Obama appeal on cig's

Log in

SmokingPipes.com Updates

48 Fresh Rattray's Pipes
36 Fresh Chacom Pipes
New Cigars
3 Fresh Doctor's Pipes
48 Fresh Brigham Pipes

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

Drucquers Banner

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

Status
Not open for further replies.

lordnoble

Lifer
Jul 13, 2010
2,677
16
As seems to be the case on the forums lately, this thread is running dangerously close to breaking the forum rules about politics. I'm incensed by this ridiculousness on the current administration's choice to appeal the ruling also, but let's keep the posts pointed at the legislation/appeal. We need to remember that the forums are frequented by many people from different backgrounds and different beliefs. OK, I'll step down from my soapbox. Consider this the final warning.
-Jason

 

goldtooth

Lurker
Nov 17, 2011
5
0
I certainly hope, in the future, that the government and political parties on both sides begin understanding what individual freedom is. Targeting children, ok, stop craming cartoons down their throat... I can understand that to an extent. I recall being a big fan of Spuds Mackensie when I was a youth, so there is grounding on that. Children should not be enticed into smoking--no one questions that. There is no need for excessive taxation or regulation of the tobacco market in the US. We already have a declining smoker population, contrary to the majority of the rest of the world. Regulation on an individual's freedom through taxations that he or she has to swallow in the purchase of simple luxuries to manage the public is a slipery slope towards a psuedo-police state. However, these things cut across political parties. These questions do not fall on one political party's policy.
The problem, of course, is not that the legislation done one party or another, but that it is false. Cigarettes do not equal death, nor cancer, nor emphezemia--though they may increase the potential, cancer is not immenent in the same way blackouts are from excessive alcohol, or braindamaged intellect and brainwashing are from too much television, or that obesity is from bad foods. The social consciousness of our nation has chosen big-tobacco as a scapegoat for the ills of all corporations, meanwhile, other more vicious corporations get away with actual malicious activities against the citizenry. Cocacola wants you addicted to their product, so does macdonalds, and television.
Luckily, a simple picture is not a tax. We can't handle another tobacco tax, from whatever party.
How about let's get some depth, and discuss the slippery slope that got us to this place in american history.
Oddly enough, and ironically, I might add, you might be interested in learning that my great-grandfather's actions at RJR as VP of advertising is one of the reasons we got to this place.
And any fool knows the conotations of a Newport Cigarette in this instance. Lets not play dumb after getting caught. There is nothing in that out of focus image that identifies it as such but the filter paper, and many cigarettes wear the same style paper.
Quite enough and slippery enough.

 

lordnoble

Lifer
Jul 13, 2010
2,677
16
braindamaged intellect and brainwashing are from too much television

I vehemently disagree with this. Television hasn't made me any more dain-bramaged than those paint chips I ate as a kid... :nana: :rofl:
-Jason

 

jlee

Starting to Get Obsessed
Jan 1, 2011
216
0
Denver
I think goldtooth waves a bit of a false flag on this one.
The argument made for individual freedom in terms of taxation and state regulation of tobacco products applies to the same elements mentioned as the apparent real ills of our society. Big tobacco as a scapegoat for the ills of all corporations (i.e. Cocacola, macdonalds[SIC], television)? That is quite a statement.
To begin to understand what individual freedom is is to let folks make choices. Choices that may include what others surmise as ills. How one can blame the company that sells hamburgers or sodas or ads for washing machines while defending the company that sells tobacco seems strange to me. None of these companies force me nor anyone else to purchase or consume any of their products or services. Has anyone seen Spuds MacKenzie hold a pistol to anyone's head to slam that can of Bud? Seems to me that liking a dog on a commercial isn't really an indicator of anything other than liking a dog on a commercial.
Slippery slope indeed.

 

baronsamedi

Lifer
May 4, 2011
5,688
6
Dallas
It's politically expedient to be "anti-big-anything" right now. The question is that will support of such an assinine program end up backfiring politically or will it have any effect at all?

 

withnail

Part of the Furniture Now
Oct 30, 2011
737
1
United Kingdom
The main point is that the pictures don't work! We have them here in the UK - on the three tins of pipe tobacco I have within reach; one shows a dead body with the face partially covered with a shroud, one shows a premature baby wired up in an incubator and one shows a mouth full of rotten teeth and gaps. Sure, they were shocking when they were first introduced a few years back, but now no-one notices them.
Of all the ex-smokers I have asked, not one was in the slightest encouraged to stop because of the picture warnings. Judging by the number of obviously under aged kids walking past on their way to school with a cigarette in hand, they don't really stop them from starting either.
And why stop at cigarettes and tobacco? Fast food cartons with pictures of a diseased heart? New cars with a pictures of a dead cyclist or melting ice caps? Electrical goods and cloths with pictures of third world sweat shops?

 

withnail

Part of the Furniture Now
Oct 30, 2011
737
1
United Kingdom
And any fool knows the conotations of a Newport Cigarette in this instance
Could some one send a private message to explain to a confused Brit why this reference can cause offence? PM rather than get this thread closed down by posting a reply on here please!

 

withnail

Part of the Furniture Now
Oct 30, 2011
737
1
United Kingdom
Thanks for the explanations on the point I asked about.
One more question - Does the American Constitution provide any protection for people wanting to make their own legal choices about what they want to do in their free time?

 

lonestar

Lifer
Mar 22, 2011
2,854
163
Edgewood Texas
Withnail, the Tenth Amendment says that any power not *specifically* given to our government, is reserved for the people exclusively.

If anyone gave a damn about it, it gives citizens the power to control any aspect of law outside the specific enumerated powers granted to government.

There is nowhere in the document that can justify controlling what we consume, or even giving them a right to tax tobacco at all.

Too bad we've all been taught that its outdated and unnecassary, because its really the only hope we have to be a Free Nation again.

 

rigmedic1

Lifer
May 29, 2011
3,896
76
In this particular instance, the appeals process is the standard legal maneuver to keep the issue alive, and keep those poor lawyers on the job. (part of this response is facetious, BTW).

 
Status
Not open for further replies.