find etiquitte more important than rules, really. Especially if said rules are selectively enforced only on certain people, and other people, say, are allowed to harass people and bait people for years without any reprimand.
     
sek929
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Cape Cod, MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2006, 11:41 AM
 
Rob, I know you are for making pot legal, how would you feel walking through a pack of joint smokers?
     
SkirtingTheBan
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 13, 2006, 11:43 AM
 
I really don't have a problem when people smoke where they are supposed to smoke. Outside is fine, away from building entrances. However, in answer to your question, I'd be annoyed, but if I stood there for a while I'd probably be less annoyed.
     
mitchell_pgh
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 4, 2006, 03:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by sek929 View Post
Rob, I'm sorry to hear about your Grandma...but my Grandma is 83, has smoked since she was 13, and amazes her doctors on a yearly basis with how healthy her lungs are.

So, like everything, the situation is not as black and white as you present it.
My grandfather consumed mass quantities of red meat all of his life and lived to over 80... and eventually died of Alzheimer's. But few people here are trying to unilaterally ban smoking. Most simply want all smoking in public enclosed spaces banned.

Originally Posted by sek929 View Post
Eating McDonalds on a daily basis will kill you faster than cigs.
That's not the point... the point most non-smokers are trying to make is "Sitting next to a smoker is infinitely worse than sitting next to a person downing McDonalds."
     
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 4, 2006, 03:41 PM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
1) Do you know how hyper I'd be if I didn't smoke? I'm already 100 mph all the time. Last time I gave up, within two days I felt like starting a gang war.

2) If I didn't smoke, I wouldn't be able to flip the butt out of the car window, which wouldn't annoy anyone. Which would be a completely wasted opportunity.
1) That's called withdrawal. You can try drinking something with caffeine or taking other stimulants to calm the effects. You wouldn't have those problems if you hadn't started smoking in the first place.

2) F*ck you. My friend lost everything in a fire started by a smoker.

Edit: Argh, I thought he was still on ignore.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 4, 2006, 03:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by olePigeon View Post
1) That's called withdrawal. You can try drinking something with caffeine or taking other stimulants to calm the effects. You wouldn't have those problems if you hadn't started smoking in the first place.

2) F*ck you. My friend lost everything in a fire started by a smoker.

Edit: Argh, I thought he was still on ignore.
See? I annoyed a hippie right here. That's what I'd call a score!.
     
GodIsPretend
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2006, 12:26 AM
 
Riiiiggghhht.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:43 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,