It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Loss of Civil Rights continues in NY

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 06:48 AM
link   
Quick article, a village in New York has completely banned smoking in all buildings, sidewalks, and parks.
Violators face up to $1,000 Fine.

www.myfoxny.com...
^^^^^^^^^^^

Continued reading on various news sites included an interview with one woman who said:
"If they are that worried about smoking, why don't they ban all cars from running, carbon monoxide comes from car exhaust, so what's the difference?"

Another person says" How far are they going to go with stripping out rights and privileges away?"

A new term being thrown around now is Third hand smoking.
The definition of which is : any after hand smell on a smokers hair or clothing, which is considered offensive and dangerous to the public"

3rd hand smoke?? come on..that's a little dramatic for me.

1: why don't they make smoking less unhealthy?
2: why do they keep banning smoking alternatives?
3: why are smokers scoffed upon as third class citizens and demonized?
4: People have been smoking since the beginning of time.




posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 07:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Mastermook
 


Smoker's provide politicians with someone to point to as a villan while at the same time reaping massive profits from them. A few years ago when Florida sued the tobacco companies for health costs the Judge gave them a bitter-sweet verdict.

Yes the tobacco companies had lied about the effects of smoking and as such they had to pay several billion dollars in penalties. However, if Florida was to accept the settlement the state had to divest itself of all it's tobacco holdings.

Can't sue the companies for expenses while at the same time having pension funds based on tobacco stocks.

Smokers are an easy target with no recourse when attacked save one...How much higher do people think everyone's taxes would be if all of a sudden hundreds of billions of dollars worth of revenues were to disappear?

Here in Canada the current arguement is that smokers are bleeding health care dry with all the diseases that they voluntarily signed up for by smoking. What people forget though is that the price of a pack of cig's (roughly $12 for name brand, $8 for discount) is almost entirely tax. Like gas, cig's only cost pennies on the dollar.

All the rest is tax.

Smoker's are the one group that actually does pay for thier health care, and everyone else's for that matter.

edit on 7-1-2011 by [davinci] because: Form



posted on Jan, 7 2011 @ 07:51 AM
link   
While I deplore the loss of rights in any and all situations, smoking is a disgusting habit that negatively affects the health of others. I believe it should be banned altogether or at least only permitted on your own property and not in the presence of non smokers. That being said, this third hand stuff is BS. Automotive emissions and other chemical pollutants are certainly more dangerous in such circumstances.
What really concerns me here is the hypocrisy of government. They should not be profiting from the sale of this toxic substance, it should be banned altogether imo.
Before I get the great outcry of "Oh you claim to be a libertarian, how can you hold this view" or some such, Libertarians believe that "your right to move your arm ends where my nose begins" as one way of saying it. It is a logical extension that "your right to smoke ends where my lungs begin" and additionally, requiring me to pay directly or indirectly for your health costs is also unacceptable.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 08:41 AM
link   
reply to post by sonofliberty1776
 


Disagreed. People have been smoking tobacco since the beginning.. It's when large cooperations, such as the tobacco companies get there hands on things, that it becomes poisoned with chemicals, and add addictive chemicals to keep the slave smokers coming back.
Smoking a natural cigarette as it used to wouldn't harm anyone, and if any, extremely minimal..
edit on 10-1-2011 by Mastermook because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 08:50 AM
link   
reply to post by sonofliberty1776
 


Let's just ban everything an individual can use that may negatively effect another persons health....hmmm, where to begin.
And even saying that, the evidence that second hand smoke causes much damage to another persons health is not solid.
edit on 10-1-2011 by Solomons because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 09:30 AM
link   
This thread is very important! How ridiculous that NY feels the need to impose on our rights like this. Just outrageous.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 09:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Mastermook
 


Smoking is a disgusting habit. Period. There is no changing that.

However, banning smoking only makes the problem worse. People will circumvent the ban as they see fit. I regularly seem people disobey a smoking ban and that's only because it's not enforced. It's just another pointless law to put on the books to make non-smokers feel better.

What really should be examined is the conspiracy of cigarette addiction and how it contributes to killing millions of Americans each year. Look at the stuff that goes into cigarettes, the advertising and so forth.

Why is it that it's always the poor and lower middle-class people that get sucked into the smoking habit? Why is it that 1 out of every 3 people I see on the street has a cigarette in their hand?

Mind control? Slow toxic death? You be the judge.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 09:35 AM
link   
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


You can't possibly defend smoking with the health costs and second-hand costs to non-smokers.

I see smoking as a sign of weakness, much like alcohol addiction.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 09:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by hotbakedtater
 


You can't possibly defend smoking with the health costs and second-hand costs to non-smokers.

I see smoking as a sign of weakness, much like alcohol addiction.


Wow, what school of science did you graduate from? Alcoholism is a disease, as is cancer or diabetes., and the gene has been identified. it's not a weakness. Please curtail your ignorance if you're going to make a post. thank you.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 10:07 AM
link   
Given the fact that over 50 years of study with pure, organic tobacco on cancer-prone rodents has shown zero connection with cancer...and that they came out with that claim the same time they claimed the sun causes cancer - and all shortly after they detonated the Trinity device, with its planetary radioactive fallout, I have to conclude that "making smoking healthier" is just a matter of:

Eliminating chemical adulteration
Removing fiberglass filters
Growing the tobacco without radioactive fertilizer (presently mandadted to maintain the facade that it is tobacco and not a defence test responsible)

Yeah baby.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Mastermook
 


Disease or not, it's a trap much like smoking that keeps people in a cycle where they're constantly drinking/smoking themselves to death.

I don't feel sorry for people crying about their "right" to stink up the air with their cigarettes. I grew up in a house with a mother who smoked. I developed asthma later in life. That explains why I hate cigarettes so much.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 10:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Amaterasu
 


That can be done. When you look at the usual cigarettes on the market, they're loaded with plenty of harmful chemicals. Perhaps I've seen too many of those anti-smoking commercials that use scare tactics.

But, if we compare the tobacco that people use today against the tobacco that was grown 100-150 years ago, it's just not the same thing.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
While I deplore the loss of rights in any and all situations, smoking is a disgusting habit that negatively affects the health of others.


So they say...with meager evidence at the very best.


I believe it should be banned altogether or at least only permitted on your own property and not in the presence of non smokers.


Do you support liberty...? Or are you a faux American?


That being said, this third hand stuff is BS. Automotive emissions and other chemical pollutants are certainly more dangerous in such circumstances.


OMG! Vehicle emmissions are off the charts worse than a whiff of tobacco - especially if it is unadulterated and organic.


What really concerns me here is the hypocrisy of government. They should not be profiting from the sale of this toxic substance, it should be banned altogether imo.


You do understand that the banning creates a mystique, motivating more to try it, removes liberty (the non-smoker is free to leave), and also creates a black market and the identical problems we saw with alcohol prohibition - which caused us to REPEAL the prohibition... Banned altogether? Insane.


Before I get the great outcry of "Oh you claim to be a libertarian, how can you hold this view" or some such, Libertarians believe that "your right to move your arm ends where my nose begins" as one way of saying it. It is a logical extension that "your right to smoke ends where my lungs begin" and additionally, requiring me to pay directly or indirectly for your health costs is also unacceptable.


Your right to move away begins with my liberties.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 10:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by Mastermook
 


Disease or not, it's a trap much like smoking that keeps people in a cycle where they're constantly drinking/smoking themselves to death.

I don't feel sorry for people crying about their "right" to stink up the air with their cigarettes. I grew up in a house with a mother who smoked. I developed asthma later in life. That explains why I hate cigarettes so much.


And you have proof that it was connected to your mother's habit...how?



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by Amaterasu
 


That can be done. When you look at the usual cigarettes on the market, they're loaded with plenty of harmful chemicals. Perhaps I've seen too many of those anti-smoking commercials that use scare tactics.

But, if we compare the tobacco that people use today against the tobacco that was grown 100-150 years ago, it's just not the same thing.



Very true. They didn't want people to end their weapons testing, so they have made every effort to cause cancer with attendant aspects. Now it's working marvelously to "divide and conquer" us. Disinfo is SOOOO useful!



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 10:28 AM
link   
Quit smoking, problem solved.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 10:39 AM
link   
I say we make a move to boycott that town. Make a statement and spread it far and wide so that nobody takes their $$ there, throw it back in their faces.



posted on Jan, 11 2011 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by PoorFool
Quit smoking, problem solved.


Sounds simple enough, but the point being. If you quit smoking because you don't feel like dealing with the government taxes, tariffs, and legalities. Then they can adapt that to anything that they want to control. Next time they'll give us a hard time about alcohol..Quit drinking..next time they give us a hard time about freedom of speech..quit talking..hard time about guns..quit owning them..

As is a pattern with the government and society, instead of solving the problem, they fear it, fail to understand it,or ban it altogether.


Originally posted by jaynkeel
I say we make a move to boycott that town. Make a statement and spread it far and wide so that nobody takes their $$ there, throw it back in their faces.

: D
edit on 11-1-2011 by Mastermook because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 09:07 PM
link   
Smoking is not a right. It is a privilege. And no one has the privilege of forcing the results of their chosen bad habits on other people.

I grew up with a father who was a three-pack-a-day smoker (he finally quit a few years ago). My whole life I had sinus and lung problems, constantly coughing and hacking and stuffed up. They took me to doctor after doctor who could find nothing wrong. I got yelled at because I was costing them too much money and I needed to stop "faking" to get attention. But I wasn't faking. It was my body reacting to the constant exposure to my father's cigarette smoke. When I left home at 19 to go into the military, after a few months, I suddenly realized that I could taste my food again, I could smell again, and my clothes didn't reek. And I wasn't coughing up a lung most of the day. Amazing!

To this day my health is not nearly as good as it might have been had I never been exposed to cigarette smoking. I for one am glad that cities are taking steps to ban smoking in public areas. It's a relief to be able to go out to a bar or a restaurant with my husband, and enjoy a drink or a meal, without having to worry about being sick for days afterward, or choosing (as I used to) not to go so for the same reason.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 09:15 PM
link   
To those who detest smoking - the truth is, your face turns my stomach, your fat butts do nothing to improve the view, your eating habits likely disgust me, your own automobiles fumes are intruding into my airspace, and your intolerance is intolerant.

Maybe I don't like your haircut, your body odor is unhealthy, your cologne sucks and is stinking up the atmosphere, and your clothes contain airborne contaminants that are most unhealthy.

On occasion - outside - someone will say something about my smoking.

That's the moment I either blow smoke right in their face, or get upwind and really start puffing.

Life is gooood.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join