Should be like marijuana in some countries in Europe (remember Pulp Fiction), illegal to sell it, but legal to smoke it. So if you cultivate your own plant and process the tobacco leaf, you can smoke it. That will make that only a very small percentage will smoke.
I'm all for allowing people to kill themselves via a process that is lengthy and painful. Only a couple of issue's need to be resolved. The first issue is, kill yourself not me. If you want to smoke in YOUR house or YOUR car be my guest but once in the public domain you don't have the write to kill me or someone else with your nasty, smelly habit. The second issue is, kill yourself on YOUR dime. I don't want to pay for your f-ing health coverage nor do I want to see my health premiums jacked up.
yea keep the smokers outside and away from enclosed public spaces.
if a study was done and said 6 hours of consecutive gaming was detrimental to your health, and the government wanted to intervene by limiting your internet access, is that not the same thing?
freedom is freedom, and governent has no right to intervene and decide what is best for me.
at first it creeps in, than it snatches you when you sleep. be vigilant.
yea keep the smokers outside and away from enclosed public spaces. if a study was done and said 6 hours of consecutive gaming was detrimental to your health, and the government wanted to intervene by limiting your internet access, is that not the same thing?
freedom is freedom, and governent has no right to intervene and decide what is best for me.
at first it creeps in, than it snatches you when you sleep. be vigilant.
What about the 'Freedom' of on-smokers who say for example want to go and have a drink at a bar but its full of smokers. Are not those people free to drink at a smokeless bar without the danger of inhaling dangerous smelly smoke from cancer sticks?
And what about the bar workers? They who dot smoke will be forced to breath in second hand smoke all day are they not free to live and work in a non toxic smoke filled environment?
Another great example of Moore's Law. Give people access to that much space (developers and users alike) and they'll find uses for it that you can never imagine. "640K ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates 1981
yea keep the smokers outside and away from enclosed public spaces. if a study was done and said 6 hours of consecutive gaming was detrimental to your health, and the government wanted to intervene by limiting your internet access, is that not the same thing?
freedom is freedom, and governent has no right to intervene and decide what is best for me.
at first it creeps in, than it snatches you when you sleep. be vigilant.
What about the 'Freedom' of on-smokers who say for example want to go and have a drink at a bar but its full of smokers. Are not those people free to drink at a smokeless bar without the danger of inhaling dangerous smelly smoke from cancer sticks?
And what about the bar workers? They who dot smoke will be forced to breath in second hand smoke all day are they not free to live and work in a non toxic smoke filled environment?
While I dislike smoking, your example doesn't work for me. If you are talking about a public building / establishment, then certainly cancer sticks are out. However, a bar or restaurant is a privately owned establishment and the owner sets the rules. If you don't like the rules, don't go inside and give them your money. Likewise, if you don't like the pay or working conditions don't work there (see how simple that is). Non-smokers shouldn't (they do) be forcing privately run businesses to cater to their whim (IMO).
There would have been nothing wrong for some bar's to cater to both smokers / non-smokers, to cater simply to smokers or to cater to only non-smokers. That is real freedom, the freedom of choice.
yea keep the smokers outside and away from enclosed public spaces. if a study was done and said 6 hours of consecutive gaming was detrimental to your health, and the government wanted to intervene by limiting your internet access, is that not the same thing?
freedom is freedom, and governent has no right to intervene and decide what is best for me.
at first it creeps in, than it snatches you when you sleep. be vigilant.
What about the 'Freedom' of on-smokers who say for example want to go and have a drink at a bar but its full of smokers. Are not those people free to drink at a smokeless bar without the danger of inhaling dangerous smelly smoke from cancer sticks?
And what about the bar workers? They who dot smoke will be forced to breath in second hand smoke all day are they not free to live and work in a non toxic smoke filled environment?
While I dislike smoking, your example doesn't work for me. If you are talking about a public building / establishment, then certainly cancer sticks are out. However, a bar or restaurant is a privately owned establishment and the owner sets the rules. If you don't like the rules, don't go inside and give them your money. Likewise, if you don't like the pay or working conditions don't work there (see how simple that is). Non-smokers shouldn't (they do) be forcing privately run businesses to cater to their whim (IMO).
There would have been nothing wrong for some bar's to cater to both smokers / non-smokers, to cater simply to smokers or to cater to only non-smokers. That is real freedom, the freedom of choice.
smoking is banned in bars in NYC amongst other states. but society, as it usually does, has conformed.I thought choice would have been the proper way to impose this
Well seeing how ciggarets second hand smoke kills the people around the smoker even faster then the smoker themselves i would most definetedly say ban them for good. Maybe not all tobacco products like chew seeing how you cannot hurt the people around you with it. Anyways its a disgusting habit and I dont see why people do it (addiction duh) but why even every try it? We all here on tv and other places that there is a very good chance that you will die and people still do it. Its disgusting and stupid ban them!
yea keep the smokers outside and away from enclosed public spaces. if a study was done and said 6 hours of consecutive gaming was detrimental to your health, and the government wanted to intervene by limiting your internet access, is that not the same thing?
freedom is freedom, and governent has no right to intervene and decide what is best for me.
at first it creeps in, than it snatches you when you sleep. be vigilant.
What about the 'Freedom' of on-smokers who say for example want to go and have a drink at a bar but its full of smokers. Are not those people free to drink at a smokeless bar without the danger of inhaling dangerous smelly smoke from cancer sticks?
And what about the bar workers? They who dot smoke will be forced to breath in second hand smoke all day are they not free to live and work in a non toxic smoke filled environment?
While I dislike smoking, your example doesn't work for me. If you are talking about a public building / establishment, then certainly cancer sticks are out. However, a bar or restaurant is a privately owned establishment and the owner sets the rules. If you don't like the rules, don't go inside and give them your money. Likewise, if you don't like the pay or working conditions don't work there (see how simple that is). Non-smokers shouldn't (they do) be forcing privately run businesses to cater to their whim (IMO).
There would have been nothing wrong for some bar's to cater to both smokers / non-smokers, to cater simply to smokers or to cater to only non-smokers. That is real freedom, the freedom of choice.
Yep i thought someone would use this Excuse [and its usually the smokers]. You say well don't go to bars then if you don't want to breath in smoke. Well i say 2 things what if in your local town every bar and club and pub has smokers? what would non smokers do? and same goes for bar workers.
So at the end you say the following " Non-Smokers shouldn't(they do) be forcing privately run business to cater to there whim (IMO)". Well i say to you " Smokers shouldn't (they do ) be forcing Privately run business to cater to there whim". Also bars are classed as public buildings because the public congregates in them. It is true in a buisnes sense that a bar is a private buisness but it still has a public function.
And so you know there is something wrong with catering to both smokers and Non-smokers in the following reasons....
- Smoke travels out of the Smokers area.
- Smoke stinks up the bar.
- Smoke taints food and drink for both Non-smokers and Smokers.
- Still creates a healph hazard for Non-smoking Workers who HAVE to work there.
I will end this post by pointing out that a smoke free system is working pretty well in the UK and other European countries.
Another great example of Moore's Law. Give people access to that much space (developers and users alike) and they'll find uses for it that you can never imagine. "640K ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates 1981
No... If people want to smoke on cancer sticks that's up to them.. We should be a bit more free with our lives.. It's up to people who like smoking...But..Shouldn't be selfish smoking infront of people who don't...
Problem is that most smokers don't care about this. Try asking them most smokers Ive asked about this basically say "I have a right to smoke where i want, if you don't like it you can always go outside".
Which is hardly fare to the Non-smokers, and is one reason Non-smokers don't like smoking as we are forced to breath in the smoke and eat bar food that's tainted with the taste of Tobacco [Yuck].
Another great example of Moore's Law. Give people access to that much space (developers and users alike) and they'll find uses for it that you can never imagine. "640K ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates 1981
If a law against ciggarette smoking had ANY chance whatsoever of being enforcable, which it does not, then yes, such should be passed, for the benefit of millions.
Unfortunately, chances are extremely high that the same thing will happen as when alcohol was banned. That is to say that alcohol consumption actually increased, and multiple new organized crime units were formed.
No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee. Hemingway
I still have shares in Tobacco, and despite the smoking ban, and many smoking bans worldwide, it's still a growth industry. Luckily I sold all my pub shares a few years ago, as since the somking ban they have all halfed in value.
Essentially I feel a load of do gooders who don't frequent pubs and clubs banned people from smoking in them. Althought he majority of politicians and doctors don't smoke, the majority of pub and club goers do.
This is an abuse of their freedom.
I smoke and I enjoy smoking.
Millions, even billions of people smoke and enjoy smoking. For us, there are no benefits to banning cigarettes. Quite the opposite.
Banning cigarettes will not "benefit society" it will benefit one element of society at the considerable inconvenience of another signifcant element of society.
You aren't forced to passive smoke by smokers. You do so by your own consent. If you do not consent then move away. This is a reasonable approach to the subject.
Similarly if you are surrounded by non-smokers, it would be reasonable for you not to smoke or to move away before lighting up.
An unreasonable approach is that when you are near a smoker, you have him imprisoned.
I still have shares in Tobacco, and despite the smoking ban, and many smoking bans worldwide, it's still a growth industry. Yea they are expanding into 3rd world countries marketing them to children i hear Luckily I sold all my pub shares a few years ago, as since the somking ban they have all halfed in value. Essentially I feel a load of do gooders who don't frequent pubs and clubs banned people from smoking in them. Althought he majority of politicians and doctors don't smoke, the majority of pub and club goers do. This is an abuse of their freedom.
I smoke and I enjoy smoking. Millions, even billions of people smoke and enjoy smoking. For us, there are no benefits to banning cigarettes. Quite the opposite. Banning cigarettes will not "benefit society" it will benefit one element of society at the considerable inconvenience of another signifcant element of society.
You aren't forced to passive smoke by smokers. You do so by your own consent. If you do not consent then move away. This is a reasonable approach to the subject. Lol so Non-smokers dont have a right to visit popular bars then because they are second class People then? Similarly if you are surrounded by non-smokers, it would be reasonable for you not to smoke or to move away before lighting up. Yes it would be resonable but they dont do so do they? An unreasonable approach is that when you are near a smoker, you have him imprisoned. LoL only if he is smoking Crack or cannabis Tabacco wise he should be asked to put it out or leave.
Another great example of Moore's Law. Give people access to that much space (developers and users alike) and they'll find uses for it that you can never imagine. "640K ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates 1981
I still have shares in Tobacco, and despite the smoking ban, and many smoking bans worldwide, it's still a growth industry. Yea they are expanding into 3rd world countries marketing them to children i hear Luckily I sold all my pub shares a few years ago, as since the somking ban they have all halfed in value. Essentially I feel a load of do gooders who don't frequent pubs and clubs banned people from smoking in them. Althought he majority of politicians and doctors don't smoke, the majority of pub and club goers do. This is an abuse of their freedom.
I smoke and I enjoy smoking. Millions, even billions of people smoke and enjoy smoking. For us, there are no benefits to banning cigarettes. Quite the opposite. Banning cigarettes will not "benefit society" it will benefit one element of society at the considerable inconvenience of another signifcant element of society.
You aren't forced to passive smoke by smokers. You do so by your own consent. If you do not consent then move away. This is a reasonable approach to the subject. Lol so Non-smokers dont have a right to visit popular bars then because they are second class People then? Similarly if you are surrounded by non-smokers, it would be reasonable for you not to smoke or to move away before lighting up. Yes it would be resonable but they dont do so do they? An unreasonable approach is that when you are near a smoker, you have him imprisoned. LoL only if he is smoking Crack or cannabis Tabacco wise he should be asked to put it out or leave.
What you choose to smoke is none of my business. To the best of my knowledge it is quite normal for people caught smoking crack or cannabis to be asked to leave. There are lisencing laws that put the publican up for prosecution if he does not enforce this. Now of course the same is true of cigarette smokers.
Crack, cigarettes what's the difference?
Non smokers do have the right to visit popular bars. There have always been non smoking bars.
That choice has always been theirs to make.
The reason why non smoking bars are not popular, is because people don't want them. The only reason non smokers want to go to popular bars is beacuse smokers go there.
How does making all the bars unpopular help?
For that matter how does putting loads of those bars you wanted to go to out of business improve your choices?
Giving you the choice of frequenting a smoking bar or not, does not make you a second class citizien. You have the same choice as every other citizien. Taking away that choice makes you a second class citizien.
A black man who does not wish to travel on the same bus as white people is excrcising his free choice. A black man who is not allowed to travel on the same bus as a white person is a second class citizien.
I don't know any smoker who lights up in non smoking area's or who lights up in non smoking households. I never see this and neither do you.
And yes Mickey Mouse Lights are on sale in the 3rd world. They place them on knee high shop shelves and give them out free in schools along with guns and hyperdermic needles full of aids.
i'll start by apologizing for this post....well there it is...so let me continue.
I like to smoke... i smoke a half pack a day and I know its pretty detrimental for my health...BUT that is MY fucking problem so leave me alone. What is the complaint here? i'm honestly lost at why people are so up and against smoking...its not hurting you...if you want to complain about things that you breath in why don't you go and do something about what really matters.: research ways to reduce pollution because i'm positive that the fumes of the hummer that you rich snots drive around in hurt you more than my smoking a cigarette near you. You are all the same people, no relevance to age or gender..you're all the middle age housewife trying to gain some control over society...you see one person attack a subject and you all jump in...
I hate people that cough around me when i'm smoking outside...do you dance in front of cripples too? assholes...
I hope some day we can all put aside our racisms and prejudices and just laugh at people
i'll start by apologizing for this post....well there it is...so let me continue. I like to smoke... i smoke a half pack a day and I know its pretty detrimental for my health...BUT that is MY fucking problem so leave me alone. What is the complaint here? i'm honestly lost at why people are so up and against smoking...its not hurting you...if you want to complain about things that you breath in why don't you go and do something about what really matters.: research ways to reduce pollution because i'm positive that the fumes of the hummer that you rich snots drive around in hurt you more than my smoking a cigarette near you. You are all the same people, no relevance to age or gender..you're all the middle age housewife trying to gain some control over society...you see one person attack a subject and you all jump in... I hate people that cough around me when i'm smoking outside...do you dance in front of cripples too? assholes...
i'll start by apologizing for this post....well there it is...so let me continue. I like to smoke... i smoke a half pack a day and I know its pretty detrimental for my health...BUT that is MY fucking problem so leave me alone. What is the complaint here? i'm honestly lost at why people are so up and against smoking...its not hurting you...if you want to complain about things that you breath in why don't you go and do something about what really matters.: research ways to reduce pollution because i'm positive that the fumes of the hummer that you rich snots drive around in hurt you more than my smoking a cigarette near you. You are all the same people, no relevance to age or gender..you're all the middle age housewife trying to gain some control over society...you see one person attack a subject and you all jump in... I hate people that cough around me when i'm smoking outside...do you dance in front of cripples too? assholes...
QFT
YEP...freakin nanny state
Trade in material assumptions for spiritual facts and make permanent progress.
Comments
I enjoy laughing at the law that it is illegal to by them but not to smoke them if you are under 18.
Should be like marijuana in some countries in Europe (remember Pulp Fiction), illegal to sell it, but legal to smoke it. So if you cultivate your own plant and process the tobacco leaf, you can smoke it. That will make that only a very small percentage will smoke.
I'm all for allowing people to kill themselves via a process that is lengthy and painful. Only a couple of issue's need to be resolved. The first issue is, kill yourself not me. If you want to smoke in YOUR house or YOUR car be my guest but once in the public domain you don't have the write to kill me or someone else with your nasty, smelly habit. The second issue is, kill yourself on YOUR dime. I don't want to pay for your f-ing health coverage nor do I want to see my health premiums jacked up.
yea keep the smokers outside and away from enclosed public spaces.
if a study was done and said 6 hours of consecutive gaming was detrimental to your health, and the government wanted to intervene by limiting your internet access, is that not the same thing?
freedom is freedom, and governent has no right to intervene and decide what is best for me.
at first it creeps in, than it snatches you when you sleep. be vigilant.
-I will subtlety invade your psyche-
And what about the bar workers? They who dot smoke will be forced to breath in second hand smoke all day are they not free to live and work in a non toxic smoke filled environment?
Another great example of Moore's Law. Give people access to that much space (developers and users alike) and they'll find uses for it that you can never imagine. "640K ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates 1981
Prohibition didn't work.
This does not mean, however, that smoking should not be regulated. No one has a right to impose their carcinogentic byproducts on my lungs.
CH, Jedi, Commando, Smuggler, BH, Scout, Doctor, Chef, BE...yeah, lots of SWG time invested.
Once a denizen of Ahazi
What about the 'Freedom' of on-smokers who say for example want to go and have a drink at a bar but its full of smokers. Are not those people free to drink at a smokeless bar without the danger of inhaling dangerous smelly smoke from cancer sticks?And what about the bar workers? They who dot smoke will be forced to breath in second hand smoke all day are they not free to live and work in a non toxic smoke filled environment?
While I dislike smoking, your example doesn't work for me. If you are talking about a public building / establishment, then certainly cancer sticks are out. However, a bar or restaurant is a privately owned establishment and the owner sets the rules. If you don't like the rules, don't go inside and give them your money. Likewise, if you don't like the pay or working conditions don't work there (see how simple that is). Non-smokers shouldn't (they do) be forcing privately run businesses to cater to their whim (IMO).
There would have been nothing wrong for some bar's to cater to both smokers / non-smokers, to cater simply to smokers or to cater to only non-smokers. That is real freedom, the freedom of choice.
And what about the bar workers? They who dot smoke will be forced to breath in second hand smoke all day are they not free to live and work in a non toxic smoke filled environment?
While I dislike smoking, your example doesn't work for me. If you are talking about a public building / establishment, then certainly cancer sticks are out. However, a bar or restaurant is a privately owned establishment and the owner sets the rules. If you don't like the rules, don't go inside and give them your money. Likewise, if you don't like the pay or working conditions don't work there (see how simple that is). Non-smokers shouldn't (they do) be forcing privately run businesses to cater to their whim (IMO).
There would have been nothing wrong for some bar's to cater to both smokers / non-smokers, to cater simply to smokers or to cater to only non-smokers. That is real freedom, the freedom of choice.
smoking is banned in bars in NYC amongst other states. but society, as it usually does, has conformed.I thought choice would have been the proper way to impose thisit wont stop there...
-I will subtlety invade your psyche-
Tobacco should be classified for what it is, a drug.
It damage your body and it is higly addictive like any other drug.
So we either legalise any other drug and let people die of their own death (like someone say) or we ban cigarettes like any other drug.
I don't have any particular preference, I do what I want, but institutions should be more consistent on what they consider legal or illegal.
Well seeing how ciggarets second hand smoke kills the people around the smoker even faster then the smoker themselves i would most definetedly say ban them for good. Maybe not all tobacco products like chew seeing how you cannot hurt the people around you with it. Anyways its a disgusting habit and I dont see why people do it (addiction duh) but why even every try it? We all here on tv and other places that there is a very good chance that you will die and people still do it. Its disgusting and stupid ban them!
And what about the bar workers? They who dot smoke will be forced to breath in second hand smoke all day are they not free to live and work in a non toxic smoke filled environment?
While I dislike smoking, your example doesn't work for me. If you are talking about a public building / establishment, then certainly cancer sticks are out. However, a bar or restaurant is a privately owned establishment and the owner sets the rules. If you don't like the rules, don't go inside and give them your money. Likewise, if you don't like the pay or working conditions don't work there (see how simple that is). Non-smokers shouldn't (they do) be forcing privately run businesses to cater to their whim (IMO).
There would have been nothing wrong for some bar's to cater to both smokers / non-smokers, to cater simply to smokers or to cater to only non-smokers. That is real freedom, the freedom of choice.
Yep i thought someone would use this Excuse [and its usually the smokers]. You say well don't go to bars then if you don't want to breath in smoke. Well i say 2 things what if in your local town every bar and club and pub has smokers? what would non smokers do? and same goes for bar workers.So at the end you say the following " Non-Smokers shouldn't(they do) be forcing privately run business to cater to there whim (IMO)". Well i say to you " Smokers shouldn't (they do ) be forcing Privately run business to cater to there whim". Also bars are classed as public buildings because the public congregates in them. It is true in a buisnes sense that a bar is a private buisness but it still has a public function.
And so you know there is something wrong with catering to both smokers and Non-smokers in the following reasons....
- Smoke travels out of the Smokers area.
- Smoke stinks up the bar.
- Smoke taints food and drink for both Non-smokers and Smokers.
- Still creates a healph hazard for Non-smoking Workers who HAVE to work there.
I will end this post by pointing out that a smoke free system is working pretty well in the UK and other European countries.
Another great example of Moore's Law. Give people access to that much space (developers and users alike) and they'll find uses for it that you can never imagine. "640K ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates 1981
No...
If people want to smoke on cancer sticks that's up to them..
We should be a bit more free with our lives..
It's up to people who like smoking...But..Shouldn't be selfish smoking infront of people who don't...
Problem is that most smokers don't care about this. Try asking them most smokers Ive asked about this basically say "I have a right to smoke where i want, if you don't like it you can always go outside".
Which is hardly fare to the Non-smokers, and is one reason Non-smokers don't like smoking as we are forced to breath in the smoke and eat bar food that's tainted with the taste of Tobacco [Yuck].
Another great example of Moore's Law. Give people access to that much space (developers and users alike) and they'll find uses for it that you can never imagine. "640K ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates 1981
I Don't like that too..But in england...We have it banned in pubs and that..Just not banned fully..
If a law against ciggarette smoking had ANY chance whatsoever of being enforcable, which it does not, then yes, such should be passed, for the benefit of millions.
Unfortunately, chances are extremely high that the same thing will happen as when alcohol was banned. That is to say that alcohol consumption actually increased, and multiple new organized crime units were formed.
No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.
Hemingway
I still have shares in Tobacco, and despite the smoking ban, and many smoking bans worldwide, it's still a growth industry. Luckily I sold all my pub shares a few years ago, as since the somking ban they have all halfed in value.
Essentially I feel a load of do gooders who don't frequent pubs and clubs banned people from smoking in them. Althought he majority of politicians and doctors don't smoke, the majority of pub and club goers do.
This is an abuse of their freedom.
I smoke and I enjoy smoking.
Millions, even billions of people smoke and enjoy smoking. For us, there are no benefits to banning cigarettes. Quite the opposite.
Banning cigarettes will not "benefit society" it will benefit one element of society at the considerable inconvenience of another signifcant element of society.
You aren't forced to passive smoke by smokers. You do so by your own consent. If you do not consent then move away. This is a reasonable approach to the subject.
Similarly if you are surrounded by non-smokers, it would be reasonable for you not to smoke or to move away before lighting up.
An unreasonable approach is that when you are near a smoker, you have him imprisoned.
Another great example of Moore's Law. Give people access to that much space (developers and users alike) and they'll find uses for it that you can never imagine. "640K ought to be enough for anybody" - Bill Gates 1981
What you choose to smoke is none of my business. To the best of my knowledge it is quite normal for people caught smoking crack or cannabis to be asked to leave. There are lisencing laws that put the publican up for prosecution if he does not enforce this. Now of course the same is true of cigarette smokers.
Crack, cigarettes what's the difference?
Non smokers do have the right to visit popular bars. There have always been non smoking bars.
That choice has always been theirs to make.
The reason why non smoking bars are not popular, is because people don't want them. The only reason non smokers want to go to popular bars is beacuse smokers go there.
How does making all the bars unpopular help?
For that matter how does putting loads of those bars you wanted to go to out of business improve your choices?
Giving you the choice of frequenting a smoking bar or not, does not make you a second class citizien. You have the same choice as every other citizien. Taking away that choice makes you a second class citizien.
A black man who does not wish to travel on the same bus as white people is excrcising his free choice. A black man who is not allowed to travel on the same bus as a white person is a second class citizien.
I don't know any smoker who lights up in non smoking area's or who lights up in non smoking households. I never see this and neither do you.
And yes Mickey Mouse Lights are on sale in the 3rd world. They place them on knee high shop shelves and give them out free in schools along with guns and hyperdermic needles full of aids.
i'll start by apologizing for this post....well there it is...so let me continue.
I like to smoke... i smoke a half pack a day and I know its pretty detrimental for my health...BUT that is MY fucking problem so leave me alone. What is the complaint here? i'm honestly lost at why people are so up and against smoking...its not hurting you...if you want to complain about things that you breath in why don't you go and do something about what really matters.: research ways to reduce pollution because i'm positive that the fumes of the hummer that you rich snots drive around in hurt you more than my smoking a cigarette near you. You are all the same people, no relevance to age or gender..you're all the middle age housewife trying to gain some control over society...you see one person attack a subject and you all jump in...
I hate people that cough around me when i'm smoking outside...do you dance in front of cripples too? assholes...
I hope some day we can all put aside our racisms and prejudices and just laugh at people
QFT
https://easynulled.com/
Free porn videos, xxx porn videos
Onlyfans nudes
Onlyfans leaked
QFT
YEP...freakin nanny state
Trade in material assumptions for spiritual facts and make permanent progress.