Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Smoking has killed 100 million people and counting.........It's a drug....it should be outlawed........
Carrie
Purily as devil's advocate, and not looking to start a new barrage of moral arguements....
Every single one of those would have died at some point anyway. If you want to argue smoking speeds the process, then I'll agree with you, but everyone eventually dies. Every life owes a death.
Do we want to start a new arguement that the government should be able to dictate the terms of our death?
Purily as devil's advocate, and not looking to start a new barrage of moral arguements....
Every single one of those would have died at some point anyway. If you want to argue smoking speeds the process, then I'll agree with you, but everyone eventually dies. Every life owes a death.
Do we want to start a new arguement that the government should be able to dictate the terms of our death?
Well that's the one thing we all have in common...none of us are getting out alive..sooner or later SOMETHING is going to kill you
Its for certain after all the posts that many here could care less about other peoples rights to belong in a public or private place. Then we have many here who agree that liberty and rights should never be prohibitied or regulated...........Even if it were sound science behind the shs debate""which it is not"" people would still smoke and they will always do it regardless of what others think.....Now I suggest each of you sit back and read about PROHIBITION in america and around the world.........I bet ya you have a whole diferent opinion after you take in how much trouble prohibition causes society in general.............here is the facts...........no prohibition has ever suceeded in working either voluntarily or forced...........many have died because of prohibition and many law abiding citizens found themselves victims of tyrannical prohibitionists at many times in our nations history............where a prohibitionists feels they are right and morally justified in what they do...........the victimized side feels they are the agrieved party and cant even understand why they are being targeted and criminalized.......but the deaths always start when either high taxation or outright prohibition causes supply demands to compel real criminals to make money at what was a very legal right.
so I say again repeating history is not worth lives lost taxes or the criminalization of your momma you brother your kids your neighbors.............mutual respect for the rights of others from both sides will be the best lesson learned here from history..........save a life and respect the rights of others and yourself.........compromise is a better deal than
guns and mobsters
Insurance Companies are getting a free ride by using public hysteria and legislative action.
Did anyone's rates go down because their state requires seat belts or motorcycle helmets?
Did anyone's rates go down because there are less smokers now than say even last year?
Oh, right, your Insurance rates will go down when there are ZERO smokers. But maybe not. A paid study could show another unhealthy habit causing high premiums.
Our life expectancies have lengthened in the last century, thus more medical care needed.
I have been in bars in non-smoking cities that were almost empty. Inside. The outdoor areas where smoking was allowed had most tables full. And I have been in bars where a sign on the door advises smoking allowed inside. Gee, a choice? To come inside or not. Just as a Movie or Tv show warns of content so one can decide for themselves.
One almost empty bar had seats for about 100 inside, only 6 people inside. And one of those guys was lonesome sitting by himself in the bar, went outside to join friends. And (bonus) had something to complain about, the smoke.
Why can't the government set standards to enforce if a business posts no smoking instead? That's what happens with designated handicapped parking.
There are many restaurants that banned smoking before it was a law. That was their choice, to provide a smoke-free air for those seeking it, Most of those businesses have succeeded because that was their target, anti-smokers.
I never ever went to any establishment that denied smokers............Why would I want too............for the same reason I wont go to any business for a take out order that was totally non-smoking befor the ban..............keep my business where good business was practiced befor.............I still dont go inside to eat we just phone it in pick it up and run...........then we go 2 times a moth out of state to get a room beside our newest favorite smoking restaraunt and dine for2 days....................what you have to do to get a choise cause Id sure like to return the privledge on the nonsmoking crowd that loves these bans..............................make them drive 100 miles or more
In Holland we have the problem with our youth. Every year around 400+ children between the age of 12-17 end up in a hospital because they drank themselves into an alcohol poisoning and 90% of these children literally drank themselves into a coma.
Most parents in Holland believe that children around the age of 12 are allowed to drink a glass of alcohol during special occasions (new year, birth day, etc).
In our country you have to be 16 to buy alcoholic beverages but most parents don't mind that their children start younger ( around the age of 12) as long as they do it at home.
Science tells us that the effect of alcohol on the developing brains of young children becomes more and more severe the younger the age of the child who starts drinking alcohol.
I have no problem when alcohol and smoking becomes completely banned altogether, because children believe that drinking alcohol and/ or smoking is part of becoming an adult. In essence they just become mindless followers who believe that they need to drink alcohol and / or smoke cigarettes to fit in.
In Holland we have the problem with our youth. Every year around 400+ children between the age of 12-17 end up in a hospital because they drank themselves into an alcohol poisoning and 90% of these children literally drank themselves into a coma.
Most parents in Holland believe that children around the age of 12 are allowed to drink a glass of alcohol during special occasions (new year, birth day, etc).
In our country you have to be 16 to buy alcoholic beverages but most parents don't mind that their children start younger ( around the age of 12) as long as they do it at home.
Science tells us that the effect of alcohol on the developing brains of young children becomes more and more severe the younger the age of the child who starts drinking alcohol.
I have no problem when alcohol and smoking becomes completely banned altogether, because children believe that drinking alcohol and/ or smoking is part of becoming an adult. In essence they just become mindless followers who believe that they need to drink alcohol and / or smoke cigarettes to fit in.
Thats a parenting issue. Ban the parents, or a more correct solution would be to hold the parents responsible for the actions of their child that results through their supervised care of the child. Nahh, lets blame an object, that way we don't offend anyone.
She might. I remember the former the head of the DEA shut up a person when he was debating who said that it makes no sense to have cocaine and marijuana illegal when tobacco and alcohol are just as unhealthy. He replied that he would outlaw them as well and even consider restricting caffeine.
Once again, I cannot agree with it, but it is so much more consistent and logical than:
"Tobacco smoke is deadly and should be banned."
"Smoke from cooking contains many of the same chemicals as tobacco smoke and often in higher amounts, if you want to ban smoking from private property for health reasons, it is only fair you ban charcoal grilling and barbecues as well."
"But I like barbecues."
I just read a report that contributed barbecuing to the spike in non-smoking lung cancer rates. Should we be banning barbecuing also?
Am I getting cancer from my neighbor's barbecuing? Where are the "oh, I'm getting cancer" people on this issue?
It seems like we only ban something when WE DON'T LIKE IT.
Purily as devil's advocate, and not looking to start a new barrage of moral arguements....
Every single one of those would have died at some point anyway. If you want to argue smoking speeds the process, then I'll agree with you, but everyone eventually dies. Every life owes a death.
Do we want to start a new arguement that the government should be able to dictate the terms of our death?
Well hey let your kids play in the street then since they will die anyway.....Doesn't that sound like nonsense, yes.......
Carrie
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
around the age of 12) as long as they do it at home. 
In essence they just become mindless followers who believe that they need to drink alcohol and / or smoke cigarettes to fit in.
