Look I understand the idea of government ruling on certain things can be considered socialism. Banning a product that is known as the “cancer stick” shouldn’t be one of them. I’d applaud the decision of Trump did it honestly.
I hate cigarettes and don't think anyone should smoke them... but this is not the role of government. If I want to do something that is damaging to my health like smoking that's my own business.
Are you okay with them banning it just because you don't like it? Because eventually they'll ban something you do like, but others don't.
Or are you okay with it because you think it saves lives? Then why not ban soda and fast food? that kills way more people.
Now I'm just guessing at what your reasoning is, but if I've guessed correctly, then you're basically making the same argument as leftists that say they believe in free speech and that hate speech is not free speech. They're okay with censoring when they agree it should be censored, just like you seem to be okay with banning things as long as you don't like them.
The waters are muddied a little bit when you bring into play second-hand smoke and all that, but I think it's been addressed just fine with designated smoking areas for public spaces, and whatever the owner says for private spaces.
i got all these dislikes but the truth is it’s not you putting your own life at risk. You got secondhand smoke oral cancer, lung cancer, throat cancer. It’s not like Cigarettes do more good than harm. All they do is harm. And not gonna lie I do support the ban on the giant sodas. Not because i’m some tyrant. But the same people who get mad that their 42oz sodas are being banned A) don’t drink 42oz sodas or B) DO drink 42oz sodas and then wonder why healthcare costs so much.
And you bring up smoking spaces. Smoking spaces are for the smokers. Not the smoke. Smoke travels. And smoking areas aren’t age restricted lol. So anyone can just walk through.
Americans were their healthiest before cigarettes. It was marketed as nothing more as a passtime in the 30s and 40s. You dont even see commercials anymore because of how bad they are. And with vaping its getting worse.
Give me all the hate you want but the idea of “We shouldn’t ban x,y, and z because America” is just a closed minded argument with bo thought to it.
Giving people the freedom of choice is the opposite of a close minded argument. You sound like an undercover commie that thinks the government should dictate our life choices.
i can’t believe people here are defending the use of cigarettes in the name of freedom. I’m not talking about guns or beef or oil or even pastic. I’m talking abiut fucking cigarettes. Go tell all those who lose rheir lives because of smoking or all those who lose their jaws or tongues or vocal chords that the lesson they learned is still gonna happen because we don’t wanna give up the freedom to kill ourselves.
Well first of all saying cigarettes only do harm is not true. The people smoking them get enjoyment, pleasure, and relaxation. It creates jobs from field to counter. It's obviously worth it to those that smoke; and obviously not worth it me, and not worth it to you.
I agree with you on a lot of your sentiments but not your solution. You don't force people to make the same decisions you do when it comes to stuff like this, you convince them.
Smoke rises and dissipates, if you're generally staying away from smokers then just regular pollution is worse then what they're putting out. (But I still get it, it's annoying, I don't like them, but still not the role of government)
You don't see commercials for cigarettes anymore because they made it illegal, no other reason.
I don't think I'm the one being close minded here either. I agree with most of what you're saying, you're just ignoring how easily "your solution" can and will be abused by other people
And just to some up I leave you with a quote:
"It’s absolutely scary seeing someone in power trying to tell me what to do." - Xirturn1984
You people are doing what liberals are doing and pushing the topic because you lost the argument. If you read my post youd see my position on soft drinks. If you want my generalization, no we shouldnt. Because its fine in moderation. Cigarettes? They are literally designed to be poisonous AND addicting.
You ask if I would ban candy or snacks. Let me answer your question with an equally stupid question. Do you give your kids a cigarette to keep them quiet during the drive home?
Where did we lose the argument? The "elected" socialist is seeking to ban menthol cigarettes. Looks like you lost the argument before you even commented.
If you read my post youd see my position on soft drinks. If you want my generalization, no we shouldnt. Because its fine in moderation. Cigarettes? They are literally designed to be poisonous AND addicting.
I made my post before you said anything about softdrinks. lmao
The only reason you think cigarettes are designed to be poisonous and addictive is because they manufacture them that way.
You ask if I would ban candy or snacks. Let me answer your question with an equally stupid question. Do you give your kids a cigarette to keep them quiet during the drive home?
I wouldn't give children alcohol to keep them quiet either, but that doesn't mean it should be banned.
Respectfully, banning cigarettes is not the same as recognizing gay marriage. Right? Theres no studies that show being gay directly leads to an increase in cancer or tumors
I don't follow your example. In general, I'm not a fan of government telling me what to do, even if it's not "good for me", in their "expert" opinion. I am perfectly capable of making my own decisions, even if I suffer negative consequences.
Look I understand the idea of government ruling on certain things can be considered socialism. Banning a product that is known as the “cancer stick” shouldn’t be one of them. I’d applaud the decision of Trump did it honestly.
I hate cigarettes and don't think anyone should smoke them... but this is not the role of government. If I want to do something that is damaging to my health like smoking that's my own business.
Are you okay with them banning it just because you don't like it? Because eventually they'll ban something you do like, but others don't.
Or are you okay with it because you think it saves lives? Then why not ban soda and fast food? that kills way more people.
Now I'm just guessing at what your reasoning is, but if I've guessed correctly, then you're basically making the same argument as leftists that say they believe in free speech and that hate speech is not free speech. They're okay with censoring when they agree it should be censored, just like you seem to be okay with banning things as long as you don't like them.
The waters are muddied a little bit when you bring into play second-hand smoke and all that, but I think it's been addressed just fine with designated smoking areas for public spaces, and whatever the owner says for private spaces.
i got all these dislikes but the truth is it’s not you putting your own life at risk. You got secondhand smoke oral cancer, lung cancer, throat cancer. It’s not like Cigarettes do more good than harm. All they do is harm. And not gonna lie I do support the ban on the giant sodas. Not because i’m some tyrant. But the same people who get mad that their 42oz sodas are being banned A) don’t drink 42oz sodas or B) DO drink 42oz sodas and then wonder why healthcare costs so much.
And you bring up smoking spaces. Smoking spaces are for the smokers. Not the smoke. Smoke travels. And smoking areas aren’t age restricted lol. So anyone can just walk through.
Americans were their healthiest before cigarettes. It was marketed as nothing more as a passtime in the 30s and 40s. You dont even see commercials anymore because of how bad they are. And with vaping its getting worse.
Give me all the hate you want but the idea of “We shouldn’t ban x,y, and z because America” is just a closed minded argument with bo thought to it.
Giving people the freedom of choice is the opposite of a close minded argument. You sound like an undercover commie that thinks the government should dictate our life choices.
i can’t believe people here are defending the use of cigarettes in the name of freedom. I’m not talking about guns or beef or oil or even pastic. I’m talking abiut fucking cigarettes. Go tell all those who lose rheir lives because of smoking or all those who lose their jaws or tongues or vocal chords that the lesson they learned is still gonna happen because we don’t wanna give up the freedom to kill ourselves.
Bro... smoking has existed since the dawn of this great country.
Really, it's been around 5000 years before Christ!
I said cigarettes. And I followed it with a fact that it was marketed as a passtime.
Well first of all saying cigarettes only do harm is not true. The people smoking them get enjoyment, pleasure, and relaxation. It creates jobs from field to counter. It's obviously worth it to those that smoke; and obviously not worth it me, and not worth it to you.
I agree with you on a lot of your sentiments but not your solution. You don't force people to make the same decisions you do when it comes to stuff like this, you convince them.
Smoke rises and dissipates, if you're generally staying away from smokers then just regular pollution is worse then what they're putting out. (But I still get it, it's annoying, I don't like them, but still not the role of government)
You don't see commercials for cigarettes anymore because they made it illegal, no other reason.
I don't think I'm the one being close minded here either. I agree with most of what you're saying, you're just ignoring how easily "your solution" can and will be abused by other people
And just to some up I leave you with a quote:
"It’s absolutely scary seeing someone in power trying to tell me what to do." - Xirturn1984
Would you feel this way if the government banned soft drinks too? Alcohol? Candy? Snacks?
wait for it.
Yeah,already talk of limiting meat.
You people are doing what liberals are doing and pushing the topic because you lost the argument. If you read my post youd see my position on soft drinks. If you want my generalization, no we shouldnt. Because its fine in moderation. Cigarettes? They are literally designed to be poisonous AND addicting.
You ask if I would ban candy or snacks. Let me answer your question with an equally stupid question. Do you give your kids a cigarette to keep them quiet during the drive home?
Where did we lose the argument? The "elected" socialist is seeking to ban menthol cigarettes. Looks like you lost the argument before you even commented.
I made my post before you said anything about softdrinks. lmao
The only reason you think cigarettes are designed to be poisonous and addictive is because they manufacture them that way.
I wouldn't give children alcohol to keep them quiet either, but that doesn't mean it should be banned.
Legislating behavior is a slippery slope we're already on.
Respectfully, banning cigarettes is not the same as recognizing gay marriage. Right? Theres no studies that show being gay directly leads to an increase in cancer or tumors
I don't follow your example. In general, I'm not a fan of government telling me what to do, even if it's not "good for me", in their "expert" opinion. I am perfectly capable of making my own decisions, even if I suffer negative consequences.
ALL processed foods may cause cancer.
Going outside exposed to the sun or staying inside exposed to blue light may cause cancer.
So, we should ban all of that?
That kind of fascistic opinion is a cancer.....
Comparing cigarettes to the sun and food is retarded.
You’re retarded
Your entire premise is:
"Item can cause cancer. Therefore banning it is good."
The Ad Hominem in your response shows that you know you have a bad argument and can't logically defend it.