Libs think smokers need much more persecution

Not long after I quit smoking my wife and I were in a restaurant in Vienna. This was before Austria had to go along with the EU smoking ban. The people at the table next to us were smoking while we were eating. I realized immediately why non smokers always objected to people smoking around them while they were eating.

What used to get me was how offended smokers used to get if you asked them not to light up and how outraged they were when they could no longer smoke at work

You're not the boss of me

The current war on smokers is going far beyond the workplace and/or public places.

What do you care if a guy wants to sit at home and chain smoke cigarettes?

It's none of your business.

As you may have noticed.......I have little sympathy for the plight of smokers. They had little sympathy for others when they smoked wherever they fucking pleased and threw their butts knowing someone other than themselves would have to pick them up.
 
What used to get me was how offended smokers used to get if you asked them not to light up and how outraged they were when they could no longer smoke at work

You're not the boss of me

The current war on smokers is going far beyond the workplace and/or public places.

What do you care if a guy wants to sit at home and chain smoke cigarettes?

It's none of your business.

As you may have noticed.......I have little sympathy for the plight of smokers. They had little sympathy for others when they smoked wherever they fucking pleased and threw their butts knowing someone other than themselves would have to pick them up.

I don't care if you have sympathy or not.

I don't give a shit if some guy who smokes 5 packs a day gets lung cancer.

I don't give a shit if some guy who eats 12 Big macs a day drops dead of a heart attack

It's not my business just like it's not yours.
 
You don't want your kids to have that much but it's none of your business if someone else's kid does and you have no right to impose your preferences on others.

True, but I see nothing wrong with protecting children in general. You do not have kids, so you do not care.

I would not presume to tell anyone how to raise their kids. Neither should you.

There is a difference between protecting children from themselves and telling people how to raise their children.
 
You cant legally drink a bottle of Jack Daniels or even a beer while walking down most streets in this country and you cant legally shoot heroin or snort cocaine any where so why should nicotine addicts have special privileges other addicts dont have?
 
What used to get me was how offended smokers used to get if you asked them not to light up and how outraged they were when they could no longer smoke at work

You're not the boss of me

The current war on smokers is going far beyond the workplace and/or public places.

What do you care if a guy wants to sit at home and chain smoke cigarettes?

It's none of your business.

As you may have noticed.......I have little sympathy for the plight of smokers. They had little sympathy for others when they smoked wherever they fucking pleased and threw their butts knowing someone other than themselves would have to pick them up.

I am one of those lucky smokers who can enjoy a cigarette, but go days or weeks without one. I am in a shopping mall now waiting for a friend. I just went outside for a smoke and enjoyed it more in the crisp, cold winter air than I would have enjoyed it indoors. I always dispose of the butts properly.
 
You cant legally drink a bottle of Jack Daniels or even a beer while walking down most streets in this country and you cant legally shoot heroin or snort cocaine any where so why should nicotine addicts have special privileges other addicts dont have?

Interesting point.
 
No. I do not want my kids having that much ice cream either.

You don't want your kids to have that much but it's none of your business if someone else's kid does and you have no right to impose your preferences on others.

True, but I see nothing wrong with protecting children in general. You do not have kids, so you do not care.

I have a little girl. I can fully manage her upbringing and safety without govt interference.
 
You don't want your kids to have that much but it's none of your business if someone else's kid does and you have no right to impose your preferences on others.

True, but I see nothing wrong with protecting children in general. You do not have kids, so you do not care.

I have a little girl. I can fully manage her upbringing and safety without govt interference.

I dunno if that's true for any of us, with Wall Street demanding Frito Lay make fat/salt and sugar products more addictive. I'm not sure a simple libertarian approach of saying the smart will live longer really works for us all.
 
And it's still none of your business if people want to drink it.

True. You do not have to allow gallon cups of it to be available to kids though.

Why not when those same kids can by a five gallon bucket of ice cream?

Are you at least starting to see how ridiculous you control freaks are?

At least with ice cream, you don't have to come into contact with offensive toxic gasses. There are no 2nd hand effects unless the kid who ate the 5 gallon container of it barfs all over you.
 
You don't want your kids to have that much but it's none of your business if someone else's kid does and you have no right to impose your preferences on others.

True, but I see nothing wrong with protecting children in general. You do not have kids, so you do not care.

I have a little girl. I can fully manage her upbringing and safety without govt interference.

That is you. I am the same. Many people are not like us.
 
The current war on smokers is going far beyond the workplace and/or public places.

What do you care if a guy wants to sit at home and chain smoke cigarettes?

It's none of your business.

As you may have noticed.......I have little sympathy for the plight of smokers. They had little sympathy for others when they smoked wherever they fucking pleased and threw their butts knowing someone other than themselves would have to pick them up.

I don't care if you have sympathy or not.

I don't give a shit if some guy who smokes 5 packs a day gets lung cancer.

I don't give a shit if some guy who eats 12 Big macs a day drops dead of a heart attack

It's not my business just like it's not yours.

Oh......I see

Its the "principle"

Personally, I don't give a shit
 
True, but I see nothing wrong with protecting children in general. You do not have kids, so you do not care.

I have a little girl. I can fully manage her upbringing and safety without govt interference.

I dunno if that's true for any of us, with Wall Street demanding Frito Lay make fat/salt and sugar products more addictive. I'm not sure a simple libertarian approach of saying the smart will live longer really works for us all.

You or I don't have to buy those products. I sure don't.
 
I disagree with all the taxes on cigarettes. But as for laws concerning second-hand smoke I'm all for it.

When I was a smoker, I disagreed with all the taxes on cigarettes, but now as an ex-smoker I am all for them. The reason is not to punish smokers, it is to stop young kids from starting. When I first started smoking, I was in high school. I was earning minimum wage, which at the time was $3.10. A pack of cigarettes cost $.75. So, if we do the math, you can see that a person earning minimum wage would only have to work about 15 minutes to pay for that pack of cigarettes. Now, because of all the tax increases, today that same pack costs around $6.00 depending where you live. Minimum wage is $7.25 in most states. Today, the young person earning minimum wage needs to work almost a full hour to be able to afford that same pack of cigarettes.

The point is, young kids who don't make a lot of money will at least debate whether it is worth spending an entire hours worth of pay in order to smoke. Many choose against this, and that is in great part helped to reduce the number of young smokers. Once someone is addicted, price rarely is a determining factor as to whether or not they will purchase cigarettes or not. But for young people who are thinking about starting, the high cost can definitely be a deterring factor.
 
Yes, that I can not understand???????:confused: It doesn't make sense to me!

Smoke it from a vaporizer and there's nothing but benefits! Also remember that smokers smoke a pack or 2 a day, whereas stoners only need a joint or 2. And are prevented from getting filtered joints by law.

That being said haven't touched the stuff in years. Now when I retire... all bets are off!


There have been several studies that show pot actually contains many of the same cancer-causing chemicals found in tobacco. Puff for puff, smoking marijuana may increase the risk of cancer more than smoking tobacco does. :dunno:

The vast majority of carcinogens in cigarettes are man-made additives. They have nothing to do with the tobacco itself, although the tobacco also poses it's own set of problems. The additives just make cigarettes much worse than they already are just from the tobacco.
 
I disagree with all the taxes on cigarettes. But as for laws concerning second-hand smoke I'm all for it.

The alleged "dangers" of second hand smoke are an absolute crock.

Let me correct that for you; the dangers of second hand smoke have been proven and can be as dangerous to some people as directly smoking cigarettes. Even when I was smoking, I realized that the lingering smoke could not possibly be good for my kids, so I quit smoking in our house and only smoked outside, even in the middle of winter.
 
There currently is no public places where you are forced to walk near a smoker.

If you walk past a bar or office building you can get engulfed in smoke.

You are not forced to walk there.

Take a wider berth.

If you think a quick whiff of cigarette smoke is going to kill you then you must be positively apoplectic when a bus drives by you.

You know what I love? I love going on a five mile run at the park and having some shithead blow their cigarette smoke right into my face as I run by them. The aroma is disgusting and I want to breath clean air when I am running. Actually, I want to breath clean air whenever possible. My right to breath clean air far outweighs the smokers right to smoke. So if you smoke, you have the right to do it anywhere that I am not. That is the bottom line. If you live in an apartment, and I live above you, you do not have the right to smoke in your own apartment because it will affect the air I breath.

While you may think that I am infringing upon your right to smoke, it is the exact opposite as the smoker infringes on the right of the non-smoker to breath clean air. The non-smoker's rights take precedent, plain and simple.
 
Sounds like you would like to gas them, rw.

They gassed me first

Not long after I quit smoking my wife and I were in a restaurant in Vienna. This was before Austria had to go along with the EU smoking ban. The people at the table next to us were smoking while we were eating. I realized immediately why non smokers always objected to people smoking around them while they were eating.

Similar experience when we visited Vienna. Looking for coffee and cake to while away and hour or two, we walked into cafe and subsequently a solid wall of cigarette smoke. We turned around and walked out the door. Within 10 seconds of being in the cafe, our clothes stunk. I smoked for about 10 years. I know how badly I stunk during those years as a smoker.
 
True, but I see nothing wrong with protecting children in general. You do not have kids, so you do not care.

I would not presume to tell anyone how to raise their kids. Neither should you.

There is a difference between protecting children from themselves and telling people how to raise their children.

It's your job to protect your children not everyone else's.

And if i want to buy a 55 gallon drum of Coke and suck it dry it's none of your business.

What is so hard to understand about that?
 
If you walk past a bar or office building you can get engulfed in smoke.

You are not forced to walk there.

Take a wider berth.

If you think a quick whiff of cigarette smoke is going to kill you then you must be positively apoplectic when a bus drives by you.

You know what I love? I love going on a five mile run at the park and having some shithead blow their cigarette smoke right into my face as I run by them. The aroma is disgusting and I want to breath clean air when I am running. Actually, I want to breath clean air whenever possible. My right to breath clean air far outweighs the smokers right to smoke. So if you smoke, you have the right to do it anywhere that I am not. That is the bottom line. If you live in an apartment, and I live above you, you do not have the right to smoke in your own apartment because it will affect the air I breath.

While you may think that I am infringing upon your right to smoke, it is the exact opposite as the smoker infringes on the right of the non-smoker to breath clean air. The non-smoker's rights take precedent, plain and simple.

I don't smoke.

I do know that a whiff of cigarette smoke is no threat to anyone's health.

And I'm sorry but if your living in a city you inhale more shit everyday than any smoker could ever blow in your face.
 
I would not presume to tell anyone how to raise their kids. Neither should you.

There is a difference between protecting children from themselves and telling people how to raise their children.

It's your job to protect your children not everyone else's.

And if i want to buy a 55 gallon drum of Coke and suck it dry it's none of your business.

What is so hard to understand about that?

Tell us about the harmful fumes from your 55 gallon drum of Coke.
 

Forum List

Back
Top