Posted on 02/15/2005 8:24:48 AM PST by SheLion
Do people who enjoy smoking have any rights? Increasingly, the answer is no. It is essential to keep in mind that smoking cigarettes, cigars, or pipes is an entirely personal choice. No one is required to smoke. Millions voluntarily stop smoking every year. People have been smoking, and enjoying tobacco products for a very long time, but now they have been demonized and ostracized.
Using the power of government, to tax, smokers are being ripped off at every level. Recently, New York City sent letters to 2,300 residents giving them thirty days to pay the taxes on the cartons of cigarettes they had purchased over the Internet. It's the law.
A single pack of cigarettes in New York City comes with a state tax of $1.50, a city tax of $1.50, and a federal tax of 39 cents. A pack of Marlboro cigarettes will cost you $7.00. A ten-pack carton will cost you more than $55.00. Purchased at an international airport's duty-free store, the same carton retails for just $16.00.
There are few, if any, people who do not know there is an element of risk involved in the decision to smoke. There is risk involved when any American gets into his car and goes anywhere. Driving kills over 40,000 Americans every year. It is the price we pay for the mobility, and other benefits cars and vehicles provide. There is, in fact, risk in every human activity, including the enjoyment of alcoholic beverages and even the simple act of eating.
The U.S. engaged in a hugely failed experiment, called Prohibition, to stop people from drinking alcoholic beverages at their favorite saloon. It took a Constitutional amendment to end it. For many years now, the same thinking that imposed Prohibition has been at work to achieve the same outcome with smoking.
It is un-American in the most profound sense of that term. In a nation founded on the individual right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, preventing people from the enjoyment of smoking runs contrary to the inherent right to enjoy this lifestyle option if you want.
Consider, however, some events in 2004. The first worldwide antismoking treaty - the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) - was ratified, and is now in effect. It is yet another example of the United Nation's intention to control every aspect of the lives of everyone on planet Earth. Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) is the lead organization in America, and it has promised to "now concentrate on enforcement efforts."
During 2004, six nations imposed a no-smoking ban. Among them were Ireland, New Zealand, Norway, and Sweden. These nations are notable for their liberal, i.e., socialist political agendas. Here in the U.S., so-called "nonsmoker's rights" became law in Idaho, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island. At the local level, thirty-two jurisdictions passed comprehensive workplace smoking laws in 2004, along with "less comprehensive smokefree workplace laws."
There's more. Eleven States, including Virginia, where historically tobacco was the crop that encouraged its establishment and growth as an American colony, substantially increased their cigarette taxes. Consider the example of New York City, and multiply it by other cities and states, cashing in, while at the same time, banning smoking, indoors and out. That is obscene.
Now imagine a similar level of taxation on a candy bar, a cup of coffee, or soft drink. Think it can't happen? Think again.
ASH has big plans for 2005. It plans to "take advantage of a new ruling which now makes it possible for sensitive nonsmokers to sue states which do not provide them with reasonable protection from tobacco smoke pollution."
These suits will eventually cost taxpayers millions, draining vital financial resources from serious needs such as infrastructure improvements. ASH will push for more and more bans, on people who smoke outdoors on beaches, and elsewhere. In California, it is already against the law to light up on the beach.
Let's say you've just bought a condo, or moved to an apartment. ASH intends to encourage and assist lawsuits by apartment dwellers who object to neighbors smoking in their own apartments. In the name of protecting children, ASH will pursue laws that ban parents from smoking around their children, by getting courts to issue orders to ban smoking in custody cases, or by a foster parent, or in a car, while driving children anywhere.
All this is happening in the "land of the free, and the home of the brave," as well as around the world, where the U.N. antismoking treaty bans any advertising for tobacco products, requires health warning labels similar to those on products sold in the U.S., bans any secondhand smoke in workplaces, public transport, and indoor public places.
It empowers a vast law enforcement program against smuggling, and there will be smuggling, leading to cartels that rival illegal drugs. There's more, but the ultimate objective is to eliminate smoking anywhere on the face of the Earth.
This is pure fascism - using the power of the state to deny this simple pleasure from being enjoyed anywhere. And, when the national and global antismoking campaign is successful, these same people will turn their attention to banning the consumption of meat, fish, cookies, candy, potato chips, soft drinks, or anything else they decide you should not enjoy.
Do smokers have any rights? Apparently not.
Really? I wasn't aware ME went that liberal. You don't have the same sex thing going on up there though, do you? ME seems to one state I haven't seen in the news on that issue.
I suggest all smokers start growing their own. It's something I'm seriesly considering.
I hate being late to these threads all the time.
:-(
I don't know much about tobacco growing, but doesn't climate play a part in it? Can people in MN, WI, OH, MI, etc grow this or do you need a special greenhouse?
Also, love the name ... big fan of "The Stand"
There's a site that details all about this and sells seed. I can't think of the name of it, but there's some FReepers on the Puff List who might be able to answer better than I.
You don't understand what it means to find the root cause of a problem, do you?
How about answering the question. I'll repeat it for you:
Are you stating agreement with those of us that stand against the "smoke free workplace" legislation? OR are you making a case for the government to monitor behavior in one's home, "for the children"?
In 2000, Maine forced the smoking ban on all restaurants in the state.
Then, when they discovered that taverns and bars were serving food as well, they forced a complete smoking ban on all taverns, bars, sports inn's in January 2004.
So, my days of going out to eat has ended, sadly.
The owner then invested in a very expensive liquor license and business started to boom again.
They then remodeled. The place is beautiful. 4 big ceiling air purifiers. Full menu. A beautiful glass enclosed non-smoking section. Sign on the entrance door "This is a smoking establishment. No one under 18 admitted without guardian."
It is a Sports Bar with the full computer golf game across the back wall; bunch of big TV's. Just beautiful.
But that still wasn't good enough for the state. A full no smoking ban went into effect a year ago January. I went once after the ban, was so miserable that I couldn't sit there like old times and enjoy the evening that I haven't put myself through that again.
And do you think the state will reimburse this business owner for spending his own money to be able to accommodate everyone? You can bet they will not.
I want a smoke free workplace. I even wanted it when I was a smoker. I thinkk its cruel to subject nonsmokers to smoke just because the smokers cannot control themselves.
Because smoke has potential risks, I believe forcing a child to breath smoke is abusive.
So, you do support the use of government force to limit private property rights and you support the use of government force to invade homes "for the children".
As long as we know where you stand.
hey, how about I buy your kids a few packs of smokes, will that make you happy?
"So, you do support the use of government force to limit private property rights and you support the use of government force to invade homes "for the children"."
It happens all the times when kids are in abusive houses. What, are you against getting kids of of abusive houses?
Smokers have the right to smell like they just stepped out of a two-day old house fire.
Thanks, Wolfie. We know Michael for several years. I have his book "AntiBrains." Michael is very gifted.
Really! Well, the smoker's "I" know believe in personal hygiene.
Of course I do. You do to.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.