Thank You for Smoking

[njautobody]

You would be surprised how many people actually tried smoking on Kingda-Ka just to have it blow in their face. But I do agree with your points as a social smoker myself i can resist the urge to smoke until I'm in an area alone or with friends. It's just amazing how many people do it anyway even though they know it annoys people. As Alfred in The Dark Knight said "Some people just like to watch the world burn."

 

[whoops1995]

The newest law they are attempting to pass is no smoking in your vehicle with children in said vehicle.

I know i'm taking you out of context here so bare with me. I don't see whats wrong with this law. Second hand smoke isnt very good for children and watching their parents smoke will probably make them more likely to smoke themselves(no sexual references intended) also it's really not safe to drive and smoke, not only do you not have two hands on the wheel but, everytime you exhale smoke, your temporarily blinded. not to mention it's a distraction.

EDIT:

You would be surprised how many people actually tried smoking on Kingda-Ka just to have it blow in their face.

really? I'd be afrid on the massive drop that I'd like swallow my cig or something, also that would suck to be behind them if you don't like smoke.

 

[iseko]

I'm from belgium. A pack a smokes costs 6? here. Price has gone up alot in the last few years. I think some people really do want to raise taxes on cigarettes so people would smoke less. Others are just hopping along because they think they took the train to money ville. Problem is its not working the way you'd think.

People from england don't come here anymore to buy their cigarettes since it's not that much cheaper anymore. They go to luxembourg or whatever(and so are alot of people from belgium nowadays).

Some people stop smoking. Other people just smoke less... Problem is that smoking is good for the economy. Belgium is down 700 million euros a year because they upped taxes(ironicaly enough that money is spent on health and social care, they should give smokers a bed of gold when they get admitted in the hospital). So what you're doing is getting ALOT less money for social and health care so that people can live longer and cost more money... Yea that seems the right thing to do...

By the way you shouldn't forget that smokers are also good for horeca-sector (not sure if its an english word... Means café's and nightlife business). Non smokers are in general alot more boring and they drink less than smokers. Any cafe owner can tell you that. (Don't even bother argueing me on this one. It's a fact. I see it every time I go out).

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

The newest law they are attempting to pass is no smoking in your vehicle with children in said vehicle.

I know i'm taking you out of context here so bare with me. I don't see whats wrong with this law. Second hand smoke isnt very good for children and watching their parents smoke will probably make them more likely to smoke themselves(no sexual references intended) also it's really not safe to drive and smoke, not only do you not have two hands on the wheel but, everytime you exhale smoke, your temporarily blinded. not to mention it's a distraction.

No worries, mate. I do agree to an extent however where my argument lays is the ridiculous nature of the law itself. The vehicle in question is your priority, you bought/leased/whatever the car with your own finances yet they are attempting to pass a law that will disallow you to do what you want within it. If it were to pass I imagine it will not be long before they try upgrading to "no smoking in a vehicle period" and so forth as this has been the example presented in other cases.

In regards to safety, I never drive with two hands on the wheel, barring when absolutely necessary such as icy roads that require a slight bit more control of the car and even then only when the car already responded somewhat sluggish, which is not often. As for smoke, most people leave the window open at least a crack, which allows the smoke room to escape. I am not a smoker myself, although I have had a few (and by that I mean ten in a year or some such) however if I can drive while drinking (soft drinks people), fiddling with the stereo or what have you, it is no more difficult to drive while smoking; granted I suppose it may be for some.

Again I do not claim to agree with smoking around children however I believe laws like this are stepping beyond people's rights to do what they choose within the own priority; and before anyone attempts to twist that logic onto an actual crime. That is an entirely different scenario.

My stand on smoking is either cease with all these laws of where you can and cannot smoke or make doing so illegal entirely, eg. do not sell the product to begin with. God forbid the Government giving up their tax haven despite claiming how horrible it is for you.

 

[Jursa]

I'm a non smoker and I see what they are trying to do. Have you even played an economy game? Winning is usually based on selling something at the highest possible price that the people would still pay for and cigarettes are an astounding thing because people are willing to pay several hundred percentages off the scale for them. Good news for you is that in reality, overpricing and banning of addictive items always causes illegal activity to sprout up, which means the market gets flooded with cheaper product, which eventually means that prices drop simply because they have to keep up.

 

[whoops1995]

The newest law they are attempting to pass is no smoking in your vehicle with children in said vehicle.

I know i'm taking you out of context here so bare with me. I don't see whats wrong with this law. Second hand smoke isnt very good for children and watching their parents smoke will probably make them more likely to smoke themselves(no sexual references intended) also it's really not safe to drive and smoke, not only do you not have two hands on the wheel but, everytime you exhale smoke, your temporarily blinded. not to mention it's a distraction.

*SNIP*

Now that I come to think about it, if I'm not mistaken, it's actually illegal to smoke and drive here in the U.S I don't if it was passed yet, but i think it has. As you said though, other people arn't as good drivers as you and some lack good judgement( example of bad judgement: well the roads are slick with snow...lets light up while driving!) I see this sort of bad driving and judgement alot in new jersey. I'm guessing they have better drivers in europe because if not how could you have the autobahn. I think this law is appropiate in the states because of the lack of driving skills, but in Europe, I don't know maybe you guys can ahndle smoking and driving.

 

[Cahlee]

Well smokers cost money really, when you guys get sick with lung cancer, it costs money. Not to say that it's any better or worse then obesity, which is why I think there should be taxes on junk food. Also, to try to deter you from smoking.

 

[Shabubu]

then again would you really want to be smoking a cigarette while riding kingdom ka. Though i think that smoking in pbulic places is very annoying. For my birthday one time I went to restaurant for dinner, the meal was completely ruined by the amount of people smoking and my clothes smelled for a week. I think that smokers shouldn't have to smoke in a restaurant, they can just smoke after or before. If they really badly had the urge to smoke i don't see the problem in stepping outside. I see it as a common courtesy.

Why'd you go to a restaurant that has a lot of smoking if you knew it'd bug you? I'm assuming there are places where you're from that smoking isn't allowed...why not go to another place if your birthday meal would be ruined by people doing something that is/was legal?

If it bugs you, go somewhere else. There, simple fix.

If anyone is going to counter with, "why should I have to go somewhere else?" Think about that, then think about what it's like to be an adult, and then realize "why should they have to go somewhere else, when I'm unhappy?"

This world would be a better place if people stop pushing their own opinions and ideals on others.

Common courtesy should be a factor outside, where people that are walking past have no control of being near cigarette smoke. Your solution will force more people to deal with cigarette smoke then before.

 

[Shabubu]

Well smokers cost money really, when you guys get sick with lung cancer, it costs money. Not to say that it's any better or worse then obesity, which is why I think there should be taxes on junk food. Also, to try to deter you from smoking.

Yes, smokers cost money. On a side-note, the extra money they're putting into the system far outweighs the amount an individual smoker will remove from the system in the ~20 years of being taxed at %500+.

Alcohol, now that's an expensive drug. That costs the average non-drinker more money than you can imagine. Kills a lot more people, too. Shame it doesn't stink like cigarettes or it'd have been pseudo-banned world-wide, by now.

 

[kaiZie]

your moaning about 6 dollars!? thats what, about 4 quid or something, and I guess this is for a pack of 20? thats cheap! try about £5.50 in the UK! so nearly 10 dollars or something around that figure! Plus we get pictures like Canada do on their smokes! except ours are very Bristish so no messed up lungs, just a picture of a bendy cigarette saying "smoking causes impotence"

 

[TerraMGP]

Frankly I think its a good thing, now they just need to put more of a tax on alcohol. I do admit that I think everyone should have the right to do what they wish with their own lives. However when dealing with something like smoking that generally causes discomfort and sometimes even adverse reactions in the rest of us a fee of some sort should be paid. Even if the whole 'second hand smoke' thing is trumped up (Which I doubt it is, at least not much) I still know that it smells bad, triggers peoples asthma and can lead to nausea or other issues.

So long story short if you guys are going to insist on a habbit that not only kills you faster but makes the rest of us uncomfortable to be around you the least you guys can do is help fund schools and road reconstruction a tiny bit more than the rest of us. Consider it Karma for making us hang around people who smell like smoldering diapers.

 

[Deathbird]

If you want to kill yourself you should be taxed if everyone that doesn't smoke has to deal with you taking the money from the healthcare.

 

[Shabubu]

your moaning about 6 dollars!? thats what, about 4 quid or something, and I guess this is for a pack of 20? thats cheap! try about £5.50 in the UK! so nearly 10 dollars or something around that figure! Plus we get pictures like Canada do on their smokes! except ours are very Bristish so no messed up lungs, just a picture of a bendy cigarette saying "smoking causes impotence"

5.5 British pounds = 8.1136 U.S. dollars - so says magical google.

About right for my area, West Coast of the States.

We ***** about $2 dollar gallons of gasoline here, as well.
So, £1.34 for 3.79 liters? What do you guys pay for that?

 

[Shabubu]

Frankly I think its a good thing, now they just need to put more of a tax on alcohol. I do admit that I think everyone should have the right to do what they wish with their own lives. However when dealing with something like smoking that generally causes discomfort and sometimes even adverse reactions in the rest of us a fee of some sort should be paid. Even if the whole 'second hand smoke' thing is trumped up (Which I doubt it is, at least not much) I still know that it smells bad, triggers peoples asthma and can lead to nausea or other issues.

So long story short if you guys are going to insist on a habbit that not only kills you faster but makes the rest of us uncomfortable to be around you the least you guys can do is help fund schools and road reconstruction a tiny bit more than the rest of us. Consider it Karma for making us hang around people who smell like smoldering diapers.

With that logic, can we tax women wearing perfume? That triggers allergic reactions to quite a few people, and arguably stinks just as bad.

Or, also tax babies, they smell more like smoldering diapers than smokers do.

I say, send all the smokers in-doors to establishments that are willing/wanting to deal with the smoke. Then, people can choose to be near smokers or not.

Last I checked, it's an addiction. Not a habit, rather large difference.

 

[TerraMGP]

Frankly I think its a good thing, now they just need to put more of a tax on alcohol. I do admit that I think everyone should have the right to do what they wish with their own lives. However when dealing with something like smoking that generally causes discomfort and sometimes even adverse reactions in the rest of us a fee of some sort should be paid. Even if the whole 'second hand smoke' thing is trumped up (Which I doubt it is, at least not much) I still know that it smells bad, triggers peoples asthma and can lead to nausea or other issues.

So long story short if you guys are going to insist on a habbit that not only kills you faster but makes the rest of us uncomfortable to be around you the least you guys can do is help fund schools and road reconstruction a tiny bit more than the rest of us. Consider it Karma for making us hang around people who smell like smoldering diapers.

With that logic, can we tax women wearing perfume? That triggers allergic reactions to quite a few people, and arguably stinks just as bad.

Or, also tax babies, they smell more like smoldering diapers than smokers do.

I say, send all the smokers in-doors to establishments that are willing/wanting to deal with the smoke. Then, people can choose to be near smokers or not.

Last I checked, it's an addiction. Not a habit, rather large difference.

Babies no, but perfume should have some sort of legal restriction yes.

Bottom line is that if you want to kill yourself that is your choice, but smoke carries from smoking sections, clings to cloths, and overall irritates alot of people especially with respiratory problems. So we are still talking about something that leaves the smell of smoke, wrings the health care system dry and causes discomfort or in some cases serious problems for others. I think in that case its only fair that smokers should have to pay more, especially those who know what they are getting into going into it. If you choose to start yourself on an addictive substance that you know will damage yourself let alone others then you should not be surprised when people get ticked off or ask you to pay more.

And yes its an addiction, but you know what? They know its one getting into it and they CAN quit. Its hard, and it sucks, but it CAN be done. This is not an issue of equal rights this is a matter of choosing to do something with a measurably harmful effect and then having the price of the item raised to compensate. They cost society more and cause more discomfort for others so that makes up for it.

 

[Fox1789]

well, i have to say that it goes both ways, the tobacco company makes cigarettes pricey to get more money in their pockets, and to stop people from smoking the state government puts a high tobacco tax on them. if you notice in states where smoking is more acceptable the price of cigarettes is around 3 dollars a pack and other places about $6.

here is a link that shows the tax on cigarettes in different states

http://www.taxadmin.org/fta/rate/cigarett.html

 

[whoops1995]

then again would you really want to be smoking a cigarette while riding kingdom ka. Though i think that smoking in pbulic places is very annoying. For my birthday one time I went to restaurant for dinner, the meal was completely ruined by the amount of people smoking and my clothes smelled for a week. I think that smokers shouldn't have to smoke in a restaurant, they can just smoke after or before. If they really badly had the urge to smoke i don't see the problem in stepping outside. I see it as a common courtesy.

Why'd you go to a restaurant that has a lot of smoking if you knew it'd bug you? I'm assuming there are places where you're from that smoking isn't allowed...why not go to another place if your birthday meal would be ruined by people doing something that is/was legal?

If it bugs you, go somewhere else. There, simple fix.

If anyone is going to counter with, "why should I have to go somewhere else?" Think about that, then think about what it's like to be an adult, and then realize "why should they have to go somewhere else, when I'm unhappy?"

This world would be a better place if people stop pushing their own opinions and ideals on others.

Common courtesy should be a factor outside, where people that are walking past have no control of being near cigarette smoke. Your solution will force more people to deal with cigarette smoke then before.

Well the restaurant usually isn't filled with smokers, I guess only at night, also it'd be better to be outside because the smoke doesn't build up and hang in the room instead it dissipates and people don't have to breath half of there air as smoke. Besides everyone ahs to deal with a little smoke outside because of cars. Also if you can make peopl more comfortable why be an asshole and smoke when it ruins people meals. It's not that hard to wait or smoke before you go. You're also being a hipocrite saying that people push their opinions on others when you're telling people it's there fault they can't deal with you so fuck 'em.

 

[Shabubu]

...

Why'd you go to a restaurant that has a lot of smoking if you knew it'd bug you? I'm assuming there are places where you're from that smoking isn't allowed...why not go to another place if your birthday meal would be ruined by people doing something that is/was legal?

If it bugs you, go somewhere else. There, simple fix.

If anyone is going to counter with, "why should I have to go somewhere else?" Think about that, then think about what it's like to be an adult, and then realize "why should they have to go somewhere else, when I'm unhappy?"

This world would be a better place if people stop pushing their own opinions and ideals on others.

Common courtesy should be a factor outside, where people that are walking past have no control of being near cigarette smoke. Your solution will force more people to deal with cigarette smoke then before.

Well the restaurant usually isn't filled with smokers, I guess only at night, also it'd be better to be outside because the smoke doesn't build up and hang in the room instead it dissipates and people don't have to breath half of there air as smoke. Besides everyone ahs to deal with a little smoke outside because of cars. Also if you can make peopl more comfortable why be an asshole and smoke when it ruins people meals. It's not that hard to wait or smoke before you go. You're also being a hipocrite saying that people push their opinions on others when you're telling people it's there fault they can't deal with you so fuck 'em.

Smoking is part of their meal and they're at a location that allows smoking. To me, it's silly to be mad at them ruining your meal, when you decided to go to a place that allows smoking. That should have been a factor in your decision if you knew that it would have been an issue. They're not being assholes by smoking in a smoking establishment. It ruins your meal, but you suggesting they smoke before or after ruins their meal - if that's how they choose to eat.

Also, I'm not being a hypocrite. You go into a fast-food restaurant you should expect fast-food, go into a bar - expect drunks and alcohol. Go into a place that allows people to smoke and expect smoking. It's real easy to restrict other people's rights when it's something that bugs you - but, it's even easier to go somewhere else, if you know that smoking will bug you - and smoking will be around - go somewhere else.

I'd be a hypocrite if I said smokers should go into non-smoking places and complain that they can't smoke there, because the clean air is ruining their meal.

 

[Shabubu]

Babies no, but perfume should have some sort of legal restriction yes.

Bottom line is that if you want to kill yourself that is your choice, but smoke carries from smoking sections, clings to cloths, and overall irritates alot of people especially with respiratory problems. So we are still talking about something that leaves the smell of smoke, wrings the health care system dry and causes discomfort or in some cases serious problems for others. I think in that case its only fair that smokers should have to pay more, especially those who know what they are getting into going into it. If you choose to start yourself on an addictive substance that you know will damage yourself let alone others then you should not be surprised when people get ticked off or ask you to pay more.

And yes its an addiction, but you know what? They know its one getting into it and they CAN quit. Its hard, and it sucks, but it CAN be done. This is not an issue of equal rights this is a matter of choosing to do something with a measurably harmful effect and then having the price of the item raised to compensate. They cost society more and cause more discomfort for others so that makes up for it.

I'm glad we can agree on perfume...most of that stuff is foul and I'm a smoker.

Oddly enough, we can't kill ourselves outright - we have to pay an arm and a leg to do so.
You are correct about the byproducts of smoking: poor ventilation makes smoke carry, it sticks to clothing, irritates a lot of people especially with respiratory problems, among MANY other issues. Let's not forget about the litter, the massive financial drain on millions of people, the mega-corporations that lie, steal and cheat their way into killing their customers, etc etc. Smoking is bad.

However, it's legal.
If smokers are allowed indoors, then you have alternatives as to if you choose to be around smokers or not. It's when they're outdoors, like most laws are forcing them to be now, then you - as a random bystander - will probably get smoke in the face. Smokers are magical beings, but they can't control the wind.

I think being overweight wrings the health-care system dry more, smokers put a lot of money into that system - then, they use that system. Most likely, more money is put into whatever health-care system by smokers than they use. Fat people just eat a lot, and most food is not taxed like the rest of things (that just might be in the US).

While I'm not arguing if smoking is bad (it obviously is) - you are part of a culture that keeps it legal, whatever the reasons, you have to accept the responsibility of being one in that culture. If it's that bad, then by all means, try to make it illegal. You'll save tons of lives, by restricting their rights.

But, nickel and diming them is not beneficial. It's a downward spiral of restricting the rights of those that aren't 'one of us'. Next, it's let's tax cake-munchers, cause they're utilizing our health-care system and who wants to look at overweight people? Let's tax meat-eaters cause cows are destroying our environment, let's tax the chronically sick - cause they're a downer. Retarded people? They're going to be a drain on society for the rest of their lives, let's tax them, too. (The previous sentences are not my opinions. Our humanity is wrapped up in how we help the needy.)

As for your addiction paragraph. This is coming from someone that studies brains and how they work, albeit I'm not too terribly far into my courses...

All of these arguments about smoking is bad, raise taxes, etc - actually increases the chance that a certain population will start to smoke. You even did it yourself, classifying it as a 'habit', instead of a death sentence (addiction), might make someone that is on the fence slightly more likely to do it. Odd, how the brain works. "They know its one getting into it and they CAN quit." <- That is a sentence that makes it more okay to smoke, because everyone thinks they are one of those that CAN quit. You, and smokers, are just your brain - the body goes along for the ride - when you, the brain, needs something (addiction, for example) it tries to get it. Breaking addictions is one of the hardest things someone can do, and I'm sorry, but the average person on the street avoids hard-work like it's the plague.

When people get all pissy about smokers, essentially saying, "take their money!" or act like assholes to them, ridicule them, etc - they're going to keep smoking. A support structure and education, is what is needed to stop the smoking scourge on mankind. Or, an all-out ban on it, but that just treats everyone like babies.

 

[PatientGrasshopper]

No, this isn't about the novel.(which if you havn't read, you should definitly check it out.) This thread is about the increasing price of cigarettes. I'm not sure about other places, but where I live, I've noticed how incredibly expensive cigarettes have gotten. It's about 6 dollars for a pack. Why is it so high? Is it to discourage smoking? or is it because the state knows that people can't stop smoking and are trying to squeeze as much money as possible out of them? Is it right? On one hand your over charging people who can't help the fact that they're addicted, but on the other hand, in theory this should be helping smokers quit and help themselves, while helping the community and bringing more money to the town. I personally say it's not right. I've never smoked and probably will never, but from what i've seen, it looks incredibly addicting. In my eyes it's like taking candy from a baby.

I think it is both to discourage smoking and get more money.
On the one hand it is not right, come to think of it I can't think of when it is right but taking advantage of people always makes you rich. However by smoking people are screwing themselves anyway, there are so many more creative and exciting ways to die,