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.

 

a motion introduced to place a ban on cigarette sales to anyone born after the year 2000?

page: 16
15
<< 13  14  15    17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 22 2012 @ 11:46 PM
link   
It seems the propaganda is working well, convince non smokers you are going to drop dead from smelling a cigarette; so the only side most of them will see is a health issue; when those not so blind or having a freedom of choice removed see it for what it is: A small stepping stone, to tell all adults what they can and cant do, just to generate revenue, it's nothing but bending all people over so they can give them whats good for them, while you have to pay them to do it to you.

This isn't the first time; alcohol was demonized, it created organized crime, it took a constitutional amendment to reinstate the sale of alcohol. Cannabis, it was demonized many know why and all the propaganda associated with that. What many people have been pointing to on this thread: It won't work, you push down a problem in one place it pops up in one form or another some where else. So please open your minds further than the spoon fed health concerns; as there is more to the picture to see here.
edit on 23-8-2012 by BigBrotherDarkness because: grammar




posted on Aug, 22 2012 @ 11:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Agit8dChop
 
Hey, while they are at it, why not pass a law banning alcohol? Alcohol is dangerous: alcholism, drunk drivers killing people and themselves, liver disease, etc. The smell of a drunk who has vomited all over themselves, putrid. Yes, let's start with cigarettes, then alcohol, then. . . ??? (ever hear of prohibition?)



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 12:50 AM
link   
reply to post by TimesUp
 


I agree 100% with you.
I would vote for a politician who admitted to dropping an E in his youth, smoking a spliff in his days or getting roudy drunk and texting a girl at 4am..
it shows character, and that he's lived, and that he's able to pick himself up and learn his lessons.

we've all been there and done the above (well most of you).

I smoked but i didnt inhale? pi55 off then!



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 12:52 AM
link   
reply to post by yesterdaysreality
 


for the 100th time yes, ive heard of prohibition.

But drinking is a much more socially accepted thing, its enjoyed by the people, it has social benefits.. and it helps us fugly's get some.

Where as smoking? what advantages does that have? why do you smoke? I think most people who smoke really dont want too... those who admit they hate it and want to quit, cudo's to them, its bloody hard.
Those that parrot on about rights and smoking is my right, in my opinion are just scared or weak.
Because really, who wants to pay money, for a chemically engineered item that does nothing but rot your body, make you smell and look woefully unattractive?



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 12:54 AM
link   
reply to post by MagicWand67
 


No, I do not agree that is my logic.
Did I say we should ban Macca's?
I think we should definately not allow kids to eat macca's or kfc or that crap.. look at the state of the kids in america these days.. you tell me thats not a direct result of fast food?

Cigs (and I say cigs because i cant be bothered checking the spelling) are a different kettle of fish to
red meat
booze
fast food

cigs are chemically engineered to make you addicted. you arent buying them because you enjoy them, or because they give you energy or nutrients, you smoke them because your addicted.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 12:56 AM
link   
reply to post by AGWskeptic
 


Nannyland, some of you are just a joke.

Drugs, yes they are not legal and regulated.. and thank god.

imagine if heroin or ice was available in the corner shop?

I walk through pinjarrah and see the result of ICE on a young girl.. she screams at her shadow because she thinks its going to kill her.. your right though, lets compare cigs to drugs in a debate about banning cigs for the future!



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 12:57 AM
link   
reply to post by twistedlogic
 


Awesome a reasonable debate


You are the one being unreasonable. "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." If people can't control what they do with themselves that is not my problem or the governments place to act.


So, is your right not to have a nuclear weapon an infringement on your liberties?
I mean, your not allowed to have it right, so how about you claim bloody mary?

Do you smoke?
Would you be happy if your 18yr old daughter came home with 3 cartons of reds and said '' dad im taking up chain smoking '' (assuming your a woman)

No one can give me one clear cut example of any positives cigs bring to the community/society... yet you all say its bloody murder if anyone tries to create a future void of cancer sticks.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 12:59 AM
link   
.. and for the record.. my best friend of 23yrs is a smoker, has been for the past 10yrs.
love the guy to death and am always happy to give him my time..
I always encourage him to get on the patches, to do something because I do not want to see my best buddy die in his 50's because he was addicted to a chemical created by a fat cat corporation ceo!


I have nothing against smokers... Im sure some of you are awesomely decent fun people.
But some of you need to look in the mirror and admit your addicted, atleast then your on you way to fixing the problem and quitting, instead of arguing why tomorrows youth should have access to the same crap your smoking!



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 01:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Agit8dChop
 


Mate, I respect you as a member here and appreciate the contributions you've made. Your thread about Hiroshima still stands one of favourites on this site so I am asking you, can you provide unvbased studies that support your argument? There is sooo much blatant propaganda around cigarettes and just blatant lies and manipulation by the anti tobacco lobby around the world.

Also, would you be against tobacco if the garbage that companies like Imperial and Phillip Morris put out filled with nasty stuff wasn't what was being sold? The natural tobacco that doesn't have the chemicals and has never been linked by either pro or anti tobacco groups to any issues health wise? Would that change your mind or are you just straight out against smoking?

And lastly, do you think that the way smokers are treated is fair and reasonable? Relegated to second class citizens because of using a legal product?



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 01:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
reply to post by twistedlogic
 


Do you smoke?
Would you be happy if your 18yr old daughter came home with 3 cartons of reds and said '' dad im taking up chain smoking '' (assuming your a woman)

No one can give me one clear cut example of any positives cigs bring to the community/society... yet you all say its bloody murder if anyone tries to create a future void of cancer sticks.





I've given you links to two sites and a websearch term for you to find some benefits of smoking. Yet you claim "No one can give me one clear cut example of any positives cigs bring to the community/society."

Here's a few more:
voices.yahoo.com...
suite101.com...
reason.com...
www.straightdope.com...

If a child of mine came home with cigarettes and was of legal age to use them; Then I have no say other than, there's no smoking in my house.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 01:20 AM
link   
reply to post by GAOTU789
 


thanks dude, appreciate that!
tell ya what, ill do some research tonight and see what i can find!




posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 01:25 AM
link   
reply to post by randomtangentsrme
 


Im reading your articles now, alot of it on the one im reading is a mental aspect

calms people
releives stress and anxiety.
this is hardly a positive for society.

your other article from 1994
has this on the third paragraph
''Basic economics tells us that smokers do in fact benefit from smoking''

that kinda gave me a very negative view of the article..

''Yet these benefits do not show up on the EPA's ledger. Admittedly, they would be hard to measure''
so, is this a pro piece for cigs or a con piece?

I havent read the first one but yes, it does raise some valid points ill check out in a bit.

its 430pm and hometime!



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 01:27 AM
link   
It is clear now, tobacco, like pot, will harm you much less than your own government. Feel the sting, you who smoked one and hated the other.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 01:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
No one can give me one clear cut example of any positives cigs bring to the community/society...


$2.7B in clear profits that go towards public works.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 01:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Agit8dChop
 


It's closing on midnight for me.
These 4 are only on the first page of almost 70 million articles in a web search. If you don't like these links try some of the others.
How is individual mental health not a good thing for society? An individual's poor mental health is defiantly a bad thing for society.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 02:29 AM
link   
I would just like to say who didn't see this coming.

Tasmania is the lab rat of Australia, Ban Guns Ban Smoking in pubs/clubs restrict to outside 5 meters away from the door, banned in all parks now.

Why don't we ban fatty cooking solids/oils while we are at it.

I hate to see whats next on the agenda once this is completed.

Maybe instead of banning things, maybe they should ban them selfs from banning things, then get on with making jobs for people who need jobs.

All its been lately is laws/policies/taxes the public never got a say on it.
Is this how you want our country ran by a government who don't consult the people before they make laws/polices/taxes then 80% of the people oppose of it?

Its ludicrous and quite scary. Just think if this is passed the next will be taking tobacco off the shelfs.

I think they will have a lot of angry people knocking on parliaments door.


Ever witnessed a smoker with out cigarettes have you? They get angry at the slightest things.

The person having the argument about butts been littered around the place, who cares look at the other bits of big rubbish you see about the place.
There are better things to worry about rubbish wise like junkies leaving needles around the place.
Which would you rather step on a cigarette but or a needle?


I wanna ask you guys two questions
how many people do you know that smoke?
How many people do you know that don't smoke?



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 02:50 AM
link   
For all Americans in this thread anti smoking.

You all forget that if it weren't for tobacco America would have never prospered the way it did. It would not be the country it is today and should be thankful that tobacco was discovered in the first place. But I guess that doesn't matter does it?

Think of this. If the British didn't put the effort to colonize this country, someone else could.
Say Germany perhaps?

We could be a German nation, therefore if ww2 still would have happened who would have ended the war?
France was invaded and taken over Germany would have snuffed out Britain. The only opposition was Russia but was still ruled by a dictatorship.

Einstein wouldn't have claimed refuge to America thus the nuclear bomb wouldn't have been created by Americans. Making the war in favor to Nazi Germany.

The Jewish community would have been exterminated.

And we all would be saying "heil"

So thank tobacco the world would be a very different place without it.


Like it or not facts are facts.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 03:24 AM
link   
reply to post by GAOTU789
 



Also, would you be against tobacco if the garbage that companies like Imperial and Phillip Morris put out filled with nasty stuff wasn't what was being sold? The natural tobacco that doesn't have the chemicals and has never been linked by either pro or anti tobacco groups to any issues health wise? Would that change your mind or are you just straight out against smoking?


I'd be happy with that..
If Farry Larry grew tobacco in his backyard and smoked it hey, all for you. Same with dope.. i dont care.
Im happy, hell id even try tobacco too.. but if you whipped out a pack of winnie gold and said its all bs what the anti lobby says.. well, thats different and i wouldnt have any respect for your position.

I suppose your right, like i said before, the crap the tobacco companies put into the cigs is designed to make you addicted and want more, that should not be permitted in todays world, keep in mind something like heroin is outlawed because A. it is addictive and B. it kills people. Why are cigs any different because they have a corporation lobbying politicians to keep it going when it has the same results?



And lastly, do you think that the way smokers are treated is fair and reasonable? Relegated to second class citizens because of using a legal product?


well, thats assuming smokers are being treated like 2nd rate citizens. I do not believe that to be true.
I havent seen anything on TV or media that name and shames smokers because they smoke. I applaud the advertising showing gruesome footage of smoker lungs, its real, its happening.. so why pay money to continue doing that to yourself if for nothing but addiction?

Do you class all the restrictions on smoking in public, all the packaging laws and such as being relegated?
I know at my work, they do not allow smoking in the building (for obvious reasons) or near the lobby doors, because people walk in and out of the doors all day and its not very healthy to have a cloud of smoke there, as well as it being disrespectful for anyone who's trying to quit or has asthma. Smoking is a personal choice, but the second you smoke in public, around people your FORCING THEM to also inhale your toxic smoke, on the flipside, would you say its fair to demand all non smokers hold their breath when in company of a smoker?

However, my building does have a specific 'smokers' zone outlined about 15m away from the front door around the corner, does this relegate them in society? I think it accommodates them, society doesn’t want smoking to be a part of it, yet they understand people have rights so they design special area's for them.

If a smoker is comfortable standing in the freezing rain for 5 minutes to have a drag, then i dont believe them being positioned 15m from the doors any different. You chose to smoke, society is trying to stamp it out.. its not like they outlawed it, they allow you to do it, but they want you to be far away from people who dont smoke, because it isnt healthy and its not fair.



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 06:27 AM
link   
Hooray for government protecting people from themselves! I like when the government rules over me with an iron fist. Hooray tyranny!



posted on Aug, 23 2012 @ 06:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Poopooplatter
reply to post by aaron2209
 


I shouldn't have to breathe stinky ass cigarettes that are harmful if I'm not a smoker. It infringes upon me. If people weren't so rude and considered others this wouldn't be an issue. Smoke at home.


Ha ha i bet you don't even see the irony in that statement. I wish i didn't have to put up with a lot of things, but hey ho live and let live



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 13  14  15    17 >>

log in

join