Pricier cigarettes a windfall for crooks

The Star Ledger ^ | 25 November 2002 | TOM HAYDON AND WAYNE WOOLLEY

[SheLion]

Robberies are rising after state tax hikes For the enterprising thief, cigarettes are as good as cash.

On the heels of the summer's major cigarette-tax hikes in New Jersey and New York City, law enforcement officials on both sides of the Hudson River are coping with a rash of smash-and-grab burglaries and robberies of stores that sell cigarettes.

[SheLion]

Why are they so weak to have to spend so much or illegally obtain their nico fix?

Listen, Bub! We haven't paid into the state coffers for the past 17 months! We ROLL OUR OWN. I roll out a beautiful carton for under $8.00 now, compared to $44-$50 that we USED to pay!

CIGARETTES ARE LEGAL HELLO! And if your obese, buddy, they are coming after you as we speak.

[Wolfie]

We are not going to prohibit...illegal drugs...

Somebody better tell the gov't. They're spending upwards of $40 billion a year and arresting hundreds of thousands of people in the Drug War. Cigarettes are just the latest target. The more the merrier.

[SheLion]

AND I SMOKE!

[Wolfie]

That makes two of us.

[Royce]

I'm with you!
Here in Palm Sprgs we have an Indian store where cigaretts are $14 per carton.

It's all about money Non-Smokers the Gov't doesn't care about your health. It's money and control over American Citizens. Next it's fast foods , liquor etc. Hillary and Socialism is on the march.

Big Brothers time and money would be better spent on going after Illegal Aliens and drug dealers.

[Becki]

Your fags may be legal, but they are still a potent drug delivery system!!!!

Right. And caffeine and sugar are drugs, according to Hillary. Change the definition and anything will be a drug.

It seems apparent that you subscribe to the latest PC fad definition, not the actual definition. That says a lot about you.

Becki

[Dataman]

Somebody better tell the gov't. They're spending upwards of $40 billion a year and arresting hundreds of thousands of people in the Drug War. Cigarettes are just the latest target. The more the merrier.

While I don't share the libertarian view of the war on drugs, I readily agree with the lack of logical consistency on the part of the gov't. and especially on the part of liberals.

[per loin]

Are you fat?

[BlackbirdSST]

Your fags may be legal, but they are still a potent drug delivery system!!!! Anything, no, make that ANYTHING, you put in your body, can be construed as being a drug. Do you buy processed food's? Look at the ingredient's lately? You consume drug's on a daily basis, several times a day. Keep giving this a pass, you are next! I'll not lift a finger to defend you either! Blackbird.

[Just another Joe]

Face it most dopers are losers, and will go to any means for their next nico fix.

What makes you think these crooks are stealing cigarettes to SMOKE them?
Wouldn't it be a better rationale to steal them and SELL them?
I get the feeling you're just an anti-smoker that wants to feel superior in any way you can so you get your rocks off calling smokers "dopers" and "addicts".

[JT_Lancer]

The black market in cigarettes due to increasing govt prohibition via high taxes simply illustrates how any govt ban increases crime. It happened with Prohibition, and it exists with the Drug War. It really boils down to whether or not you think the govt owns you and should regulate how you choose to live your life. In this case, illegal drugs are no different from legal ones like alcohol or tobacco, or fatty foods for that matter. Consumption of any of them poses possible health risks, and users under the influence of legal or illegal drugs may pose a threat to others if they drive a vehicle while using, for example. But should the govt be able to imprison you for the simple act of consumption of a substance that may impose health threats to yourself, but harms noone else? If you believe so, then any claim to natural rights is non-existent.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

While I don't share the libertarian view of the war on drugs

In which their view is certainly much better than the current fiasco we have now.

[Dataman]

But should the govt be able to imprison you for the simple act of consumption of a substance that may impose health threats to yourself, but harms noone else?

This is the hanging rope for the libertarian perspective. While it is easily demonstrated that "harmless" libertarian behavior does indeed have consequences which harm others, the libertarians have yet to create a scenario in which they can consume their intoxicants or practice perversions without hurting others.

Just as the criminal does not get to define crime, the libertarian is not the impartial judge who can fairly determine if someone else gets hurt.