• Secure your account

    A friendly reminder to our users, please make sure your account is safe. Make sure you update your password and have an active email address to recover or change your password.

  • Xenforo Cloud has scheduled an upgrade to XenForo version 2.2.16. This will take place on or shortly after the following date and time: Jul 05, 2024 at 05:00 PM (PT) There shouldn't be any downtime, as it's just a maintenance release. More info here

Smoking bans: Good or Bad?

logansoldcigar said:
ahhhhhhhhhh, but the big problem with smoking, if you remove the arguments on health alone, cos there are plenty of other things we can ban on health grounds and wont consider, which is the actual point about driving..not that i actually think they should ban it), is the addiction. i doubt the void would be allowed to be filled by another addictive product, and therefore, the void may remain.
plus, a few years may be too late

If it's an addictive product that isn't harmful, then why not?

Actually, pharmaceuticals are doing just that. They may or may not cause a physical addiction like cigarettes, but definitely a psychological one for many of it's users.
 
Outsiderzedge said:
If society's view towards cigarettes changes enough, then it's completely possible.
Hopefully it won't. At least, not in the next 30 years. Give me that much, please, um, god?
 
logansoldcigar said:
which is how they should have done it in the first place.
at the end of the day, money talks, if the non smoking establishments made all the money and the smoking ones went bust, then they would all switch sharpish
So often I wish I were english so I could use "sharpish." Dammit.
 
Outsiderzedge said:
If it's an addictive product that isn't harmful, then why not?

Actually, pharmaceuticals are doing just that. They may or may not cause a physical addiction like cigarettes, but definitely a psychological one for many of it's users.

they very nature of addiction, whether physical or physchological, kills the idea that its harmless. I need a fix of addictive non toxic substance X. i have no money. its 3 weeks till payday. ill mug that old lady for it
 
People rioted when heroine was first make illegal.

It was used for a pain killer.
 
Lord Siva said:
Just use the god damn spell check.

spell check makes no difference. It looks wrong to me, and cos most spell checks are american, it often is wrong as far as im concerned. (colour as the famous example)
 
logansoldcigar said:
they very nature of addiction, whether physical or physchological, kills the idea that its harmless. I need a fix of addictive non toxic substance X. i have no money. its 3 weeks till payday. ill mug that old lady for it

That really depends on the severity of the addiction.

I don't hear too often about people mugging or robbing others to buy cigarettes or viagra.
 
Lord Siva said:
People rioted when heroine was first make illegal.

It was used for a pain killer.

yep. then they invented methadone as a non toxic replacement.

that one worked really well. its just as addictive as horse was in the first place
 
Lord Siva said:
People rioted when heroine was first make illegal.
You're a champ at grammar.
 
Outsiderzedge said:
That really depends on the severity of the addiction.

I don't hear too often about people mugging or robbing others to buy cigarettes or viagra.

No, cos they are socially acceptable drugs. do you really wanna bet that it doesnt happen though?
 
logansoldcigar said:
No, cos they are socially acceptable drugs. do you really wanna bet that it doesnt happen though?

Probably no more often than people who mug or rob to buy food or anything else that they want.
 
logansoldcigar said:
No, cos they are socially acceptable drugs. do you really wanna bet that it doesnt happen though?
If cigarettes became illegal, and we could only get them at really high prices from illegal sources, I'd probably wind up mugging someone.
 
Calvin said:
If cigarettes became illegal, and we could only get them at really high prices from illegal sources, I'd probably wind up mugging someone.

I have a better idea, why don't you just quit and save your miserable life.
 
logansoldcigar said:
No, cos they are socially acceptable drugs. do you really wanna bet that it doesnt happen though?

If government and private enterprises alike were to endorse and support them, then it would be unlikely they would be or become socially unacceptable.
 
Lord Siva said:
I have a better idea, why don't you just quit and save your miserable life.
Why don't you quit criticizing someone for typos when you're often prone to make grammatical mistakes, which is a much bigger indication of lower intelligence and poor communication skills than typos are? In case you're having trouble comprehending that, it means quit being a hypocrite.
 
Calvin said:
Why don't you quit criticizing someone for typos when you're often prone to make grammatical mistakes, which is a much bigger indication of lower intelligence and poor communication skills than typos are? In case you're having trouble comprehending that, it means quit being a hypocrite.

negative9.jpg
 
Outsiderzedge said:
Probably no more often than people who mug or rob to buy food or anything else that they want.

but we arent talking about things that may (or may not) be needed to stay alive, or are wanted cos someone else has it. we are talking about addictive drugs, whether toxic or otherwise. you agree, despite the fact we never hear of it, that people will mug for cigarettes or other forms of drug. therefore, if someone came up with a non toxic, but addictive substance to fill the void created by a cigarette ban, it wouldnt be harmless. and if it wasnt addictive, it wouldnt fill the void and the ecomony suffers.
 
Lord Siva said:
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/forumfun/negative9.jpg
Wow, what a deliciously witty comeback, did mommy help you with that? :rolleyes:
 
redmarvel said:
They may not have been "holding a gun to anyone's head", but you were forced to patronize smoke-filled places simply because there were no "non-smoking" ones.
If you're going to make statements please try to base them in at least a smidge of reality.
Th^t is utter balogna and you know it.
I KNOW it is because I'm a smoker and everytime I want to smoke I have to go outside.

There's no "smoking section" in any of the coffee-houses here in Seattle except one that I know of, there's no smoking section in any hospital, grocery store, theater, library or fine restaurant that I've ever been to except one wannabe upscale place that had a cigar smoking lounge that was completely sealed off from the other areas. Nor is there one at McDonalds, 7-11, or....like ANYwhere except bars and Truck Stops and Casinos Boo-f***ing-Hoo.

What you said there was just ridiculous. :rolleyes:
 
Calvin said:
Wow, what a deliciously witty comeback, did mommy help you with that? :rolleyes:
Oh s***, Calvin. He really gutted you with the "I see dumb people" thing from half a decade ago. :(
Good luck finding all the shards of your shattered self-esteem. :(
 
Wilhelm-Scream said:
Oh s***, Calvin. He really gutted you with the "I see dumb people" thing from half a decade ago. :(
Good luck finding all the shards of your shattered self-esteem. :(
I'm gonna curl up in a ball and suck on a cancer stick for comfort until I have the courage to go on with my life.
 
logansoldcigar said:
but we arent talking about things that may (or may not) be needed to stay alive, or are wanted cos someone else has it. we are talking about addictive drugs, whether toxic or otherwise. you agree, despite the fact we never hear of it, that people will mug for cigarettes or other forms of drug. therefore, if someone came up with a non toxic, but addictive substance to fill the void created by a cigarette ban, it wouldnt be harmless. and if it wasnt addictive, it wouldnt fill the void and the ecomony suffers.

There are people who mug and rob others to buy stereos. We don't need steroes to survive, so I guess that means stereos should be banned?

People whom have no money and are inept at earning it, may try to take it from others. This is nothing new.

As Calvin pointed out, making these products illegal will probably make them more expensive to get and will likely spur greater numbers of robbing and muggings. Atleast we'd be able to take action against these individuals before they rob or mug anyone, simply for having or using the product.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"