Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 09-19-2018, 05:25 PM
 
4,336 posts, read 1,556,238 times
Reputation: 2279

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisC View Post
You are the 21st century equivalent of an early 1960s smoker. Of course, as a smoker, you are not going to believe that there is any ill effect from smoking.

Fact is, not only are there some rather concerning studies about the radiation issue, but there are some even more concerning studies of the adverse psychological effects of smartphones. You were not alive (I presume) when there was no such a thing as cell phones. I was. I see a distinct difference in the way people communicate and behave between the two times. And it's not an improvement. "Phone Zombies" are getting frighteningly common everywhere. They are as "out of it" as a heroin addict is after a fix. If they didn't have that phone in their hand or in front of their face for, say a couple days, they would react a lot like a junkie in withdrawals.

So go ahead and keep denying it. An addict always does. See if you can live without that little screen in front of your face for two weeks. My bet is you'd be an absolute wreck after a week.

And you may as well give your Red Herring up. Chemtrails have nothing to do with phone addiction or second hand radiation.
First cell phone 1998 at age 44. You are clueless.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-20-2018, 08:08 AM
 
Location: LEAVING CD
22,974 posts, read 27,023,656 times
Reputation: 15645
Quote:
Originally Posted by Open-D View Post
Yes. You're the one terrified by Cell Phones. Back under your rock.
Where have I said anything about cell phones? I think hate has finally caught up with you clouding your thinking.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-20-2018, 11:50 AM
 
4,336 posts, read 1,556,238 times
Reputation: 2279
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimj View Post
Where have I said anything about cell phones? I think hate has finally caught up with you clouding your thinking.
No, no such thing. Just a mix-up of user names. I retract my mis-directed post.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2018, 09:11 PM
 
417 posts, read 191,152 times
Reputation: 850
Quote:
Originally Posted by rstevens62 View Post
There is a citi bank call center close to my house, just recently Ive been seeing large crowds of people standing around smoking on the opposite side of the street (vacant lot for now). turns out Citi will no longer permit employees to smoke anywhere on the property, even in the employees cars, so they all cross the street and smoke there.

Im not sure how Citi can do that, if they choose to smoke in their cars, that is their private property.

I totally agree. Cigarette smoke to me is noxious, but not allowing someone to smoke in their own car doesn't make sense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-23-2018, 10:45 PM
 
28,122 posts, read 12,612,875 times
Reputation: 15341
Quote:
Originally Posted by addakisson View Post
I totally agree. Cigarette smoke to me is noxious, but not allowing someone to smoke in their own car doesn't make sense.
I dont think they can legally prevent people from smoking in their cars, but I would imagine all the employees are too concerned about their jobs to take any risks.

Its really strange to me, places like Citibank and other employers are banning smoking on their property more and more, even some public places have outdoor smoking bans...all this...and they will not go after the tobacco companies or come up with ways to restrict access to tobacco products??!!! WTF?

I dont understand this at all, when opioid prescription drugs started becoming a problem, they were very quick to target access to the drugs and the pharma companies themselves, not to mention tobacco kills FAR more people that opioids have, the only thing I can think of is that tobacco industry must have the absolute best, top of the line lobbyists on the planet, much better than lobbyists for the pharma industry, some people say its about money, but if that were true, opioid prescription drugs were flying off the shelves, and some were selling for $100 a pill on the street...LOTS of money was coming in thanks to opioid drug sales, and this didnt stop Govt from throwing a wrench into it, if they wanted a cut of it, they could have slapped a sin tax on opioids and watch the cash roll in...but they didnt, they went with the option that cut off the money...?

Id like to sit down with someone from DEA or ATF and ask them about this, why is the tobacco industry exempt from Govt intrusion, and much are they paying to keep it this way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-24-2018, 07:27 AM
 
Location: LEAVING CD
22,974 posts, read 27,023,656 times
Reputation: 15645
Quote:
Originally Posted by rstevens62 View Post
I dont think they can legally prevent people from smoking in their cars, but I would imagine all the employees are too concerned about their jobs to take any risks.

Its really strange to me, places like Citibank and other employers are banning smoking on their property more and more, even some public places have outdoor smoking bans...all this...and they will not go after the tobacco companies or come up with ways to restrict access to tobacco products??!!! WTF?

I dont understand this at all, when opioid prescription drugs started becoming a problem, they were very quick to target access to the drugs and the pharma companies themselves, not to mention tobacco kills FAR more people that opioids have, the only thing I can think of is that tobacco industry must have the absolute best, top of the line lobbyists on the planet, much better than lobbyists for the pharma industry, some people say its about money, but if that were true, opioid prescription drugs were flying off the shelves, and some were selling for $100 a pill on the street...LOTS of money was coming in thanks to opioid drug sales, and this didnt stop Govt from throwing a wrench into it, if they wanted a cut of it, they could have slapped a sin tax on opioids and watch the cash roll in...but they didnt, they went with the option that cut off the money...?

Id like to sit down with someone from DEA or ATF and ask them about this, why is the tobacco industry exempt from Govt intrusion, and much are they paying to keep it this way.
What's even more funny is how companies like CitiBank and other financial firms are so worried about people to ban smoking but are more than willing to cheat investors and destroy people's lives over $$$$$$ and rip off the public via bailouts.
Yeah, they really care about "the people"...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-24-2018, 03:14 PM
 
45,232 posts, read 26,464,208 times
Reputation: 24994
Quote:
Originally Posted by addakisson View Post
I totally agree. Cigarette smoke to me is noxious, but not allowing someone to smoke in their own car doesn't make sense.
Nor does forbidding smokers from associating with other smokers on private property i.e. restaurants, bars, casinos, etc. (consensual smoking )
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-24-2018, 03:40 PM
 
4,336 posts, read 1,556,238 times
Reputation: 2279
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
Nor does forbidding smokers from associating with other smokers on private property i.e. restaurants, bars, casinos, etc. (consensual smoking )
The problem is that the overwhelming majority of people are being forced to, in effect, smoke, i.e. to breath in the toxic filth spewed by a bunch of drug addicts who either aren't aware that other people have to breath the air they are fouling, or, more likely, just don't give a damn about others. The old retort offered for decades by the make-chicken suckers was "if you don't like my smoking, don't breath" typifies their contempt, and mandates the stern, and soon-to-be sterner controls on these filthy, disgusting arrogant bass terds.


I can't for the life of me fathom the arrogance of these filthy smokers who are spewing their abject, toxic, malodorous filth into the air without so much as a give-a-poop about other people who the same right to the air they are corrupting and rendering unfit for human consumption. It stunning, absolutely stunning.

Last edited by Open-D; 09-24-2018 at 03:55 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-24-2018, 03:50 PM
 
Location: A Nation Possessed
25,770 posts, read 18,834,175 times
Reputation: 22616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Open-D View Post
First cell phone 1998 at age 44. You are clueless.
You do realize that an ad hominem attack is not an arguing point, right? You didn't dispute a thing I said other than your age. I would say being "clueless" is more in line of not discussing anything that was stated and rather, simply calling someone clueless to make you feel better about yourself.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-24-2018, 04:35 PM
 
28,122 posts, read 12,612,875 times
Reputation: 15341
Quote:
Originally Posted by Open-D View Post
The problem is that the overwhelming majority of people are being forced to, in effect, smoke, i.e. to breath in the toxic filth spewed by a bunch of drug addicts who either aren't aware that other people have to breath the air they are fouling, or, more likely, just don't give a damn about others. The old retort offered for decades by the make-chicken suckers was "if you don't like my smoking, don't breath" typifies their contempt, and mandates the stern, and soon-to-be sterner controls on these filthy, disgusting arrogant bass terds.


I can't for the life of me fathom the arrogance of these filthy smokers who are spewing their abject, toxic, malodorous filth into the air without so much as a give-a-poop about other people who the same right to the air they are corrupting and rendering unfit for human consumption. It stunning, absolutely stunning.
Well, cigarettes are sold at about every gas station and conv store, heck they are still sold at most drug stores (only one chain has dropped them!)

When products or drugs are deemed to be unhealthy or dangerous, ACCESS is restricted/ regulated...make them more difficult to obtain, there is rarely any concern for the manufacturer or their profits.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:00 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top