More Anti-tobacco propaganda

[TripEMT]

This made me laugh. These people are trying to get cigarette companies to lower the nicotine levels in an attempt to make people quit smoking... i think in the long run, a few people might quit, but i think the reality is that most of the hardened inveterate smokers (who cant quit) will end up inhaling double the smoke in an attempt to get their normal amount of nicotine... now how is that "Helping the people?!?!



http://images.google.com/imgres?imgu...%3Den%26sa%3DG[/u]

[Condor]

I dont know why people can't chill the **** out and let us have our vice. Its not crack cocaine, its tobacco. Keep your morals off my snus, you ****ing do-gooders. Im tired of politicians and special interest groups trying to legislate and scare me into "what they think i should do" and "they know whats best for me". In the words of Mojo Nixon, "**** YOU, Mr. Rules and Regulations."
Im not robbing banks, and Im not injecting meth into my eyeball. We all can agree (MOST of us...) that those are wrong, shitty degenerate things to do, and society cannot function properly with everyone doing that shit. Tobacco use is a non-issue, as I see it, plain and simple. Its not like they (the royal "they") have every other aspect of society nailed down so well that tobacco use HAS to be a primary concern. Smoking causes cancer? No shit, I didnt know that.
As we move towards socialized medicine, tobacco users will be increasingly targeted and it pisses me off. Just unfairly tax the everloving dog shit out of us- like you always do- enjoy the revenue you gain from it, and kindly **** OFF.

-end rant-

[Breezy]

**** the goverment, plain and simple. Just **** it.

[Soft Morning, City!]

What a ridiculous idea. Lowering the amount of nicotine in cigarettes will definitely cause people to smoke more. I can see it as a marketing ploy, but not as a public health initiative.

Not to sound like a Pynchon character, but could it be that this is a marketing ploy masquerading as a public health initiative? I wouldn't put it past big tobacco, and certainly not big Fed. They're gonna need that tax money if they want to socialize health care in a nation of over 300 million people.

[chainsnuser]

It already has hapened in Europe with a maximum of 1.0 mg of nicotine per cigarette. It indeed only lead to much more chainsmokers than to more non-smokers.

I guess theres nothing left to say. I'd appreciate if lowering the nicotine-content of cigarettes would lead to more "chainsnusers" or even more abstainers, but it it doesn't, it's plain and simple counterproductice from experience.

Yes, maybe it makes sense from a tax-rrevenue-standpoint but there's no way that it makes sense from a health-standpoint. It's that simple and everybody who has the chance to argue aginst such a law should do so.

Cheers!

[TripEMT]

I completely agree with what Condor said... Until our "government" (i use that term loosely) has everything else figured out, leave tobacco alone...

i live in Polk County FL... and up until August of 2008, Polk County was one of the highest meth producing areas in the southeast...

...And the heroin dealers in highschool...
...Bums...

...all this shit that could be taken care of, or at least worked on, and they go for tobacco... douche bags....all of 'em

[NonEntity]

i live in Polk County FL... and up until August of 2008, Polk County was one of the highest meth producing areas in the southeast...

Dude, Highlands County here, just south of your west Frostproof crime capital. Small internet ain't it.

NonEntity

[TripEMT]

Yeah! Very Small internet!