Cigarettes

[Osborn F Enready]

Chris said:
Agreed. But you and others must also recognize non smokers as people with equal rights. The instant someone lights up in a restaurant it turns the entire place into a smoking establishment.

I say:
I agree, and that is why people who don't like smoking shouldn't go to places that the OWNER OF THE LAND allows smoking on his property, in his establishment. It is not the smokers, it is THE OWNER who ALLOWS the smokings choice.

The owner puts your rights as a non-smoker behind the rights of a smoker, so perhaps you should open your own restraunt and make it non-smoking so you can empower the non-smokers in the area by allowing them to have a choice.

[James]

I think that smoking cigarettes, cigars, pipes, and anything else people come up with should be illegal. What do you smokers get from it? Does it help you? Our country? Our world?

I mean, most smokers will admit that they are addicted and also that they know smoking kills. So why not quit? They just can't pull themselves away from that attractive shade of brown on their teeth or that smell that never leaves?

Some smokers say that the government can't make them quit smoking. But I say: The government today CAN make you stop doing anything they want to. Some say they have the right to smoke. Should we let people do something that kills millions of people that has NO kind of advantage or upside???

[Prometheus]

Quote by: James I think that smoking cigarettes, cigars, pipes, and anything else people come up with should be illegal. What do you smokers get from it? Does it help you? Our country? Our world?

The same could be said about bungy jumping, playing hopscotch or masterbating. It's not the job of the government to decide wheather something is useful.

I mean, most smokers will admit that they are addicted and also that they know smoking kills. So why not quit? They just can't pull themselves away from that attractive shade of brown on their teeth or that smell that never leaves?

You obviously don't know anyone who has gone through the hell that is quitting smoking. It is *exceedingly* difficult.

Some smokers say that the government can't make them quit smoking. But I say: The government today CAN make you stop doing anything they want to. Some say they have the right to smoke. Should we let people do something that kills millions of people that has NO kind of advantage or upside???

Yes. Because it's not our place to tell people what to do with thier body. Hamburgers kill millions a year too, but we still let people eat them.


Good grief, you really want to controll the world don't you?

[SteveA]

I wouldn't mind if businesses were required to notify people who enter of what potential harmful chemicals might be contained there but to require everyone to not use them because of possible dangers to those willing to accept the risks, is wrong.

Making smoking illegal means that people couldn't even smoke in their own homes, or the owner of a restaurant wouldn't be able to have a restaurant that allowed smoking.

I'd guess that non-smokers are 10 times more likely to die from diabetes or obesity from eating sugar in their food than any indirect second hand smoke they might encounter. People hardly even know what McDonalds puts in their food. Shouldn't we be protecting fat people by removing all McDonalds restaurants too?

These arguments are silly and destructive. If someone doesn't like cigarette smoke in some establishment, buy the place and put a "No Smoking" sign up, or just go elsewhere.

Hitler was a health nut too. He was into "cleansing" a lot of things.

This is yet another reason why decentralization is a good thing. Look at Utah. If you don't like smoking, drinking, gambling etc. there are places in the U.S. already that support these views but we don't need every state to be like Utah. Gambling destroys a lot of peoples wealth and is addictive but Nevada exists and doesn't appear to be going anywhere anytime soon.
Smoking should be illegal whereever property owners desire to make it illegal - if you want to make it illegal somewhere, buy the right to make your own rules there.

[Chris]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready I say: That was pure and refined sarcasm Chris, I thought you would notice that without the smiley, sorry.

Sorry I misread. I didn't mean to de-rail this thread about it either, since there already is a thread about smoking bans, that I have been tired to post in.

Quote by: Osborn F Enready I say: I agree, and that is why people who don't like smoking shouldn't go to places that the OWNER OF THE LAND allows smoking on his property, in his establishment. It is not the smokers, it is THE OWNER who ALLOWS the smokings choice. The owner puts your rights as a non-smoker behind the rights of a smoker, so perhaps you should open your own restraunt and make it non-smoking so you can empower the non-smokers in the area by allowing them to have a choice.

All good ideas. I, for now, will have to live with it. But 100% of restaurants in Nashville, TN (unless someone can correct me) allow smoking. Doesn't leave much of a choice.

Quote by: James I think that smoking cigarettes, cigars, pipes, and anything else people come up with should be illegal. What do you smokers get from it? Does it help you? Our country? Our world?

Now this is just crazy. Yes it is unhealthy, and yes there is no point to smoking, but making it illegal will do nothing. Limiting where they can be smoked will though. Even I believe smoking bans aren't totally perfect. Cause you have people sitting in the front door smoking so you have to pass next to them anyway.

A seperate smoking section with vacuum sealed walls and quick ventilation is the answer. Also employees willing to work in that environment by signature of a waiver seems the best route.

[SteveA]

All good ideas. I, for now, will have to live with it. But 100% of restaurants in Nashville, TN (unless someone can correct me) allow smoking. Doesn't leave much of a choice.

Times are changing. Education is the best way to stop people from smoking. Again, I happen to smoke and don't mind at all when there's a restaurant that doesn't allow smoking (I never smoked in a restaurant anyway) but passing laws to do it won't really resolve things in the end, and we'll just be battling an even larger war on drugs.

[James]

Quote by: Prometheus Yes. Because it's not our place to tell people what to do with thier body. Hamburgers kill millions a year too, but we still let people eat them.

Hamburgers are food. Food keeps us alive. Do you really not see what I'm saying?

Quote by: Prometheus Good grief, you really want to controll the world don't you?

Well, I DO like Age of Empires...:)

Oh, and to whatever fool said that the government CAN'T make you do anything- the government CAN DO ANYTHING they like. They control the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, National Guard, Reserves, the Coast Guard, and the Police.

THE GOVERNMENT CAN MAKE YOU STOP DOING ANYTHING THEY DON'T WANT YOU DOING.

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: James THE GOVERNMENT CAN MAKE YOU STOP DOING ANYTHING THEY DON'T WANT YOU DOING.

Well, they can try. The drugwar doesn't seem to have succeeded in the thirty years it has been raging...

[James]

Quote by: PatrickHenry Well, they can try. The drugwar doesn't seem to have succeeded in the thirty years it has been raging...

If the government really wanted to win the war against drugs, there would be no drugs. So someone must either have something to gain from the buying and selling of illegal drugs, or nobody wants to spend their time and effort to stop it.

But if the US REALLY wanted to, then we would. But there are bigger problems, believe it or not.

[ghost_stalker]

Quote by: kubedawg I think the government SHOULD ban cigarettes or at least levy taxes. I'm for the people's well being. The government is killing us all by allowing such things to happen. Same thing with drinking. And shit, the people SHOULD have to pay extra to smoke cigarettes, after all, they can just say no. And while I'm kinda with you on the fact that they should prohibit the use of unhealthy additives, I ask a question. Do you know what causes cancer from smoking to happen? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco If you would like to see them take out all the cancer producing carcinogens, that'd be removing the tobacco... leaving you without a cigar or cigarette. Yeah, it'd piss people off, but look at the bright side. People could look to other, positive ways for stress relief, have less of a chance of getting some sort of cancer, and be able to enjoy life better rather than waiting till smoke break to enjoy maybe ten minutes. SMOKING IS BAD FOR YOU, ME, EVERYONE, AND IT HAS TO BE BANNED!

I believe that the government should promote good health, but should not be able to impede on peoples rights to unhealthy activities.
And about people living longer and relieving stuff positively. It just couldnt happen.

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: James So someone must either have something to gain from the buying and selling of illegal drugs

Bingo!

Quote by: James nobody wants to spend their time and effort to stop it.

Well there is a little matter of the funding pouring into the many police agencies as they prosecute this phoney war.

But cigarettes are a special case. Why attack them when, as you said, there are bigger problems believe it or not...

[Chris]

Quote by: SteveA Times are changing. Education is the best way to stop people from smoking. Again, I happen to smoke and don't mind at all when there's a restaurant that doesn't allow smoking (I never smoked in a restaurant anyway) but passing laws to do it won't really resolve things in the end, and we'll just be battling an even larger war on drugs.

How? Smoking would still be legal. I am not advocating making smoking illegal. Just limiting smoking in public places.

[Osborn F Enready]

Chris, publicly OWNED, or publicly open, PRIVATELY OWNED?

Publicly owned land can outlaw smoking based on health findings.

Privately OWNED land, open to the public is at the owners discretion.

[Prometheus]

Quote by: James Hamburgers are food. Food keeps us alive. Do you really not see what I'm saying?

But there is much healthier food. Fattening food like hamburgers costs billions in healthcare dollars a year. According to your logic, hamburgers should be outlawed.

THE GOVERNMENT CAN MAKE YOU STOP DOING ANYTHING THEY DON'T WANT YOU DOING

I can steal candy from a baby. I could rape a woman. I could shoot someone. Just because we can do something dosent we *should* or have a right to do said action.

[Prometheus]

Quote by: James If the government really wanted to win the war against drugs, there would be no drugs.

Bullshit. Your statements are getting exceedingly stupid. I am willing to bet that you are a second username. You are in here trying to stir things up. No one is this stupid.


Sean - check this guy's IP's. He's a double.

[Osborn F Enready]

Also, Prometheus, I must ask you a question regarding this thread:

You say it is not right for people who smoke to receive health care, because they smoke unless they pay for it?

[Prometheus]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Also, Prometheus, I must ask you a question regarding this thread: You say it is not right for people who smoke to receive health care, because they smoke unless they pay for it?

Well, I've always been against sociolized medicine - I want everyone to pay for thier own healthcare (paying for your own stuff, novel idea I know).

But on top of that we have the government paying for healthcare of people who smoke, which really fubs me the wrong way.

It's government payment of healthcare that makes smoking a big political issue. Because of our sociolized healthcare, we all share the economic burdern the smokers impose on us. If there were no sociolized medicine, we could forget this issue, because people would be paying to fix thier own screwed up bodies.

[Osborn F Enready]

Prometheus said:
But on top of that we have the government paying for healthcare of people who smoke, which really fubs me the wrong way.

I say:
So it rubs you the wrong way when we are forced to pay for smokers healthcare en masse, but not for idiots who do extreme sports, injure themselves due to idiocy or lack of common sense, entertainment purposes(stuntmen like Evil Knievel)?

I agree that it is BS that all people pay for everyone else, but to disallow a paying taxpayer healthcare in the socialist system we have now is a double negative.
1st negative) The system forces smokers to pay the same as others for everyones healthcare.
2nd negative) The system would then deny them their right to their own money, they have put in through taxes.

If it were a Libertarian system, people would pay their own bills.

In this current system, everyone pays for those who can't. Why not smokers, since they injure themselves knowingly just like idiots who risk injury for entertainment, sport or daily life?

Prometheus said:
It's government payment of healthcare that makes smoking a big political issue. Because of our sociolized healthcare, we all share the economic burdern the smokers impose on us. If there were no sociolized medicine, we could forget this issue, because people would be paying to fix thier own screwed up bodies.

I say:
I agree completely, but I wouldn't endorse MORE disenfranchisement just because someone smokes.

If smokers have to pay taxes under this fucked up system, they are entitled to the same treatment under this fucked up system. Also, you don't address that smokers pay an UNFAIR amount of the tax burden through extra taxation THEY have no control over. If anything, this should entitle them to EXTRA healthcare, since they shoulder more of the burden.

[Prometheus]

Well you have a good point about people who do dangerous stunts. If we didn't have public healthcare, the none of it would be an issue. With insurance you pay more money if you life dangerously/unhealthely. With government you pay no more even if you have an increased likeleyhood of being a burden.

I would agree that *if* we are going to have sociolized health care, that we can't disenfranchise those who live dangerously/unhealthely. But in the same vien, I also assert that we have no right to tell those people to stop being dangerously/unhealthy. So it's a contradiction of my ethics brought about by damnable public health care.

[Osborn F Enready]

I agree Prometheus, lets do away with our socialist intentions in our capitalist nation.