U.S. to ban smoking in Public Housing

a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

The nose? # that camel is tucked into the sleeping bag with us! Lol.

"They came for the smokers, and I said nothing, as I wasn't a smoker. They came for the huddled masses living in the ghettos, and still I said nothing. Now they are coming for me, and there is no one to say anything for me."

Smoke inside and face a fine.
Smoke outside and face getting shot knifed or robed in public housing projects.

I know people that live in public housing and never hang outside because its so dangerous.

a reply to: jjsr420

yes and what is absolutely amazing to me is how smokers reacted! We completely mimicked the reaction of the jews when Hitler started his pogram. We tried to be "polite" and to just get along. Surely they didn't mean to go after polite smokers, who followed all their rules.

And the drinkers are sitting back and thinking the same thing. I never drink and drive, surely they don't mean to bring prohibition to me.

And the ones who like to eat what they choose instead of what their told to eat.

And all those purfume wearers.

And those who choose not be vegans.

You know, now that I think of it, why should people be allowed to eat meat in their own homes. Surely vegans shouldn't have to be offended by that horrible stench of burning flesh.

Man - they could far with this

Tired of control Freaks

a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

Indeed. Very, very far.

"Umm yea. The neighbors apparently don't like how you smell soooo were gonna have to evict you."

a reply to: jjsr420

I can almost hear the debate now.

Cooking meat release carcinogines into the air that could potentially affect your neighbours health. Studies show that exposure to cooking meat causes 1/3 of all cancers. Of course, we don't want to take away your choice of eating meat. We are just asking you to show some consideration for your neighbours who have chosen not to eat meat by cooking and eating your meat outside!

Tired of Control Freaks

originally posted by: PraetorianAZ

I understand that not everybody is abusing the system. But the fact still stands if you need government assistance (AKA: my tax dollars) just to keep a roof over your head than you shouldn't be allowed to purchase things not necessary to survival.

Or else why the hell am I paying full price for my housing or my power or anything. The government should be giving me handouts to so I can fuel my habits as well.

thats where i am at with it.
i dont give a # about the smell or any of that.

i just dont see how people can claim they need public assistance and then go out and spend 5 bucks a pack each day on smokes. yeah some smoke less but some smoke more. this is just a nice round number. a pack a day is a good average for smokers.

how can a person say they do not have enough for food or enough for rent and then spend $150 a month on smokes. i dont get it.
that is a lot of money.

and cigarettes most certainly are a luxury.
150 a month buys a lot of groceries. pays a couple bills.

a reply to: TinySickTears

So I guess its up to YOU, through the government to teach a lesson to those ingrates. They should be spending their money on crack like everybody else.

Do you think we should be checking on the quality of the toilet paper that they use as well? After all they are barely human as it is. Why should they be treated with any dignity or respect while they live on our tax dollars.

Who cares if they are disabled veterans? They should never have gone off to war and gotten hurt like that.

Got sick and can't work? good, cause that makes you our bitch now!

Now what do you have planned for all those corporate welfare bums?

Tired Of Control Freaks

a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

i dont care what they spend their money on. flush it for all i care.
they are accepting money from others as help though. thats different.

disagree all you want. im not changing my opinion about it.

a reply to: TinySickTears

Neither am I. I don't believe in kicking people when they are down.

and its not about the money for you. Youd don't care about the money. According to you it can be flushed down the toilet.

But the right to punish the weak....now that is a real motive for some people!

Tired of Control Freaks

a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

i dont care what they do with their money
i thought i explained it

oh well. we feel how we feel

a reply to: TinySickTears

Yes you did explain it but only in relation to smoking.

How do you feel about woman on welfare who insist on buying 20 or 25 a month on tampons. Shouldn't they have to use old rags like woman in poor countries do?

Whats up with wanting to go out and away from the children once a month or so. That money could be spent on food!

Their lives should be one of contistant, unending drudgery. Its an excuse that they are only human!

Whats with corporations making billions in profit and still demanding tax breaks. No wait, lets go back to those filthy poor people.

Tired of Control Freaks

a reply to: TinySickTears

then maybe they should ban alchohol from the public housing also?? and, by the way, I doubt most of those in public housing buy brand name cigs, heck, if you roll your own, you can get more than a carton for around $15...
and much of that money that is paid for cigs is tax that goes right back to the gov't anyways...

heck if they are doing this for health reasons, then there is a few other things that they should be banning...
like perfume, many cleaning agents, incense, to name a few, heck ban the cars from the parking lots!!

a reply to: dawnstar

exactly Dawnstar!

For example, environmentalists would like us to all eat a vegan diet because it reduces CO2 emissions. Some one like TinySickTears would, of couse, step forward to announce that its not about the money. Vegan diets are so much cheaper. How could someone complain about not having enough money for food, if they are spending $20, $50 or $100 on meat.

There is an anti-meat charity group like PETA would step forward to argue for the rights of animals and cruelty to animals. Vegan Society www.vegansociety.com... would step forward to extoll the benefits of meat free diets

Other charities would be formed to fund "studies" showing how carcinogins from grilled meat are "being imposed on the neighbours.

then, of course, there is the one pathetic meat eater, who calmly explains that if it wasn't for government bans on meat, he would be eating 1 pound a week but by, being punished and harassed by the right-thinking and kindly government, he was able to reduce his consumption of meat by 1/2 a pound a week. As a result, he is feeling so muc better. He is looking forward to more bans, taxes etc to get him completely off his meat addiction (obviously the most pathetic meat eater on the planet)

Of couse, there is sympathetic media, who word-for-word publishes media events of studies showing that second hand meat is far worse, shockingly worse, than thought. Absolutely no one will ever debate or question these studies and they all just happen to show up in the media in time to support calls for bans. In fact, meat eating will be shown to be even worse then smoking and are "linked" to and associated with sudden death at the age of 72.

And there you have it - Bans Bans and more bans. What is your complaint this week, we can solve your problem is record time, now that we have public well trained on how to respond to ban proposals

Tired of Control Freaks

a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

and we just won't talk about the health effects of working in certain occupations...
mining, machinist, printing, working in plastic factories, painters, and on and on...

I still say that the are using cigarettes as a scapegoat, to cover the fact that our modern lifestyle is killing us...
what's next?? they gonna ban computers from the public housing since they are known to heat up and then all the plastic in them start letting pollutants into the air while more and more employers seem to almost demand that we carry cellphones so that they can call us into work 24/7?? heck, the cellphones are making men sterile if you believe some of the studies.

so we go from talking about cigarettes to if its ok to spend 25 a week on tampons...
quite the leap

lol at 25 a month on tampons

keep at it though

a reply to: TinySickTears

Doesn't do it for you? I thought it wasn't about the money but about making more funds available to buy groceries. Do you mean it really was about SMOKING. And people buying and consuming a legal product.

Tired of Control Freaks

a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

i told you what it was about. keep at it though.

im still amused at 25 a month on tampons.
thats a mean vagina i tell you
hahahahah

thanks for the laugh. im over this. i clearly dont care as much about it as you do

a reply to: dawnstar

dawnstar

Again you hit the nail right on the head.

You would think that the incidence of lung cancer would decrease with the decrease in smoking....

www.medscape.com...

In fact, at one institution, the incidence of never-smokers diagnosed with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) jumped from 13% to 28% during a 6-year period, Eric Lim, MD, from the Royal Brompton & Harefield NHS Foundation Trust in London, United Kingdom, and colleagues report in their study. And many of these patients initially presented with advanced-stage disease. The second study demonstrated that the incidence of lung cancer in never-smokers is increasing in the United States. This was observed in three facilities, most significantly for NSCLC. At one institution, for example, the rate of never-smokers climbed from 8.9% in 1990–1995 to 19.5% in 2011–2013.

Of course, they don't want to admit that non-smoking lung cancer isn't increasing, its that lung cancer isn't decrease with the decrease in smoking rate BECAUSE smoking is only "associated" in lung cancer. It has never correlated with lung cancer. Witness both Japan and Greece with the highest rates of rates of smoking but the lowest rates of lung cancer.

Tired Of Control Freaks

a reply to: TinySickTears

hey I know that that $25 probably doesn't cover what some of the poor in these housing projects are spending on beer!
and I also know that that $25 dollars really wouldn't go far when it comes to paying the rent alone. maybe the person is walking a half of mile to work every day and saving alot more in gas, car maintenance, and insurance.. living without a cable bill, or in some other way is going without something that everyone else is just taking for granted?
and ya know what is the sick thing about this?? every city probably has their own little public housing building dedicated to the elderly seniors.. who have put in their time in the workforce, paid into the social security, managed to save a little bit of money.. not to mention probably started smoking before the smoking bans were even a thought in anyone's minds. well, their social security check that they've been getting back for all those years they were working and putting into the fund hasn't seen an increase in how long? how long have they gone with near 0 interest rates on their savings? how many lost money on their houses, stock investments, retirement funds because of the housing scam? and, I'm sorry but if they have lived for that long smoking their cigs, more than likely it isn't gonna help their health much if they quit now.

a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

look at the rate of asthma in the country!! when I was young, there was no smoking bans, not in the bars, not in the restuarants, not in workplace (heck smoking was even allowed in the faculty rooms in the schools... and by what I hear, in the schools by the students in the southwestern va area where I am living. ) and there was far more parents smoking. and yet, I really didn't know of any other kids that had trouble breathing, really not many that I'd consider obese. we could all run and play, and breath just fine!!!
now, go into any school nursing office and open up their medicine chest and that is all you see is a bunch of inhalers for asthmatics!