Should Smoking Be Banned?

Originally posted by systemic.aberration
I'd like to point out that the 5.4 Million deaths caused by smoking, according to your source, is misleading. All of those deaths are smoking-related, not -caused. It's never been proven that any of those ailments (cancer, heart disease, etc) would not have occured anyway. The statistics used by the Anti-Smokers is largely statistics taken out of context or even engineered [Note: I don't mean falsified.]. Statistics are a horrible way to prove anything, due to how easy it is to make the statistics support any case.

Banning smoking is just silly.
It's like banning red meat, electricity, or fishhooks.
Yes, it may contribute to your death, or even the death of others... but it's not exactly a loaded gun.

Of course, I disagree with any type of vice laws...
IMHO, drugs [not just marijunana - ALL drugs], gambling, public nudity, prostitution, public intoxication, public fornication, and imported ninja monkeys should be legal everywhere.

Might as well just ban the homeless, strong perfume, and smog.

You rock. Morality police actions have no place in modern society.



[edit on 12/13/2008 by systemic.aberration]

[edit on 12/14/08 by scooterstrats]

reply to post by scooterstrats

I didnt post this right the first time. The response was
You rock. Morality police actions have no place in modern society.

reply to post by Anti - Government


As a response... yet me say this. I smoke... and I like it. You know why - one, because it's "bad", two, because I have absolutely zero faith that the world that's going to be around when the bad effect of smoking (yes - we all know it'll kill you - I'm not a dumbass) finally take me out - I'm sure something much worse will happen.

Besides... how dare people have the audacity to dictate what someone else does to themselves.

You know... in some ways... the apocalypse might not be that bad... at least self-serving idiots would die too

Txtriker thank you for your support, I figured a smoker would jump on my band wagon, but you see I bring up an issue that would effect the self righteous prick non smokers so they fail to comment on my scenario. Which is fine with me because it proves how self righteous they are.

Please I am begging a non smoker to tell me the difference from banning smoking because it “may” I repeat “may’ cause damage through second hand smoke. But the perfumes and colognes that people where directly can give people who suffer from migraines their migraines.

Wait, it would cause self righteous asses to have to give something up for someone other than themselves.

Non smokers go to your local shop a snack pick up a pack of smokes a six pack sit down shut up and relaxe loosen up your sphincter for once in your life and have a good time.

Specifically speaking this means you jfj123 since I believe you were the one who brought up the odors.

“There's a difference between offensive odors and something that causes health related problems.” jfj123

I just gave you a offensive odor that directly affects health. If you know any one who suffers from migraines then you will well know that your not an hundred percent when you have one so I say again your “pleasant” odors affect my health immediately.

[edit on 12/11/08 by Ant4AU]

[edit on 12/11/08 by Ant4AU]

[edit on 12/11/08 by Ant4AU]

I am a PROUD smoker! I smoke because right here in America we were given the choice. The only way I will agree to a ban on cigarettes is if....

They ban:
1. Cupcakes, Ding Dongs, Twinkies, Potatoe Chips,
basically anything that if eaten in moderate amounts will pack the fat on. We are not bears and do not need to accumulate blubber for a winter's hibernation.

2. Fast Food: This aids to the obecity factor also.

Once they ban this then I will agree that the medical community and the public are truely aware of health and safety. Obesity cause more deaths than anything else. Obesity also promotes many forms of cancer including prostrate cancerLink to Prostrate Cancer.

Additional supporting documentation why obesity should be banned

Obesity can cause cario problems and promote Type !! Diabetes

I want them to ban obesity then I will agree to a ban on cigarettes. This is nothing but driscimination based on habit. In the work environment we cannot call a person "fat" because it is discrimination yet people call us "smokers". No difference. People are gaining a racial-like hatred towards smokers and all these city/local/State/Nation bans and restrictions are encouraging this. Bottom of the line.... Ban obesity and I will quite smoking gleefully. Then I know people are concerned with general health and not just because of a "smell" they have to endure for 10 feet as they walk towards a public entrance.

I feel that smoking should be banned anywhere but on property owned by those smoking or choosing to allow smoking upon their property, and anywhere that allows for the escape of second-hand smoke.

That said, I do not feel that smoking should be banned outright. As such, since industrially produced smoking tobacco is a suspected carcinogen and health risk, I feel that substances demonstrably less risky should be legalized, including, but not limited to, cannabis.

That's my personal opinion.

reply to post by Recalcitrant


Ye that is very smart smoke because we are all going to die anyway before the smoke kills me well what if that doesnt happen what if an apocalypse doesnt happen then what

dont get me wrong though i know where you are coming from i disagree with a ban also now after reading through all the posts because yes its against our rights but comments like what you gave are just stupid and pointless and doesnt contribute to the debate atall

I believe smoking should be banned because it's best for everyone to lead healthier lives. Plus, babies were born to inhale fresh, clean air and not smoke! However, there are so many addicted people who might go nuts without their usual dose of smoke. It's best to let them shorten their life span because it's their choice to smoke. It will unfortunately make non-smokers like me unhappy if smoking is not banned because I would end up inhaling the smokers' fumes anyway.

[edit on 2008-12-15 by pikypiky]

reply to post by prototism


As A smoker I am downright ticked at you mewling non smokers that only seem to see one side of the facts. No matter where us smokers get pushed to enjoy or choice , it seems that one of these non smokers have to put themselves in my radius and then cough and make like I am purposefully intruding on their space when I am obeying the "rules". I fought for my rights to live in my country , I obey the laws and biased rules So why dont these non smokers quit invading my space . And dont get me started on the nice little phone surveys and the tricks they use to determine the amount of Non smokers . I smoke natural grown tobacco and it is not refined and doctored by the corps. My lung capacity is fantastic and my dive times are better than "Healthy Non Smokers" I have been smoking for over over 25 years . Please respect our rights also .

Originally posted by meadowfairy
i dont smoke puffed it twice in my in my life but i figured since i had small sunspot moles everywhere it was either dying from ciggarette smoke or dying from slow exposure off the sun's rays mixed with the chemicals off sunscreen i use on my skin to cause skin cancer. So i threw away the smoke and decided to add, atleast 10 years to my life.

Tobacco is not as harmful as the chemicals companies put in the smoke. They should ban the chemicals. But either way i hate breathing in any smoke.

No you misunderstood. I might not have been clear. I am a smoker, I'm tired of people doing that to me.

Originally posted by TruthDefender
smoking is toxic, final so YES
it should be banned, like any poison

Hairspray has toxins, so does everything you use pretty much. So everything should be banned? Bleach is toxic but you use it to clean. Breathing in those fumes is bad for your lungs, eyes, skin. But you still clean. But you're right we should ban that too. Automobiles are toxic, those should be banned, and molds and many things in the air of your home can be toxic, so let's all live in caves again, walk everywhere, kill animals for food and clothing, but you can't cook it because you may set off a chemical reaction in the animal you kill by exploding one of the internal organs by fire. Our ancestors did it yes, but they were obviously smarter than us. They didn't die by inhaling any toxins. Of course they did live till they were in their twenties.

I would say my little rant here makes as much sense as yours

Originally posted by pikypiky
I believe smoking should be banned because it's best for everyone to lead healthier lives. Plus, babies were born to inhale fresh, clean air and not smoke! However, there are so many addicted people who might go nuts without their usual dose of smoke. It's best to let them shorten their life span because it's their choice to smoke. It will unfortunately make non-smokers like me unhappy if smoking is not banned because I would end up inhaling the smokers' fumes anyway.

Raises a good revision which would make me support the amendment.

I would completely vote to abolish smoking for pregnant women. I would sign that so fast you wouldn't be able to see my pen moving.

Originally posted by mandrake
I'd hate to post a one liner here, but...

Of course it should be banned. I can't think of any reason why it shouldn't.

Because of the same reason prohibition didn't work. You cannot tell an adult what they can and can't do. Taking the negative effects of smoking aside,

How would you feel about school taxes being 3-4 times higher than you pay now? Your drivers license and/or license plate taxes for highway usage, toll fares, sales tax, all going up at least double to try to make up for the taxes they collect on cigarettes?

What good does it do? It helps keep the cost of sending your child to school, and keeping roadway costs down.

Seems like a lot of you would rather hold on to what the MSM has told you since the late 80's about second hand smoke. Weird how I haven't seen any commercials on tv about that in quite a few years. You all hold onto this falicy and spout it off to any smoker you see that will listen, mainly because you don't like the smell. That is not the issue being debated.

The OP already agreed after one of my posts (I believe page 8 or so) that it nor anything else should be banned. Your whining has gotten you planes, all inside forms of entertainment, restaurants, public transportation. You couldn't leave us the bars or give the bar owner a choice. You forced your opinions and ill-informed beliefs onto them and took away not only a smokers right to freedoms, but you took away the business owners right to choose. But smokers are the ones that are self centered. Egotistical.

Most of you are the same ones that are in the conspiracy theory rooms stating things like the constitution needs to be upheld, you are just as bad as the politicians. Bending the amendments to suit your needs.

Originally posted by gpfwestie
reply to post by prototism

 

Non-passive smoking, like dragging 20 Cigs a day for 40 years kills you - we know this, we live with it every day, and would not like to inflict this on people who choose not to smoke.

Love the rest of your post and agree wholeheartedly. This quote I take issue with. It doesn't mean it will kill you, good chance? Oh hell yeah, definitively? No.

Originally posted by jfj123
Actually there are plenty of FACT that support my opinion including from ACS, CDC, etc..
I'm not sure where you get your info from but smoking is a health hazzard INCLUDING 2nd hand smoke. Ask any doctor, ask any person working in a smoking bar, etc....
If you actually believe smoking is not hazzardous to your health, there is no point for me to post information to the contrary as you will NEVER believe it. Hopefully you're at least honest enough to yourself for you to agree with me on that !

Ask the doctors about the safety of immunizations also, then ask them to explain why autism rates have risen from 1 in 5000 to 1 in 166 since they started putting themarisol in them? You seem to place a lot of trust in the government and doctors, (which are controlled by the pharmaceutical companies, why do you think they buy the entire office very expensive meals every time they come there to peddle their poison and throw extravagant Christmas parties, I know this because my wife is a nurse in a doctor's office) for someone visiting a conspiracy site. I find this rather odd, do you only place your confidence in these entities when it is beneficial to your point, or do you always afford them this kind of credibility? And if it is the latter why are you even on a conspiracy site?

[edit on 12/15/2008 by DarrylGalasso]

Originally posted by DarrylGalasso

Originally posted by jfj123
Actually there are plenty of FACT that support my opinion including from ACS, CDC, etc..
I'm not sure where you get your info from but smoking is a health hazzard INCLUDING 2nd hand smoke. Ask any doctor, ask any person working in a smoking bar, etc....
If you actually believe smoking is not hazzardous to your health, there is no point for me to post information to the contrary as you will NEVER believe it. Hopefully you're at least honest enough to yourself for you to agree with me on that !

Ask the doctors about the safety of immunizations also, then ask them to explain why autism rates have risen from 1 in 5000 to 1 in 166 since they started putting themarisol in them? You seem to place a lot of trust in the government and doctors, (which are controlled by the pharmaceutical companies, why do you think they buy the entire office very expensive meals every time they come there to peddle their poison and throw extravagant Christmas parties, I know this because my wife is a nurse in a doctor's office) for someone visiting a conspiracy site. I find this rather odd, do you only place your confidence in these entities when it is beneficial to your point, or do you always afford them this kind of credibility? And if it is the latter why are you even on a conspiracy site?

[edit on 12/15/2008 by DarrylGalasso]

Bravo Good Sir! That was one of the points I was attempting to make, and poorly I may add But I also believe some of these posters are arguing just to argue. They call us pigheaded and that we are being selfish, yet they give no wiggle room to think maybe the info they receive is skewed to make others more money. No, that could never happen!

I scanned most of the posts, but not all, so if this is a re-post I apologize.

I think the big issue here that is not being addressed is not related to whether or not smoking should be banned. I think anyone with any sense can see why that will not work and should not be attempted (I mean prohibition). However, I haven't seen anyone address the consequences from a financial standpoint. People who smoke a lot are virtually guaranteeing the future necessity of extremely expensive medical care. So, should non-smokers be required to shell out for higher medical insurance to help cover the smokers voluntary behavior which guarantees increased medical costs down the line?

This does create a slippery slope of the issues, however. Should obese people be charged more for insurance, etc.? What if the obese person has a genetic metabolic disorder resulting in permanent obesity despite eating well and exercising?

The real reason I mention this is because I predict a trend going toward behavior-related health insurance costs. With ever-increasing premiums responsible people are getting sick of paying for those with bad habits.

Banning this makes about as much sense as encouraging everyone to have 10 children. Or it makes as much sense to ban smoking as to ban Volcanoes, or do they get an exception?

reply to post by prototism


So I can smoke in public if the infintesimal traces of toxins in parts per million of breathable air might get up your nose, but GOD forbid that I should complain how the lead in your diesel or petrol is causing me and my kids to suffer physically and mentally. Carboxyhaemoglobanaemia is death related to exhaust fumes. People kill themselves by shutting themselves in cars and leaving the engines on. People who drive cars are comitting homicide through emissions, or in the very least, assisted suicide. Keep your exhaust fumes to yourself, and I'll keep my fumes to myself. Deal?

My mother never drank alcohol and never SMOKED.
She died at the ripe young age of 54 YEARS OLD.

During her last days, she said that she wished she had've whooped it up, smoked herself silly and got jolly on some shandies.

It seems a common theme with smokers.
We ALL KNOW people who smoked and lived until their 80s.
That's why we don't buy into all the crap.
And why we keep on smoking.

Do you really think if we all knew someone who died of a smoking related disease that we would all still be puffing away?

Doctos can't explain why most smokers seem to live to a ripe old age.
They only want to focus on the minority who don't.

It seems it's "minority rules" in everything in life.