Pages: 1 … 3 4 5 6 7

 

2010-08-22 16:12:21
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6941|USA

jord wrote:

lowing wrote:

jord wrote:

I don't smoke...
and yet I am still completely indifferent. I speak in general terms, not specifically to you.
The general theme of your posts in this thread is anything but indifferent. You're making sweeping generalizations on a group that probably numbers in the hundreds of millions, you're assuming smokers don't enjoy smoking yet do not smoke and you're tone is that of resentment.

Furthermore, and be honest here, if it were up to you how would you legislate smoking? No smoking in public places, outright ban or other?
Yup I did, as I said, there are only 2 possibilities here, you are weak minded and succumb to peer pressure, or if you chose to do this for your own pleasure, you are an idiot, for the reason listed.


I would allow KNOWN smoking establishments and then non-smoking establishments. I would let the proprietor decide which he wanted.

If a non- smoker CHOOSES to enter an KNOWN smoking establishment then that person waives all rights to any complaints.
Separate but equal is the rule of thumb for me on this issue.

Last edited by lowing (2010-08-22 16:16:14)

2010-08-22 16:15:15
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6941|USA

FatherTed wrote:

lowing wrote:

FatherTed wrote:

how did you get my life down to such a tee from my posts on an internet forum D:
Hey you said I was wrong.  you said you smoke for pleasure and that it did not start from peer preasure and the desire to be accepted.

So obviuously you wieghed all options for yourself and decided smoking does you more good than harm in all the ways I listed. Just want to understand your reasoning behind the positive affects of your cigarette smoking, health wise, and financial, since social reasons,  obviously, according to you, do not come into play.
Where did this bit;

lowing wrote:

decided smoking does you more good than harm
come from? I know smoking is fucking stupid, but i still enjoy it v0v. people do seemingly pointless, life-threatening and generally stupid things every day in the pursuit of fun, why is smoking particular different for me?

do you drink lowing?
ok, so then you choose door number 2 you are an idiot, not because you smoke now, but because you decided to start BEFORE you had an addiction. Basically, you chose an addiction. Sorry this points toward idiocy.
I drink rarely, but when I do it is margaritas mostly. and no, I do not have to drink.....do you have to smoke? Let me guess, you can quit any time you want right?

Last edited by lowing (2010-08-22 16:15:34)

2010-08-22 16:17:43
jord
Member
+2,382|6968|The North, beyond the wall.

lowing wrote:

jord wrote:

lowing wrote:


and yet I am still completely indifferent. I speak in general terms, not specifically to you.
The general theme of your posts in this thread is anything but indifferent. You're making sweeping generalizations on a group that probably numbers in the hundreds of millions, you're assuming smokers don't enjoy smoking yet do not smoke and you're tone is that of resentment.

Furthermore, and be honest here, if it were up to you how would you legislate smoking? No smoking in public places, outright ban or other?
Yup I did, as I said, there are only 2 possibilities here, you are weak minded and succumb to peer pressure, or if you chose to do this for your own pleasure, you are an idiot, for the reason listed.


I would allow KNOWN smoking establishments and then non-smoking establishments. I would let the proprietor to decide which he wanted.

If a non- smoker CHOOSES to enter an KNOWN smoking establishment then that person waives all rights to any complaints.
Separate but equal is the rule of thumb for me on this issue.
Not every teenager cares about their health when they're 70. I don't enjoy it and probably never will, but I hold no anger for those that do enjoy it. Nor am I particularly concerned about passive smoke, but I can see why some people might be. For that reason I agree with what you'd do, I said the same years ago when smoking in public places including bars/clubs/etc was banned. Now bars are going out of business rapidly. Personal choice advocate right here.
2010-08-22 16:20:01
FatherTed
xD
+3,936|6790|so randum
why do you drink lowing. dont you know alcohol is a fairly addictive drug and by choosing to consume said addictive drug you smack a little of idiocy. Furthermore it's well documented as a substance that ruins peoples lives and the lives of people around them in a plethora of ways. tut tut

see how your argument can go?
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
2010-08-22 16:28:47
FatherTed
xD
+3,936|6790|so randum
bed time
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
2010-08-22 16:33:38
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6941|USA

FatherTed wrote:

why do you drink lowing. dont you know alcohol is a fairly addictive drug and by choosing to consume said addictive drug you smack a little of idiocy. Furthermore it's well documented as a substance that ruins peoples lives and the lives of people around them in a plethora of ways. tut tut

see how your argument can go?
As I said, I drink rarely, and I do not like the taste of any alcohol. If I drink it is a bitch drink drink. I also so said, I do not have to drink....Do you HAVE to smoke?

I tried a cigarette when I was a teenager like everyone else. Only to see what the big deal was, there wasn't one, so I walked away, peer preasure be damned.

Last edited by lowing (2010-08-22 16:35:10)

2010-08-22 16:36:48
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6941|USA

jord wrote:

lowing wrote:

jord wrote:


The general theme of your posts in this thread is anything but indifferent. You're making sweeping generalizations on a group that probably numbers in the hundreds of millions, you're assuming smokers don't enjoy smoking yet do not smoke and you're tone is that of resentment.

Furthermore, and be honest here, if it were up to you how would you legislate smoking? No smoking in public places, outright ban or other?
Yup I did, as I said, there are only 2 possibilities here, you are weak minded and succumb to peer pressure, or if you chose to do this for your own pleasure, you are an idiot, for the reason listed.


I would allow KNOWN smoking establishments and then non-smoking establishments. I would let the proprietor to decide which he wanted.

If a non- smoker CHOOSES to enter an KNOWN smoking establishment then that person waives all rights to any complaints.
Separate but equal is the rule of thumb for me on this issue.
Not every teenager cares about their health when they're 70. I don't enjoy it and probably never will, but I hold no anger for those that do enjoy it. Nor am I particularly concerned about passive smoke, but I can see why some people might be. For that reason I agree with what you'd do, I said the same years ago when smoking in public places including bars/clubs/etc was banned. Now bars are going out of business rapidly. Personal choice advocate right here.
No they don't, teenagers care about being accepted.....Peer preasure. and as I said, I have no anger toward smokers that keep that bullshit habit to themselves. however, those people are rare.
2010-08-22 18:20:31
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,057|7062|PNW

JohnG@lt wrote:

ATG wrote:

BAN TOBACCO
http://www.truthdig.com/images/reportup … ty_350.jpg

BAN CONSPIRACY THEORY FUCKHEADS

wiki wrote:

The Oklahoma blast claimed 168 lives, including 19 children under the age of 6, and injured more than 680 people.

wiki wrote:

Lung cancer, the most common cause of cancer-related death in men and women, is responsible for 1.3 million deaths worldwide annually, as of 2004.
Sure, not all of those were smoking-related, but it puts things in perspective, if you're going to draw comparisons.
2010-08-22 18:24:32
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5648|London, England

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

ATG wrote:

BAN TOBACCO
http://www.truthdig.com/images/reportup … ty_350.jpg

BAN CONSPIRACY THEORY FUCKHEADS

wiki wrote:

The Oklahoma blast claimed 168 lives, including 19 children under the age of 6, and injured more than 680 people.

wiki wrote:

Lung cancer, the most common cause of cancer-related death in men and women, is responsible for 1.3 million deaths worldwide annually, as of 2004.
Sure, not all of those were smoking-related, but it puts things in perspective, if you're going to draw comparisons.
Not all lung cancer is caused by smoking. Heck, it's not even the cause in the majority of cases.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-08-22 19:04:33
jsnipy
...
+3,277|6812|...

Well regardless, if a state sued the tobacco industry that state should no longer sell cigarettes, period. Hippocrates.
2010-08-22 19:06:32
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5648|London, England
I find it fucking hilarious that the same people who think weed should be decriminalized want to criminalize tobacco. How's that War on Drugs working out anyway? I can't wait to spend a month in jail for possessing an ounce of tobacco...
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-08-22 19:08:30
jsnipy
...
+3,277|6812|...

JohnG@lt wrote:

I find it fucking hilarious that the same people who think weed should be decriminalized want to criminalize tobacco. How's that War on Drugs working out anyway? I can't wait to spend a month in jail for possessing an ounce of tobacco...
criminalize? No, but if a state truly believes it to be harmful to people's health and wants to sue for billions of dollars, then why would it sell it to its citizens? Besides commercial cigarettes are far more then just tobacco. Commercial marijuana could end up the same way.
2010-08-22 19:09:13
11 Bravo
Banned
+965|5527|Cleveland, Ohio

jsnipy wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

I find it fucking hilarious that the same people who think weed should be decriminalized want to criminalize tobacco. How's that War on Drugs working out anyway? I can't wait to spend a month in jail for possessing an ounce of tobacco...
criminalize? No, but if a state truly believes it to be harmful to people's health and wants to sue for billions of dollars, then why would it sell it to its citizens? Beside commercial cigarettes are far more then just tobacco.
2010-08-22 19:10:00
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5648|London, England

jsnipy wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

I find it fucking hilarious that the same people who think weed should be decriminalized want to criminalize tobacco. How's that War on Drugs working out anyway? I can't wait to spend a month in jail for possessing an ounce of tobacco...
criminalize? No, but if a state truly believes it to be harmful to people's health and wants to sue for billions of dollars, then why would it sell it to its citizens? Beside commercial cigarettes are far more then just tobacco. Commercial marijuana could end up the same way.
Since when does the state sell anything? Private stores sell tobacco. If you're going to ban the sale of tobacco, you have to ban the possession of, and growing of, as well.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-08-22 19:12:08
jsnipy
...
+3,277|6812|...

JohnG@lt wrote:

jsnipy wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

I find it fucking hilarious that the same people who think weed should be decriminalized want to criminalize tobacco. How's that War on Drugs working out anyway? I can't wait to spend a month in jail for possessing an ounce of tobacco...
criminalize? No, but if a state truly believes it to be harmful to people's health and wants to sue for billions of dollars, then why would it sell it to its citizens? Beside commercial cigarettes are far more then just tobacco. Commercial marijuana could end up the same way.
Since when does the state sell anything? Private stores sell tobacco. If you're going to ban the sale of tobacco, you have to ban the possession of, and growing of, as well.
States collect taxes from it. In fact most packs have some state issued seal on it. Some states in the example of alcohol control the sale of it. In VA for example we have ABC stores which sell spirits and such.

So its more controlled, then say HFCS.
2010-08-22 19:14:00
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5648|London, England

jsnipy wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

jsnipy wrote:

criminalize? No, but if a state truly believes it to be harmful to people's health and wants to sue for billions of dollars, then why would it sell it to its citizens? Beside commercial cigarettes are far more then just tobacco. Commercial marijuana could end up the same way.
Since when does the state sell anything? Private stores sell tobacco. If you're going to ban the sale of tobacco, you have to ban the possession of, and growing of, as well.
States collect taxes from it. In fact most packs have some state issued seal on it. Some states in the example of alcohol control the sale of it. In VA for example we have ABC stores which sell spirits and such.
Yes, they place an excise tax on them. The state doesn't sell a damn thing though, they just tack on a tax. States have their own gasoline taxes too, does the state sell or own any of the gasoline?

Last edited by JohnG@lt (2010-08-22 19:14:51)

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-08-22 19:25:48
jsnipy
...
+3,277|6812|...

JohnG@lt wrote:

jsnipy wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Since when does the state sell anything? Private stores sell tobacco. If you're going to ban the sale of tobacco, you have to ban the possession of, and growing of, as well.
States collect taxes from it. In fact most packs have some state issued seal on it. Some states in the example of alcohol control the sale of it. In VA for example we have ABC stores which sell spirits and such.
Yes, they place an excise tax on them. The state doesn't sell a damn thing though, they just tack on a tax. States have their own gasoline taxes too, does the state sell or own any of the gasoline?

And so? That's Virginia. Move out of an ass backward state where the government has a monopoly on liquor sales.



Cigarettes are not a controlled substance beyond the need to buy a license to sell them.
Nothing backwards about Virginia at all really, its quite balanced in many regards, but back on topic ...

All I am pointing out is that it is hypocritical for a state to sue a company for selling a product is deems dangerous and then profit from its continuous sale. Agree?

If a state wanted to discontinue their sale it would not have to be a police state ban as you described. Fireworks are illegal in most states but states don't have tasks forces hunting them down.
2010-08-22 19:30:00
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5648|London, England

jsnipy wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

jsnipy wrote:


States collect taxes from it. In fact most packs have some state issued seal on it. Some states in the example of alcohol control the sale of it. In VA for example we have ABC stores which sell spirits and such.
Yes, they place an excise tax on them. The state doesn't sell a damn thing though, they just tack on a tax. States have their own gasoline taxes too, does the state sell or own any of the gasoline?

And so? That's Virginia. Move out of an ass backward state where the government has a monopoly on liquor sales.



Cigarettes are not a controlled substance beyond the need to buy a license to sell them.
Nothing backwards about Virginia at all really, its quite balanced in many regards, but back on topic ...

All I am pointing out is that it is hypocritical for a state to sue a company for selling a product is deems dangerous and then profit from its continuous sale. Agree?

If a state wanted to discontinue their sale it would not have to be a police state ban as you described. Fireworks are illegal in most states but states don't have tasks forces hunting them down.
Yes they do. New York does anyway.

It was nothing more than a money grab. Any time a politician smells free money with no ramifications they'll be all over it. Also, the States sued on behalf of their constituents and most of them paid lip service to channeling the money into public health programs. Because the States sued for their constituents, they also preempted any future civil lawsuits levied against tobacco companies by common citizens. Cute huh?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2010-08-23 09:09:53
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6941|USA

JohnG@lt wrote:

I find it fucking hilarious that the same people who think weed should be decriminalized want to criminalize tobacco. How's that War on Drugs working out anyway? I can't wait to spend a month in jail for possessing an ounce of tobacco...
Not sure anyone said anything about criminalizing tobacco. All that is asked for is for you assholes that smoke to keep it to yourselves. Not really sure where you think you have the "right" to impose your fucked up habits on other people.
2010-08-23 09:11:35
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6941|USA

JohnG@lt wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:


http://www.truthdig.com/images/reportup … ty_350.jpg

BAN CONSPIRACY THEORY FUCKHEADS

wiki wrote:

The Oklahoma blast claimed 168 lives, including 19 children under the age of 6, and injured more than 680 people.

wiki wrote:

Lung cancer, the most common cause of cancer-related death in men and women, is responsible for 1.3 million deaths worldwide annually, as of 2004.
Sure, not all of those were smoking-related, but it puts things in perspective, if you're going to draw comparisons.
Not all lung cancer is caused by smoking. Heck, it's not even the cause in the majority of cases.
Nothing like the arguments presented by smokers to justify and rationalize their habits to those of us that were smart enough not to pick it up.
2010-08-23 09:41:42
lxcpikiman
imbad @ bf2
+70|6885|Toronto-Canada

lowing wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

I find it fucking hilarious that the same people who think weed should be decriminalized want to criminalize tobacco. How's that War on Drugs working out anyway? I can't wait to spend a month in jail for possessing an ounce of tobacco...
Not sure anyone said anything about criminalizing tobacco. All that is asked for is for you assholes that smoke to keep it to yourselves. Not really sure where you think you have the "right" to impose your fucked up habits on other people.
this post is spot on!
2010-08-23 09:43:59
cpt.fass1
The Cap'n Can Make it Hap'n
+329|6986|NJ
I hope they ban it, then maybe Cig prices would go down again. Crime would raise, you'd have junkies breaking into peoples houses to make money for their tobacco fix.

Lowings whole life is based on Gallants life from Highlights and he's never done anything wrong.

Lowing, Soda is horrible for people and children and addictive cause caffeine is one of the most addictive drugs out there, we should ban caffeine.
2010-08-23 09:46:15
jord
Member
+2,382|6968|The North, beyond the wall.
Smog hurts my lungs, we should only produce and drive hybrids.
2010-08-23 09:47:38
cpt.fass1
The Cap'n Can Make it Hap'n
+329|6986|NJ

lxcpikiman wrote:

lowing wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

I find it fucking hilarious that the same people who think weed should be decriminalized want to criminalize tobacco. How's that War on Drugs working out anyway? I can't wait to spend a month in jail for possessing an ounce of tobacco...
Not sure anyone said anything about criminalizing tobacco. All that is asked for is for you assholes that smoke to keep it to yourselves. Not really sure where you think you have the "right" to impose your fucked up habits on other people.
this post is spot on!
Spot on stupid. We never had the right nor did we ever show up to your place of work or home and smoke. Most smokers I knew would only smoke in bars and in smoking sections. If you chose to sit there, it was your fault..

I want examples of our habits getting "Imposed" on you.

Last edited by cpt.fass1 (2010-08-23 09:48:24)

2010-08-23 09:51:55
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6941|USA

cpt.fass1 wrote:

I hope they ban it, then maybe Cig prices would go down again. Crime would raise, you'd have junkies breaking into peoples houses to make money for their tobacco fix.

Lowings whole life is based on Gallants life from Highlights and he's never done anything wrong.

Lowing, Soda is horrible for people and children and addictive cause caffeine is one of the most addictive drugs out there, we should ban caffeine.
where have I said anything about banning anything? I said do what you want, keep it to yourself. As far as your analogy to soda. I don't give a fuck if you drink a case of coke a day. You are only fucking yourself up, and by doing so you are not harming anyone else. Drink up.

Regarding your assertion that I "have never done anything wrong". This is also incorrect. I have done plenty wrong, difference is, I accept it, I acknowledge it, I try to learn form it, and I do not blame others for it. Is it so bad to expect you to do the same?

 

Pages: 1 … 3 4 5 6 7

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard