Ridiculous!

[Nam]

Fuck it..I can't argue with anyone who even tries to remotely defend the tobacco companies after they've knowingly killed millions upon millions of people and will continue to. They ought to be shot at sunrise, every fucking one of them..

I feel the same way about people who are antitampons.

(Mobile link)

http://m.mic.com/articles/54367/texas-legislature-bans-tampons-but-allows-guns

You'd think the day Texas plans to put an end to safe and legal abortion, they'd be extra nice to the women whose fundamental rights will suddenly be stripped away by a bunch of Republicans with two-dollar haircuts. Nope. Not only is Texas planning to pass the most draconian anti-abortion bill in the country, but they're also planning to do it while proverbially slapping Texas women in the face. 

According to journalists on the ground, on Friday afternoon, security guards started confiscating tampons and pads from women attending House proceedings. Yup. Women who are on their period and need their sanitary products will need to leave their "weapons" at the door or be turned away. But don't worry, if you happened to bring your gun and you have your concealed carry permit, you're all set! Go right in. No need to check your gun at the door, but you're going to have to leave your tampon with them. Why are they taking pads and tampons away from women? To punish them for having a uterus? No of course not. That's what SB1, the bill that will shut down most abortion clinics in the state, is there for. According to Huffington Post, it was to preserve the "rules of decorum" because officials suspected they would be used as projectiles.

When the news about the no tampon rule spread on Twitter, women could not contain their outrage (or their lady hormones as Texas Republicans would probably put it).

-Nam

[Shol'va]

That's got to be a troll. Please let it be a troll.

[Nam]

That's got to be a troll. Please let it be a troll.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/07/14/fringe-factor-tampons-but-not-guns-banned-in-texas-legislature.html

Guns allowed, tampons not. Because firing a bullet is nothing compared to throwing a tampon.

-Nam

[zarus tathra]

If someone kills themselves with a drug because they're too stupid to quit, I feel that that's a rational outcome in the grand scheme of things.

[Mermaid]

Wait. Throwing your tampon at someone is a thing? Someone please tell me that's not a thing.

[Nam]

Wait. Throwing your tampon at someone is a thing? Someone please tell me that's not a thing.

It happened last year in Texas. See, their logic actually was that registered guns with bullets in them was okay but tampons and pads were not because women protesters could use these non-lethal products against those in the Texas Congress.

Guns okay. Tampons not okay.

-Nam

[Hakurei Reimu]

If someone kills themselves with a drug because they're too stupid to quit, I feel that that's a rational outcome in the grand scheme of things.

1. It's not the drug (nicotine) that kills you; it's all the rest of the crap that comes along with it in the chosen delivery system (smoke). It is incumbant on the tobacco industry to deliver the actual product (nicotine) in a safer manner.

2. When you are addicted to a drug, you have a diminished capacity to make choices. Physical withdrawl is a very unpleasant thing to experience, and so you structure your whole life around having ready access to that drug. Yes, some may be able to quit on their own, but the drug addiction itself discourages that, and as such the most successful at breaking the addiction do so with medical intervention.

3. Cigarettes are sold as a cosmetic thing, like makeup or clothes â€" they're part of an image. They have no medical value. They are also advertized such that kids and teens will be enticed into making a poor decision early on, and the product designed to keep you hooked with physical addiction.

So the tobacco companies have been engaged in a campaign to catch users before they have the full reasoning capacity of an adult, with a product designed to discourage quitting when that capacity does develop, and the product is detrimental to health even with proper use. That's malicious and malevolent, and as such tobacco companies shoulder a lot of the blame for anyone's death by cigarettes.

[Solitary]

It doesn't help when unethical scientists that work for the tobacco companies downplay or give false information about the dangers of cigarette smoking from their research. Solitary

[Nam]

1. It's not the drug (nicotine) that kills you; it's all the rest of the crap that comes along with it in the chosen delivery system (smoke). It is incumbant on the tobacco industry to deliver the actual product (nicotine) in a safer manner.

2. When you are addicted to a drug, you have a diminished capacity to make choices. Physical withdrawl is a very unpleasant thing to experience, and so you structure your whole life around having ready access to that drug. Yes, some may be able to quit on their own, but the drug addiction itself discourages that, and as such the most successful at breaking the addiction do so with medical intervention.

3. Cigarettes are sold as a cosmetic thing, like makeup or clothes â€" they're part of an image. They have no medical value. They are also advertized such that kids and teens will be enticed into making a poor decision early on, and the product designed to keep you hooked with physical addiction.

So the tobacco companies have been engaged in a campaign to catch users before they have the full reasoning capacity of an adult, with a product designed to discourage quitting when that capacity does develop, and the product is detrimental to health even with proper use. That's malicious and malevolent, and as such tobacco companies shoulder a lot of the blame for anyone's death by cigarettes.

I started when I was 8 years old. It was advertised everywhere, and in the 80's and the 90's where I lived while they kept regular cigarettes at the front of the counter (and behind), they kept cigars, mini cigars, chewing tobacco, and snuff etc., in the candy aisle.

THE CANDY AISLE!!!

Where kids go.

Also, in the candy aisle they had candy that looked and acted like tobacco products. Like, the cigarettes. Stick gum wrapped like a cigarette and instead of sucking you blew on it and powder would come out like smoke.

Then you had the "chew" gum, in a bag like chewing tobacco, with a baseball player on the package showing you that chewing is cool because baseball players do it.

Then you had the tape gum that was supposed to look like a snuff can.

Etc.,

That's how they got me, and the cigarette adverts in school. I remember one in elementary where at the front of the Cafeteria they had cartoon adverts for smoking, and how it was good for you after or before a meal. All children saw that before lunch.

I heard the excuses afterward: those were adverts for the teachers not the students. Rebuttal: they were cartoons. Answer: teachers like cartoons.

Etc.,

I was coerced into it like so many other children from the 1970's to the early 1990's when they aggressively targeted children.

People who say that didn't happen are blind to reality. My second topic is evidence it happened. I wish I had more photographic evidence but I don't but that one to PRESCHOOLERS should be enough.

Now, for people like my sister who smoke, and didn't start smoking until they were adults because "my friends do it", are fuckin' morons, in such regard. If they're going to sue people they should sue themselves for being fucking retarded.

-Nam

[Berati]

Fuck it..I can't argue with anyone who even tries to remotely defend the tobacco companies after they've knowingly killed millions upon millions of people and will continue to. They ought to be shot at sunrise, every fucking one of them..

I get what you're saying but I'm trying to look at the bigger picture. This is not at all about defending the tobacco industry, it’s about personal responsibility. I think you know my views enough by now to know that I’m no shill for corporate America , but…

This is the same mentality that has people suing their local bar for being “over served”

I think the tobacco companies and farmers could still be sued for their treatment of migrant workers and use of children for labor. But I have little to no sympathy for smokers.

I’m over 50 now and I remember my older brother and I getting in trouble when I was around 10 years old for hiding my mother’s cigarettes because we had already heard how dangerous smoking was. I was 10 in 1973 and I knew it then. Anybody today claiming they were duped into smoking is just plain lying.

Why not sue Coca Cola if you’re fat and diabetic. Coke used to advertise itself as a health drink at the turn f the century.

Sorry, but IMO 26 billion to one person for their self inflicted wounds is, as the title of this thread says, ridiculous!

[Berati]

1. It's not the drug (nicotine) that kills you; it's all the rest of the crap that comes along with it in the chosen delivery system (smoke). It is incumbant on the tobacco industry to deliver the actual product (nicotine) in a safer manner.

2. When you are addicted to a drug, you have a diminished capacity to make choices. Physical withdrawl is a very unpleasant thing to experience, and so you structure your whole life around having ready access to that drug. Yes, some may be able to quit on their own, but the drug addiction itself discourages that, and as such the most successful at breaking the addiction do so with medical intervention.

3. Cigarettes are sold as a cosmetic thing, like makeup or clothes â€" they're part of an image. They have no medical value. They are also advertized such that kids and teens will be enticed into making a poor decision early on, and the product designed to keep you hooked with physical addiction.

So the tobacco companies have been engaged in a campaign to catch users before they have the full reasoning capacity of an adult, with a product designed to discourage quitting when that capacity does develop, and the product is detrimental to health even with proper use. That's malicious and malevolent, and as such tobacco companies shoulder a lot of the blame for anyone's death by cigarettes.

Just a few comments.
Nicotine by itself is incredibly toxic. There is a very small amount in each cigarette but 1 gram of pure nicotine would kill you very quickly. Nicotine is also the addictive part of cigarettes. So even leaving all the other crap out would still leave you with a deadly and addictive substance. Even if you grow your own tobacco (which is legal) you will still get the nicotine and the carcinogens (which always occur when you combust organic material like leaves) Who would you sue then? Yourself?

Everything you say about addiction and drugs can also be said bout alcohol... but alcohol is still advertised, cigarettes are not and have not been for quite some time. The campaigns you refer to to catch users while young were banned since before most of you here were born. I can't see that being used as an excuse anymore.

Alcohol companies are the next ones who will be sued by those who chose to drink (it's already happening) so be prepared to pay allot more for your booze.

BTW, I hope you all realize that the companies will simply pass the cost of the lawsuits back into the cost of the cigarettes or alcohol itself. You smokers and drinkers will be paying off the ridiculous amounts being awarded to individuals for their self inflicted wounds. Even if some of your dreams come true and the cigarette and alcohol industry are destroyed... all we will end up with is a black market (which is way worse that what we have now)... and people will still smoke and drink.

[Nam]

I’m over 50 now and I remember my older brother and I getting in trouble when I was around 10 years old for hiding my mother’s cigarettes because we had already heard how dangerous smoking was. I was 10 in 1973 and I knew it then. Anybody today claiming they were duped into smoking is just plain lying.

So, I am a liar?

Fuck you.

-Nam

[Hijiri Byakuren]

So, I am a liar?

Fuck you.

-Nam

Get used to it. I've never seen him argue a case without making unbased assumptions and generalizations.

[Hakurei Reimu]

Just a few comments.
Nicotine by itself is incredibly toxic. There is a very small amount in each cigarette but 1 gram of pure nicotine would kill you very quickly. Nicotine is also the addictive part of cigarettes. So even leaving all the other crap out would still leave you with a deadly and addictive substance.

Irrelevant. In the dosages delivered in your typical cigarette, nicotine is not particularly toxic, just addictive. Dosage is everything.

Even if you grow your own tobacco (which is legal) you will still get the nicotine and the carcinogens (which always occur when you combust organic material like leaves) Who would you sue then? Yourself?

Irrelevant. It is the tobacco companies who make the product, so they can be subject to lawsuit because they are the ones who develop the product for mass consumption and as such bear responsibility for making the product as safe as feasable in its intended use.

Everything you say about addiction and drugs can also be said bout alcohol... but alcohol is still advertised, cigarettes are not and have not been for quite some time. The campaigns you refer to to catch users while young were banned since before most of you here were born. I can't see that being used as an excuse anymore.

Made today, mimics chewing tobacco. It's all a part of the image. Explicit advertisement to children is illegal, but there's still implicit and parallel advertisement.

Alcohol companies are the next ones who will be sued by those who chose to drink (it's already happening) so be prepared to pay allot more for your booze.

Minneolas to oranges (ie, while the comparison is closer, it's still not the same). You can drink moderately your entire life and not suffer ill effects from alcohol, and might even benefit medically. Not so with smoking. Used as advertised, smoking will damage your health. Also, alcohol doesn't come with a bunch of other carcinogenic crap.

I also don't think there is a single drinker out there who drinks every hour or so just to feel normal, like with cigarettes.

BTW, I hope you all realize that the companies will simply pass the cost of the lawsuits back into the cost of the cigarettes or alcohol itself. You smokers and drinkers will be paying off the ridiculous amounts being awarded to individuals for their self inflicted wounds.

Self inflicted, but in diminished capacity. It speaks to the addictiveness of the cigarette that a smoker will brave the blistering cold of Vermont to have their smoke break every couple of hours. It speaks to the addictiveness of the cigarette that quitting cold turkey rarely works, and that the most successful at quitting smoking involve medical intervention. These people just don't think right when it comes to cigarettes.

Also, I doubt that the full $23 billion will actually be paid. It'll probably be knocked down as it works it's way through the appeals.

Even if some of your dreams come true and the cigarette and alcohol industry are destroyed... all we will end up with is a black market (which is way worse that what we have now)... and people will still smoke and drink.

Oh, come off it. The current crop of companies may go under, but tobacco and alcohol will still both be legal â€" even if people have to resort to growing tobacco themselves (as you pointed out before). What will happen is that new companies will crop up and buy out the bankrupt companies, and start fresh with cigarettes that are more benign and may even be phased out in favor of alternative delivery modes. (I doubt alcohol will be touched by their own lawsuits; the situation is way different, and there are still microbrews.)

[Lao Tou]

Yeah I gotta call bullshit here. The second time I smoked was from 1985 to 2000. Most of that time (except for a week on either end) I smoked 4 packs a day. That time period included the 11 years I lived in Taiwan and smoked their cheapest brand, Long Lifes. Those were basically Lucky Strikes with a filter. Yeah, you are talking a hooker's ass after a long pay day weekend. Nasty smokes.

I am not dead yet, dammit, and I have not wanted a smoke since 2000. But that is another story. Hey, you choose to smoke, you gambling bro. Sometimes the house wins.