WillowTree
Diamond Member
- Sep 15, 2008
- 84,532
- 16,092
How about let people smoke as often as they like, but refuse them medical treatment. Or let them pay the whole cost themselves.
Same for alcohol same for aids.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
How about let people smoke as often as they like, but refuse them medical treatment. Or let them pay the whole cost themselves.
How about let people smoke as often as they like, but refuse them medical treatment. Or let them pay the whole cost themselves.
And the march towards Totalitarianism goes on.
First they impose a heavy sin tax. Then they kick you outdoors. Then they ban you from certain public areas. Now this:
Bill Proposed in Oregon to Make Cigarettes Prescription Only Drugs! - 1/24/13 - YouTube
Rep. Mitch Greenlick, from Portland, is sponsoring a bill that makes cigarettes a Schedule III controlled substance, meaning it would be illegal to possess or distribute cigarettes without a doctors prescription, Fox 12 Oregon reports.
Other drugs and substances that are considered Schedule III controlled substances are ketamine, lysergic acid and anabolic steroids, the report adds.
Should the bill pass, and even Rep. Greenlick doesnt think it will, offenders would face fines of up to $6,250, one year in jail, or both...
Ore. Rep. Moves to Make Cigarettes Prescription-Only, Threatens One Year in Jail and/or $6K+ Fine | Video | TheBlaze.com
Great idea. Tobacco kills and, the cost to tax payers for medical treatment/care, a direct result of smoking, is enormous. I don't support jail for the end user, possibly a drug diversion program wherein they can learn to quit and of the health consequences if they do not. Growers of tobacco are no different than producers/traffickers of narcotics and crack.
Here's a great solution. If someone chooses to smoke, then their medical care/treatment is their own expense. There's no logical, decent reason why taxpayers should be dunned to pay for anyone's self-inflicted medical issues. That is another great flaw in the government gimme programs.
And the march towards Totalitarianism goes on.
First they impose a heavy sin tax. Then they kick you outdoors. Then they ban you from certain public areas. Now this:
Bill Proposed in Oregon to Make Cigarettes Prescription Only Drugs! - 1/24/13 - YouTube
Rep. Mitch Greenlick, from Portland, is sponsoring a bill that makes cigarettes a Schedule III controlled substance, meaning it would be illegal to possess or distribute cigarettes without a doctors prescription, Fox 12 Oregon reports.
Other drugs and substances that are considered Schedule III controlled substances are ketamine, lysergic acid and anabolic steroids, the report adds.
Should the bill pass, and even Rep. Greenlick doesnt think it will, offenders would face fines of up to $6,250, one year in jail, or both...
Ore. Rep. Moves to Make Cigarettes Prescription-Only, Threatens One Year in Jail and/or $6K+ Fine | Video | TheBlaze.com
And the march towards Totalitarianism goes on.
First they impose a heavy sin tax. Then they kick you outdoors. Then they ban you from certain public areas. Now this:
Bill Proposed in Oregon to Make Cigarettes Prescription Only Drugs! - 1/24/13 - YouTube
Rep. Mitch Greenlick, from Portland, is sponsoring a bill that makes cigarettes a Schedule III controlled substance, meaning it would be illegal to possess or distribute cigarettes without a doctors prescription, Fox 12 Oregon reports.
Other drugs and substances that are considered Schedule III controlled substances are ketamine, lysergic acid and anabolic steroids, the report adds.
Should the bill pass, and even Rep. Greenlick doesnt think it will, offenders would face fines of up to $6,250, one year in jail, or both...
Ore. Rep. Moves to Make Cigarettes Prescription-Only, Threatens One Year in Jail and/or $6K+ Fine | Video | TheBlaze.com
no one cares.
How about let people smoke as often as they like, but refuse them medical treatment. Or let them pay the whole cost themselves.
what about minorities that are extremely over weight ??should they be allowed to eat fast food ??Here's a great solution. If someone chooses to smoke, then their medical care/treatment is their own expense. There's no logical, decent reason why taxpayers should be dunned to pay for anyone's self-inflicted medical issues. That is another great flaw in the government gimme programs.
well actually that would include a great many diagnoses,, we can really save money on drug abusers, alcohol abusers, STD's etc etc,, we shouldn't have to pay for attempted suicide either then huh?
Nope. The taxpayer should not be forced to subsidize medical expenses for people whose choices have put them at risk. It isn't like the dangers of risky behavior are some big state secret any more.
How about let people smoke as often as they like, but refuse them medical treatment. Or let them pay the whole cost themselves.
This is exactly what freedom looks like. If you want to be stupid and irresponsible with your body and health, the person who is truly free can be stupid and irresponsible with his/her body and health. But, everybody should be required to live with the consequences of the choices they make including the cost. It is for that reason that federal government supplied 'benevolence' in the form of health care or welfare or whatever is not the way for a free people to go. While there is some genuine compassion that is accomplished, the government too often punishes the successful and responsible and rewards those who make the worst choices.
When we have to be accountable and suffer consequences for making bad choices, we are far more likely to make better ones.
How about let people smoke as often as they like, but refuse them medical treatment. Or let them pay the whole cost themselves.
This is exactly what freedom looks like. If you want to be stupid and irresponsible with your body and health, the person who is truly free can be stupid and irresponsible with his/her body and health. But, everybody should be required to live with the consequences of the choices they make including the cost. It is for that reason that federal government supplied 'benevolence' in the form of health care or welfare or whatever is not the way for a free people to go. While there is some genuine compassion that is accomplished, the government too often punishes the successful and responsible and rewards those who make the worst choices.
When we have to be accountable and suffer consequences for making bad choices, we are far more likely to make better ones.
In short, the tobacco industry has created an enormous cost to the nation by marketing a deadly product, IMO a reasoned response is to regulate or ban such a substance. The crazy right wing - the libertarians - don't agree.
what about minorities that are extremely over weight ??should they be allowed to eat fast food ??well actually that would include a great many diagnoses,, we can really save money on drug abusers, alcohol abusers, STD's etc etc,, we shouldn't have to pay for attempted suicide either then huh?
Nope. The taxpayer should not be forced to subsidize medical expenses for people whose choices have put them at risk. It isn't like the dangers of risky behavior are some big state secret any more.
And the march towards Totalitarianism goes on.
First they impose a heavy sin tax. Then they kick you outdoors. Then they ban you from certain public areas. Now this:
Bill Proposed in Oregon to Make Cigarettes Prescription Only Drugs! - 1/24/13 - YouTube
Rep. Mitch Greenlick, from Portland, is sponsoring a bill that makes cigarettes a Schedule III controlled substance, meaning it would be illegal to possess or distribute cigarettes without a doctors prescription, Fox 12 Oregon reports.
Other drugs and substances that are considered Schedule III controlled substances are ketamine, lysergic acid and anabolic steroids, the report adds.
Should the bill pass, and even Rep. Greenlick doesnt think it will, offenders would face fines of up to $6,250, one year in jail, or both...
Ore. Rep. Moves to Make Cigarettes Prescription-Only, Threatens One Year in Jail and/or $6K+ Fine | Video | TheBlaze.com
And the march towards Totalitarianism goes on.
First they impose a heavy sin tax. Then they kick you outdoors. Then they ban you from certain public areas. Now this:
Bill Proposed in Oregon to Make Cigarettes Prescription Only Drugs! - 1/24/13 - YouTube
Rep. Mitch Greenlick, from Portland, is sponsoring a bill that makes cigarettes a Schedule III controlled substance, meaning it would be illegal to possess or distribute cigarettes without a doctors prescription, Fox 12 Oregon reports.
Other drugs and substances that are considered Schedule III controlled substances are ketamine, lysergic acid and anabolic steroids, the report adds.
Should the bill pass, and even Rep. Greenlick doesnt think it will, offenders would face fines of up to $6,250, one year in jail, or both...
Ore. Rep. Moves to Make Cigarettes Prescription-Only, Threatens One Year in Jail and/or $6K+ Fine | Video | TheBlaze.com
Why does the right wing oppose local government by locals?
And the march towards Totalitarianism goes on.
First they impose a heavy sin tax. Then they kick you outdoors. Then they ban you from certain public areas. Now this:
Bill Proposed in Oregon to Make Cigarettes Prescription Only Drugs! - 1/24/13 - YouTube
Rep. Mitch Greenlick, from Portland, is sponsoring a bill that makes cigarettes a Schedule III controlled substance, meaning it would be illegal to possess or distribute cigarettes without a doctors prescription, Fox 12 Oregon reports.
Other drugs and substances that are considered Schedule III controlled substances are ketamine, lysergic acid and anabolic steroids, the report adds.
Should the bill pass, and even Rep. Greenlick doesnt think it will, offenders would face fines of up to $6,250, one year in jail, or both...
Ore. Rep. Moves to Make Cigarettes Prescription-Only, Threatens One Year in Jail and/or $6K+ Fine | Video | TheBlaze.com
Why does the right wing oppose local government by locals?
I thought you didn't care? Are you a liar? Why yes, I think you are.
Why does the right wing oppose local government by locals?
I thought you didn't care? Are you a liar? Why yes, I think you are.
Why does the right wing oppose local government by locals?
How about let people smoke as often as they like, but refuse them medical treatment. Or let them pay the whole cost themselves.
Great idea. Tobacco kills and, the cost to tax payers for medical treatment/care, a direct result of smoking, is enormous. I don't support jail for the end user, possibly a drug diversion program wherein they can learn to quit and of the health consequences if they do not. Growers of tobacco are no different than producers/traffickers of narcotics and crack.
Another good fascist heard from.
Veee pay for your medical care. Vee vill tell you vat to eat, vat to drink, vat to smoke, vat to do.
Nice Nazi move; sure sign you have nothing of substance to offer.
The fact is local government (county hospitals) will care for smokers while the tobacco industry - from farmer to maker to merchandizer and the stock holder - profits. As a smoker - you are (are you not?) aware of this provision in the ACA
Penalty could keep smokers out of health overhaul - Yahoo! News
and all of the misery goes to the smoker, his/her family and community.
How about let people smoke as often as they like, but refuse them medical treatment. Or let them pay the whole cost themselves.
This is exactly what freedom looks like. If you want to be stupid and irresponsible with your body and health, the person who is truly free can be stupid and irresponsible with his/her body and health. But, everybody should be required to live with the consequences of the choices they make including the cost. It is for that reason that federal government supplied 'benevolence' in the form of health care or welfare or whatever is not the way for a free people to go. While there is some genuine compassion that is accomplished, the government too often punishes the successful and responsible and rewards those who make the worst choices.
When we have to be accountable and suffer consequences for making bad choices, we are far more likely to make better ones.
I thought you didn't care? Are you a liar? Why yes, I think you are.
Why does the right wing oppose local government by locals?
I thought you didn't care? Liar? Yes,