I really wish that one outdoor cafe would ban smoking. The village loves to smoke. Here I sit at one of the newest and most “progressive” places in town, and the smokers are everywhere (4 out of 7 tables). Really disgusting. Since they are responsible for a good chunck of our taxes, why can’t we just start killing them all?
Since a few cigarettes a day are deadly, why can’t we just put a small explosive device in every other cigarettes? Life would be so much better. Plus, the fireworks going off around us would make this an entertaining place.
C-Ville, BAN SMOKING TODAY. BAN IT. NOW. It has been discussed several times, but our lovely city council keeps trashing it since they think it would not be good for the village. All the places that have banned smoking are now healthier, and business is better than before. BAN SMOKING IN THE VILLAGE.
Loading ...
AMEN!!!
Yeah. And we should ban people who wear too much perfume. And people who don’t bathe. Cause they all stink.
And let’s ban people from talking too loudly. Oh, and we should probably ban gay people, cause they’re icky. Unless they’re hot lesbians.
And ban driving cars, because they kill many, many people. And let’s ban people from putting a house on the beach or in an earthquake zone, cause that’ll just cost us money in insurance.
We should probably ban people from wearing ipods when they’re walking near traffic. Perhaps we should ban people from checking out dangerous books from the library.
We should ban students who don’t participate in conducting research in one capacity or another. We should definitely ban the drinking of alcoholic beverages.
Ban snowboarding, whitewater kayaking, and, um, horse racing. Ban holding hands in public. Ban not banning things. We should do all that.
Smokers are the new pariahs, the people it is socially acceptable to hate.
Socially acceptable hatred is more dangerous than second hand smoke.
Smoking kills more than 400,000 people every year. It costs the US more than $150 billion each year. One in five people die due to smoking related causes every year. One in five.
Is it acceptable to kill one out of every five in a society? I guess smokers feel it is.
Wow, talk of killing smokers and out of the smoke cloud comes all these people upset with your strong statement. I guess I too fall in the dangerous class of socially acceptable haters. I’d like to think that people stupid enough to smoke in the first place are just part of the natural selection process that weeds out the weak (read as simply stupid). The only problem with that is that we (the non-smokers) eventually end up paying indirectly for the medical costs for the fool hacking up a lung, walking down the hospital hall with IV’s in place, ass showing in the back of gown, to reach the doorway to grab a “smoke”.
The mind reels with the stupidity of the human race (well, OK, only 1/5th of us) at times.
It is interesting that smokers are now considered to be stupid people in America (studies also show a correlation between [less] education and smoking). Look at how American television and movies portray smokers. They are the dark, seedy side of society.
I personally do not want to kill smokers, they are doing that to themselves. I am not pleased that stupid people smoke, and run up medical/insurance costs more than they need to be. Nor am I happy to see insurance companies pay out after some recurring natural disasters because some people MUST live in that pretty place and rebuild their house every 5 years. [Let people in earthquake zones pay VERY high premiums, or have VERY high deductibles. Maybe they already do.] But, it is not a rational extension of RP’s comments to include people who screw up their own lives of their own volition in private. Go home and smoke. Don’t feel you have ANY right to do it next to me. It is moronic to suggest that people have a right to smoke next to me in public any more than they have a right to come up to me and fart in my face. When you intrude upon my personal space, you’ve gone too far. There are many other examples where laws regulate intrusions on my personal space (i.e. you can’t play your music too loud or show me your penis at the busstop.)
My problem is asthma. When I walk next to a cigarette, my lungs sieze up to some extent and it ruins my day, or worse. If peanuts must be banned on airline flights, then I wholely support banning cigarettes in stores and restaurants. Go find an opium den to snort your tobacco and watch your NASCAR.
AMEN!!! My amen before was to the banning of cigarettes - in public places - ??? NASCAR - I dunno - because I don’t a thing about that except it is racing - and Jeff Gordon won something and was on the Morning Show.
oops I mean I don’t know a thing about NASCAR - Apparently I can’t type either.
DUH!!!
Many non smokers only seem to see smokers as a financial berden on society but fail to see that tax generated from cigarettes pumps billions into the economy. I think many hospitals would never have been built without smoking. Lets not forget too that smokers die young which means no old age pension is required, no long term treatment for various old age diseases etc. Old people cost the economy billions. A smoker never normally lives this long and serious illneses seem to kill them off relatively quickly in most cases. In the eyes of a goverment a smoker is the perfect member of society, contributing far more in tax than anyone else and dying before they become a drag on society.
I feel this is why most governments are incredibly reluctant to go down this route of an all out ban because they know the truth about the mind bending figures involved. To cover the hole left in the ecomony if everyone quit would bring down any party in power. Can you imagine the rioting if income tax went up by 10% to cover it.
They have to be seen to be perswading smokers to quit but they would have a breakdown if this really occured. They really could care less about smokers or non-smokers dying from the effects of cigarettes.
I see what you are saying. The government hates to give up a profit center. It doesn’t seem at all morally justified to exploit the poor and weak, who are least able to defend themselves. The government, or corporations appear only as moral as they legally have to. Sane people need to speak out against this hypocrisy that leads to addiction, subjugation and often death.
In the future, man will be able to craft a genetically modified disease that kills only certain races. Isn’t that horrific? How different is smoking? It may not be as fast, but it works sure enough to target a socioeconomic group. Since the members of that group are not in power, no one needs to care what happens to them (outside of appearing politically correct). As long as they hold on long enough to buy thousands of cartons of cigs, and put money in fat cat’s pockets.
At this time, gasoline (oil) is a necessity, but that will not always be so. For each dollar, the impact is disproportionately greater for the poor (older, less fuel efficient cars; if they miss work, they get fired; rising gas prices destroy any disposable income they have; etc.)
There should be certain items which are either so important, or so detrimental to society that they are not used as a revenue source or tax base. But then, addicts can’t be choosers!
(correcting spelling)
My next door stupid guy smoking in every morning, the smoke all come into my house where my 1.5 yrs kid is playing around, no option to hide as this type of house it too small. Our country does not has law to fight this invisible crime. Anybody has good idea so that I could kill him with other type of smoke, before he kill my family