RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much?

RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Aubre -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/18/2007 8:15:41 AM)
Ask Dana Reeve about the risks of secondhand smoke. Sorry, too late.

starshineowned -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/18/2007 8:28:34 AM)
Not and never said it wasn't true. However, to use cigarette smoke as being a trigger for some asthmatics is enough in your mind to use it as a viable reason to stop people from smoking in their own homes? This is my point. Breathing air period is a damn trigger for some asthmatics. You going to jump on the band wagon to require that all parents with asthmatic children live in bubbles? The arguement is just this stupid. Infact now just looking at cigarette packs..it doesn't even state "may cause cancer or low birth weight. It simply says they contain carbon monoxide. Um well so do cars, and God knows what else we pilfer into the air by the crap loads every hour of every day. Ah but we gotta have those nifty things now don't we. I don't think we need alot of crap that is produced for consumption as those smoke stacks churn out harmful chemical compounds. quote: Ask Dana Reeve about the risks of secondhand smoke. Sorry, too late. Do you have a link that states with fact that second hand cigarette smoke was the causitive factor in her obtaining lung cancer? Don't suppose it could be attributed to Any other carbon monoxide producers that pollute the air on a grand scale do you? Thanks and have a great day starshine Happy slave of Master Delvin

Real0ne -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/18/2007 8:52:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Freedom us usually given away. First other people's soon enough yours. Who know, in 10 or 15 years there will be special "donut zones" in the workplace. On the bright side we will know where all the cops are! Its all about large scale mass media programming and its a very simple and fundamental process actually. Step 1) Lower the SAT scores 15 points to create the illusion we really are educated. Step 2) Create a structure/culture of greed. Thats what i am talkin bout! (yes its all about me). Step 3) Teach the public something is bad. (threfore not tolerated) Smoking is bad. Fat is bad. Those guys are bad. Step 4) Teach the public something is good. (therefore tolerated) Seat belts save lives. Flouride makes strong teeth. Step 5) Stalk your prey. (timing is essential) Wait till a problem occurs, give it lots of media attention and then pass legislation to prevent it from happening again. Step 6) Compartmentalize. Pass laws that are seen as good that target a minority to maintain public approval over all. Step 7) Occasionally create a catastrophe that induces awe, shock and fear. Pass unconsitutional laws that derail our liberties but offer us a blanket of false sense of security. Step 8+) Never go back. Combine that with a throw away world of cheap worthless products that devaluate rather than appreciate in value. Inferior educational standards. Children who grow up with gameboy in one hand and ipods in the other. Now we have a society of educated idiots, living in their idiocracy. People do not look any further than their own nose, who do not think any further than the run in their nylons, football stats, or teenage ninga turtles. These are the people deciding good and bad based on what is taught to them. They can care less about the other guy as long as it doesnt hurt them personally. Seat belts are good so i dont care if they pass a law. Oh and flouride helps teeth so fine put it in the water. Oh and smokers are bad so make laws to ban cigarettes Those who fail history are doomed to make the same mistakes. (Bill Clinton "Our children are ready") yes they are. They are beyond ready. This undermining our freedom is slow an innoctuous and compartmentalized as to effect one group at a time while having support of another which prevents uprisings and overall bad publicity. Of course it will hit you too as Merc said. When its your turn in the box, none of us will stand up for your rights because we dont care. It doesnt hurt us personally, we could care less it infringes on your rights under the constitution as long as it didnt bite into mine. There are never enough people hurt at one time to cause a revolt... Last the big ones. The Bush regime said "we need another pearl harbor". (referring to NWO) We got 911. The new pearl harbor. 3000, now in the aftermath 6000 dead and counting. Each Catastrophe creates a new world of order. CIA NSA Homeland security Large scale disolving of freedom "with the majority of public approval" THE PATRIOT ACT Finally, since the wheels turn fast for government and slow for people, drag their feet, block challenges and over time it will become accepted as "ok" or even a duty as have the illegal taxes that they have been collecting from us over the last 100 years. Welcome to the very simplistic creation of "SHEEPLES". Ingeniously simple plan really. Dont need to fire a shot, sheeples walk into the house asking for the slaughter. In the end the failure of democracy. quote: ORIGINAL: KatyLied quote: Have any links to support as fact that second hand smoke has been proven a danger to anyone as of yet? Or are we still in the "maybe, might, hypothetical" stage? It's not a "maybe, might, hypothetical" to anyone who has asthma that is triggered by smoke. So, yes, second hand smoke is a proven danger to some people. Smoking is a carcinogen and any level of it is hazzardous. What pisses me off are those who expect people to smoke in their homes while cars and deisels, jet airliners billow tons of the shit into the air. I think that as usual people are bass ackwards and should have the planes boats trains and cars restricted to the home and allow people to smoke their cigarettes outside. So pass a law for that LOLOL It would be a cleaner world wouldnt it? edited for the vision impaired [Mod Note: font size reduced]

MasterDelvin -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/18/2007 8:59:00 AM)
Hmm six pages so far.. :) It sure has been a long time since I posted here but figured at this point would toss my two cents minus the 15% tax in and light up a cig... If, and I use that word carefully, if the medical society, scientific society and the political society all had our best interest at heart and wanted to help us make a clear safe decision about our personal life, I might be willing to stop and listen to them. To tell someone they can't do something because...and then state this law or that, this instance or that and later find out that most if not all that that instant or law was based on was false, makes people very hessitant in believing them a second or third or forth time. I really have to go back to the following... Drunk driving kills...so what do we do ? The EPA has proven that not only our air, but land and water are polluted because of industry, then what do we do ? Relying on fossil fuels has placed us on the end of a short stick for having alternate resources used, so what do we do ? You are not allowed to smoke around other humans... okay..then what... I can't smoke at all ? okay fine, now what...Well, you can't eat too terribly much either, in fact we have proven that McDonalds causes cancer, ok, close them...now what...Fast foods all around the world, lets stop that, because it causes people to gain weight... possible heart attack...ok, close those, all of them... now what... well we are still polluting the air, the fossil fuels used causes a plathoria of diseases and illnesses so, lets stop all plane, bus, truck, car travel, in fact anything that uses fossil fuels, coal, industry of all sorts, lets stop that....ok...now what...well, the sun really isn't good for you because it causes skin cancer....okay, so no more humans allowed outside during the times the sun is up, ok, now what....well, ... hmm....okay...well....hmm.... Sure, a good deal of it sounds silly, but it also is a bit scary the power we turn over to our "representatives" who supposedly has our best interest at heart. It wasn't too long ago a certain man mentioned that if he was elected president he would use the national guard to break into homes and search for illegal drugs....huh ? At what point do we, as humans, take responsibility for ourselves, take pure honest information that is not tainted by big business or fat lawyers or law makers and make an informed decision of how we should live. I have no problem with keeping the human race out of anarchy with laws, as long as those laws not only apply to everyone but the impact of EACH of those laws is so thouroughly researched, that it proves to be benificial to the individual...you know, that person you see in the mirror each morning unless of course the air is too thick from cigarettes, car emmisions, industrial waste or your local dust storm blowing through the poppy fields... Good luck with the decisions at hand.. Master D [Mod Note: Font size reduced]

KatyLied -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/18/2007 9:08:18 AM)
quote: a viable reason to stop people from smoking in their own homes? This is my point. I don't care what people do in their own homes. I do think it's bad parenting to subject children to second-hand smoke. That is common sense.

MasterDelvin -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/18/2007 9:09:33 AM)
*Okay, vicious text size, my apologies :)* *RealOne, well said, all of it...* I guess the one thing (of many) that really just makes me shake my head in disbelief is how easy we believe media as being true and factual. That all government officials are honest and work for us, the tax payer (ahem...world war I anyone ?), the voter. *Perhaps the next topic should be bottled water :) (that should be a hoot)* *Master D*

starshineowned -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/18/2007 9:17:56 AM)
I think it is bad parenting to curse infront of your kids ever, drink any alcohol infront of them ever..after all they can't buy it or drink it until they are adults..have sex in the same house as children because they can see it or hear it. Ban it all I say! Off with those terrible parents heads already! But lets not just say it..lets really make it into law based on the assumptions without proven factual cases Ever. Again to this date in the history of man and smoking not one single case Ever has been stated as fact that any health issue was solely and directly a result of cigarettes alone. You can prance around all day saying it may have attributed to or may have been caused by or even was likely to have been caused by..but you can't proove it because you breathe the crap in everyday, and will continue to breathe the crap in everyday of every breath you take Even if not a single darn cigarette were around. I always wanted to be a sheeple Well Wishes starshine Happy slave of Master Delvin

Real0ne -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/18/2007 9:19:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterDelvin *Okay, vicious text size, my apologies :)* *RealOne, well said, all of it...* I guess the one thing (of many) that really just makes me shake my head in disbelief is how easy we believe media as being true and factual. That all government officials are honest and work for us, the tax payer (ahem...world war I anyone ?), the voter. *Perhaps the next topic should be bottled water :) (that should be a hoot)* *Master D* we are being severely manipulated and few even have a clu. i used to smake, i quit, but i feel people have the "right" to smoke in a mutually safe environment. i feel that people have a right to build nonsmoking as well as smoking establishments, and hopefully have consideration for each other rather than leaving each other hang hi and dry. On of my all time favorites is a welding shop i know of... Its a nonsmoking welding shop. they walk into the shop and the smoke from the welders are so thick you can cut it with a knife, in th eoffice its nonsmoking... like duh!! but thats industry and smoke is ok in industry.

QuietlySeeking -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/18/2007 9:27:46 AM)
Remember what the OP said, the smokers in question were smoking in their home. The adjoining non-smokers were affected by the smoke in their home. If what you do in your home negatively affects me in my home, then this doesn't become a rights issue, this becomes a responsibilites issue. Everybody I've read so far has been talking about their rights and forgetting that the non-smoking couple is doing nothing but living in their own home and they have the exact same rights as the smoking couple...to live without interference. Whoops, that's not happening! What if the neighbors next door had loud sex, banging on the wall all the time, do you think it would be wrong to file a noise complaint? shaking his head in disbelief

LadyEllen -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/18/2007 9:35:51 AM)
I propose a "clean air tax" on non-smokers, to pay for the enforcement of smoking bans. This is only fair, since tax on cigarettes is already accounted for in government spending programmes. Non payment will result in disconnection from the supply. A Hitler

Real0ne -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/18/2007 9:39:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: QuietlySeeking If what you do in your home negatively affects me in my home, then this doesn't become a rights issue, this becomes a responsibilites issue. Everybody I've read so far has been talking about their rights and forgetting that the non-smoking couple is doing nothing but living in their own home and they have the exact same rights as the smoking couple...to live without interference. Whoops, that's not happening! The funny thing about rights are that we all have them. (supposedly). Except for the really little humans, their right to life has been taken away but thats another topic. You have the right to do your thing until it encroaches on anothers rights. Of course living in cities or on opposite sides of walls from each other can make this very difficult because at some point it comes down to an acceptable level of tolerance of each other. quote: ORIGINAL: QuietlySeeking What if the neighbors next door had loud sex, banging on the wall all the time, do you think it would be wrong to file a noise complaint? shaking his head in disbelief Well proper ettiquette would be to knock on the door and politely ask if you may join them!

Real0ne -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/18/2007 9:42:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen I propose a "clean air tax" on non-smokers, to pay for the enforcement of smoking bans. This is only fair, since tax on cigarettes is already accounted for in government spending programmes. Non payment will result in disconnection from the supply. A Hitler u got my vote!

QuietlySeeking -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/18/2007 9:56:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne The funny thing about rights are that we all have them. (supposedly). Except for the really little humans, their right to life has been taken away but thats another topic. You have the right to do your thing until it encroaches on anothers rights. Of course living in cities or on opposite sides of walls from each other can make this very difficult because at some point it comes down to an acceptable level of tolerance of each other. Agreed...and the non-smokers had reached an level which was unacceptable to them...so we are crucifying them for standing up? Or are perhaps we are crucifying the government for standing up for one person's rights vs anothers? Isn't that what EVERY law does? Doesn't each law in some way limit someone's rights? quote: ORIGINAL: Real0neWell proper ettiquette would be to knock on the door and politely ask if you may join them! Nahhh, I've seen my neighbors. shudders

Wildfleurs -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/18/2007 10:27:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: starshineowned Ban it all I say! Off with those terrible parents heads already! But lets not just say it..lets really make it into law based on the assumptions without proven factual cases Ever. Again to this date in the history of man and smoking not one single case Ever has been stated as fact that any health issue was solely and directly a result of cigarettes alone. You can prance around all day saying it may have attributed to or may have been caused by or even was likely to have been caused by..but you can't proove it because you breathe the crap in everyday, and will continue to breathe the crap in everyday of every breath you take Even if not a single darn cigarette were around. It would be so nice if people did some actual substantive research. Cigarette smoking is the single most preventable cause of premature death in the United States. Each year, more than 400,000 Americans die from cigarette smoking. In fact, one in every five deaths in the United States is smoking related. Every year, smoking kills more than 276,000 men and 142,000 women. From: http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/research_data/health_consequences/mortali.htm C~

Real0ne -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/18/2007 10:40:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: QuietlySeeking quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne The funny thing about rights are that we all have them. (supposedly). Except for the really little humans, their right to life has been taken away but thats another topic. You have the right to do your thing until it encroaches on anothers rights. Of course living in cities or on opposite sides of walls from each other can make this very difficult because at some point it comes down to an acceptable level of tolerance of each other. Agreed...and the non-smokers had reached an level which was unacceptable to them...so we are crucifying them for standing up? Or are perhaps we are crucifying the government for standing up for one person's rights vs anothers? Isn't that what EVERY law does? Doesn't each law in some way limit someone's rights? In 1 word yes. i do not want to side track this into an abortion issue, but as an example. R v Wade. The first mistake was to make abortions illegal or extremely difficult where women had to go to the butcher shop to get one and often die in the process. Another solution woudl have been to look the other way and let society and medical services take care of itself, and just turn their heads and look the other way. That is entirely different then making a law that approves of abortion that is unconstitutional and in the end denies more humans of their rights. The problem is that our wonderful government will always come to a solution that revokes anothers right and in the case of abortion those who cannnot protest. Once its a law it becomes wrong, turning a blind eye was the solution but that would have left out constitutional rights intact and they do not want that.

Real0ne -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/18/2007 10:45:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Wildfleurs quote: ORIGINAL: starshineowned Ban it all I say! Off with those terrible parents heads already! But lets not just say it..lets really make it into law based on the assumptions without proven factual cases Ever. Again to this date in the history of man and smoking not one single case Ever has been stated as fact that any health issue was solely and directly a result of cigarettes alone. You can prance around all day saying it may have attributed to or may have been caused by or even was likely to have been caused by..but you can't proove it because you breathe the crap in everyday, and will continue to breathe the crap in everyday of every breath you take Even if not a single darn cigarette were around. It would be so nice if people did some actual substantive research. Cigarette smoking is the single most preventable cause of premature death in the United States. Each year, more than 400,000 Americans die from cigarette smoking. In fact, one in every five deaths in the United States is smoking related. Every year, smoking kills more than 276,000 men and 142,000 women. From: http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/research_data/health_consequences/mortali.htm C~ if you said "pollution" in its entireity i would agree with you. The only way to do a test like that is to take people and have them live in a clean room of filtered air, pure filtered water, organic food, etc have one group smoke and the other not. The problem is that we live in a dirty world and i assure that cigarette smoking was not the only factor in thier premature deaths. i can equally say those deaths were eating related, drinking related, and toxic chemicals in our surrounding related.

eyesopened -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/18/2007 11:11:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Wildfleurs quote: ORIGINAL: starshineowned Ban it all I say! Off with those terrible parents heads already! But lets not just say it..lets really make it into law based on the assumptions without proven factual cases Ever. Again to this date in the history of man and smoking not one single case Ever has been stated as fact that any health issue was solely and directly a result of cigarettes alone. You can prance around all day saying it may have attributed to or may have been caused by or even was likely to have been caused by..but you can't proove it because you breathe the crap in everyday, and will continue to breathe the crap in everyday of every breath you take Even if not a single darn cigarette were around. It would be so nice if people did some actual substantive research. Cigarette smoking is the single most preventable cause of premature death in the United States. Each year, more than 400,000 Americans die from cigarette smoking. In fact, one in every five deaths in the United States is smoking related. Every year, smoking kills more than 276,000 men and 142,000 women. From: http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/research_data/health_consequences/mortali.htm C~ No problem, then the products should be immediately pulled from the retail shelves and tobacco products banned. Products are banned every day for a whole lot less than the above example. Who are we kidding? Since when does the government care about your heath or rights when tax money is involved. http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28331 http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/media/nr-cp/2003/2003_78_e.html http://www.fda.gov/FDAC/features/2004/204_ephedra.html

adaddysgirl -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/18/2007 11:14:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: QuietlySeeking Remember what the OP said, the smokers in question were smoking in their home. The adjoining non-smokers were affected by the smoke in their home. If what you do in your home negatively affects me in my home, then this doesn't become a rights issue, this becomes a responsibilites issue. Everybody I've read so far has been talking about their rights and forgetting that the non-smoking couple is doing nothing but living in their own home and they have the exact same rights as the smoking couple...to live without interference. Whoops, that's not happening! What if the neighbors next door had loud sex, banging on the wall all the time, do you think it would be wrong to file a noise complaint? shaking his head in disbelief Oh this is a blast. If i am sitting in my living room watching tv and smoking, and my smoke wafts over to your house next door, i should not be allowed to smoke in my home? Or if because i don't want to smoke in my home (because of the kids of course), i go outside to have a cig, and it wafts over to your yard, i am now not allowed to smoke outside of my home either? Gimme a break! Singery said he has friends go outside to smoke. So, if some of that smoke makes its way over to your yard, we should no longer be able to have anyone over to our house who doesn't mind going outside to smoke? And if i were a vegan and you loved to barbecue outside, should that be taken away from you too (since i can smell your smoke and i find the smell of grilling meat nauseating)? Trust me, you are not the only one shaking their head in disbelief [sm=m23.gif] DG

Zensee -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/18/2007 11:30:09 AM)
Apart from being addictive enough to make people engage in proven fatality inducing behaviours, nicotine is also a powerful mind-altering substance. One side effect of smoking, which is often ignored, is a form of pathological rationalisation called T.A.L.E.S. (Tobacco Associated Lame Excuse Syndrome). Symptoms are varied and may include: excessive use of apples and oranges arguments (banning smoking is like requiring seatbelts), fallacious comparisons (cars kill people, you must ban cars too), demonisation (if you favour restrictions on smoking you are a Nazi), the slippery slope defense (today cigarettes, tomorrow democracy), all or nothing excuses (if you can’t stop all sources of pollution you can’t stop me lighting up wherever I want), reductio ad absurdum (if you restrict smoking why not just execute smokers?) and emotional appeals to unrelated topics (abortion, flouridation, etc.). Z. PS: Why is smoking a right but clean air an imposition? Everyone has to breathe, only a few have to smoke.

Mercnbeth -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/18/2007 11:39:44 AM)
quote: Apart from being addictive enough to make people engage in proven fatality inducing behaviours, nicotine is also a powerful mind-altering substance. One side effect of smoking, which is often ignored, is a form of pathological rationalisation called T.A.L.E.S. (Tobacco Associated Lame Excuse Syndrome). Second had smoke is a theory. Pet dander, where you live, and even cockroaches contribute to the onset of asthma similarly. Using the same logic and without hypocrisy all dogs and cats should be baned and/or killed to prevent any child from having an outbreak. You walk by many more dogs being walked on the streets and parks than you do smokers now a days. On hypocrisy. "Second hand" deaths from alcohol consumption, as evident by traffic accidents, are not theory. Every day at minimum 100's die. I assume all the anti-smokers have no alcoholic beverages in their homes, never gave a guest a drink and sent them on their way at night. If a cigarette was shared in the home, it may cause an odor but many more children wouldn't be dead as a result of second hand beer consumption.

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875