Pipes Magazine » Tobacco Legislation

Search Forums  
   
Tags:  No tags yet. 
[closed]

New Proposed Bill Seeks to Eliminate Online Tobacco Sales

(128 posts)
  • Started 4 months ago by chasingembers
  • Latest reply from Kevin Godbee
  1. brian64

    brian64

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Jan 2011
    Posts: 5,254

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    I had Skype once.

    Fortunately a long-term regimen of broad-spectrum antibiotics put it in remission.

    “Bipartisan usually means some larger-than-usual deception is being carried out.” – George Carlin
    Posted 4 months ago #
  2. olkofri

    Olkofri

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Sep 2017
    Posts: 2,168

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    I had Skype once.

    Fortunately a long-term regimen of broad-spectrum antibiotics put it in remission.


    Whoa, did it come with Melissa or Wannacry?

    Not the sweet, new grass with flowers is this harvesting of mine;
    Not the upland clover bloom...
    Posted 4 months ago #
  3. diamondback

    diamondback

    Member
    Joined: Feb 2019
    Posts: 227

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Pype dystopia.

    Can’t get political, but yes, I couldn’t agree more. In every aspect of our lives, this is indeed where things are headed. ‘They’ want it all. From the Boy Scouts to pipe tobacco. All of it. Not joking.

    We hang together or we hang separately.

    “Well, I can’t cure death. This is bad, Morty. You’re trapped in a dead man. Listen, if the situation keeps darkening, do yourself a favor and pop by Pirates of the Pancreas. Obviously I’m biased, but I think it’s great, Morty. It’s a bunch of *belches* pirates running around a *belches* pancreas. We don’t whitewash it, either, Morty. I mean, the pirates are really rapey.” - Rick & Morty
    Posted 4 months ago #
  4. brian64

    brian64

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Jan 2011
    Posts: 5,254

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Whoa, did it come with Melissa or Wannacry?

    lol ... I had to look those up...I figured they must be computer viruses.

    Strange times this internet age.

    Posted 4 months ago #
  5. brian64

    brian64

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Jan 2011
    Posts: 5,254

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    ‘They’ want it all.

    And then some.

    The world is not enough.

    Posted 4 months ago #
  6. chasingembers

    chasingembers

    Captain Of The Black Frigate
    Joined: Nov 2014
    Posts: 15,583

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    I see a lot of Skyping and FaceTime in the future....

    Probably a loophole they have considered as Skype is not true face to face. UPS already will not ship cigarettes and mini cigars and the bill will likely ban private shipments of tobacco.

    I like coffee exceedingly.
    - H. P. Lovecraft
    Posted 4 months ago #
  7. diamondback

    diamondback

    Member
    Joined: Feb 2019
    Posts: 227

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    And then some.

    The world is not enough.

    Amen my friend.

    (Wish I could say what I really think.)

    Anyway, cellar up. On lots of cool stuff.

    III

    Posted 4 months ago #
  8. derhammer

    derhammer

    Senior Member
    Joined: Sep 2018
    Posts: 336

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    I am sorry if this is political.
    But why are the D always wanna change everything so awesome about the US?

    Pierre
    Posted 4 months ago #
  9. chasingembers

    chasingembers

    Captain Of The Black Frigate
    Joined: Nov 2014
    Posts: 15,583

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    I goes deeper than political parties, even beyond them. The masses of antis plus the W.H.O. have got their eyes set on crushing the thing.

    Posted 4 months ago #
  10. olkofri

    Olkofri

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Sep 2017
    Posts: 2,168

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    ^^
    This. Something I suspected, but essentially confirmed after reading the replies to the E-mails sent to elected officials fighting the plain packaging for all tobacco products new regulations.

    Posted 4 months ago #
  11. brian64

    brian64

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Jan 2011
    Posts: 5,254

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    There are also two significant, must read articles on the site linked in the OP that offer some hope for a bit of sanity being involved in all of this...and address most of the key issues involved.

    One would hope that since the IPCPR (ostensibly) includes pipes, that if this "exemption" were to be successful it would include "premium" pipe tobacco as well as premium cigars.

    Rubio Holds Congressional Hearing on Premium Cigars

    https://tobaccobusiness.com/rubio-holds-congressional-hearing-on-premium-cigars/

    Castor Introduces HR 1854 to Exempt Premium Cigars

    The bill joins other efforts on Capitol Hill to exempt premium cigars from federal regulation including senate bill S9 that also seeks premium cigar exemption and was introduced by Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL).

    “IPCPR is very pleased that there is a strong bi-partisan support for the thousands of premium cigar retailers throughout this country and the many thousands our members employ,” commented Scott Pearce, executive director of the International Premium Cigar & Pipe Retailers Association (IPCPR). “We are proud that as we have engaged policy makers, our message that continuing with existing and planned regulations on this artisanal industry will cripple it to the point of obsolescence, has resonated and is gaining momentum.”

    https://tobaccobusiness.com/castor-introduces-hr-1854-to-exempt-premium-cigars/

    Posted 4 months ago #
  12. sablebrush52

    sablebrush52

    The Bard Of Barlings
    Joined: Jun 2013
    Posts: 9,782

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    One would hope that it could be argued that pipe tobacco should be treated in the same manner as premium cigars. I find it concerning that pipe tobaccos are never mentioned in any of this and I wonder if there is some nebulous connection being made between pipe smoking and vaping.

    It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt. - Mark Twain

    It is pointless to argue with a fanatic since a dim bulb can't be converted into a searchlight. - Jesse Silver
    Posted 4 months ago #
  13. ashdigger

    ashdigger

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Jul 2016
    Posts: 5,298

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    I find it concerning that pipe tobaccos are never mentioned in any of this and I wonder if there is some nebulous connection being made between pipe smoking and vaping

    Exactly!!

    Where is RYO in this mess?

    Ubi Ignis Est?
    Posted 4 months ago #
  14. chasingembers

    chasingembers

    Captain Of The Black Frigate
    Joined: Nov 2014
    Posts: 15,583

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    There's no difference in this newer outlook, it's all tobacco to them. It contains nicotine, burns, "produces chemicals known by the state of California-blah, blah, blah", and is generally frowned upon by the populace.

    Posted 4 months ago #
  15. olkofri

    Olkofri

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Sep 2017
    Posts: 2,168

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    ^^
    This. Again. Looks like the Cap'n is on a roll.

    Even non-smokers who aren't anti-tobacco wouldn't move a finger to stop this—better things to worry about, yadda, yadda. Worse, a number of smokers with perpetual pangs of guilt support such legislation too.

    Posted 4 months ago #
  16. brian64

    brian64

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Jan 2011
    Posts: 5,254

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    There's no difference in this newer outlook, it's all tobacco to them. It contains nicotine, burns, "produces chemicals known by the state of California-blah, blah, blah", and is generally frowned upon by the populace.

    You have to keep this issue separate from the CA state stuff. The "premium" cigar industry does have some pull, and is probably the only reason why internet sales haven't gone away already.

    But even at the state level, some states specifically include pipe tobacco in their exemption for on-line sales.

    As far as the RYO issue, the same distinction that's being made in those articles between premium cigars and all other cigars is the same distinction that should be made between premium pipe tobacco and RYO.

    The only sliver of hope I see at the moment in this is, as I said before, the "IPCPR" includes pipes/pipe tobacco along with premium cigars. But whether pipes are really being represented in the talks at the legislative level I have no idea because as Sable said, it just never seems to get mentioned in these articles

    This excerpt is very telling...if premium cigars are that small a percentage, premium pipe tobacco must be nearly non-existent:

    “Premium cigars are just 3 percent of the cigar industry and just one half of one percent of the tobacco industry as a whole. We are just a tiny sliver of the tobacco world,” explained Newman. “According to current estimates, it will cost approximately $30 million for our historic Tampa cigar factory to comply with FDA regulation. This is why FDA estimated that regulation would force as much as 50 percent of the cigar industry out of business.”

    https://tobaccobusiness.com/rubio-holds-congressional-hearing-on-premium-cigars/

    Posted 4 months ago #
  17. carcosa

    carcosa

    Member
    Joined: Oct 2013
    Posts: 154

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    This is lame, I spend about 80 bucks every 3 months on tobacco and thats all i can afford. All the local shops around here sell bongs and cary crap for pipe tobacco. I used to go to a local tobacco shop that was decent but cost 25 bucks for a tin of petersons, now a new owner took over and no selection of pipe tobacco. (smoking some peter stokebey cherry as i write this) i have no tobacco saved excpt for a can of syrian latakia and what i smoke through every few months.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  18. hoosierpipeguy

    hoosierpipeguy

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Jan 2018
    Posts: 1,964

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Whether this is passed and/or whether it happens in a month, 6 months, a year or whatever, I believe it is inevitable that State Sales tax will be charged and some States won't allow tobacco products to be sent to their Residents. If smoking were important to me and I lived in one of those States, I'd be considering some alternative workarounds. A cheap MailBoxes Etc. in the nearest town/city in a State near to me. Or an amenable friend who would accept shipments in a State near to me. Inconvenient? Yes. Impossible? No.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  19. didimauw

    didimauw

    Mod
    Joined: Jul 2013
    Posts: 3,048

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Yes it's a good thing I can get Carter Hall at the local grocery store. And I've had gas stations start keeping it in stock for me as well.

    "I don't know half of you half as well as I should like, and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
    Posted 3 months ago #
  20. hawky454

    hawky454

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Feb 2016
    Posts: 2,991

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Man, I really do feel bad for those who are just now getting into this “hobby” of ours or those who were not fortunate enough to be able to stock up on tobacco. It’s just sad that it’s come to this.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  21. brian64

    brian64

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Jan 2011
    Posts: 5,254

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Yes it's a good thing I can get Carter Hall at the local grocery store. And I've had gas stations start keeping it in stock for me as well.

    They'll come for that too eventually. They want it all.

    What they really want is your soul.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  22. didimauw

    didimauw

    Mod
    Joined: Jul 2013
    Posts: 3,048

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Damn, already gave my soul away.... Too bad

    Posted 3 months ago #
  23. hoosierpipeguy

    hoosierpipeguy

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Jan 2018
    Posts: 1,964

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Man, I really do feel bad for those who are just now getting into this “hobby” of ours or those who were not fortunate enough to be able to stock up on tobacco. It’s just sad that it’s come to this.

    Me too but when you think about it, it wasn't that long ago that Smoking Pipes, P&C, Tobacco Pipes and all those folks didn't exist on the internet. I remember calling in orders for cigars and pipe tobacco to stores I learned about from other folks. If someone wants something bad enough, they will find it and buy it. Assuming the actual stores are still open for business, if I had to, I'd save up as much money as possible, rent a passenger van or pick up, and drive to one of the big retailers for a major purchase and deliver home myself. It's really only a question of how bad do you want it.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  24. User has not uploaded an avatar

    cfreud

    Member
    Joined: Feb 2014
    Posts: 162

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Before we panic — too late, I suppose — can't we be comforted by two realities of our political world? Two Democrats proposed the bill in the House. Ergo, even if it gets out of the House, the Senate ain't going to approve it. If the Democrats like something, the Republicans don't, and vice versa. Seriously, how is this going to get through Congress as a whole? Meanwhile, you have to remember that states, though they pass laws against smoking, still rely on taxation of tobacco. Sin taxes are good revenue sources for federal and state governments. While unpleasant, it's still necessary to keep producing tobacco and have smokers to collect said revenues. Just a few thoughts. Resume panic, if you please.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  25. cosmicfolklore

    Cosmic

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Aug 2013
    Posts: 18,229

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Sin taxes are good revenue sources

    Maybe, although most of them are designed moistly to reduce smokers. But, that means nothing here, because buying tobacco online bypasses all of the sin taxes. It's inevitable. Cigarettes and chewing tobacco and dip are all illegal to ship to residents. I'm not panic'd, because I have seen this coming for a long time. Buy now, buy as much as you can, because the end is near. B&M's are praying this day will come sooner, because it will be our only way to purchase in the future... and the gov can continue to collect their taxes.

    Michael
    Posted 3 months ago #
  26. daniel7

    daniel7

    Senior Member
    Joined: Sep 2018
    Posts: 313

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    One more reason to travel. I do it already, whenever and wherever I travel, I buy enough tobacco (even some local ones) until my next travel.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  27. crazyhog

    crazyhog

    Member
    Joined: May 2015
    Posts: 206

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    I highly doubt that bill will pass as written. That's not to say that a toned down version won't pass in the near future. I'm glad I'm a casual puffer and that a 50 gram tin will last me almost three months. Unfortunately, many fellow pipers go through this amount weekly.

    "I yam what I yam."
    Posted 3 months ago #
  28. chuckyeageronlsd

    chuckyeageronlsd

    New Member
    Joined: Mar 2019
    Posts: 48

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Yet people just roll over an accept it. What happened? I thought this was America. You know that place founded by a bunch of long haired pipe smokers who hated taxes and big government.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  29. warren

    warren

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Sep 2013
    Posts: 7,643

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    The people do not roll over and accept it. They go out and reelect the same people time and again. A large centralized government is the choice of the people. So, blame your fore-bearers, neighbors and yourself if you do not vote from a position of knowledge.

    I believe the country was founded by wealthy, landholding men ... objecting to being taxed without a voice in the Parliament. While I fail to see what the personal habits regarding smoking and hair-style has to to with the current situation, I will point out that many of those people also wore powdered wigs, silk pantaloons and stockings.

    It is the people who took a limited government, only certain areas reserved for such governance, the bulk of the control assigned to the individual states, and allowed such, indeed encouraged it, to grow into a large central government. The government didn't do that ... the voters did.

    A man without a shillelagh is a man without an expedient.
    Posted 3 months ago #
  30. chuckyeageronlsd

    chuckyeageronlsd

    New Member
    Joined: Mar 2019
    Posts: 48

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Yeah they do, when was the last pro tobacco demonstration or protest? Something else needs to be done, voting isn't working. We need to protect our right to engage in free enterprise to facilitate our choice to smoke. As far as I'm concerned if my smoking habit hurts no one but myself it's none of their business to regulate.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  31. warren

    warren

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Sep 2013
    Posts: 7,643

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    No one really cares about you smoking a pipe. It's about tobacco and society. And, interstate commerce, taxes (local and customs duties), whether or not you'll avail yourself of government funded medical moneys (Your neighbors' moneys for all intents and purposes.) should you suffer health problems, etc.

    Five guys smoking pipes in front of the local Federal building is hardly gonna draw interest from the media. Well, other than humorous comments. And, the general public simply doesn't accept smoking as socially acceptable. We smokers are on the losing side of that issue. Even many of the members here acknowledge smoking is not efficacious nor defensible. All we smokers really have going for us is that it is pleasurable. Hardly a defense which can be used to combat all of the negatives attached to tobacco use.

    As to various government interests in your smoking. They have a vested interested in you and your tobacco related products. You do rely on the government to see that you get your product when you order. You rely on various government agencies to insure that you are not "ripped off" when buying either mail order or in person. You rely on the government to have trade rules and treaties in place so you may purchase purchase imported tobaccos, pipes and other paraphernalia. Then there are the various agencies overseeing the raising of the leaf and production of the blends you smoke and, the working conditions of those who are in the chain. If you have a loved one close by to call emergency services (tax payer funded) should you suffer a stroke or other malady which can be attributed to smoking ... well, there is another reason for "government" to take an interest. Sure, some of the relationships cited above are tenuous but, they all form part of the basis to have an interest in your smoking and are used to justify the various, often intrusive regulations.

    All life is politics and we smokers do not have the clout to stem the tide of the electorate. They have spoken, loudly and the people we elect to make the rules have heard.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  32. chuckyeageronlsd

    chuckyeageronlsd

    New Member
    Joined: Mar 2019
    Posts: 48

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Just because they use those things to justify their illegitimate attack on my personal choice, it does not make it just. Last I checked, I had to pay my medical bills. Society really means crap to me when it comes to personal choices. The war on tobacco did not come from the electorate. It came from rich busybodies who funded decades long smear campaigns and injected propaganda into the mass media to control the opinion of the electorate. I have no problem making sure that I don't get ripped off, believe it or not, it still happens even with government oversight. In fact the government is the reason they are getting ripped off on excise taxes. Had they not effectively forced so many B&Ms into closure they would still be collecting their extorted gains through that route and this would essentially be a non issue. I only resorted to online purchasing because of the closure of local B&Ms, and I'm sure many others have for the same reason. If voting isn't going to work I'm afraid we're going to have to go with that other v word.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  33. chuckyeageronlsd

    chuckyeageronlsd

    New Member
    Joined: Mar 2019
    Posts: 48

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    They're trying to be my nanny, I don't want a nanny, I want to smoke.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  34. warren

    warren

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Sep 2013
    Posts: 7,643

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    No one is interfering with your choice to smoke. It is not prohibited. You and I made the choice to smoke. But, it is a choice, not a right, certain restrictions and obligations come with the choice, just like getting a driver's license. There are consequences that come with the choice to smoke. Taxes and the "slings and arrows" of society are only a part of what we face.

    When I started smoking, sixty years ago, I knew it wasn't going to get cheaper as the years went on. I also knew society was starting to take smoking related illnesses and the attendant costs seriously. My mother was a founding member of the "American Cancer Society" in Alaska back in the fifties. Bless her heart and rest her soul, she was a caring lady.

    I choose to enjoy my smoking and not give a thought to what society thinks or to the costs. I've weighed the risks and rewards. I can readily afford the increasing costs. I wouldn't have a problem if tobacco usage were to be suddenly banned though. I'd take my increased disposable income and find something else I enjoyed, model trains for instance. Neither smoking nor pipes are necessary for me to live an enjoyable life.

    And voting is working! You're just not getting your way. You and I are in a tiny, tiny minority. And, I'm not a supporter of smoking "per se." I am somewhat selfish though and feed the need for nicotine all the waking hours of the day. Smoking, as a political issue, simply isn't that important to me in the grand scheme of life. It's a little pleasure but, not a necessary one.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  35. chuckyeageronlsd

    chuckyeageronlsd

    New Member
    Joined: Mar 2019
    Posts: 48

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Even if the pro tobacco people are in the minority that is irrelevant. It is widely recognized that minority oppression by the majority is wrong and was a danger the fore fathers didn't take lightly. While taxes may not be a ban de jure, I think in many cases that it could be argued that it is progressing into a de facto prohibition. By doing this to online sales they are effectively denying me access to choices on the free market. I would, and I mean would in the literal sense, compromise and say this. If they want taxes online, fine. Find a way to collect just as they have done with sales tax, it's obviously not that hard. Keeping it out of the hands of minors is fine as well, as others have mentioned we have technologies such as skype. But to say that they are going to outright ban sales online is essentially moving towards a de facto prohibition. However, they don't want you to smoke period. They do not want a compromise, even though smokers and the like have been compromising for decades. They want to subject you to their psychopathic will. Like I said, I would compromise, but for this reason I refuse to compromise and so should others. They view you as property and they don't want you to damage company property by smoking. Judging by many of their attitudes were not far from requiring a tax stamp to possess and requiring possession to obtain a tax stamp.

    While it can be argued that the taxes raised are for the extra medical expense of smokers it's not a very effective argument. Very rarely do those funds go to actual medical expenses. They are largely misappropriated into other funds as the government sees fit. Do we get to tax obese people too?

    Posted 3 months ago #
  36. chasingembers

    chasingembers

    Captain Of The Black Frigate
    Joined: Nov 2014
    Posts: 15,583

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Tobacco is a want and not a need. If looked at from a pursuit of happiness angle, it is looked at as infringing upon non users pursuit of happiness. The world wide popular opinion of tobacco is negative and pro tobacco groups and individuals are quickly losing ground. Argue all we want, majority rules especially over an unnecessary commodity like tobacco.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  37. chuckyeageronlsd

    chuckyeageronlsd

    New Member
    Joined: Mar 2019
    Posts: 48

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    It may be looked at that way, however what I do alone in the privacy of my own home does not infringe on anybody. They are infringing on my pursuit. No disrespect intended embers but that seems to be a defeatist attitude to me, and I do not intend to go quietly without a fight to these uptight busybodies who think that they have they right to impose moral control through varies government means.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  38. sablebrush52

    sablebrush52

    The Bard Of Barlings
    Joined: Jun 2013
    Posts: 9,782

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    I thought this was America. You know that place founded by a bunch of long haired pipe smokers who hated taxes and big government.

    They didn't hate taxes, they hated taxes imposed by a foreign government to fund foreign needs, no taxation without representation.

    The Founding Fathers were also among the wealthiest land owning elite who didn't believe that the common people should have the same rights as they had. Some of them, quite frankly, didn't like the idea of a democracy as it potentially put too much power in the hands of people who they felt were too ill equipped to handle it. Wealth was equated with wisdom and virtue. If you weren't wealthy there was clearly something lacking in your character. So I have no problem with the country having strayed from the original intent of some of the Founders.

    Complain all you want, but the course is pretty well set. We might have had more B&M's if people had chosen to support them rather than running to online stores for the cheapest price.

    And Embers' point is a good one. Can you keep your smoke to yourself without encumbering others who may not wish to partake of it by being in proximity?

    Posted 3 months ago #
  39. chuckyeageronlsd

    chuckyeageronlsd

    New Member
    Joined: Mar 2019
    Posts: 48

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Yes I can, assuming they do not invite themselves onto my 10 acre property. I don't smoke in public. I made that concession, yet you give them an inch and they take a mile. If people do not like smoke, they need not come to my property.

    While it's hard to argue that online stores have an advantage, I don't think they would have had the same advantage without subjugating regulations and nanny laws.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  40. ashdigger

    ashdigger

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Jul 2016
    Posts: 5,298

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    You must have a bunker with a basement. Your argument is with the wrong folks. Social norms change and commerce changes and legislation changes.

    It's adapt or die time.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  41. chuckyeageronlsd

    chuckyeageronlsd

    New Member
    Joined: Mar 2019
    Posts: 48

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    I would rather die for liberation than live in subjugation.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  42. warren

    warren

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Sep 2013
    Posts: 7,643

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    uptight busybodies who think that they have they right to impose moral control through varies government means.

    Your logic is very convoluted. At least I can't follow it. There is no "moral" argument, that's a real stretch, involved in the right or wrong of tobacco use. It's a purely selfish choice which can harm others and the smoker. If you desire total freedom from the regs and laws, grow your own tobacco, make your pipes and smoke in isolation where you are not harming others. To do otherwise means you are depending on various government supports to continue to acquire blends, pipes etc. I feel a breeze. Are you simply "blowing smoke" up my kilt.

    If you feel so strongly, run for office, appeal to others for support, get elected and change the regs.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  43. chuckyeageronlsd

    chuckyeageronlsd

    New Member
    Joined: Mar 2019
    Posts: 48

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    I mean in a way I am appealing to others for support, if there's not support for smoking among fellow smokers what hope have we? As I said, I do not smoke in public and if someone doesn't like smoking they can see themselves off my property, so who am I hurting other than myself? For people to say that my smoking hurts other people passes a judgement of morality on my activity and using this logic to pass laws to regulate or frustrate my smoking becomes a morality law. The biggest moral argument is this "should someone have the right to frustrate or prohibit my activity if in doing that activity, smoking, it does not harm another?" My belief is no, no one has that right. We will have to agree to disagree on a great many things. And although I disagree with you I wouldn't go so far as to say your logic is very convoluted.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  44. warren

    warren

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Sep 2013
    Posts: 7,643

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Nothing is prohibiting you or anyone else of age from smoking. But, don't look to me to support your choice. I think smoking is simply a bad choice. One I made years ago, well informed. I expect no other to support me in my poor choice. I neither want nor solicit the support of others for the poor choices I've made in life.

    If your complaint is based on the taxes and other out of pocket costs you need to earn more money or quit smoking. If it's based on the so called "moralists" as you refer to the anti-tobacco crowd ... suck it up, it ain't gonna get any better. But, again I don't see a moral/immoral side to the debate. Though, depending on what one's religion may be self-harm could be a sin.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  45. chuckyeageronlsd

    chuckyeageronlsd

    New Member
    Joined: Mar 2019
    Posts: 48

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Not yet, but if this bill passes it essentially attempts to by limiting my accessibility. They are trying to kill the industry, but maybe that will be a good thing. I hear the black market is good money. Tax free. That's what they will create.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  46. chasingembers

    chasingembers

    Captain Of The Black Frigate
    Joined: Nov 2014
    Posts: 15,583

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    No disrespect intended embers but that seems to be a defeatist attitude

    You're asking to fight a battle that was lost decades ago. The world has got it in its head that tobacco causes all ills. The only way you could make any forward movement with tobacco is to prove it is a viable fuel source or a cure for cancer. We're hanging onto the fringes of a dying market where the majority of the populace sees tobacco as a bad thing. You're not granted the right to smoke but for the time being, although limited, it's still a privilege.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  47. User has not uploaded an avatar

    bent1

    Member
    Joined: Jan 2015
    Posts: 239

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Wonder if the feds could be sued for interfering with the right to life, liberty, & pursuit of happiness?

    Posted 3 months ago #
  48. ashdigger

    ashdigger

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Jul 2016
    Posts: 5,298

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Wonder if the feds could be sued for interfering with the right to life, liberty, & pursuit of happiness?

    It would be helpful to read the Constitution. From the Preamble

    We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

    The short answer is no, but I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn.

    BTW, I'm no believer in big government and my favorite holiday is April 19th, but they do have the power to regulate items with results you don't agree with. Go to the ballot box.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  49. chasingembers

    chasingembers

    Captain Of The Black Frigate
    Joined: Nov 2014
    Posts: 15,583

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Wonder if the feds could be sued for interfering with the right to life, liberty, & pursuit of happiness?

    Again, that would imply having those things without infringing on the same for others.

    Life- popular opinion: tobacco is bad for life

    Liberty- free to do what you want as long as it causes other no harm: second hand smoke

    Pursuit of Happiness- antis aren't terribly happy around tobacco users.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  50. brian64

    brian64

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Jan 2011
    Posts: 5,254

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    I never understood why they bothered including the 9th and 10th amendments since the "general welfare" clause apparently trumps everything.

    "Promote the general Welfare" ... the scariest phrase in the English language.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  51. warren

    warren

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Sep 2013
    Posts: 7,643

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    Interestingly, the 10th is beginning to show up more in arguments in front of the "Vestal Virgins of the Potomac."

    Posted 3 months ago #
  52. carcosa

    carcosa

    Member
    Joined: Oct 2013
    Posts: 154

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    prohibition of tobacco and legalization of marijuana?? where is the logic in that?

    Posted 3 months ago #
  53. jpmcwjr

    jpmcwjr

    Preferred Member
    Joined: May 2015
    Posts: 13,538

    online

    Login to Send PM

    It's for the children, of course.

    I know that you believe you understood what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.
    Posted 3 months ago #
  54. warren

    warren

    Preferred Member
    Joined: Sep 2013
    Posts: 7,643

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    where (sic) is the logic in that?

    What does one have to do with the other?

    Posted 3 months ago #
  55. ron123

    ron123

    Member
    Joined: Jan 2015
    Posts: 193

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    The Founding Fathers were also among the wealthiest land owning elite who didn't believe that the common people should have the same rights as they had. Some of them, quite frankly, didn't like the idea of a democracy as it potentially put too much power in the hands of people who they felt were too ill equipped to handle it.

    Maybe they were right. Now that the "takers" outnumber the "makers" we'll see where this goes. California ahem, Socialism here I come...

    Posted 3 months ago #
  56. chasingembers

    chasingembers

    Captain Of The Black Frigate
    Joined: Nov 2014
    Posts: 15,583

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    prohibition of tobacco and legalization of marijuana?? where is the logic in that?

    A more obedient and agreeable populace.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  57. sablebrush52

    sablebrush52

    The Bard Of Barlings
    Joined: Jun 2013
    Posts: 9,782

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    prohibition of tobacco and legalization of marijuana?? where is the logic in that?

    Sigh, this old saw again. Marijuana prohibition was a tremendous boon to crime and a huge pointless cost to everyone else. So the people, bless 'em, voted to "legalize" it, though technically it's not legal anywhere. And once the issues with marijane become more apparent, statutes will be enacted to restrict its use. Add to that the dissemination of the damage it does, and over time it will become equally unpopular, kind of like tobacco. It's just that boo hasn't been nearly as visible as tobacco, nor has it been studied to the same extent. Tobacco isn't being prohibited, it's just being made a lot less convenient to obtain. Once the honeymoon period wears off, marihooyah will follow the same course.

    California ahem, Socialism here I come...

    Fifth or sixth largest economy on the planet. If that's a result of socialism, we should all jump on the bandwagon. People love to bandy about that word "socialism" like they actually have a clue about what it means. Very few who bandy it about actually have a clue what it means.

    Posted 3 months ago #
  58. admin

    Kevin Godbee

    Smoking a Pipe Right Now
    Joined: Nov 2008
    Posts: 8,043

    offline

    Login to Send PM

    This is starting to get a little too political, and has dragged out. Closing. Sorry guys.

    The good news is, with how stupid this bill is, that these things usually don't pass, and I don't think this one will.

    Check Out Our - Pipes Podcast
    Posted 3 months ago #

Topic Closed

This topic has been closed to new replies.

 

 

    Back To Top  | Back to Forum Home Page

   Members Online Now
   dontbeaburleyman, yuda, brooklynpiper, krizzose, trouttimes, alaskanpiper, mossdoug, jpmcwjr, pipeanddrum, prndl, tolkienfan, ukbob, metzmo