|
Post by Umbrafire on May 28, 2005 16:29:14 GMT -5
Why would you want to take that away from them? they can do all of that at home.
|
|
|
Post by Lobstrosity on May 28, 2005 16:52:19 GMT -5
why can't they hang out at the bar with their buddies and smoke a cigarette or two? Are you trying to tell me that they shouldn't be allowed to do what they want just because they want to do something that's unhealthy? Why do you even care?
|
|
|
Post by Vash on May 28, 2005 17:18:18 GMT -5
why can't they hang out at the bar with their buddies and smoke a cigarette or two? Are you trying to tell me that they shouldn't be allowed to do what they want just because they want to do something that's unhealthy? Why do you even care? Would you allow some psychopath to stab some inocent person just because he wants to? I can garantee that thats unhealthy (for the person getting stabbed at least...). And I doubt you'd let the psychopath do that..
|
|
|
Post by Lobstrosity on May 28, 2005 17:25:41 GMT -5
I would if the person being stabbed wanted to be stabbed, and if the psychopath was making a profit by stabbing the person who wanted to be stabbed.
|
|
|
Post by Vash on May 28, 2005 17:34:29 GMT -5
Uhh, lets put it this way, the psychopath stabs people because he wants to, but hurts the person being stabbed. (just as a smoker smokes if he wants to, but hurts other people with second hand smoke). Does that sound right?
|
|
|
Post by Lobstrosity on May 28, 2005 17:45:23 GMT -5
oh, so the psychopath is the smoker and the stabbed person is the innocent bystander who gets the second-hand smoke. I'll have to say that that is a false analogy then. For one thing I don't believe second-hand smoke is as bad as they say. And another thing, a smoker doesn't always hurt other people by smoking (in your analogy you made it seem like the psychopath's goal was to stab the other person, which isn't the goal of a smoker). If we refuse to let people smoke in restaurants (by refusing to make the smoking sections more ventilated), why can't they at least smoke in bars where most of the people smoke anyway?
|
|
|
Post by Umbrafire on May 30, 2005 19:01:44 GMT -5
Are you trying to tell me that they shouldn't be allowed to do what they want just because they want to do something that's unhealthy? no, im trying to tell you that by smoking, they affect the health of those around them
|
|
|
Post by Lobstrosity on May 30, 2005 19:30:40 GMT -5
In a very small way, if at all. Not to mention if they smoke in bars, there's probably other people who smoke there as well. Also if people are to scared of the big, bad second hand smoke, they can always leave, they don't have to sit around and inhale it. Furthermore, if they are scared, they should invest in properly vetilated areas for people to smoke in.
|
|
|
Post by Azan on May 30, 2005 19:36:58 GMT -5
My view is that the tobacco companies should be able to advertise, but not on tv or mass media, showing a product that can kill people in front of children is just wrong, which is why they cant nowdays, and tobacco companies dont need advertisment they are already making money in the billions, tobacco companies should be allowed to advertise on private media, just not public (like non cable television) but seeing as how the cable companies are privatly owned they themselves choose not to have tobacco adverts, and who could blame them, if they did parents wouldnt let their children watch tv and the cable companies would be screwed.
|
|
|
Post by Lobstrosity on May 30, 2005 19:48:44 GMT -5
Okay if the privately owned cable companies don't want tobacco ads, that's fine. But tobacco companies should ba able to have ads in anything that isn't privately owned that other companies can. Tobacco companies should have all the rights of any other company, because we live in a free market economy where if someone has an idea to make money, they should be allowed to go for it.
|
|
|
Post by Azan on May 30, 2005 19:50:39 GMT -5
Well yeah, im all for cable companies being able to advertise it, they just choose not to.
|
|
|
Post by Niccolo on Jun 3, 2005 19:02:33 GMT -5
WHAT IS YOUR PROBLEM lobstrosity?!
It is proven that secondhand smoke DOES kill! The sugeon general says so! And it kills tens of thousands a year! It's a widely accepted fact!
Smoking is nothing more than releasing poison into the air! I CANNOT believe you support something so awful!
|
|
|
Post by Lobstrosity on Jun 3, 2005 20:51:00 GMT -5
Only 38,000 people a year, if you believe the surgeon general. I do not support smoking, just the free market system it is based on. Why should the tobacco companies be pushed around by you just because the product they sell is poisonous and deadly? People have a choice to smoke, but you don't seem to like letting other people have choices.
After all, Demon. Smoking makes you look cool. Go ahead... try it. You're not afraid, are you?
|
|
|
Post by Azan on Jun 3, 2005 21:00:06 GMT -5
Well I think the point Demon is making, is that it hurts other people through second hand smoke, which is an issue but thats why its outlawed in most public places, sure people have a right by choice, but when you show adds on Sesimi Street while little children are watching it can increase their chances of smoking, thats why I say no public broadcasting, private advertisment is ok. (but thats just my opinion)
|
|
|
Post by Niccolo on Jun 3, 2005 22:27:49 GMT -5
"Only" 38,000?! That's nearly four times the size of Mendota Heights! That's 2/3 of the number of US troops dead in Vietnam. That's 27 times the number of US troops dead in Iraq. And you say that's insignificant to you?
....sickening...that's all I can say. Just outright sickening. You heartless bastard.
|
|