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.

 

Will Cigarettes Be Made Illegal in the Near Future?

page: 3
1
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by dukeofjive
 


Well I am not arguing with you however it is not your choice not really anyway to not wear a seatbelt in a car without a penalty, or not wear a helmet on a motorcycle without a penalty, or try and kill yourself or have someone help you do so without penalty, or try to kill someone else without penalty? There are many instances of our government(s) deciding what is best for us because they see that based on the death tolls from voluntary habits we are too stupid to make them ourselves.




posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 06:32 PM
link   
I dont get it!!! If people wanna smoke, they smoke. If people wanna be fat, they eat. If people wanna drink, they drink? Stop butting in into other peoples buisness! ITS THEIR LIFE?? How bout' them apples USA?



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 06:34 PM
link   
reply to post by FeeBanks
 


You have probably all seen that I have a few replies up on this post. I am not saying in any of them however that I agree with another "right" being taken away from supposedly free individuals. However I am saying that based on the deaths caused by cigarettes directly and indirectly. We as citizens are apparently too dumb to make the rational choice in this matter so "they" (the government(s) are making it for us or atleast are gearing up to do so.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 06:46 PM
link   
It's all a game, sure some people "care" about other people and want them to not smoke. But as far as the governments caring, then what about toxic waste dumps located next to schools? What about the poisons in the air, water, ground? What about all the drug companies dangerous drugs? So I quit smoking and still get cancer or something else because of any of the above? Sounds like a great plan to me. Not, I think I can decide for myself.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 08:25 PM
link   
I believe they will continue to try to restrict where you are able to smoke. However, I cannot see the government being able to make smoking illegal in the near future.



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 09:01 PM
link   
*Smiles*...Smokes some good tobacco*



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 09:16 PM
link   
HA, that would be quite amusing. I quit smoking myself, but can you imagine "hey man, I got some legit smoke here, its $10 a gram!"

Well, that would be one booming black market for sure. That would be a whole generation of potential criminals created instantly as well! Holy crap, my mom could go to jail


Nah, it won't happen anytime soon. If it does, I think it would be the straw that broke the camels back. The control freak government will have to wait another fifty or more years to try that stunt, but I imagine some day, with the way people role over, it will happen.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 05:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by DragonSpirit2
reply to post by lewtra
 


Um.......Well it may not stop you but depending on your area if smoking is banned then the availability of cigarettes will be around the same as that or marijuana. Which means that there will be days where you will not smoke at all which will probably reduce your mental and obviously physical addiction to them so all in all it will be a good thing regardless of whether you think so now or not.


Smoking wont be banned altogether, there is too much money involved. Are you implying that I have a mental problem, due to smoking cigarettes. Please elaborate? I have smoked 20+ years, and enjoyed every drag, thank you very much,
I also respect other peoples space and go out of my way, when smoking.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 05:23 PM
link   
I certainly hope not.

I love my smokes.Hate these people discriminating against smokers.I'm sure everyone has gotten the idea that smoking is bad for your health.It's a choice and I except and take responsibility for it.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 05:23 PM
link   
reply to post by SmokeandShadow
 


Funny you should say that. A few years back, when New York decided to "help" people quit smoking by taxing the hell out of cigarettes, they unwittingly did so without a thought as to the repercussions of their actions. What indeed happened was (and I can vouch for this as I lived in Manhattan for over 8 years) they created a massive new underground black market. And by that, I mean, people from the city started to buy black market cigarettes from "dealers" who buy cartons for cheap in other states, then they bring them to NYC and sell them for $5 a pack as opposed to the ridiculous $9 a pack. Also, take a stroll down the Avenue of the Americas, there you can buy individual cigarettes for 25 cents to a dollar each. There were individuals on our block that we used to call the "smoke-smokes" who previously sold marijuana and other drugs on the streets, who now have switched to selling cigarette packs because they make more money doing that. Amazing. Way to go New York! You now have created a thriving black market cigarette trade, so much for your "Quality of Life" programs.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by FeeBanks

Will Cigarettes Be Made Illegal in the Near Future?


www.alternet.org

The battle over cigarettes is heating up -- and the momentum to criminalize tobacco smoking continues to build in the United States and around the world.
(visit the link for the full news article)


I have qoated the OP's post to clarify, it has nothing to do with marijuana!! That is a totally different topic of which cannot be discussed on ATS. Lets get back to the topic of banning smoking, shall we..

Personally, I think it should be banned in all public places, period. I went to a gig in Rotterdam a couple of years ago, and people where smoking in McDonald's while people where eating..


I tell everyone, smoking is ugly. Every culture on this planet, has it's smokers. As long has they don't interfere with anyone else.. leave them to it. That's what I say.

In the UK it is illegal to throw your butts on the pavement



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 06:24 PM
link   
Well it would be impossible to get rid of cigarettes altogether, so I can't see that making them illegal would be worthwhile.... it would just force it underground.... cigarettes will always exist in some form or another, whether they're illegal or not.

And there is far too much profit in the tobacco industry.


But if they just didn't exist, that would be good.

I mean people smoke because they're addicted to a drug.

And smoking kills so that's not good.


But then.... anyone should be free to poison their body with any substance they like, so long as it doesn't harm anyone else.

It's just that the "acceptable" drugs are Alcohol and Tobacco.... and they make good money on taxes and stuff.


People should be free to use any recreational drugs they like, maybe one day adults will be free to do what they want with their own bodies and minds...

Wont that be nice.



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 06:38 PM
link   
Cigarettes aren't illegal? Why am I made to feel like a criminal every time I light up? Outside? A million miles from anyone?



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 09:17 AM
link   
reply to post by lewtra
 


No of course not I would never insult someone like that, I'm not saying you have a mental problem, I am saying that you are so attached to your cigarettes mentally that if they did ban them you would criminally go out of your way to do what you wanted to do anyway. For whatever reason you enjoy them it's a "mental" thing it's just something in your mind you have built up but really it's just a stupid habit, the only reason it relieves stress for people or they enjoy it is because they were around it for a long period of time i.e. their parents and/or friends or they have done it for a long time. You have positive memories associated with smoking right now so "mentally" you are attached to them so in a way you are "mentally" addicted. The physical addiction is the easy part to beat it's the mental association with cigarettes=good, stress relief, etc... that is the hard part. That's all I'm saying



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 10:21 AM
link   
Anyone here use smokeless tobacco? I have used dip, chew, and snus. I currently use nasal snuff mainly. I used to smoke but quit years ago, and only very rarely will I bum a cig.

I think it was wrong to ban smoking from bars and nightclubs. I think the bars should have been able to decide if they wanted to be somekfree or not. I think both types would have business.

In the EU, it's illegal for shops to sell snus(except Sweden, and only loose in Denmark).

Then the US did ban Clove cigs.

It's all about control. Where is the democracy?



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by tom502

Then the US did ban Clove cigs.



not true. they are just marketed differently. They are marketed as cigars and there are 12 per pack.



posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 09:03 AM
link   
Yes, they did ban clove "Cigs", and there were a few different brands available. Djarum though, made the changes they needed to to legally get their new item labelled as a cigar. They are similar to the older cigs, but they passes the law as cigars, and the other brands and clove cigs are still banned.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 10:13 AM
link   
reply to post by FeeBanks
 


The signing of the new Tobacco Safety Act of 2009 by the IMF- CEO Barry Soetoro gives most Tobacco Corporations and their affiliated "parent" companys complete immunity from any resulting public sickness or illness as a result of any "modifications" to their product. Also, they are not required by law to notify the public of any related illness nor is any research required by the "government" pertaining to any illness claims by the public ( under Sec. 909 Records and Reports, articles (A) 3-6) and Sec 911 "Modified Risk Tobacco Products") More than 27,000 smokers worldwide have signed a petition since the implementation of world-wide FSC or "Fire Safety Compliance" laws claiming a strong metallic taste, headaches, sores in their mouth, nausea and diarrhea. It has of course, fallen on deaf ears and has been completely ignored by our World Bank and IMF "government" and of course, corporations within the Tobacco Industry. But this...is just the tip of the iceburg.

In 2000, Phillip Morris began using what they called "fire safe technology" in their Merit brand of cigarettes. Once again, this was done without any public notice whatsoever, just like the current FSC laws. They were sued by The Department of Justice in 2004 which forced them to change to the newer "government" standard of FSC cigarettes soon to be implemented for the first time in New York in 2005. Phillip Morris' version obviously did not contain all of the unnecessary toxic metallic nanoparticulates. It's interesting to note that the state with the highest amount of population within the US at the time, was the first to implement these newly formed FSC standards. Ironically, FSC cigarettes are called Reduced Ignition Propensity (or RIP) cigarettes by the Tobacco Industry.
In US Patent 7,640,936 filed September of 2005, Phillip Morris scientists explain in depth, the introduction of metal oxide nano-particulates to their products. The same type US patent was recently granted to RJ Reynolds in 2010 (#20100122708). Note that these patents were granted AFTER US-CEO Barry Soetoro signed the Tobacco Safety Act of 2009, supposedly giving the FDA and the US "government" control over tobacco additives.
The nanoparticles are incorporated into tobacco filler material cigarette paper and/or filter material, according to Muslim inventors Sharyar Rabiei, Firooz Rasouli and Mohammed Hajaligol. The metal oxide particulates consist of a combination of copper oxide, cerium oxide, titanium oxide, iron oxide and Yttrium, a radioactive rare-earth element... less than one micron in diameter, meaning they easily pass through the filter and are inhaled. This combination can then be applied to the cigarette paper or filler using an adhesive such as VINYL ACETATE, forming bands along the length of the cigarette. This toxic metallic mix, supposedly cuts down on carbon monoxide emissions from cigarette smoke, but in my opinion, there's a far more sinister agenda. Smokers are now inhaling a mixture of toxic metallic nano-particulates which explains the metallic taste and sicknesses expressed by so many smokers to date. Nanoparticulates are more deeply ingested on a cellular level, meaning once they're in the cell, they cannot be removed by conventional detoxifying methods and the above mentioned are known to break cells DNA strands and cause mutations. The result will be a myriad of new, aggressive forms of cancer which do not respond at all to conventional chemotherapy "treatment". This, in combination with IMF/Soetoro proposed budget cuts to water treatment facilities and newly relaxed EPA standards on agricultural toxic waste disposal and the numerous "profit poisons" in our food will lead to a rapid decline in human population and health. The "official" FSC website conveniently refuses to mention these toxic metallic nanoparticulates. The question is...why are these now being added under the disguise of FDA tobacco regulation via "The Tobacco Safety Act of 2009? Please research the above patent numbers for yourself.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by lewtra

Originally posted by FeeBanks

Will Cigarettes Be Made Illegal in the Near Future?


www.alternet.org

The battle over cigarettes is heating up -- and the momentum to criminalize tobacco smoking continues to build in the United States and around the world.
(visit the link for the full news article)


In the future tobacco use will be used as a screening life style event that helps the medical industry make treatment/harvest choices for people who arrive for "treatment" . Think I am making this up? After a few drinks ask an emergency medical worker " what exactly is a donorcycle ?" honest answer, a person who rides a motor cycle especially a rider who does not wear a helmet.



posted on Mar, 16 2011 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Sure they will. They affect the collective. With Obamacare pushed through, money will need to be saved on treatment. The govt will come out with health restrictions, to save money.
It is nanny Govt at its best. Duuhhh!!!!



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join