Discussion in 'Campaigning discussions' started by Bill Godshall, Apr 2, 2009.
Image has been removed.
URL has been removed.
Email address has been removed.
Media has been removed.
very well said indeed, jpargana!
Sorry man I TOTALLY disagree about analogs being allowed in bars. As an asthmatic I should be allowed to go into a place without coming out hacking and barely breathing, also not stinking. I fully support any raising of price of cigs too, even if you support letting people make their own decisions, the decision to smoke is NEVER a good one. Once we take the first few cigs it's game over. We all know how hard it is to quit, any effort to make them harder to get, more expensive, less socially acceptable is a good one. I've had many friends either quit straight up or switch to vaping because of taxes, and most of that money goes to helping people quit, health, things that are actually good for our society, not feeding the greedy mouths of big tobacco and killing millions of innocent people.
If you are speaking of cigarette taxes,most of the State tax money goes into the General Fund and the States" have become dependent on the money for things other than smoking education. The Federal tax is also used for purposes other than those the tax was intended.
"that way the FDA couldn't ban the products from the market"
Jman ... doesn't seem to understand the difference between banning ALL e-cigs and banning >99.9% of e-cigs, the latter of which would be achieved by the FDA deeming regulation.
Bill Godshall ... doesn't seem to understand that his earlier comment, which he used the words 'pleasantly shocked' in relation to FDA deeming eCigs tobacco products, mean that the FDA CANNOT BAN PRODUCTS FROM THE MARKET.
Enough... you disagree. It's a de facto ban. Move on.
It's kinda crazy to expect major corporations to develop products that promote customers to no longer have use for - such as quitting nicotine. I think that's why they develop such mediocre products. They want you off cigarettes (maybe) but not to reduce the dependancy on nicotine - or buying their products A corporations first legal duty is to make money for shareholders, not 'public health'.
I'm a Johnny come lately to this post but only recently just joined it bites my butt that you have people who want to ban this when it actually helps I have smoked for 20 odf years and my wife 30 odd years and thanks to this we have been smoke free for over a month and don't have not one carving for tobacco and it was our Dr. Who said we should try it I truly think the government should worry more about more important things like the out break of perscription drug abuse and things like that!
Sign up for CASA's email. Make sure you sign their petitions. Pay attention like you have. My husband and I like you two smoked for more than 40 years and it's been 13 months since we have had a cigarette. I have always thought that they should not be classified as a tobacco product. Tobacco= $$. Good Luck to the both of you. It's been a long fight. One that I fear we will lose in the long run.
Separate names with a comma.