| Author | Thread |
|
|
01/20/2007 08:36:58 PM · #1 |
Talk all you want about health advocacy, step behind the children whatever, but we are losing rights one step at a time.
//www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6898808&ft=1&f=1003
First it was retail stores, then bars and restaurants, now cars... next will be our homes. They'll be searches of homes soon.
Then when they are done with smoking, guess who's next? EATERS. Yup, fat folk are next, I believe.
Welcome to the US (the land of the free) where it is illegal to smoke in your own car.
What gets me is WHY they don't just shut down the tobacco companies and get it over with. Let all the smokers go through withdrawals together. Why? Because they want the tax money AND the fines. Can't tax illegal drugs, right? Oh and let's not forget campaign contributions from big tobacco...
Message edited by author 2007-01-20 20:38:29.
|
|
|
|
01/20/2007 08:46:49 PM · #2 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Can't tax illegal drugs, right? Oh and let's not forget campaign contributions from big tobacco... |
Actually they can -- one of the time-honored ways they try and get "organized crime" figures is by convicting them of tax evasion -- for failing to declare their income from illegal drug sales. |
|
|
|
01/20/2007 08:52:31 PM · #3 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Can't tax illegal drugs, right? Oh and let's not forget campaign contributions from big tobacco... |
Actually they can -- one of the time-honored ways they try and get "organized crime" figures is by convicting them of tax evasion -- for failing to declare their income from illegal drug sales. |
Not to mention many in that line of work don't know that while it is illegal to not declare their income to be taxed -- those tax documents are not admissable as evidence. As long as they declare their income they are in good with at least that branch of the government.
David |
|
|
|
01/20/2007 09:32:06 PM · #4 |
I have no issue with what the folks in Bangor are doing. More power to them.
Smokers are junkies, plain and simple. Smoking is a disgusting habit that has stuck around because big tobacco bidness lines the pockets of politicians. It's a huge burden on health care. It`s just a matter of time before fatty foods will suffer the same fate as the cigarette.
Big business has for too long made a tidy profit off people's health.
|
|
|
|
01/20/2007 09:43:34 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by Beagleboy:
Big business has for too long made a tidy profit off people's health. |
Understood, but our Government should attack the source rather than the common folk.
Either way, if I choose to smoke in MY car that is MY right. If it affects my health or the health of my offspring, well that's just Darwinism. I feel the same about seatbelt laws.
|
|
|
|
01/20/2007 09:46:41 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
I feel the same about seatbelt laws. |
Yeah. Always safer to be thrown clear during an accident than to be restrained by seatbealts and the SRS |
|
|
|
01/20/2007 09:47:25 PM · #7 |
| I agree. Totally awful that they want to protect the children of parents who are too stupid to do it on their own. |
|
|
|
01/20/2007 09:48:43 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by Beagleboy:
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
I feel the same about seatbelt laws. |
Yeah. Always safer to be thrown clear during an accident than to be restrained by seatbealts and the SRS |
I wear mine, but if I choose not to. that's my right. If I die, well there is just one less stupid person taxing the infrastructure. Laws that prohibit Darwinism are diluting the species.
|
|
|
|
01/20/2007 09:48:55 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Talk all you want about health advocacy, step behind the children whatever, but we are losing rights one step at a time.
//www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6898808&ft=1&f=1003
First it was retail stores, then bars and restaurants, now cars... next will be our homes. They'll be searches of homes soon.
|
For a while here it WAS homes, or at least some of them. They passed a law banning smoking anywhere indoors where anyone was employed. Well, when folks got up in arms that that meant they couldn't even smoke in their own homes if they had a housekeeper come in weekly some adjustments were made.... |
|
|
|
01/20/2007 09:56:13 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by mk:
I agree. Totally awful that they want to protect the children of parents who are too stupid to do it on their own. |
My problem with this kind of law is where does it end? When they set the diet for what you are permitted to feed your children? Miss a serving of veggies and you get fined? When they tell you you can't skydive/bullride/etc. because it's too dangerous and might orphan your children? When they monitor the number of hours your child spends using electronics and requires that it be lesser than hours spent reading or exercising or studying?
I feel that more needs to be done at the root of problems, rather at the tips of the branches.
Since tobacco use is proven to be such a health hazard, outlaw it.
Since it's proven that "speed kills" (as relating to autos) limit the allowable maximum speed at the production level.
If you don't want us to use something, don't let us have it legally in the first place.
Message edited by author 2007-01-20 22:01:46. |
|
|
|
01/20/2007 10:07:01 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
If I die, well there is just one less stupid person taxing the infrastructure. |
It's your survival as an invalid which will tax the infrastructure thrugh enormous rehabilitation and long-term care costs. |
|
|
|
01/20/2007 10:10:33 PM · #12 |
Who has seen Demolition Man? Lets start a pool how long it will take to get to salt being outlawed!
To quote Mr. E. Friendly "I have seen the future! It's a bunch of 40 year old virgins sitting around singing I wish I was an Oscar Meyer Weiner!" Be Well!
|
|
|
|
01/20/2007 10:16:14 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by TheStick:
Who has seen Demolition Man? Lets start a pool how long it will take to get to salt being outlawed!
To quote Mr. E. Friendly "I have seen the future! It's a bunch of 40 year old virgins sitting around singing I wish I was an Oscar Meyer Weiner!" Be Well! |
That is EXACTLY where we are headed.
|
|
|
|
01/20/2007 10:16:27 PM · #14 |
| I can understand trying to protect children but with the way these laws have progressed it has been anything but that. As Leroy mentioned it's a money grab not to mention a votes grab nothing more. |
|
|
|
01/20/2007 10:24:30 PM · #15 |
Maybe the people that know 'whats good for me' would like to go to work for me too? After all, it appears I can't think for myself. I am a smoker. But, anyone who has been around me for any length of time would know I don't light up with kids in the car and if anyone that doesn't smoke rides with me, I either ask if they mind or open the windows.
|
|
|
|
01/20/2007 10:29:29 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by Beagleboy:
I have no issue with what the folks in Bangor are doing. More power to them.
Smokers are junkies, plain and simple. Smoking is a disgusting habit that has stuck around because big tobacco bidness lines the pockets of politicians. It's a huge burden on health care. It`s just a matter of time before fatty foods will suffer the same fate as the cigarette.
Big business has for too long made a tidy profit off people's health. |
Yes indeed, more power to people who would readily pounce on addicts. We, as a society, would be much better served if we truly took the time to provide assistance to those addicted to cigarettes. Perhaps the sale of cigarettes should be regulated.
I wouldn't worry too much about smokers being a burden on society, as they tend to die a lot quicker, at least that is what my government would have me believe.
Ray
|
|
|
|
01/20/2007 10:36:12 PM · #17 |
Smokers and fat people should be penalized on their health insurance (and I would be included in that punishment). They should not be legislated against. Nor should marijuana be illegal. Nor should the President be allowed to listen to our phone calls without a warrant, or detain us without charges. I'm afraid we're losing rights by leaps and bounds, not one step at a time.
|
|
|
|
01/20/2007 10:45:18 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by posthumous:
Smokers and fat people should be penalized on their health insurance (and I would be included in that punishment). They should not be legislated against. Nor should marijuana be illegal. Nor should the President be allowed to listen to our phone calls without a warrant, or detain us without charges. I'm afraid we're losing rights by leaps and bounds, not one step at a time. |
Most health insurance premiums are higher for smokers, even employer plans.
Private insurance companies will often require blood tests, and a physical before you get a rate. If you are overweight, have high cholesterol, high BP, etc. you pay more if you can get coverage at all.
Increasing the cost of smoking doesn't work to curb smoking. Look at how high tobacco taxes are now, but people who smoke, pay anyway because the physical suffering of denying their addiction is worse.
|
|
|
|
01/20/2007 10:49:43 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Beagleboy:
I have no issue with what the folks in Bangor are doing. More power to them.
Smokers are junkies, plain and simple. Smoking is a disgusting habit that has stuck around because big tobacco bidness lines the pockets of politicians. It's a huge burden on health care. It`s just a matter of time before fatty foods will suffer the same fate as the cigarette.
Big business has for too long made a tidy profit off people's health. |
Yes indeed, more power to people who would readily pounce on addicts. We, as a society, would be much better served if we truly took the time to provide assistance to those addicted to cigarettes. Perhaps the sale of cigarettes should be regulated.
I wouldn't worry too much about smokers being a burden on society, as they tend to die a lot quicker, at least that is what my government would have me believe.
Ray |
There are plenty of people willing to help smokers quit, but, they only work if the smoker really wants to quit.
The sale of tobacco is regulated. Perhaps it should be restricted even further?
Smokers, on the average may die more quickly, but usually only after extensive (and expensive) periods of illness.
|
|
|
|
01/20/2007 10:56:55 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Talk all you want about health advocacy, step behind the children whatever, but we are losing rights one step at a time..............Then when they are done with smoking, guess who's next? EATERS. Yup, fat folk are next, I believe.......... |
Already started
Story
|
|
|
|
01/20/2007 10:57:49 PM · #21 |
Anything short of outlawing all, ALL, behaviors and lifestyles that increase the chance that a person will get sick and become a burden on 'the healthcare system' is discriminatory legislation.
Outlaw all activities that increase the chance you will contract AIDS. Outlaw 60 hour work weeks. Outlaw all fast food.
No? Then shut the f**k up about smoking. |
|
|
|
01/20/2007 11:03:13 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Beagleboy:
I have no issue with what the folks in Bangor are doing. More power to them.
Smokers are junkies, plain and simple. Smoking is a disgusting habit that has stuck around because big tobacco bidness lines the pockets of politicians. It's a huge burden on health care. It`s just a matter of time before fatty foods will suffer the same fate as the cigarette.
Big business has for too long made a tidy profit off people's health. |
Yes indeed, more power to people who would readily pounce on addicts. We, as a society, would be much better served if we truly took the time to provide assistance to those addicted to cigarettes. Perhaps the sale of cigarettes should be regulated.
I wouldn't worry too much about smokers being a burden on society, as they tend to die a lot quicker, at least that is what my government would have me believe.
Ray |
There are plenty of people willing to help smokers quit, but, they only work if the smoker really wants to quit.
The sale of tobacco is regulated. Perhaps it should be restricted even further?
Smokers, on the average may die more quickly, but usually only after extensive (and expensive) periods of illness. |
Absolutely right Spazmo... I should have made my point clearer.
In this country we see government departments and government subsidized agencies strive to provide assistance to drug addicts and other elements of our society in an effort to assist them, but the same cannot be said for smokers.
Considering that smoking is indeed an addiction, perhaps we would be better served if we addressed the problem as such, and not try to alter peoples' behaviour through legal enforcement.
Just a thought.
Ray |
|
|
|
01/20/2007 11:06:39 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Smokers, on the average may die more quickly, but usually only after extensive (and expensive) periods of illness. |
Which provides jobs in the health care, insurance, accounting, and every other industry we have. What people generally object to the most is paying for someone else's health care. Simple solution, don't. Don't try to legislate people into not smoking just make them pay their own way or they don't get health care. |
|
|
|
01/20/2007 11:08:51 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by TechnoShroom:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
Smokers, on the average may die more quickly, but usually only after extensive (and expensive) periods of illness. |
Which provides jobs in the health care, insurance, accounting, and every other industry we have. What people generally object to the most is paying for someone else's health care. Simple solution, don't. Don't try to legislate people into not smoking just make them pay their own way or they don't get health care. |
Exactly.
|
|
|
|
01/20/2007 11:11:08 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by Ristyz:
Originally posted by fotomann_forever:
Talk all you want about health advocacy, step behind the children whatever, but we are losing rights one step at a time..............Then when they are done with smoking, guess who's next? EATERS. Yup, fat folk are next, I believe.......... |
Already started
Story |
AT LEAST NYC is attacking the source and not the eater.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/28/2025 01:09:07 AM EDT.
