Hello Guest, please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
Login with username, password and session length.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6   Go Down

Author Topic: Smoking  (Read 19117 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Pyru
Smoking
« on: April 10, 2006, 10:21:50 am »
I'm talking tobacco here. Anyone wanting a debate about cocaine, or cannabis, nah. This isn't about that.

So, what is the use of tobacco? Millions of people addicted, billions upon billions of pounds for tobacco companies, not any good economically for the countries producing it, and no health benefits- as well as a lot of problems- for the people addicted.

Yes, people should have free choice, but... I'm sure many wish they'd never smoked in the first place, which they probably wouldn't have- if it was legal. But, then, there's the amount of money governments get from the taxes of these things.

So, uh, yeah. Debate. :P
Logged
Re: Smoking
« Reply #1 on: April 10, 2006, 01:50:04 pm »
  • *
  • Reputation: +4/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 4747
I wish they made it illegal to smoke anywhere except people's houses...or ban the entire thing all together.

Basicly, you pay a lot of money, to go get stuff, that will poison your body...thats like paying to go breathe from the exhaust of a car.
Logged
Re: Smoking
« Reply #2 on: April 10, 2006, 02:12:50 pm »
  • Revan Does Not Care!
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 330
People have the right to smoke, who are we to tell them what they can do to thier own bodies.
Logged
http://www.youtube.com/HarveyArtifex

Sic vis pacem, para bellum.

Pyru
Re: Smoking
« Reply #3 on: April 10, 2006, 02:27:56 pm »
Quote from: Revan on April 10, 2006, 02:12:50 pm
People have the right to smoke, who are we to tell them what they can do to thier own bodies.

What about the effect of passive smoking? Or, y'know. The effect smoking has on unborn children.
Logged

Limey
Re: Smoking
« Reply #4 on: April 10, 2006, 02:38:00 pm »
I think smoking should be completely legal, but there should be more laws about the advertisment for smoking.  Something really needs to be done about the idea that 'smoking is cool', which attracts so many teens to smoking.  I'm not talking about dumb anti-smoking ads, I mean, The main characters are often paid to smoke, to get kids interested (the cool-looking characters).  I think things like that should be out-lawed.

I think it IS up to people, and they should have the choice, but I think the way advertising affects us needs to be monitored and controlled.
Logged
Re: Smoking
« Reply #5 on: April 10, 2006, 02:49:46 pm »
  • *
  • Reputation: +4/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 4747
I think a lot of people know its bad for you and stupid and such, but that what makes it look cool for a lot of people...like, they are willing to do that cuz theyre so cool.

It sickens me.
Logged
Re: Smoking
« Reply #6 on: April 10, 2006, 03:45:03 pm »
  • *
  • Reputation: +8/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 6604
The issue is really whether or not the non-smoker has a choice in this.  Do they want to breathe in the second-hand smoke?  No, but some arrogant smoker is breathing smoke right in front of them.  Considering that about 2/3 of the cancer-causing chemicals are in second-hand smoke, I think that this violates the rights of the person who chose not to smoke.

Why the hell are there restaraunts with smoking sections and non-smoking sections?  A smoker would say that it provides equallity.  Well, they are wrong.  The air in the restaraunt is often circulating throughout the room, getting into everyone's section.  It would be like if somebody peed in a swimming pool.  There is no non-pee section as the pee circulates through the whole pool.

Logged
Re: Smoking
« Reply #7 on: April 10, 2006, 04:48:38 pm »
  • *
  • Reputation: +4/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 4747
Quote from: 4Sword on April 10, 2006, 03:45:03 pm
The issue is really whether or not the non-smoker has a choice in this.  Do they want to breathe in the second-hand smoke?  No, but some arrogant smoker is breathing smoke right in front of them.  Considering that about 2/3 of the cancer-causing chemicals are in second-hand smoke, I think that this violates the rights of the person who chose not to smoke.

Why the hell are there restaraunts with smoking sections and non-smoking sections?  A smoker would say that it provides equallity.  Well, they are wrong.  The air in the restaraunt is often circulating throughout the room, getting into everyone's section.  It would be like if somebody peed in a swimming pool.  There is no non-pee section as the pee circulates through the whole pool.
You're so correct. Passive smoking pisses me off.
Logged

Pyru
Re: Smoking
« Reply #8 on: April 10, 2006, 06:00:21 pm »
Quote from: 4Sword on April 10, 2006, 03:45:03 pm
The issue is really whether or not the non-smoker has a choice in this.  Do they want to breathe in the second-hand smoke?  No, but some arrogant smoker is breathing smoke right in front of them.  Considering that about 2/3 of the cancer-causing chemicals are in second-hand smoke, I think that this violates the rights of the person who chose not to smoke.

Why the hell are there restaraunts with smoking sections and non-smoking sections?  A smoker would say that it provides equallity.  Well, they are wrong.  The air in the restaraunt is often circulating throughout the room, getting into everyone's section.  It would be like if somebody peed in a swimming pool.  There is no non-pee section as the pee circulates through the whole pool.



Well, people can always go to other restaurants. The problem is in workplaces... if you're working in a restaurant, and need the income, you can't just go somewhere else.
Logged
Re: Smoking
« Reply #9 on: April 10, 2006, 06:11:29 pm »
  • The Broken King
  • *
  • Reputation: +0/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 1259
Quote from: Pyru on April 10, 2006, 02:27:56 pm
Quote from: Revan on April 10, 2006, 02:12:50 pm
People have the right to smoke, who are we to tell them what they can do to thier own bodies.

What about the effect of passive smoking? Or, y'know. The effect smoking has on unborn children.

People have the right to smoke. It's a fact. We can not make it illegal because it's 'unhealthy'. The government is not responsible for forcing peopel to be healthy. Potato chips, candy, beer, pop, coffee - it's not really good for us, but it's legal.

There should be more laws about smoking in a public place. I hate it when people light up near me. If it was illegal, I'd ask them to put it out. (I'm tempted to half the time anyways but I'm pretty sure that they could beat me up). It's especially rude when someone sits next to you and, without asking, lights up. Whenever they do that, I get up and walk upwind.

Like alchohol, their should be laws regarding smoking to keep it safe for all. Drunk people can't drive so that they don't crash into people? Smokers can't smoke in public so that they don' poison my lungs. That's my stance.

(and as for the restaurant thing, in GOOD restaurants, the smokers area has air circulating towards a fan/etc. that sucks up the smoke, or is in a seperate room)
Logged
  • Broken Kings [Temp Site]

Pyru
Re: Smoking
« Reply #10 on: April 10, 2006, 06:21:22 pm »
Quote from: therabidwombat on April 10, 2006, 06:11:29 pm
Quote from: Pyru on April 10, 2006, 02:27:56 pm
Quote from: Revan on April 10, 2006, 02:12:50 pm
People have the right to smoke, who are we to tell them what they can do to thier own bodies.

What about the effect of passive smoking? Or, y'know. The effect smoking has on unborn children.

People have the right to smoke. It's a fact. We can not make it illegal because it's 'unhealthy'. The government is not responsible for forcing peopel to be healthy. Potato chips, candy, beer, pop, coffee - it's not really good for us, but it's legal.

There are potential benefits of those. They're food. You get energy and nutrition from them. The government DOES ban things simply because they're not good for you- drugs, anyone? Tanks? High explosives?

Quote from: therabidwombat on April 10, 2006, 06:11:29 pm
There should be more laws about smoking in a public place. I hate it when people light up near me. If it was illegal, I'd ask them to put it out. (I'm tempted to half the time anyways but I'm pretty sure that they could beat me up). It's especially rude when someone sits next to you and, without asking, lights up. Whenever they do that, I get up and walk upwind. Pyru comment: I like to fart at that point.

Like alchohol, their should be laws regarding smoking to keep it safe for all. Drunk people can't drive so that they don't crash into people? Smokers can't smoke in public so that they don' poison my lungs. That's my stance.

Short term, yes. But I think banning smoking in public places and work places should only be the beginning of it. I believe that smoking should be banned completely eventually- like many drugs.

Quote from: therabidwombat on April 10, 2006, 06:11:29 pm
(and as for the restaurant thing, in GOOD restaurants, the smokers area has air circulating towards a fan/etc. that sucks up the smoke, or is in a seperate room)

What about all the rubbish restaurants?
Logged
Re: Smoking
« Reply #11 on: April 10, 2006, 06:41:32 pm »
  • *
  • Reputation: +4/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 4747
We tell people to wear their seatbelts...or does that have to do with blood stains or something?

Cuz police and all usually do stuff for protection.
But its true, if the whole world would stop smoking now, companies would go bankrupt and governments would lose a LOT of money.

But so be it.
Logged

Pyru
Re: Smoking
« Reply #12 on: April 10, 2006, 06:44:10 pm »
Quote from: Kleaver on April 10, 2006, 06:41:32 pm
But its true, if the whole world would stop smoking now, companies would go bankrupt and governments would lose a LOT of money.

But so be it.

Companies that make money from people dying. Governments wouldn't lose as much money as you'd think- people would have more money to spend, and therefore would spend it on other things, which are still taxed.
Logged

2awesome4apossum
Re: Smoking
« Reply #13 on: April 10, 2006, 07:42:12 pm »
Quote from: Pyru on April 10, 2006, 02:27:56 pm
Quote from: Revan on April 10, 2006, 02:12:50 pm
People have the right to smoke, who are we to tell them what they can do to thier own bodies.

What about the effect of passive smoking? Or, y'know. The effect smoking has on unborn children.
And what about the taxes imposed upon us Americans?  Lung cancer anyone?  The choice to smoke affects EVERYONE like it or not.  We have the freedom to choose just as much as they do, so I'm all for choosing to put an end to wasting our tax dollars.

Quote from: Pyru on April 10, 2006, 06:44:10 pm
Quote from: Kleaver on April 10, 2006, 06:41:32 pm
But its true, if the whole world would stop smoking now, companies would go bankrupt and governments would lose a LOT of money.

But so be it.

Companies that make money from people dying. Governments wouldn't lose as much money as you'd think- people would have more money to spend, and therefore would spend it on other things, which are still taxed.
Definitely.
Logged
Re: Smoking
« Reply #14 on: April 10, 2006, 08:10:01 pm »
  • *
  • Reputation: +4/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 4747
Well, they pull up a lot of extra fees to the cigarettes here, on top of tax. But I guess it wouldnt be that bad.

I wonder how much time it will take to outlaw smoking.
Logged

2awesome4apossum
Re: Smoking
« Reply #15 on: April 10, 2006, 08:11:29 pm »
Quote from: Kleaver on April 10, 2006, 08:10:01 pm
Well, they pull up a lot of extra fees to the cigarettes here, on top of tax. But I guess it wouldnt be that bad.

I wonder how much time it will take to outlaw smoking.
It's not realistic in our modern-day world.  So I don't think it will happen for a VERY VERY VERY long time (if ever).
Logged

Piers
Re: Smoking
« Reply #16 on: April 10, 2006, 08:21:02 pm »
Quote from: 2awesome4apossum on April 10, 2006, 08:11:29 pm
Quote from: Kleaver on April 10, 2006, 08:10:01 pm
Well, they pull up a lot of extra fees to the cigarettes here, on top of tax. But I guess it wouldnt be that bad.

I wonder how much time it will take to outlaw smoking.
It's not realistic in our modern-day world.  So I don't think it will happen for a VERY VERY VERY long time (if ever).
Its relistic but we'd need to bomb alot of farmers and cig companies.

I really see no debate here. Everyone agrees smoking in public should be lawed.
Logged
Re: Smoking
« Reply #17 on: April 10, 2006, 08:26:39 pm »
  • *
  • Reputation: +4/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 4747
Then why doesnt it happen? No smokers in crowd here I guess....
Logged

Piers
Re: Smoking
« Reply #18 on: April 10, 2006, 08:30:59 pm »
Quote from: Kleaver on April 10, 2006, 08:26:39 pm
Then why doesnt it happen? No smokers in crowd here I guess....
It doesn't happen because more then half the world smokes so to get them all to stop smoking outside is impossible practicly. Plus the goverment makes money from it and everyone knows how cheep they are. (Like an old saying, "We could kill off millions of people and not care as long as we make the buck")
Logged

bran371
Re: Smoking
« Reply #19 on: April 10, 2006, 08:37:44 pm »
     This is one debate I like because it deals with something I actually know about. =) First, let me thank the school system for giving us three drug talks a year since Grade 1. If they wouldn't have told me all that stuff, who would've told me? Certainly not the tobacco companies. (although the drug talks are really annoying now, nothing new is ever said >_<)
     People say "they're free to do with their body as they wish". The problem with that is that the argument goes both ways. If they can choose to waste so much money and kill themselves, fine, but us non-smokers should be able to choose not to kill ourselves, and as long as people are smoking, they are killing everyone and everything. All that stuff coming out of cigarettes (and cigars) is spreading out into the air. Eventually those chemicals are going to reach other countries. Imagine that cigarette your smoking, killing a tree in Africa? Exactly, there is no such thing as "they're only harming themselves", the only fair point here is that they are only wasting their own money, thankfully.
     Why should people have the right to kill us all? Isn't that the point of laws against pollution in the first place, to make our planet livable? We make laws about treating water to keep it safe for using, yet we legalize other things that completely destroy our Earth and harm everyone, like gasoline and cigarettes! If we're going to attempt to save the planet with our insightful laws, why go halfway?
     I'm sure if I said this in real life, I'd get the usual "it's their choice" screamed at me, but really, let's think... the rights of a few million people, versus the rights of the ENTIRE WORLD AND ALL IT'S PLANTS AND ANIMALS. Who's more important, do you think?

Quote from: Piers on April 10, 2006, 08:30:59 pm
Quote from: Kleaver on April 10, 2006, 08:26:39 pm
Then why doesnt it happen? No smokers in crowd here I guess....
It doesn't happen because more then half the world smokes so to get them all to stop smoking outside is impossible practicly. Plus the goverment makes money from it and everyone knows how cheep they are. (Like an old saying, "We could kill off millions of people and not care as long as we make the buck")
"Half the world"? Prove it. I'd like to see how all the poor countries (which make up a significant amount of the world) can afford cigarettes.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6   Go Up
« previous next »

 


Contact Us | Legal | Advertise Here
2013 © ZFGC, All Rights Reserved


Page created in 0.163 seconds with 73 queries.

anything