Gold prices plummet!

I could not care less how many smokers die by slow suicide but if one non
smoker does via second hand smoke then it's one too many that has to be
prevented no matter how many smokers whine about it. Billy


"Jud" wrote in message
...
On Oct 2, 12:45 pm, "Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote:
Jud wrote:
Smokers seem to be the only minority without rights.

Who you talkin' to?

James the Confused

Just to be up front, yes, I am a smoker. My tobacco tax dollars are
funding health insurance for children without insurance, which should
I (and everyone else) stop smoking , would render them without
insurance. So it appears to me that the government wants me to quit
smoking, and that would do damage to the kids, more so than '2nd hand
smoke'.

I believe that 99% of smokers rightfully believe that non-smokers have
rights, but the percentage of non-smokers who believe that smokers
have rights can be counted on one hand. Until they make smoking
illegal, it is my belief that wherever smoking is prohibited, a
designated smoking area should be provided. We smokers don't want to
infringe on non-smokers rights, we just want to have a place to go
where we won't offend you. In the winter we in Maine often hear a
warning to joggers not to go running because the temperature is too
low and is dangerous. Hmmmm...let me see if I have that right. Joggers
with healthy lungs are told not to go outside, but smokers aren't
permitted to smoke inside, so they have to go outside? The hazard to
your health is not from cancer, but from pneumonia! Women want 'potty
parity' for restrooms, smokers just want a place to call our own.

What is that story about WWII that goes along the lines of "They came
for the Jews, but I am not Jewish, so I did nothing" Beware! They
might come for left-handed people next! After all, proportionately,
they have more accidents than 'rightys'. Hey! I am offended by the
aftershave/perfume that some people wear! Where is the justice?

Jud - Pack a day Camel non-filter smoker for 45 years
(Only partially tongue-in-cheek)

note.boy wrote:
"Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote in message
...
note.boy wrote:
"Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote in message
...
oly wrote:
On Oct 2, 10:29 am, "Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com
wrote:
Jud wrote:
Smokers seem to be the only minority without rights.

Smokers have rights. Those rights are necessarily abridged, as
are virtually *all* rights. If you do not agree, please provide
a list of groups, majority or minority, that enjoy unabridged
rights, *or* any right or rights themselves that are unabridged,
historical or modern. James the Abridger of Rights

IMHO, once the meddling ninny *******s make smoking tobacco a
capital offense, then they come after the beer.

Now oly, sayaing that smoking is a capital offense is just a tad
extreme, dontcha think?


It already is a capital offence for about 25% of smokers. Billy

Hadn't thought of that. Good point. But that's their business. I
shouldn't have to be collateral damage.

James the Survivor



Roy Castle, a UK entertainer, died of a cancer that only smokers get
but he was a non smoker, he worked in many smoke filled clubs over
the years so he was killed by smokers.

Perhaps if a non smoker can smell cigarette smoke the smoker
responsible should be charged with attempted murder? Billy

Unfortunately, yours is a post hoc ergo propter hoc argument. One would
have to establish clear cause and effect beyond the shadow of a doubt (at
least in an American court) and that would take a very clever lawyer working
an very ignorant jury (not saying that combination never exists).

James the Bailiff

note.boy wrote:
I could not care less how many smokers die by slow suicide but if one
non smoker does via second hand smoke then it's one too many that has
to be prevented no matter how many smokers whine about it. Billy

I take risks every waking hour, and I'm not completely safe even during
sleep, so I don't worry so much about that. However, my beef has to do with
the genuine physical discomfort I experience when I breathe smoke, no matter
what kind or whose it is.

James the Hacker

"Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote in message
...
George D wrote:
The Giant Brain wrote:
"George D" wrote in message
...
Obama care won't fix this or maybe it will if he gets everything
he
wants and we move closer to socialism.

And that would be a bad thing because....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6H63CD7uQA&NR=1

I notice that the JQP in this 1948 propaganda piece was interested
in reading the primary document, something we virtually never hear
of these days. "Oh, it's just such hard reading." "Oh, I just
don't have time to read it." "Oh, I'll just get my news from ______
(fill in the blank with your favorite media blowhard)." Wait,
there's some crank on rcc who keeps harping on that very topic, but
no one ever listens to that old fart.

This Just In: According to Politifact.com, the House bill has 163,000
words and takes an estimated 7 to 13 hours to read. So much for those
bitching about having only 3 days to read it. That's only a couple of
hours a day if you put your mind (or your legislative assistants) to
it. Of course, there's additional time needed to analyze and draw
conclusions; but it's merely a demanding task, not an impossible one.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...e-reform-bill/

"Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote in message
...
oly wrote:
On Oct 2, 10:29 am, "Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote:
Jud wrote:
Smokers seem to be the only minority without rights.

Smokers have rights. Those rights are necessarily abridged, as are
virtually *all* rights. If you do not agree, please provide a list of
groups, majority or minority, that enjoy unabridged rights, *or* any
right or rights themselves that are unabridged, historical or modern.

James the Abridger of Rights

IMHO, once the meddling ninny *******s make smoking tobacco a capital
offense, then they come after the beer.

Now oly, sayaing that smoking is a capital offense is just a tad extreme,
dontcha think?

Accordingly, I will be right there with the smokers in the last ditch
fighting the damn ninnies.

And I'll be right there with my bucket of fresh pig manure and my stir
stick and *really* stink up the joint. Anyway, there's a big difference
between smokers and drinkers. I've never sat next to a drinker who
bothered me in the least. They can swill all the booze they want and it
doesn't affect my liver in the least manner. Smokers...lungs...different
story.

So would you seek out the restaurant that featured a smoker section just to
make your point? I suspect you would be asked to leave with your bucket,
while the smoker would be welcome to stay. Although I am a "reformed"
50-year smoker, I still think that many local governments have gone too far
too quickly with that issue. That being the case, I still would have no
problem abiding by the rules, if I were still a smoker.

"note.boy" wrote in message
...

"Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote in message
...
George D wrote:
Mr. Jaggers wrote:
Bruce Remick wrote:
"George D" wrote in message
...



snipped
As the documents change daily I know not how to do that and even
if I could find the most current of them I am not sufficiently
knowledgeable to be able to understand what they say and than
determine what the real effect will be if enacted. Damn even those
voting on them don't read them as you mention in your last
sentence. FWIW I do not listen to Limbaugh and the sources are from
both
right wing and left wing news. My home pages are azcentral, BBC,
and Foxnews anything else would only cause me to become more
confused. I only know that anytime the US government or any other
government
or quasi government gets started on anything they must grow or die.
This is true from your labor union, HOA, city, state, federal,
fire, or other group.

If the current bills pass into law it will only be the beginning of
a long down hill battle of more freedoms lost. One only needs to
look at what we had 40 or 50 years ago and where we are now to know
what a slippery slope we are on and as the years pass how much
faster we are slipping. You are a teacher of history so you must
know what we have lost in freedoms during this period. Many of the
laws could be considered for our own best interest BUT every one of
them reduces our ability to function independently. We are being
taught to let big brother take care of us and not learn to look out
for ourselves.
I was in college 50 years ago. The only freedoms I have lost since
that time, other than the freedom to be drafted, have been things
like checking in at an airport, walking out the door on the tarmack
to navigate a flight of stairs to my flight, and then lighting up a
smoke. Now we have to get to airport a couple hours early so our
selves and belongings can be searched. And smoke? Forgetaboutit. I
miss our old freedom there, but then we all have to go through the
same thing. Any other "freedoms" I might have lost in the past 50
years are equally as trivial and have little to do with our
government, per se. Which freedoms were you thinking of?

I consider it as having gained a freedom with the
smoking-in-public-places ban. No longer do I have to endure the
discomfort and danger of asthma from breathing secondary smoke or
smelling like a chimney when I leave a restaurant.

James the Nicotine-Addicted



I am a smoker and I understand that some people don't want smoking
near them but in city parks?????


http://www.azcentral.com/news/articl...ng0527-ON.html

I also believe a restaurant should be able to run its affairs with out
government interference. Let the market prevail if people don't want
smoking in the restaurant don't eat there. Non smoking areas or rooms
should be allowed for any business owner... We have been smoking on
this earth for a very long time and these laws are definitely a loss
of freedoms, both for the smokers and the owners of the business.

http://www.tobacco.org/History/Tobacco_History.html

George, I'm prepared to make you a deal!

We'll meet at a restaurant of your choice and sit at adjoining tables. I
will be bringing with me a large bucket of fresh pig manure with a stir
stick and you may bring the cigarette brand of your choice, even if your
choice happens to be Gauloises. As you enjoy your smoke, I will stir the
manure at regular intervals for your dining and dancing pleasure. The
only requirements are that we both eat everything on our plates and tip
the server appropriately.

James the Farmerboy


Was it larry Hagman who, upon being asked by someone if he minded that
they smoked, his reply wold be, do you mind if I fart.

In the real non-TV world, I imagine the most frequent answer would be "no".
Most smokers seem to be tolerant folks.

"Mr. Jaggers" lugburzman[at]yahoo[dot]com wrote in message
...
The Giant Brain wrote:
"George D" wrote in message
...

I am a smoker and I understand that some people don't want smoking
near them but in city parks?????

As I citizen I want to be free to enjoy a park without smelling
someone's stinking carcinogenic tobacco smoke.
You want to smoke? Go home, go in your car but don't expose others to
a proven health risk.

Just the other day I was in the drive-up at Mickie D's and the driver of
the car ahead of me was smoking with her window down. The breeze was such
that I got the full monte in my lungs as if I were sitting in the car with
her. Pew!

James the Gagger

C.mon, James, a bit overly dramatic. You're certainly old enough to
remember when this wouldn't have bothered you much at all. Just part of the
environment most of us occasionally share and tolerate, from bus exhausts to
body odor. Just today, I had to walk along the outdoor curb check-ins at
Las Vegas airport where many were enjoying their last puffs before going
inside. The odor of smoke was obvious and I'll admit a bit unpleasant, but
hardly something to declare outrage over. I doubt I was seriously damaged
from the brief experience. I doubt you were from yours either.

"Bruce Remick" wrote in message
...

So would you seek out the restaurant that featured a smoker section just to
make your point? I suspect you would be asked to leave with your bucket,
while the smoker would be welcome to stay. Although I am a "reformed" 50-year
smoker, I still think that many local governments have gone too far too
quickly with that issue. That being the case, I still would have no problem
abiding by the rules, if I were still a smoker.

I smoked for almost 40 years and quit cold turkey about 10 years ago.
I believe that there is solid evidence that 2nd hand smoke is dangerous.
When I'm in a restaurant, I'm there to enjoy the food, not smell someone's
stinky ciggie.
While I agree that some governments are getting carried away with anti-smoking
bans, banning is in restauarants is fine by me.
My take on the smoking issue is to make the tax so high ($30/pack or so) that
people will just be forced to give up smoking.

"The Giant Brain" wrote in message
...
"Bruce Remick" wrote in message
...

So would you seek out the restaurant that featured a smoker section just
to make your point? I suspect you would be asked to leave with your
bucket, while the smoker would be welcome to stay. Although I am a
"reformed" 50-year smoker, I still think that many local governments have
gone too far too quickly with that issue. That being the case, I still
would have no problem abiding by the rules, if I were still a smoker.

I smoked for almost 40 years and quit cold turkey about 10 years ago.
I believe that there is solid evidence that 2nd hand smoke is dangerous.
When I'm in a restaurant, I'm there to enjoy the food, not smell someone's
stinky ciggie.
While I agree that some governments are getting carried away with
anti-smoking bans, banning is in restauarants is fine by me.
My take on the smoking issue is to make the tax so high ($30/pack or so)
that people will just be forced to give up smoking.

I don't doubt that second hand cigarette smoke can be dangerous. It's just
the exasperated cries of health danger from people who experience the
slightest whiff of it that seems a bit over the top to me. Raising your
kids in a household of smoke is one thing, but catching a passing sniff of
tobacco smoke (where legal) from the third deck of a college football game
is quite another.

I also have no problem with non-smoking restaurants. When I smoked, I
accepted that, having no problem going without a smoke until after leaving.
I even was aware that lighting up as soon as I exited might irritate
incoming diners, so I waited until I was out of range. I believe most
smokers do abide by the ever-changing rules, but are constantly being
squeezed by over-zealous politicians eager to show their constituants-- some
of who are smokers-- how health conscious and green they are.

One reason I quit was because of the increasing price of the habit. I
probably wasn't alone there.

"Bruce Remick" wrote in message
...

One reason I quit was because of the increasing price of the habit. I
probably wasn't alone there.

My pop used to say he's quit when ciggies went up to $.25/pack (he didn't
though!)
Back in the day, when ciggies were $.23/pack, they used to tape 2 pennies to the
packs in the machines.
Wonder if there were any double-dies?
"Name" brand ciggies here are now around $8.00/pack but people keep smoking
anyway.