Once we get rid of all the smoking criminals, then we can focus our attention on illegal immigrants. And in some cases, I bet we could even kill two birds with one stone.
There's no political will to go after illegals or they would already be rounded up. I say we go after the "fatties" for being eyesores and cost burdens. That's psychological and economic abuse.
Michael Siegel, that IS what tobacco control is all about. Being sarcastic about it won't change that. If I'm not much mistaken, anti smoker groups are going to respond to your fun poking by advocating something you made fun of.
Losing Your Parents to Smoking
KATU, a Portland, Oregon, TV station, reports that the physician-activist behind Washington state's smoking ban, Chris Covert-Bowlds, has a new mission: making it a crime to smoke around children. The rule would apply not only to smoking in cars (which Arkansas already has banned) but also to smoking at home. Covert-Bowlds says smoking in the presence of children should be treated as a form of child abuse, although he recommends "educating" parents before hauling them off to jail and putting their kids in foster care.
http://www.reason.com/hitandrun/
...ar.shtml#013715
And why limit it to smoking?
Epidemiology scholars offer up 'shock and awe,' education ideas.
To fight obesity, the nation needs a "shock and awe" campaign similar to public drives to stop smoking, including attention-grabbing posters and advertisements that illustrate grim health consequences, such as heart attacks, cancer, stroke and type 2 diabetes.
Fast-food outlets have a role in the battle of the bulge, according to the student epidemiologists.
Such chains should serve healthful foods at the same low prices that they seek for less nutritious fare, says Kelly Staves, 17, of Bellingham, Wash.
They should offer whole-grain breads and produce that hasn't "been sitting around in boxes for hours," says Sesha Hanson-Drury, 16, of Richland, Wash.
It would help if "fast-food chains would go away," suggests Elaine Shing, 16, of Duluth, Ga.
Or perhaps, posed Christopher Chen, 17, of San Marino, Calif., taste buds can one day be "genetically manipulated to prefer the taste of healthier foods."
(my emphases)
Are there any studies on the effects of brainwashing?
The possibilities are virtually unlimited:
The United States CPSC has initiated criminal legal action against us and other chemical suppliers.
In short, the CPSC would like to ban the public from all access to chemicals. This would mean an end to hobbies such as model rocketry, pyrotechnics and of course chemistry. One by one, our freedoms are slowly being taken away from us - this action must be stopped now.
'Ah, but think about "how many lives this will save." And when you're bureaucrat, banning stuff is fun!'
http://www.theagitator.com/
archi...6523.php#026523
Brainwashing has already been proposed (in 1997 by the Kessler-Koop Commission) to prevent "youths" from smoking.
Or to quote their report directly:
"Research the effect of subliminal messages in early childhood and among elementary school- aged children ..."
That comes from Appendix 3B but the whole report, whose recommendations are so frighteningly statist that i once dubbed it "The Final Solution To the Smoker Problem," can be found at the first part of this address:
http://ash.org/report2.html#Appendix3B
I'm a novelist who wrote a fictional account of a man who discovers he has been reincarnated. Now I will assume that reincarnation exists. Dr. Chris Covert-Bowles must have been a Nazi in a previous life.
I applaud those parents who smoke in front of their children. It was done for decades, and those who still do acknowledge the lies and BS of the Anti Prohibitionists. Yes, Prohibitionists. After reading through many of these blogs and the preposterous claims contained therin, there is no doubt in my mind that the goal here is a completely smoke-free society. Car accidents kill about 40,000 Americans per year. Therefore, we should go back to horses and buggies. Please, Big Brother! In your infinite wisdom, save us!
Walt, the content of the page you link to is frightening. Even Orwell couldn't have dreamed this up. It transfers law enforcement from the "perpetrator" to private businesses. Well, we all know the reasons: get the MONEY where you can get it. So much for the constitutional separation of powers.
Enforce prohibition on tobacco sales to minors through a national enforcement program consisting of the following elements:
* -- routine unannounced compliance testing enforcement through decoy "sting operations;"
* - require licensing of tobacco retailers with licensing fees [more money for government], and provide for fines, license suspension and revocation for repeated sales to minors;
* - target penalties primarily to store owners; [what the hell is the responsibilty of store owners in this game?]
* - require display of warning sign at cash register stating legal age-of-sale, ID required to purchase tobacco, and a toll-free number for customers to report illegal tobacco sales;
* - require tobacco companies to assist merchants by installing electronic scanners which require identification with every sale. This may require that identification is required with every sale but may be essential to achieve our goals.
Enforcement funded by a combination [a business selling a legal product has to act as if the product were illegal? How stupid can you get?] of moneys paid by tobacco industry, tobacco licensing fees, taxes or surcharges; [meaning: ultimately smokers pay for the smoking ban]
Commenting by HaloScan
