Smoking in the U.S

[bushwhacker2k]

I don't understand why flavoured ones would be taken off the market.

That seems weird, do they have some extra damaging ingredient or something?.

I guess it is to try to influence people to not smoke, maybe?

Since maybe they won't enjoy it as much or something?

Anyways, I'm not trying to hate on smokers but I just have a question out of curiosity:

Why do you smoke? I've never understood the appeal.

 

[Legion]

Anyways, I'm not trying to hate on smokers but I just have a question out of curiosity:

Why do you smoke? I've never understood the appeal.

Not as a smoker but as someone who has smoked:

I did a few times, and personally didn't mind the smell, it's only when it's on your clothes/hands afterwards that I found it horrible.
It was more enjoyable when it was allowed in Bars/Clubs.

Some people try it to look cool, then get addicted.
Some actually enjoy the smell, taste, act, then get addicted.

 

[bushwhacker2k]

Anyways, I'm not trying to hate on smokers but I just have a question out of curiosity:

Why do you smoke? I've never understood the appeal.

Not as a smoker but as someone who has smoked:

I did a few times, and personally didn't mind the smell, it's only when it's on your clothes/hands afterwards that I found it horrible.
It was more enjoyable when it was allowed in Bars/Clubs.

Some people try it to look cool, then get addicted.
Some actually enjoy the smell, taste, act, then get addicted.

So to look cool or because you got addicted fairly quickly(not trying to sound like an ass, that's just what I hear).

Okay, so would you say trying to look cool is the prime reason people give it a try?

 

[Legion]

Anyways, I'm not trying to hate on smokers but I just have a question out of curiosity:

Why do you smoke? I've never understood the appeal.

Not as a smoker but as someone who has smoked:

I did a few times, and personally didn't mind the smell, it's only when it's on your clothes/hands afterwards that I found it horrible.
It was more enjoyable when it was allowed in Bars/Clubs.

Some people try it to look cool, then get addicted.
Some actually enjoy the smell, taste, act, then get addicted.

So to look cool or because you got addicted fairly quickly(not trying to sound like an ass, that's just what I hear).

Okay, so would you say trying to look cool is the prime reason people give it a try?

The reason people give it their first try? Yes. The same goes for alcohol, drugs and anything else that is potentially bad for you.

Although like alcohol and drugs, once they have tried it once, the reasons often change.

 

[bushwhacker2k]

Anyways, I'm not trying to hate on smokers but I just have a question out of curiosity:

Why do you smoke? I've never understood the appeal.

Not as a smoker but as someone who has smoked:

I did a few times, and personally didn't mind the smell, it's only when it's on your clothes/hands afterwards that I found it horrible.
It was more enjoyable when it was allowed in Bars/Clubs.

Some people try it to look cool, then get addicted.
Some actually enjoy the smell, taste, act, then get addicted.

So to look cool or because you got addicted fairly quickly(not trying to sound like an ass, that's just what I hear).

Okay, so would you say trying to look cool is the prime reason people give it a try?

The reason people give it their first try? Yes. The same goes for alcohol, drugs and anything else that is potentially bad for you.

Although like alcohol and drugs, once they have tried it once, the reasons often change.

I see, thanks for info

 

[GodsOneMistake]

Oh my moms gonna be pissed XD I love it

 

[slevin8989]

First off, here is the article I'll be referring to. I'll try to paraphase but it still may be better to read the page.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/12/obama-congratulates-congress-stiff-new-tobacco-regulations/

Basically, congress has passed (and Obama will sign) a bill handing over tobacco regulation to the FDA. What this means for us smokers is this:

1) Nicotene levels in cigarettes will be reduced.
2) Flavored cigarettes will be taken off the market (including Clove cigarettes).
3) Advertisements will be restricted to black-and-white only ads and certain descriptions such as "light," or "low tar" will no longer be acceptable, as these have not been proven to reduce the risk of lung cancer or other tobacco-related illnesses.

Points 2 & 3 are mainly for the protection of children, making smoking cigarettes virtually unappealing. Which I don't necessarily mind altogether, but it is a lot to suddenly look at all the adults of the nation and say, "Okay you can smoke, but you're not going to like it."

Now, as far as I know, the bill does not include things like cigars, pipe tobacco, or sheesha (the tobacco/molasses mixture used in smoking hookah).

I'm solely a hookah smoker myself, so I wanted to get other thoughts on this bill. Or, if applicable, hear about any activism going on against the bill.

Wait so is hookah gonna be illegal?

 

[Cuniculus]

Not a smoker, never will be. I also don't have a problem with smokers. If anything, I feel bad for them. It went from a mainstream smoke anywhere you want habit, to a now you have designated spots you have to smoke in habit. Your rights are on the decline.

As for this bill, I also read that they are going to make the warning labels bigger. I love how they attach that to every tobacco bill ever created. As if people don't know how dangerous it is. They know, and the don't care. The whole pack could be a damned warning.

"Give me a carton of low birth weights."
-Bill Hicks

 

[WingedFortress]

Great, let yourselves become more like us in Canada. American cigarettes are world class, and if this little bill so much as skews the taste of a marlboro red a fuckin' inch, Obamas got trouble on his hands. I'm sick and tired of the pathetic scare tactics non-smokers use to make us quit. You've already got us on the street, and now your hurting our incentives for that.

Well fuck you, congress, I hope you all get lung cancer from my second hand smoke.

I'm just rambling though, and niccing out a bit. You Americans need to stop trying to have your cake and eat it too. Its only a matter of time before you drop 12 bucks on a pack with a big picture of what is supposed to your brain in twenty years, all the time wondering why the government would charge you so much, with no regard for flavor or quality whatsoever. Eurgh.

 

[BlazeTheVampire]

First off, here is the article I'll be referring to. I'll try to paraphase but it still may be better to read the page.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/12/obama-congratulates-congress-stiff-new-tobacco-regulations/

Basically, congress has passed (and Obama will sign) a bill handing over tobacco regulation to the FDA. What this means for us smokers is this:

1) Nicotene levels in cigarettes will be reduced.
2) Flavored cigarettes will be taken off the market (including Clove cigarettes).
3) Advertisements will be restricted to black-and-white only ads and certain descriptions such as "light," or "low tar" will no longer be acceptable, as these have not been proven to reduce the risk of lung cancer or other tobacco-related illnesses.

Points 2 & 3 are mainly for the protection of children, making smoking cigarettes virtually unappealing. Which I don't necessarily mind altogether, but it is a lot to suddenly look at all the adults of the nation and say, "Okay you can smoke, but you're not going to like it."

Now, as far as I know, the bill does not include things like cigars, pipe tobacco, or sheesha (the tobacco/molasses mixture used in smoking hookah).

I'm solely a hookah smoker myself, so I wanted to get other thoughts on this bill. Or, if applicable, hear about any activism going on against the bill.

Wait so is hookah gonna be illegal?

Read again... as far as I know the bill does NOT include sheesha. From the wording of the article, it looked like these regulations would only apply to cigarettes.

 

[tmnnerd]

.[/quote] My main problem with smoking is second hand smoke. Killing yourself is your own problem, dont make it mine.[/quote]

here is an extract from a letter published in issue 2710 of New Scientist magazine:

"i have spent years looking for published evidence that environmental tobacco is dangerous to health, but have failed to find any. We see plenty of papers on the presence of cotinine* in people exposed to tobacco smoked by others, but there are other toxic components in smoke. the levels of these substances in non-smokers exposed to tobacco smoke are conservatively estimated to reach 1/500th of the dose inhaled by smokers."

i dont smoke cigarettes, just the occasional pipe and cigar not to mention *ahem,* well i wont mention it. anyway, i have no understanding of the science behind this but if New Scientist readership questions the dangers of second hand smoke then i think ill keep an open mind.

*cotinine is a metabolite of nicotine more info here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cotinine

 

[dmase]

I think this will stop a lot of people from smoking and then they all switch to dip which is twice as disgusting in my opinion. Until they outlaw that. So on and so forth.

 

[LuzGutierrez]

*clap clap* Gujawb, Obama! d -.0

Personally I think what the government is trying to so to be a good thing. They just suck at doing it. I mean honestly, what are they thinking. "Let's try not to advertise cigarettes any more!" Yes, "Let's try to make it less appealing to children!" YES! "Let's make it so that current smokers who don't want to quit the habit will suffer as well! Maybe they'll quit too!" No, you fools! Alright, so making a cigarette that has less nicotine in it might be a good idea, but at the same time, they either means:
a) You're adding in more tar/other junk to make it last the same.
||
b) You're making the cigarette smaller to be more proportional to the amount of nicotine in them.

Both seem like good ideas on paper, but in theory, you're just making it more expensive for those who don't want to quit smoking (like many have said), and you're just losing money in the long run. I mean, wasn't it Obama's idea to try and get us out of this recession?

Yeah sure, not wanting kids these days to get into smoking is a good idea, but at the same time, you don't have to harm the ones who "enjoy" (for lack of a better term) smoking suffer, especially when we are making money from it. I mean sure, tabacco is a cash crop, and we can make money off of it just like the British did by selling opium to the chinese, but still, we can find more productive ways to try to stop our nation from smoking.

If it's the quitters who you are trying to appeal to, then make them their own line of cigerettes, ones with less nicotine, or which require a nicotine patch, or something intuitive that would get smokers off smoking. I don't know, maybe MAKE money off of that? Just a thought.

Four words, to this whole thing, Good Idea, Bad Execution!

 

[Atomicmoo]

How bout not taxing tobacco products 100%. Just came from Korea Dun hills were less than 2 dollars compared to 6 71 in the US. Marborro's were less than 2 dollars why anyone would smoke that beat the hell out of me.

I agree with Thunderhorse, if and when the time comes that Cigs are 12 dollars, or hell if they get up to 10 dollars. I switch to smoking pot, more of a high less addicting.

Stripping away flavored cigs in my opinion is just weird.
Seeing as we are having problems with the "Economy" I think the ideal should be is to have people spend more not less.

Making cigs less light is also a pointless Ideal unless they want people to buy more cigs to get that high. Thing about nicotine is the addiction qualities of it, the high it produces is a lot less than many drugs but the addiction rate is one of the highest.

Illegalizing any drug in my opinion is stripping away personal freedom.

 

[beddo]

First off, here is the article I'll be referring to. I'll try to paraphase but it still may be better to read the page.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/12/obama-congratulates-congress-stiff-new-tobacco-regulations/

Basically, congress has passed (and Obama will sign) a bill handing over tobacco regulation to the FDA. What this means for us smokers is this:

1) Nicotene levels in cigarettes will be reduced.
2) Flavored cigarettes will be taken off the market (including Clove cigarettes).
3) Advertisements will be restricted to black-and-white only ads and certain descriptions such as "light," or "low tar" will no longer be acceptable, as these have not been proven to reduce the risk of lung cancer or other tobacco-related illnesses.

Points 2 & 3 are mainly for the protection of children, making smoking cigarettes virtually unappealing. Which I don't necessarily mind altogether, but it is a lot to suddenly look at all the adults of the nation and say, "Okay you can smoke, but you're not going to like it."

Now, as far as I know, the bill does not include things like cigars, pipe tobacco, or sheesha (the tobacco/molasses mixture used in smoking hookah).

I'm solely a hookah smoker myself, so I wanted to get other thoughts on this bill. Or, if applicable, hear about any activism going on against the bill.

Fox News is not a good source for decent news, it's alarmist nonsense. I can't really see a problem, if you want to smoke high levels of nicotine you could have things like cigars.

This is part of a movement to reduce smoking in the West, it's quite a good thing in my opinion, a lot of good crop space is wasted on a disgusting and damaging habit. Moreover, it affects the health of people around you. Smoking is atrocious and should only be allowed in private resident where there are no under-18s.

 

[Weaver]

Smokers in Canada are damn hilarious. It's illegal to smoke in any public building in Ontario, so in the middle of winter they all have to huddle outside in a blizzard. It's really not worth your time.

 

[Guestowel]

How bout not taxing tobacco products 100%. Just came from Korea Dun hills were less than 2 dollars compared to 6 71 in the US. Marborro's were less than 2 dollars why anyone would smoke that beat the hell out of me.

I used to roll my own cigarettes before the April 1st tax, for loose tobacco there was a 2000% tax increase. I paid $3 a pouch of drum, but now I would pay $11 for it.