Bill proposed in Oregon would make cigarettes prescription-only drugs

reply to post by beezzer

Gee, you sound like you work for ATS.

I posed this question earlier. Where does the madness stop? Someone else suggested the government will be dictating what sexual positions we use.

I'm at my wit's end trying to figure out how to get these legislative wackos under control.

Originally posted by Obsrvr
reply to post by beezzer

 

Gee, you sound like you work for ATS.

I posed this question earlier. Where does the madness stop? Someone else suggested the government will be dictating what sexual positions we use.

I'm at my wit's end trying to figure out how to get these legislative wackos under control.

I do work for ATS, but I just clean the toilets. I'm not allowed to post at work.

How to stop legislators to stop. . . um, well. . . legislating.

Sounds thread-worthy.

The easiest way to end smoking would be to say that starting next year, tobacco is illegal for someone turning 21.

All those who don't want to give up the habit and are over that age could continue to smoke. Al those younger would not be able to purchase tobacco legally.

The health benefits to society from eliminating smoking would be huge.

reply to post by Wildbob77


Slippery slope. I do not know what else to say here. I would love a smoke free world, but it has to happen voluntarily. There is always something about somebody else that we would like to change. I do not like my neighbors cigarette's. I do not like my neighbor's guns. I do not like my neighbor's alcohol. Slippery slope.

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by resoe26


Yeah. I think Beeezer once got my thread banned and got me kicked off the site before....

One of the mods told me to clean his desk. I used too much Windex on the computer screen and it got fried.

My bad.

-beez
(ATS Janitor)

WORD

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
reply to post by Obsrvr

 

I can only speak for myself, but i've smoked cigs before, one I decided one day to turn the tables, everything seemed to improve when i decided to go clean! never looked back!

But I agree, a fine cigar or some fine tobacco is nice on the occasion. So maybe we need to really focus on the laws properly. Make it perscrption, people who smoke a pack a day need to be regulated. So maybe enforce some sort of system that limits the amount of cigs released at a time? maybe force people to grow their own (so the companies dont fill it full of chemicals)

Honestly, i find all the people jumping up and down about cigs are usually the ones too scared to try quitting.
I mean, why would you want to continually pump your body full of toxic CRAP that does nothing but ruin your health and bring misery in the long run? People want to quit, its just that most are too scared!

There are compromises to be made if people didnt just jump on the cig haters are bad bandwagon. I have friends who smoke, they are dear and close friends, myself, my other friends and their family are always encouraging them to quit, they want to quit, but there's a reason cigerettes are addictive.. because the CEO's want to make money! or does this point get lost on people?

sorry mod!

just making a point!

edit on 24-1-2013 by Agit8dChop because: (no reason given)

Even with all that in them there are people who smoke a life time and are as healthy as a horse.

Instead of focusing on issues that actually matter like our failing public education system, these politicians would rather spend their time conjuring up something they know will keep us sheeple divided and debating over silly issues like this. Yet time and time again people buy into this crap because it gives them a chance to flex their verbal muscles on something that bothers them personally and so when a politician says something should be a certain way, then all of the sudden someone who agrees with that become the most educated person in the world and feels as if they have some sort of high stature over someone else. How about if someone doesnt like cigarette smoke, then THEY should just stay home, where they are safe and sound from all the worlds harm.

This is great because now the black market profits can really get going!

And who cares if people pay the price of their lives in the process, this is a real cash cow and exploiting it will be on everyone's minds.

Prohibition always works....
for the criminals!

Originally posted by Wildbob77
The easiest way to end smoking would be to say that starting next year, tobacco is illegal for someone turning 21.

All those who don't want to give up the habit and are over that age could continue to smoke. Al those younger would not be able to purchase tobacco legally.

The health benefits to society from eliminating smoking would be huge.

Anyone not 16 yet should also be banned from driving a car as they pollute and cause lung cancer and can also wreck thus causing horrific instant death.

That way in the future we can kick this unhealthy lazy habit of driving everywhere and get back to being healthy and walking no matter where we need to go.

reply to post by Obsrvr


While they are at it...why not add alcohol to that list; alcohol is one of the worst things there is.

reply to post by Obsrvr


I'm playing the world's smallest violin here.

Cigarettes should be eradicated.

This would make them illegal then, because a physician will not prescribe something that they know is harmful to a patient. They took an oath to first do no harm, thus if they uphold that oath they could not, in good conscience, write a prescription for such a product. How dumb are the people that make these laws? I mean they lack common sense. Unless this was their intention, to make them illegal. This would be against our rights, once again, and just shows that government on all levels can be corrupt. I mean I know politicians are supposed to understand the basic concept of Constitutional rights, but so many either don't, or completely ignore them. They should be tried for treason.

Electronic cigarettes woud quickly become popular there, as it is not tobacco. Hmmm I smell a lobbyist

I logged in just to post.

I have smoke for....well **** it's been almost ten years now. I have wanted to quit so bad but it's the hardest thing I have ever tried and I keep ending back on them.

I myself, as an addicted smoker, who only smokes because I get a craving (there is no real reason to smoke, you get nothing from it), would LOVE to see this bill pass.

If they made it harder for me to get them, I would stop trying. I'm not going to waste my money to see the doctor for a prescription to smoke cigarettes.

They benefit us in no way. I don't wanna hear this government infringement BS. No one actually NEEDS to smoke. It does NOTHING for us.

It's your right? Ha! It's called denial

reply to post by mthgs602


Those who refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat.

This is NOT the governments first attempt at tobacco prohibition. Lucy Page Gaston was successful in getting the sale of tobacco banned in 27 states in the 1920s at about the same time as alcohol prohibition. She used all the same tactics that are currently being used (health) (second-hand smoke issues), (shaming smokers) etc etc (Isn't it funny that all those tactics were used BEFORE epidimiology was ever used to provide "scientific proof" of those assertions?

en.wikipedia.org...

By the 1950s, smokers peaked in the United States at pretty close to 50 % of the population

Hitler was also an anti-smoker. He was the first to pay scientists to manufacture the proof that smoking is bad for your health and the first to coin the phrase second-hand smoke.

www.prisonplanet.com...

The first thing that happened when he committed suicide in that bunker was that someone lit a cigarette and smoked in his presence. Following the war, smoking rates peaked in Germany far higher than in any other European country.

Even today, the Germans remember Hitler's virulant desire for personal control of his subject's personal behavior. Anti-smoking campaigner's have a very hard time in Germany as a result.

I am happy to report that anti-smoking campaigns crop up about every 70 or 80 years, during a time when smoking rates are historically pretty low (you can't pass bans for something that 50 % of the population do), last about 10 years and then melt away like ice.

Google this - funding for anti-smoking being reduced.

Once the money is gone - so are the anti-smokers!
Tired of Control Freaks

A 400 year old history of anti-smoking campaigns

www.ash.org.uk...

Tired of Control Freaks