Pages: 1 2

 

2008-12-10 16:46:48
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6774

konfusion wrote:

Flecco wrote:

Kon wtf is wrong with brothels?
What's wrong with it is how women are treated in them if no one checks. The police are now finally starting to do routine checks there, but it's a major part of the human trafficking business.

And its legality in this country is... weird. They're not legal, but then they are...? I don't know, it's messed up.

-kon
If you can suggest a practical and effective method of policing the world's oldest trade, let the government and law-makers know .

It's a hot-topic tossup between legal protection and human's individual rights and freedoms. Touchy touchy.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
2008-12-10 16:47:35
LT.Victim
Member
+1,175|6867|British Columbia, Canada
We already have this in Canada.. Not much of a problem. You just have to ask for the brand you want and the clerk opens up a easy access cupboard and you go on your way.

If you want to smoke, you still can. The only real problem is you have to know what kind you want, because you can't see any of the packets..

Turquoise wrote:

NeXuS wrote:

I don't smoke. I hate smoke. But really come on. How can you ban someone from advertising there product just because it's know to cause health problems? Thousands of people die every day in car accidents but car commercials still run on a regular basis.
I mostly agree.  This is rather nanny statish.
Yes, your right thousands of people die every year from car accidents.

But car manufacturers are actually trying to make cars safer, what have tobacco companies done recently to make smoking safer?
2008-12-10 16:53:14
CammRobb
Banned
+1,510|6434|Carnoustie MASSIF

LT.Victim wrote:

But car manufacturers are actually trying to make cars safer, what have tobacco companies done recently to make smoking safer?
http://www.iwantoneofthose.com/gamucci- … index.html

TADA!!!!!
2008-12-10 17:12:16
LT.Victim
Member
+1,175|6867|British Columbia, Canada

SirSchloppy wrote:

LT.Victim wrote:

But car manufacturers are actually trying to make cars safer, what have tobacco companies done recently to make smoking safer?
http://www.iwantoneofthose.com/gamucci- … index.html

TADA!!!!!
I think it's safe to say that a Cigarette company didn't make that.
2008-12-10 17:12:34
CammRobb
Banned
+1,510|6434|Carnoustie MASSIF
I know. I was being facetious.
2008-12-10 21:10:04
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6709|North Carolina

LT.Victim wrote:

We already have this in Canada.. Not much of a problem. You just have to ask for the brand you want and the clerk opens up a easy access cupboard and you go on your way.

If you want to smoke, you still can. The only real problem is you have to know what kind you want, because you can't see any of the packets..

Turquoise wrote:

NeXuS wrote:

I don't smoke. I hate smoke. But really come on. How can you ban someone from advertising there product just because it's know to cause health problems? Thousands of people die every day in car accidents but car commercials still run on a regular basis.
I mostly agree.  This is rather nanny statish.
Yes, your right thousands of people die every year from car accidents.

But car manufacturers are actually trying to make cars safer, what have tobacco companies done recently to make smoking safer?
Everyone knows cigarettes kill.  What business does the government have in interfering with advertising of a legal product?  Again, this is a very slippery slope.

This is not how a free market behaves.
2008-12-10 22:51:38
konfusion
mostly afk
+480|6854|CH/BR - in UK

Turquoise wrote:

LT.Victim wrote:

We already have this in Canada.. Not much of a problem. You just have to ask for the brand you want and the clerk opens up a easy access cupboard and you go on your way.

If you want to smoke, you still can. The only real problem is you have to know what kind you want, because you can't see any of the packets..

Turquoise wrote:


I mostly agree.  This is rather nanny statish.
Yes, your right thousands of people die every year from car accidents.

But car manufacturers are actually trying to make cars safer, what have tobacco companies done recently to make smoking safer?
Everyone knows cigarettes kill.  What business does the government have in interfering with advertising of a legal product?  Again, this is a very slippery slope.

This is not how a free market behaves.
Yes, because as we can see, the free market is a perfectly viable system that always works 100% without fail... yes?

-kon
2008-12-10 22:54:58
Uzique
dasein.
+2,865|6774

konfusion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

LT.Victim wrote:

We already have this in Canada.. Not much of a problem. You just have to ask for the brand you want and the clerk opens up a easy access cupboard and you go on your way.

If you want to smoke, you still can. The only real problem is you have to know what kind you want, because you can't see any of the packets..


Yes, your right thousands of people die every year from car accidents.

But car manufacturers are actually trying to make cars safer, what have tobacco companies done recently to make smoking safer?
Everyone knows cigarettes kill.  What business does the government have in interfering with advertising of a legal product?  Again, this is a very slippery slope.

This is not how a free market behaves.
Yes, because as we can see, the free market is a perfectly viable system that always works 100% without fail... yes?

-kon
Ruh-oh, we're going to have another economic theory #101 tutorial on Free Market Economics, Darwinian principles and Keynesian theory again!
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
2008-12-10 22:56:29
Scorpion0x17
can detect anyone's visible post count...
+691|7070|Cambridge (UK)
I'm all for it.

As long as they also ban the display of alcohol.
2008-12-10 22:58:40
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6709|North Carolina

konfusion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

LT.Victim wrote:

We already have this in Canada.. Not much of a problem. You just have to ask for the brand you want and the clerk opens up a easy access cupboard and you go on your way.

If you want to smoke, you still can. The only real problem is you have to know what kind you want, because you can't see any of the packets..


Yes, your right thousands of people die every year from car accidents.

But car manufacturers are actually trying to make cars safer, what have tobacco companies done recently to make smoking safer?
Everyone knows cigarettes kill.  What business does the government have in interfering with advertising of a legal product?  Again, this is a very slippery slope.

This is not how a free market behaves.
Yes, because as we can see, the free market is a perfectly viable system that always works 100% without fail... yes?

-kon
Well, I think you know me well enough to know that I'm not a pure Libertarian.  I support government intervention on certain things.  I don't see what makes intervention relevant when it comes to advertising a product that only adults can purchase.

I do support restricting advertising that targets children, but that's another discussion.

Every adult has the responsibility to make their own decisions, and the government is not supposed to treat us all like we're children.
2008-12-11 08:24:09
jord
Member
+2,382|6982|The North, beyond the wall.

konfusion wrote:

I don't think I'd complain if the UK did what Australia seems to be doing, and blocked illegal sites for downloads and such - not because I don't do it, but because I know it's wrong. (random note)

-kon
See this is also where we differ. The way Australia is going makes it a totally unreasonable place for me to live or retire too, which is what a lot of brits did do. The internet is the only place left that is truly free. Nicolas Cage not being able to get 4 Ferraris and a Hummer instead of his 3 Ferraris and a Hummer because of illegal downloads doesn't really bother me. I download games, music and programs all the time, and am unapologetic towards a billion dollar company such as Apple, or multi millionaire overrated actor such as Tom Cruise. That's a whole different debate though...
2008-12-11 08:30:35
max
Vela Incident
+1,652|6871|NYC / Hamburg

I think I'll take up smoking now. Let people smoke, drink, snort or inject whatever they want.
once upon a midnight dreary, while i pron surfed, weak and weary, over many a strange and spurious site of ' hot  xxx galore'. While i clicked my fav'rite bookmark, suddenly there came a warning, and my heart was filled with mourning, mourning for my dear amour, " 'Tis not possible!", i muttered, " give me back my free hardcore!"..... quoth the server, 404.
2008-12-11 17:09:11
Flecco
iPod is broken.
+1,048|6969|NT, like Mick Dundee

The answer to brothels is this.


Make it a legal industry. Then apply OH&S to the industry.
Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.
2008-12-12 02:44:29
BVC
Member
+325|6999
One fundamental difference between smoking and drinking is, the effects of drinking are mostly confined to the drinker.  With smoking, everyone around you gets a share whether they like it or not.

We have pics of eyes, teeth etc...I think they're the same ones as in Aussie...smokers don't really care, if anything the view the packets as collectables.
2008-12-12 03:06:37
CammRobb
Banned
+1,510|6434|Carnoustie MASSIF
Pubic, you say that the effects of drinking are confined to the drinker, but not neccessarily, what if the drinker is a bad drunk and decides to pan someones face in. Or vandalise a bus stop?

Also, you say that we've got nothing in common, no common ground to start from smokers are putting other people's health at risk.

If you don't wanna inhale 2nd hand smoke, don't stand next to soemone smoking. Not difficult.
2008-12-12 04:38:50
konfusion
mostly afk
+480|6854|CH/BR - in UK

Pubic wrote:

One fundamental difference between smoking and drinking is, the effects of drinking are mostly confined to the drinker.  With smoking, everyone around you gets a share whether they like it or not.

We have pics of eyes, teeth etc...I think they're the same ones as in Aussie...smokers don't really care, if anything the view the packets as collectables.
Is this including drunks or no? Because I'm pretty sure the effects drunk driving is not confined to drinkers.

-kon
2008-12-12 04:42:01
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,817|6410|eXtreme to the maX
Someone standing next to me having a beer affects me a lot less than someone standing next to me smoking a cigarette.

Drunk driving is illegal, smoking in a bar used to be legal in most places.
Fuck Israel
2008-12-12 14:33:03
CammRobb
Banned
+1,510|6434|Carnoustie MASSIF

Dilbert_X wrote:

n someone standing next to me smoking a cigarette.

.
Move then.

 

Pages: 1 2

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard