smoking and public image

Recommended Videos

Kit Fox

New member
Mar 29, 2009
81
0
0
It seems to me that lately (in the US atleast), that smoking has recieved a terrible public image. I've seen more and more advertizements claiming tobacco companies are making their products more addictive, but do we blame Coke or Pepsi for putting caffine in our drinks? Making a substance people want to buy is just part of business. And by now everyone knows smoking can cause cancer, and all these anti smoking groups attempt to portray the tobacco companies as plotting to kill people, which is clearly not in their best interest, as dead people can't buy cigarettes. Anyone else thinks tobacco companies are getting a bum rap or are they getting what they deserve?
 

Knight Templar

Moved on
Dec 29, 2007
3,848
0
0
They sell things that kill people, thats all they do, kill you. They target adds and products at kids, because when your product kills those who use it you need new users.

They derserve the bad image they have, would it be ok to sell a soda that is made from arsenic and sold in a lead can?
 

historyfend13

New member
Aug 5, 2009
79
0
0
Kinda of a bum question when asked. Having know several smokers, some like to smoke and some can't kick the habit. Knowing smoking contains carcinogens and everything, also with it being public knowledge, the groups still go a little over the edge.

However, with all the legislation that has been enacted to stop smoking and what not, are those ad's still needed? Do we need to see how many people are gonna die and make the smokers feel even more like shit for picking up a habit that used to be cool when they were younger?

Another good question is all the tobacco farmers. I wonder how they feel making this stuff.
 

Diablini

New member
May 24, 2009
1,027
0
0
I don't like smoking but I do agree that smokers' rights are being drained fast.

Kit Fox said:
It seems to me that lately (in the US atleast), that smoking has recieved a terrible public image. I've seen more and more advertizements claiming tobacco companies are making their products more addictive, but do we blame Coke or Pepsi for putting caffine in our drinks? Making a substance people want to buy is just part of business. And by now everyone knows smoking can cause cancer, and all these anti smoking groups attempt to portray the tobacco companies as plotting to kill people, which is clearly not in their best interest, as dead people can't buy cigarettes. Anyone else thinks tobacco companies are getting a bum rap or are they getting what they deserve?
Have you watched the South Park episode Butt Out? If not, watch it!
 

xdirtyboots

New member
Aug 1, 2009
7
0
0
smoking is bad; that's undeniable. if you choose to smoke, it means you don't care about your health. cigarettes are shitty for the same way wal-mart is shitty: people still buy their products regardless of any negative results they have.

it's our right..right? i don't think anti-smoking lobbyists should get smoking banned from places that want to allow smoking. if you don't like smokers, then stay away. if you give two shits about your health, don't smoke. if you enjoy it, enjoy the image and all the shit that comes with it, then do it; you can.
 

darch_chylde

New member
Jul 23, 2009
11
0
0
Living is a slow suicide. Look at it rationally; by living you passively choose to continue in an activity that will inevitably end in death.

For anyone who's curious, or oblivious:

The first warning label appeared in January of 1966, about two years after the first Surgeon General's Report on Smoking and Health. The original warning label said "CAUTION: Cigarette Smoking May Be Hazardous to Your Health" and was replaced in 1970 by one saying "WARNING: The Surgeon General Has Determined That Cigarette Smoking Is Dangerous to Your Health."

This means that very few people are alive in the US have ever picked up a cigarette pack that did not tell us the dangers of smoking. 42 years, i think we know what we are doing. The same goes for getting into cars, crossing streets and living outside of bubbles.

In the past 17 years, it has become popular to pick on smokers legally.

Send us outside of bars, and in some cases our own homes or even cities.

Taxes in the past 10 years alone have more than doubled the prices of cigarettes. (When compared to other taxes, vice taxes are extravagant and a means of forcing a small segment of the population to pay for the ills of the majority; a financial punishment for activities we legally pursue).

We went from being encouraged to smoke (it has even been endorsed by medical doctors as being healthy) to becoming social pariahs for doing so. Both the American government and the media helped to spread the quantities of those addicted to smoking, now those smokers have been betrayed.

If you believe the bullshit anti-smoking media campaigns, choosing to smoke is actually the responsible decision. Smoking has be so vilified that we are supposed to be convinced that second-hand smoking is actually more dangerous than first-hand smoking; so we apparently save ourselves by smoking.

___________

People are so happy to throw away the rights of the smoker. Unfortunately, they do not realize that when you freely give up one right; it becomes easier to take the next right from you. Read Orwell's "1984", or Vonnegut's "Harrison Bergeron" to see what lies at the bottom of the slippery slope that we, as Americans, are choosing to dive down; all while we fight for our freedom... what a hypocritical joke,

Open air outdoor environments, even when heavily populated with smokers are full of far more dense and dangerous pollutants than cigarette smoke. There have long been bars and restaurants with smoking sections, and even those that choose (not enforced by tyrannical laws) to prohibit smoking on their premises. Just as you can choose to not watch an offensive television program, you can choose to not enter a smoke-filled bar. By all means your rights are important. but not when they infringe on mine.

But my point is that when you choose to violate my rights; you also grease the wheel for the violation of your own.

As for the democratic ideals that this country is supposedly intended to espouse, the rights of the few do not outweigh the rights of the many; and in the same vein, the rights of the many do not outweigh the few. The rights of all are of equal importance.

And as far as the rights of the many?

-54 million americans smoke http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,920057,00.html which is approximately 1/6th or 16 percent of the population of 304 billion http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html

-That means that there are far more smokers than either of the two major minority races in the united states

black or african american 35 million
hispanic or latino (of any race) 42 million
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ADPTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=01000US&-ds_name=ACS_2005_EST_G00_&-_lang=en&-_caller=geoselect&-format=

I mean really, when compared to these other numbers; how much of a minority are smokers?

I'm not saying that you should not be able to go into a bar because i want to smoke. I'm saying that i deserve the same right as you. You, to choose a smoke-free bar to enjoy your drinks. I, to choose another establishment that openly allows me to have my cigarette without having to step outside.

Smoking outside is an imposition. Five smokers hiding from the sun or rain under 9 square feet of awning is less than fun. Then there's all the fun of being forcibly segregated from the general population as a social pariah.

You work in a coal mine, you expect to breathe coal dust. You work in a "men's club", you expect to run into sweat, lube and cumstains. You work in a bar, you deal with smoke and assholes. Those are the facts of life.
 

Nuke_em_05

Senior Member
Mar 30, 2009
828
0
21
I'm going to be honest here, I've not actually seen an advert for tobacco in a very long time. Of those that I can remember seeing, I don't remember any of them even remotely implying "hey kids, smoking is awesome!". As a matter-of-fact, there was more text and speaking related to the health issues involved over the product.

Yes, there are dangerous things out there. Yes, companies sell them. No, it isn't their fault that people use them. It is called personal responsibility. If you want to use it, use it; if you don't, don't. If you don't want to research or consider the risk involved, that's also your call. If you're a dependant, it is your guardian's job.
 

darch_chylde

New member
Jul 23, 2009
11
0
0
Just as an added note, government led anti-smoking movements are nothing new.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-tobacco_movement_in_Nazi_Germany
The exact same policies that the US Government follows now were being used by the National Socialist party in Hitler Era Germany. What a great example to follow, eh?
 

Emeli

New member
Mar 9, 2009
276
0
0
I'm a smoker, I like my smokes, but I don't blame the cigarette companies one bit. Not even a little. If I didn't want them, I wouldn't buy them, those people are providing me with a product that I choose to buy knowing the risks full well.

You know who I think are a bunch of evil bastards? The government.

Yeah, you heard me. They put a massive tax on cigarette products so they keep them legal, it's amassive source of revenue, and then create laws and fund ad campaigns to turn smokers into pariahs. There's an ad on tv at the moment which bassically tells me I'm a horrible person who doesn't care about my family because I smoke. Funded by the government. Who are getting paid to keep it legal.

I think that smoking is probably at least a little reckless if not stupid, but it's a damn sight better than being a hypocrit juggling numbers against people's lives and then calling those people out as assholes.

 

Abedeus

New member
Sep 14, 2008
7,412
0
0
darch_chylde said:
Just as an added note, government led anti-smoking movements are nothing new.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-tobacco_movement_in_Nazi_Germany
The exact same policies that the US Government follows now were being used by the National Socialist party in Hitler Era Germany. What a great example to follow, eh?
Godwin already?


Smokers disgust me, make me cough and I know I won't be smoking, thanks to all the people I knew who died of lung cancer.
 

joystickjunki3

New member
Nov 2, 2008
1,887
0
0
Knight Templar said:
They sell things that kill people, thats all they do, kill you. They target adds and products at kids, because when your product kills those who use it you need new users.

They derserve the bad image they have, would it be ok to sell a soda that is made from arsenic and sold in a lead can?
Can you help me out by giving some sort of example where they have advertised to children or shoved cigarettes down someone's throat? At least nowadays.

[edit] I'm not saying that tobacco is good for you, but those Truth commercials have a shit load of propaganda in them nowadays. Numbers aren't hard to manipulate, and people who choose not to verify information are no better than the people who claim that smoking won't contribute to causing cancer.
 

notsosavagemessiah

New member
Jul 23, 2009
635
0
0
it's absolutely true. Smoking kills, it's addictive, and will increase the odds of killing you the longer you smoke. I've been smoking since 15 (i'm 24) and i'll keep doing so because i can't stop. Personally though, i don't think we quite do enough. In places like Thailand they show the results of smoking right on the pack. Mouth cancer, lung cancer, it's all on full display, it's by no means subtle, but it gets the point across. THIS WILL KILL YOU IF YOU DON'T STOP.
 

joystickjunki3

New member
Nov 2, 2008
1,887
0
0
Mr.Tea said:
Kit Fox said:
It seems to me that lately (in the US atleast), that smoking has recieved a terrible public image. I've seen more and more advertizements claiming tobacco companies are making their products more addictive, but do we blame Coke or Pepsi for putting caffine in our drinks? Making a substance people want to buy is just part of business. And by now everyone knows smoking can cause cancer, and all these anti smoking groups attempt to portray the tobacco companies as plotting to kill people, which is clearly not in their best interest, as dead people can't buy cigarettes. Anyone else thinks tobacco companies are getting a bum rap or are they getting what they deserve?
Cigarettes provide no high nor buzz, unlike alcohol and weed for example, and are packed with toxic additives. Basically then, tobacco companies keep making and selling a product the only objective effect of which is slow death. Tobacco companies should thus cease to exist and in averting this deserve whatever shit comes their way.
Have you ever smoked? It most definitely gives you at least some sort of buzz. I enjoy smoking, I don't force anyone else and I'm sick of all this shit where it's the tobacco companies who are evil. It's not like everyday life is like a Captain Planet episode.

[edit] I reserve every right to enjoy a smoke just like the guy next to me should be able to not smoke, or have a cheeseburger or enjoy a drink.

[edit edit] Not all cigarettes have toxic additives. Ever heard of American Spirits? Tobacco companies exist and attempt to make a profit just like any other company. They warn everyone about the dangers of smoking. Talking trash about smoking is not completely dissimilar to talking trash about eating meat. Everything is bad for you, get over it and just die at 80 instead of 90 (maybe help w/ over population by dying early).
 

darch_chylde

New member
Jul 23, 2009
11
0
0
Mr.Tea said:
Kit Fox said:
Tobacco companies should thus cease to exist and in averting this deserve whatever shit comes their way.
And how are you going to provide for the millions of Americans who would lose their livelihood if such were to happen? Tobacco farmers, line workers at factories, truck drivers and even mom and pop corner store owners (many of these stores owe up to and beyond 50 percent of their income to tobacco sales) are all dependent on the revenues provided by the 'evil' tobacco companies.

In this economy, the need is to create jobs not destroy them. Before you make an all encompassing statement, use your mind and maybe even do a little research.

PS: "Tobacco contains the harmala alkaloids harman and norharman, and the closely related harmine and harmaline are known hallucinogens. The levels of harman and horharman in cigarette smoke are between forty and 100 times greater than in tobacco leaf, showing that the burning of the plant generates this dramatic increase."

http://biopsychiatry.com/tobacco/index.html
 

Dusty Donuts

New member
Jul 16, 2009
928
0
0
Has anyone heard of smoking candy? That is the most wrong thing I have ever seen, because it's probably encouraging 20,000 lolly-sucking kiddies into sucking cigarettes 5 years from now. It looks relatively authentic, and I have no clue why anyone would want to be seen with dissolved fingers and teeth and putrid smoke erupting from their weathered mouths and lungs. Sorry for the imagery but it gets the message across.
Please people, if you HAVE to smoke, keep it in moderation.
 

Knight Templar

Moved on
Dec 29, 2007
3,848
0
0
joystickjunki3 said:
Knight Templar said:
They sell things that kill people, thats all they do, kill you. They target adds and products at kids, because when your product kills those who use it you need new users.

They derserve the bad image they have, would it be ok to sell a soda that is made from arsenic and sold in a lead can?
Can you help me out by giving some sort of example where they have advertised to children. At least nowadays.

[edit] I'm not saying that tobacco is good for you, but those Truth commercials have a shit load of propaganda in them nowadays. Numbers aren't hard to manipulate, and people who choose not to verify information are no better than the people who claim that smoking won't contribute to causing cancer.
I am afraid that my information cromes from books and the like, so I cannot link you to anything, apart from a TV show about commercials but that won't give you what you ask for. I don't know what "Truth commercials" are that might be because I live in Asutralia.

Cigarette companies flavor cigarettes in the same way beer companies do(which is a bad way), what kind of flavor is mint or chocolate? *Some anti-smkoing campains are followed by a rise in cigarette sales, which is convenent considering they are funded by cigarette companies* (this is the only thing I am having trouble confirming, take from that what you will).

People make their own decisions and if you start smoking its going to be partly or entirely your fault when you get ill, but that doesn't excuse or remove the guilt belonging to cigarette companies.


or shoved cigarettes down someone's throat?
I never said they did, don't put words in my mouth.

If I'm wrong call me out on it, I wouldn't like to go around saying things that are wrong.
 

similar.squirrel

New member
Mar 28, 2009
6,021
0
0
If the governments hate it so much, why not just ban it?
Could it be..that they need the money?
Nooo..That's corruption and hypocrisy. Of course not. Every government is morally sound.

/saracasm.

EDIT: Ninja'd. Much more eloquently.