Replies

Your thesis on my comments is duly noted......I still disagree with you, but we are reasonable people and can agree to disagree.

You keep referring to tobacco addicts and tobacco being a drug, it isn't. The 'drug' is nicotine not tobacco. Yes there is nicotine in tobacco, as there is in every other member of the nightshade family including tomatoes, potatoes, and eggplants. I personally consume a heck of a lot more of those crops than I do of tobacco.

Facts have never bothered me, the abuse and misuse of them is what bothers me. You, yourself state that someone that is able to take or leave something is not an addict, yet you lump all smokers into the category of "tobacco addicts." I have a problem with that categorization.

You may not be on any payroll, but I must disagree with you claiming to be in the politically incorrect camp. I am in the politically incorrect camp. You may personally oppose government forced smoking bans in principle, but becuase you prefer smoke-free atmospheres you've probably done little or nothing to keep them from happening. That puts you squarely in the camp of the politically correct. sorry - but that is how I see it.

I do agree with you when it comes to doing with one's life as one sees fit. Why do the anti-smokers not understand this simple premise? If you don't like the smoking policy of your favorite establishment, talk to the owner not the government. Why does it seem to me that it is only smokers that see it this way?

You keep referring to tobacco addicts and tobacco being a drug, it isn't. The 'drug' is nicotine not tobacco.

Well, to accept your premise, you would have to accept that Opium is not a drug. Like Tobacco, Opium is merely a plant made up of several psychoactive drugs, the most potent being Morphine, Thebaine, Codeine. So, while in theory Asian (where it is most common) chewers and smokers are addicted to Morphine & Codeine, Opium is indeed considered "a drug".

Tobacco itself contains compounds which act on the Mu receptors (the same receptors that Morphone acts upon) as well as acting as a central nervous system stimulant, analgous almost to low doses of Amphetamine. Therefore, Tobacco would actually be considered a "polydrug", since it acts on more than one type of neural receptor, rather than one like most drugs. This also explains why Tobacco is so hard to quit after prolonged use, because the tobacco user is actually withdrawing from several neural agonists, instead of single agonists like Alcohol or Cocaine.

Clinicians often acknowledge Tobacco as being the hardest drug to kick, with the highest relapse rate. It is one of the most addictive substances known to man.

Yes there is nicotine in tobacco, as there is in every other member of the nightshade family including tomatoes, potatoes, and eggplants. I personally consume a heck of a lot more of those crops than I do of tobacco.

True, and there are trace amounts of Morphine and Codeine in poppy seeds, and chocalate is itself a minor serotonin agonist (such as Prozac and Ecstacy). Luckily, addiction is very dose-dependant or we'd all be duly whacked for most of the day ;-)

Facts have never bothered me, the abuse and misuse of them is what bothers me. You, yourself state that someone that is able to take or leave something is not an addict, yet you lump all smokers into the category of "tobacco addicts." I have a problem with that categorization.

I don't mean to do that. I don't know who is, and is not addicted. Sometimes I refer to certain behavior of tobacco "addicts" because they are the core of the smoking industry. I do realize that there are many recreational non-habituated users though. Whether they are recreational users, or addicts however - I don't really have a moral qualm with either one. I don't consider one worse than the other.

You may not be on any payroll, but I must disagree with you claiming to be in the politically incorrect camp. I am in the politically incorrect camp. You may personally oppose government forced smoking bans in principle, but becuase you prefer smoke-free atmospheres you've probably done little or nothing to keep them from happening. That puts you squarely in the camp of the politically correct. sorry - but that is how I see it.

Well, it is a fact of life that you cannot fight every battle. I guess I am more perturbed with the War on Some Drugs, Rampant unchecked illegal immigration, the abolishion of the 2nd and 4th ammendments, out of control taxes, and larger infringements of the consitution than wringing my hands over exactly where someone can administer a drug. Maybe once those things get squared away, i'll be more motivated to fight for the rights of "smokers".

It's hard to get worked up about the little things when the big things have already happened and nobody is doing anything to remedy them. Our great president just proposed amnesty for crying out loud. Smoking is way down on the list of government outrages.

I do agree with you when it comes to doing with one's life as one sees fit. Why do the anti-smokers not understand this simple premise? If you don't like the smoking policy of your favorite establishment, talk to the owner not the government. Why does it seem to me that it is only smokers that see it this way?

It's a natural outgrowth of the War on (Some) Drugs. when they came for the crackheads, I said nothing because I wasn't a crackhead. When they came for the potheads, I said nothing because I wasn't a pothead. When they came for the Tobaccoheads, nobody came for me .... you get the idea.

Government got a taste of telling people what they could and couldn't consume, and they got public support and billions of dollars for doing so. Exactly what made you think they would stop there?