|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Omaku Toba
Minmatar
Tribal Liberation Force
   |
Posted - 2009.04.05 14:08:00 -
[1]
I don't like the smell of people smoking
I don't like the smell of a person who smokes
I don't like that my taxes are wasted on treating the medical problems that people suffer because they smoke
I don't like it when I see people smoking around their children
I don't like seeing people smoke around other peoples children
Its disguisting
|
Omaku Toba
Minmatar
Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2009.04.05 15:06:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: Abrazzar
Originally by: Omaku Toba
I don't like the smell of people smoking
I don't like the smell of a person who smokes
I don't like that my taxes are wasted on treating the medical problems that people suffer because they smoke
I don't like it when I see people smoking around their children
I don't like seeing people smoke around other peoples children
Its disguisting
I don't like your smell.
I don't like that you are breathing.
I don't like how taxes are used to help you when you get ill.
I don't like when children have to see your face.
I don't like to see you around children.
It's disgusting.
That the best you can do? The issue at hand is that if you choose to smoke you not only do damage to youself but those around you. In public the best solution to this is to ban it so those that don't want to have put up with the above don't have too. The ban on smoking in certain public places didn't go too far. It should have been a complete ban in all public places and if you smoke in your house around children you should get charged with child abuse.
|
Omaku Toba
Minmatar
Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2009.04.05 16:32:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Omaku Toba on 05/04/2009 16:32:57
Originally by: Abrazzar
Originally by: Omaku Toba
That the best you can do? The issue at hand is that if you choose to smoke you not only do damage to youself but those around you. In public the best solution to this is to ban it so those that don't want to have put up with the above don't have too. The ban on smoking in certain public places didn't go too far. It should have been a complete ban in all public places and if you smoke in your house around children you should get charged with child abuse.
Everybody procreating should be charged with murder by proxy, considering they are ensuring the death of a person. Also they are responsible for everything this person does or has happening to it.
Procreation is the source of all the death and misery of the world and should be outlawed!
You're just being silly now. Dying is a simple fact of life but the manner in which you die can be partly determined by yourself and those around you. Dying of smoking related illnesses is rarely pleasant and by what right do you have to inflict that on those around you? Also not all those illnesses are fatal but serve to reduce your quality of life.
If you want to go around smoking and have your cloths and breath reek of smoke then go somewhere far away and don't force your nasty habit on everyone else. Its no different to those dirty bastards who don't wash or use deodrant yet still insist on using public transport much to the disguist of everyone around them.
Show a bit of consideration to those around you for once.
|
Omaku Toba
Minmatar
Tribal Core
|
Posted - 2009.04.05 20:35:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Omaku Toba on 05/04/2009 20:44:31
Edited by: Omaku Toba on 05/04/2009 20:41:27
As far as the economics argument you pulled out if you read the thread you would have seen that that argument is bullcrap, smokers pay enough tax on their cigarettes to not only cover their own added cost to health service but actually add money into the budget over and above , add to that the fact that 50% of smokers won't be claiming years of pensions and your argument just falls to pieces.
as to the rest of it, what kinda car do you drive how much electricity do you use how much **** do you throw away are you obese ?should you be allowed to procreate and rear children when you allow yourself to fling supposed facts out without researching them breeding ignorance and stupidity is a form of abuse imo especially in modern Britain.
smoking is a personal choice of mine as I'm sure your faults are yours ( or are you goign to claim you are a faultless in which case i wont bother replying to any further posts from you not sure why i did with this one tbh
When did I mention the economics of the issue? I will add though that its somewhat naive to assume that just because you are paying tax on something that all that money is being directed into the NHS. Currently the NHS is overstretched and understaff. A problem that is being compounded by government targets set in place to ensure that the ever increasing number of patients that need treatment due to smoking, obesity and substance abuse are getting that treatment within a set time limit. Clearly the solution to this is to change peoples lifestyle so that they aren't smoking, eat less, take regular exercise and reduce their substance usage. Paying taxes on whatever you smoke does not negate the problem or magically shrink waiting lists in which those with illnesses which they had no part in causing have to share with those that made themselves ill.
I see you've chosen to ignore the anti-social aspect of smoking which I have raised which is probably because you know you can't argue against that and instead chose to attack me directly. I don't want this reply to go on forever so suffice to say I try and live as environmentally friendly life I can within the contraints of modern life. I don't have a choice when it comes to living within the contraints of the UK society but nobody makes you smoke in order to pay the bills and get by.
Your insults aside I'm not planning on having more than one or two chidren for obvious reasons. You on the other hand will no doubt smoke through your partners pregnancy (No doubt she will too assuming you are a guy) and your kids can look forward to a lifetime of illnesses brought on by a mother who smoked during pregnancy and parents who smoked throughout their childhood. With you as a role model they will no doubt take up smoking themselves. Hell maybe you'll give them ciggies when they are kids and you can show them off to your friends.
I'm not perfect and have never claimed to be but with what we know now continuing to smoke is an incredibly stupid thing to do.
|
Omaku Toba
Minmatar
Tribal Core
|
Posted - 2009.04.05 22:01:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Omaku Toba on 05/04/2009 22:01:24
We're not just talking about a few people here. The UK is catching up with the US when it comes to poor lifestyle and they aren't messing around when they tell us that its a timebomb waiting to go off. Smoking is part of that poor lifestyle which needs to be curtailed. Quite simply the government can't force people to exercise for example but they can and do try to encourage people to live a more healthy lifestyle. On the other hand they can force people to stop smoking by banning it and the loss of that is hardly a devestating thing in terms of quality of life. Of course some people will get hold of whatever they smoke through more nefarious means like you can with all controlled drugs but for the most part people won't miss it.
Quote:
This is just government fed propaganda that your spouting now. Exactly how is smoking anti social when litterally billions of people on the planet smoke some sort of plant in one form or another.
Funnily enough they rekcon that smoking will soon be the worlds third major killer pretty soon according to the WHO. Oh the old government propogander line. Not heard that line said since the pot heads I knew at university were busy trying to justify their habits and undermine the medical claims that said it was bad for them. Just because billions of people do something does not make it right. There are billions of religious people but that doesn't make them right either.
How is smoking anti-social? Well first of all you have to consider the image you portray when you are seen smoking which I'm afraid to say isn't a good one. It makes you look like s****basically. Its also one of those things that I find makes an attractive girl instantly unnatractive once they start doing it. Typically those who take up smoking do it because they believe that it will elevate their social standing with their equally moronic peers who find such things impressive.
Next there are the obvious signs of a smoker. They usually have yellowed front teeth from the constant smoke that passes over them though some do some wierd things to try and avoid it like smoking out of the side of their mouths. They also have yellowed fingers where the chemicals have leached into their skin. You should really look up the chemicals in those things. I'm fairly sure one of them is the same chemical I use in the lab to preserve organic samples and its fairly toxic, carcinigenic I think. Neither of these are particually attractive to look at.
Then there is the smell. When someone smokes near to you its unpleasent and the smoker is usually oblivious to where their smoke is blowing. If they do notice that its blowing in your face some will apologise (A sure sign of guilt) was their hands through the smoke inneffectively and then carry on. If they have to go outside and smoke then what happens is it just blows back into the building via doors and windows and smells even worse oddly enough. Now its not just the smell from whatever they are smoking cause it sticks to their cloths, skin and gets into their lungs and mouth. If a smoker is anywhere nearby you can't help but smell the horrendous stench of their smoking and if you are trying to talk to one its even worse.
That is why it is anti-social to smoke.
...
Seems most people are wide-eyed stupid |
Omaku Toba
Minmatar
Tribal Core
|
Posted - 2009.04.05 22:07:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Omaku Toba on 05/04/2009 22:07:25
Edited by: Omaku Toba on 05/04/2009 22:06:51
Quote:
1. If you're against smoking cause second hand smoking is bad for your health... stop driving your car... stop using electricity... stop using anything made from synthetic materials... stop...
A stupid arguement if I've ever heard one. Simply because there are other things that aren't good for you isn't justification to carry on doing the one that is being discussed. People should cycle or walk to work if they can, you shouldn't waste electricity, and products shouldn't be made of synthetics that are bad for your health. Plenty of other things that we shouldn't do or allow to be done.
Quote:
2. over here ( netherlands ) tax on smoking brings in way more cash then is needed to pay for the additional health costs caused by smoking related illnesses.
Again taxes on smoking stuff don't magically reduce the waiting lists in hospitals to treat these illnesses.
Quote:
3. Alcohol causes far greater problems, but for some strange reason is still accepted. Even though the number of alcohol related health problems, and accidents far far exceeds any damage caused by smoking.
Alcohol does cause major problems too. Didn't claim otherwise
...
Seems most people are wide-eyed stupid |
Omaku Toba
Minmatar
Tribal Core
|
Posted - 2009.04.05 23:46:00 -
[7]
There is nothing wrong with a national healthcare system. It means that people don't end up dying from easily treated illnesses because they can't afford health insurance like they do in developed countries that don't have an equivilent system. What is bringing this system to its knee's is the ever increasing number of people with poor lifestyles which are making them ill of which smoking is a part of this. Why do you think one of the first questions a general practice doctor asks you is if you smoke? Its not out of idle curiosity. Remove a national health system and all you do is create a two-tier soceity of smokers who can afford meducal help and smokers who can't.
Governments already impose strict rules on how individuals live their life so that they don't endanger themselves and those around them. Easy example is the requirement to hold a driving license to ensure that at least on the day you pass your test you are a competent driver. They then impose rules on the road to keep you in check with penalties should you drive dangerously. Now by your there should be no regulation of driving because individuals should be free to make a choice for themselves how they drive. Sure lots of people will die in crashes or be horribly injnured and traumatised for life but thats ok because it happened as a result of theirs or someone elses free will.
Well in what I've seen of the use of the word anti-social its any behaviour that makes life unpleasant for those around you in the public sphere. You've chosen to ignore this by trying to argue from the point of terminology. Its not a clever use of wording to get people on my side. I can bet you that if you got on a train and starting smoking the majority of the people on that train would not be impressed. Its no different to anti-social behaviour in the form of drunk people being a nuisance or gangs of youths intimidating passers by.
I recomend government control simply because its the most effective way of imposing widescale change. You sound somewhat like one of those people who think that the government is out to get them at every turn. There are times that I think the governemnt needs to step in and times that it needs to leave things well alone. This current culture of suing after an accident is something that shouldn't have been allowed to get out of control. Its gotten to the point where schools are to afriad to take their kids out on activity holidays because they don't want to end up in court because little jimmy tripped over and broke his arm. I don't want a bubble wrapped world but it makes sense to mitigate self harm when allowing it has no obvious benefit. Kids need to go out and get involved in activities and if they fall and hurt themselves they usually end up the better for it. Kids don't need to start smoking and if they do they won't end up for the better for it.
Smoking doesn't have as a profound effect on people as most controlled drugs. That people I knew at uni often only smoked as a means of taking weed for example is a prime example of this. For them it was a means to and end and they didn't actual take any real joy in the tabacco they smoked. Of course there will be some die hard smokers but for the most part it will be a trend that dies out with the exception of perhaps cigars and pipes.
@ Asuka Smith - You paint the image of a smoker as a freedom fighter for civil liberties when really they are just people with a dirty habit that refuse to give up. You then seek to demonise those that would do their best to protect people from their own stupidity. In some ways this reflects arguements between the religious who think they have the right to believe and teach any old rubbish they like and the educated atheist who recognises the dangers of such teachings.
Also being gay won't kill you, smoking will.
...
Seems most people are wide-eyed stupid |
Omaku Toba
Minmatar
Tribal Core
|
Posted - 2009.04.05 23:58:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Xen Gin
Originally by: Omaku Toba
Also being gay won't kill you...
It might but only indirectly, you know some of those bigots do like to get their 'man' on.
Yeah I was going to mention that but getting to my word limit.
...
Seems most people are wide-eyed stupid |
Omaku Toba
Minmatar
Tribal Core
|
Posted - 2009.04.06 01:09:00 -
[9]
You are afraid of people who are trying to help you and find inspiration amongst fools who pay to breath in smoke laden with toxins? I can only assume that you refuse to ever see a doctor no matter what ails you because they are secretely seeking to take over your brain with their evil drugs concocted in government labs deep underground etc...
Actually the perfect society it my mind was one of an African tribe in which they lived simple relatively contented lives surving the natural dangers posed by their environment. They are quite able to get on with their lives without the need for someone to come in and help them because their lifestyle is inherintly quite healthy. I actually find myself yearning for such a simple and straighforward way of life at times.
I am not advocating 1984 at all because I don't insist that we live in a bubble-wrapped existance where we aren't allowed to take risk. I simply object to smokers considering themselves as being some kind of freedom fighter like you protray them as. This issue has been allowed to escalate into a much wider and pointless discussion about civil liberties though its interesting that nobody seems interested in the notion that certain individuals such as those who make and distribute would not want to see their product taken off the shelves.
Quote:
And if the cost of a free society if a few innocent people coughing at the bus stop then so be it, it is a small price to pay and I will not be bitter if I wind up with lung cancer from second hand smoke, or if I die in a drunk driving accident, as such idiocy is the every-mans way of demonstrating that he is free to do as he likes
Sounds to me that you consider others well being as secondary to your personal freedom. If you found out that you had aggressive and untreatble lung cancer and were doomed too a slow and painful death because those around you smoked I doubt that you would not be angry. When you speak of dying while drunk driving you show complete disregard for the consequences of your actions which sadly in such incidents typically result in others dying because of your negligence behind the wheel. Humans are constantly doing stupid things that have the potential to injure or kill themselves or those around you and the only way to mitigate this to to put in barriers which force people to consider their actions. I also find that its easy to make these statements when you aren't the fireman trying to pull a mangled body out of a ruined car, a policeman knocking on a families front door to tell them their daughter was killed by a drunk driver, or the nurse phoning to tell someone that they have terminal cancer.
You already live in a time where people make choices that are defined by government which will save their life or the lives of others. For the most part people don't think before they are or just assume that nothing bad will ever happen to them. Thats why Health & Safety is so prominant now in the workplace because they have to make thing idiot proof to protect people from themselves.
In the end you can choose to abide by a laws and advice intended to protect you or simply ignore it. Its apparant that in the UK at least many people ignore the law regarding substance abuse or ignore advice to use condons during sex but they think they know better. Eventually things go wrong as has been shown with the rise in teenage pregnancies and the occurance of STI's in the UK.
There is little point on continuing this arguement but I'd like to finish on telling you that a friend of mine at my local scuba diving club recently had a heart attack while diving on holiday which was caused by smoking. Her heart is now permanently damaged and she will never be able to dive again and its likely she'll never be able to partake in active sports either. I'm fairly sure that she now regrets her smoking habit but no doubt you simply she her as another sacrificial lamb on the alter of freedom.
...
Seems most people are wide-eyed stupid |
Omaku Toba
Minmatar
Tribal Core
|
Posted - 2009.04.06 02:07:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Omaku Toba on 06/04/2009 02:14:12
Quote:
You are aware that the UK compared to the USA you have practically no freedom and live in a police state, yes? I recently read that the government is now screening school children for potential "vulnerability to radicalization". I have no idea what they will do to the children whom they deem are "likely" to be radicalized, but I imagine it will not be pleasant or in the interest of freedom. Do you further realize that giving the government the ability to control your actions in any way is what has given them the ability to conduct such outrageous actions?
I find this statement somewhat ironic and laced with ignorance. At the moment the UK government is trying bring in laws that will help them deal with potential terrorist suspects to which I might add the UK has considerably more experience in dealing with than the US. For a time the US even funded the IRA through charitable donations so please don't take the high moral ground here. The screening is because we have a problem with muslims in the UK which people tend to skirt around mentioning because muslims have a habit of thorowing bricks through the windows of those who critise them. Thanks to the US led invasions of Iraq and Afganistan which my country was dragged into by that idiot Tony Blair there has been ample material supplied for islamic terrorist groups to use to turn young muslims into terrorists within the UK. They are simply ensuring that this process is not allowed to happen so that we don't have a repeat of the attack on the London underground. At least we don't ship people off to prisons in cuba where they are held without trial.
Quote:
The reason that your government behaves in such a manor is because you are willing to trade freedom for security, or the illusion of security. As you yourself have stated no one pays any heed anyways, and the only people who are harmed by the laws and regulations are innocents who now have to follow another oppressive rule and regulation.
Its a double edged sword but given that the UK has been subject to bombing campaigns by the IRA for most of us accepting an invasion of our privary is a small price to pay for one less bomb going off in a market place. There is a limit and governemnt attempts to increase the duration which people can be held without trial have failed time and time again. We are not stupid and for the most part we do not trust our government. Its constantly being dragged over the coals for endless misdomeanors.
Quote:
I am in favour of absolutely freedom no matter the price to myself personally or to anyone else. I would rather have the option to do anything and die in an accident because someone else had that same freedom of choice rather than live like you do with a camera recording your every movement and the government passing a law to eat your carrots before your peas because it helps your digestion or some such "public health" nonsense.
Those camera's have been rather useful in tracking silly young girls that have been grommed by pedophiles into running away with them. In other instances they have been used to provide evidence in violent crimes. Of course it does mean that you can be tracked but the government if they really want to find you but since I'm not involved in any crime or intending to run away with a fourteen year old girl I'm fairly unconcerned. You're very keen on dying for your freedoms. That either means that you're a nutcase or a lier. I'm inclined to think the latter.
Quote:
EDIT: I would rather that people not smoke, but I want them to not smoke because they are smart enough to recognize the health risks and understand that it is a foolish choice, rather than because the government is running their lives down to the most miniscule detail.
I've never said that th government should run their lives down the miniscule detail. e
...
Seems most people are wide-eyed stupid |
|
|
Omaku Toba
Minmatar
Tribal Core
|
Posted - 2009.04.06 11:07:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Omaku Toba on 06/04/2009 11:17:47
Edited by: Omaku Toba on 06/04/2009 11:15:44
Quote:
And in public space there should be no rule either way and common sense and common courtesy should prevail.
It won't and it shows how little you understand of human nature. Its wishful thinking at its worst to believe that if you removed all public laws that people would magically behave themselves off their own back. Especially in places like the UK and US where we're so disconected from one another that you spend your entire life around strangers.
Societies both human and otherwise need strictly enforced codes of conduct in order to maintain any semblence of order and peace. Individuals who deft those codes are instantly punished to ensure that they don't misbehave again. One of the reaons they are having a problem in Africa with elephants attacking villages is because they've destroyed their social structure through poaching and its resulted in what is best described as juvinille delinquents who are running amok without restraint. Exactly the same thing that is happened in the UK with children being allowed to roam free without any adult supervision (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/south_yorkshire/7984963.stm).
You have far too much faith in human nature.
--------------
On the issue of telling people how to live their lives its pretty simple. Its all very well talking about personal freedoms but in a country the government has to consider the wellbeing of all its citizens. I can garuntee that when this upcoming health epidemic comes up and the hospitals are incapable of dealing with the sheer volume of people needing treatment for lifestyle related problems that people will accuse that governemnt of not doing enough.
I find it incredulous that you can stand there and bleat on about your rights when countries like the UK and US are heading towards disaster which won't be avoided if we just leave people to their own devices. Its like those people who let their children decide what and when they want to eat or when they should go to bed. The child isn't responible enough to make those decisions for itself and it seems that in a lot of cases things don't improve when they reach adulthood.
You already spend your life being told what to do by someone else for the most part and most of those people dont have your interests at heart. Yet you rebel against those who are genuinly trying to improve your standard of life. Its like we're a society if spoilt children throwing a hissy fit because our parents won't give us another chocolate cake to stuff our faces.
...
Seems most people are wide-eyed stupid |
|
|
| |
|