Researchers Debate a License to Smoke Cigarettes

LiveScience ^ | November 13 2012 | Stephanie Pappas

[EveningStar]

They do it for coal-burning power plants. So how about something for what many consider to be a walking smokestack — the cigarette smoker?

Yes, a license to smoke. Simon Chapman, a professor of public health at the University of Sydney in Australia, offers this radical proposal to help reduce the damaging health effects of tobacco, both for the user and the recipient of second-hand smoke.

[Army Air Corps]

Ping.

[Jonty30]

They have a license. It’s called being 18 years old, in most jurisdictions.

[EveningStar]

ping

[Gene Eric]

Can one deduct the license fee?

[EveningStar]

This prof’s idea goes farther than that.

[M-cubed]

Sure!..it must be in the commerce clause...but on a bigger scale...cant we just tax all the damned amendments to the Constitution?

[FlingWingFlyer]

The Third Reich rises from the ashes of “Election” 2012!

[Gator113]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYgLAPhbyKg

[Revel]

Next they will put a carbon tax on it.

[Seaplaner]

I merely scanned the article; however, one suspects that your alleged president is still a tobacco addict (no evidence, just a suspicion) it might be interesting to see if there are exemptions for political fungi.

.

[Army Air Corps]

This is in Australia, but I am sure our fascists will love it.

[Jonty30]

Oh I know. It’s all about control.

[Mears]

Charcoal grills?

Fireplaces?

.

[carlo3b]

If you think this is a good idea, I have a much, greater idea.. A license to screw, and and an advance degree to to procreate! Yeah!..

Now, which idea has a greater positive impact on our culture, and humanity in general..???

[Flick Lives]

Yes, a license to smoke.

Sure. Then we can have a french fry consumption license, a 16oz soft drink license, a fatty food license, candy bar license...

[Teflonic]

This will just cause lots of non-smokers to get a license to sell what they buy on the black market.

[spintreebob]

We exhale the most insidious of all pollutants: CO2.
We must all get licenses and be regulated for the amount of pollutant we are allowed to exhale. Those identity groups that invented other pollution producers such as dairy cows must have shorter licenses to exhale than the noble savage of Rousseau who invented no pollutants. :)

[Slings and Arrows]

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."

--C. S. Lewis

[ClearBlueSky]

For a long time I`ve been trying to understand how liberals can be AGAINST smoking evil tobacco anywhere while being FOR the legalization of pot. Wouldn`t smoking a joint be prohibited under the same anti-smoking laws? Would marijuana be ok but tobacco not? One smoke bad for your health even second hand but the other not? Someone help me make sense of this.