free stuff from Bucktown tobacco(18 and over please)

[mysterX]

http://www.bucktowntrading.com/addtolist.asp

[TheLoneGunman]

There are some additional free offers from these people too:

CANCER EMPHYSEMA DEATH

In addition, if you smoke around your kids, you can shorten their life span and keep the medical community employed. (Keep the medical community from feeling the recession -- cough up blood!)

[bontrage]

Originally posted by TheLoneGunman
There are some additional free offers from these people too:

CANCER EMPHYSEMA DEATH

In addition, if you smoke around your kids, you can shorten their life span and keep the medical community employed. (Keep the medical community from feeling the recession -- cough up blood!)

If you smoke enough around your kids, they won't live to be old enough to go to college. Considering how expensive schools are these days, I would call that quite a savings! Good Find!

[xDFuNK]

there isnt any need for those last 2 replies...yea ppl smoke and no they dont need to hear your preaching, so theres no need to even bother writing it

[sbp]

Amen xDFuNK!

[froggystyle]

I'll second that..... I'm sick of people telling me what i alreaddy know and I dont have kids for that matter. We smokers make enough sacrifices for you as it is. Our governmet uses us as scapegoats for all the problems of our country and taxes us accordingly. These taxes pay for YOUR kids to go to schools, pay for YOUR hospitals, and fund YOUR security. Dont you ever wonder why the government doesnt ban tobbacco? Well I'll tell you. If you ban tobacco then there would be a huge loss in funding for all government programs and our country would crumble. The government has decided that it is better suited to all people to make THEIR OWN CHOICES about smoking, so cut the condescending "I'm better than you" bit and lets start being civil to each other.

-The Frog

[welfareloser]

Originally posted by froggystyle
I'll second that..... I'm sick of people telling me what i alreaddy know and I dont have kids for that matter. We smokers make enough sacrifices for you as it is. Our governmet uses us as scapegoats for all the problems of our country and taxes us accordingly. These taxes pay for YOUR kids to go to schools, pay for YOUR hospitals, and fund YOUR security. Dont you ever wonder why the government doesnt ban tobbacco? Well I'll tell you. If you ban tobacco then there would be a huge loss in funding for all government programs and our country would crumble. The government has decided that it is better suited to all people to make THEIR OWN CHOICES about smoking, so cut the condescending "I'm better than you" bit and lets start being civil to each other.

-The Frog

okay, the lone gunman's comments were unnecessary, but so are 90% of the comments around here... no need to yell.

things you are so wrong about i weep:

"we smokers make enough sacrifices for you as it is."
1. i don't consider keeping secondhand smoke away from nonsmokers a sacrifice; you shouldn't have been sharing it in the first place.
2. if you were referring to the taxes on tobacco, they are NOT enough to cover all the damned money the government has to spend on healthcare for people who die long, slow deaths of emphysema (total $85 billion per year. source: american heart assoc.). chronic lung problems, and various cancers caused by the smoking. eight years in a wheelchair hooked up to tanks of oxygen and dripping bags with a 12 pill per day regimen is not cheap, and the government pays for a big chunk of it (45% - source: Lung USA) when the sick people run out of money, which happens awfully fast with tobacco related illness.
3. add in lost productivity,smoking costs $100 billion a year. that is $363 per american citizen (not per smoker!!) if, for the sake of convenience, we make a gross overestimation in the percent of the american population that smokes, say 10%, that means each smoker owes the country $3,630 per year. have you paid that much? i doubt it.
SUMMARY: you have not made enough sacrifices yet.

"Our governmet uses us as scapegoats for all the problems of our country and taxes us accordingly."
1. umm... i have yet to see tobacco implicated in alien abductions, unemployment, teen pregnancy, or the oklahoma city bombing. "all the problems of our country" was a tad bit of exaggeration, right? right.
2. if you are referring to smokers as "scapegoats" for tobacco related illnesses... well... they are the fault of smokers.
SUMMARY: you are not a scapegoat, you are actually to blame for certain bad things.

"If you ban tobacco then there would be a huge loss in funding for all government programs and our country would crumble."
1. There have been hundreds of tobacco tax increases in the U.S. over the years, and every single one of them has raised additional revenue. (source: http://www.lungusa.org/smokefreeclass/tobacco.html) so no need to worry about the tobacco industry's demise anytime in the next century.
2. how much of the total us budget do you think your pennies (or even dollars) per pack account for? it is many decimal places less than one percent.
SUMMARY: you were wrong again.

"so cut the condescending "I'm better than you" bit and lets start being civil to each other."
1. no one said they were better than you.
2. all anyone said was that smoking is bad. if that makes you feel bad, that's your problem with your guilt that you need to deal with.
3. you're the only one here who has not been civil.
SUMMARY: be nice.


[Edited by welfareloser on 04-03-2001 at 01:04 PM]

[welfareloser]

oh, and thanks for the freebies, mysterX! smoking paraphenalia (if i di'n't spell it right, i don't wanna hear about it) is mad cool.

[joesquared]

Awesome reply welfareloser.

It's great to see people back up their opinions, and I love it when people can prove ignorant people wrong. =)

[I'm being serious]

And thanks mysterx for the consistant links of good freebies.

[froggystyle]

in all this you assume that what the tv tells you is true.....#1 there was a report out that second hand smoke kills 5000 people a day...this was front page news. Weeeks later that study was withdrawn. I agree that we should not smoke indoors in public. I dont like to intake smoke while i eat either....but i want you to realise that i Make huge efforts to distance myself from people everywhere i go so that they dont have to be bothered by the smell of my cigarettes....not so they arent subjected to second hand smoke.... thats absurd...living in Los Angeles i cant see how anyone can fear faint smells of second hand smoke and actually worry about dying from them while thousands of cars drive by spewing black death......how many of those studys about how much harm smoking causes fgures in the carcinogens we ingest on a daily basis from automobiles in our water supply front he walls and in all the food we eat? but you see if the person who died of cancer smokes then its automatically going to beassumed that they die of smoking. Im not saying smoking is harmless and im not saying that it doesnt kill...im sayign that the numbers are highly exagerated and that second hand smoking deaths are also highly exagerated in cases where people pass in public....the worry is around kids and i agree witht hat....kids should not be exposed to that they are not strong enough to fight those chemicals. Before you attack me from forcing death upon others i recomend you go destroy your car cause you are hurting alot more people than I am. second if smoking is COSTING the government money... then answer the question i posed in my first entry....why dont they ban tobacco all together ill tell you why. because your facts are BS because you read highly biassed material trying to tell people what they want to hear. The government proffits largely from tobbacco sales and the medical industry thrives.... THRIVES.....those who are forced to pay obscene amounts of money to the hospitals in 99 percent of cases are those who chose that fate whent hey chose to smoke. IF your pissed about spending government money to fund that, then I have more news for you. the government provides for poor people to sit on their ass instead of getting a job case it actually benefiets the poor to leech off the government over getting a job....after the cost of child care it becomes less profitable to work then to get less money from the govt but not have to pay child care.... third the ammount of money the govt gets from cigarettes is much more than you think....realise that the taxes here in california at least are over 100% of the price cigaretes would otherwise be. cigarettes are $4.25 a pack...of that at least $2.00 are tax. now realize that me who smokes a pack a day gives the government 800 dollars a year. And thats not even to say that i will get sick....MOST of us dont (check the statistics... small percentage) figure int he # of smokers to the # of people who get sick and see that we more than pay our way. And we are scapegoats when the govt needs more money for schools...they raise our taxes.....whent he govtneeds a new plane they raise our taxes first...its brilliant...make the smokers look like the most evil people on earth feed it to the public...then they wont complain when we hike taxes up to absurd levels. Realise that the UNITED STATES is the only place in the world where there is an uproar over smoking like this every other country laughs at us for being so anal.

BOTTOM LINE: fear everything cause everything will kill you and now that im done spouting everybody put down your computers and go be brainwashed.

-the frog

[froggystyle]

2. if you were referring to the taxes on tobacco, they are NOT enough to cover all the damned money the government has to spend on healthcare for people who die long, slow deaths of emphysema (total $85 billion per year. source: american heart assoc.). chronic lung problems, and various cancers caused by the smoking.

not all those emphysema and lung cancer cases are cause by smoking...so i recommend you find out how many fo those deaths are cause by smoking. cause i think you are charging us for those who die of non smoking related lung cancers and emphysema and such.

[welfareloser]

Originally posted by froggystyle
2. if you were referring to the taxes on tobacco, they are NOT enough to cover all the damned money the government has to spend on healthcare for people who die long, slow deaths of emphysema (total $85 billion per year. source: american heart assoc.). chronic lung problems, and various cancers caused by the smoking.

not all those emphysema and lung cancer cases are cause by smoking...so i recommend you find out how many fo those deaths are cause by smoking. cause i think you are charging us for those who die of non smoking related lung cancers and emphysema and such.



the studies that i have seen refer ONLY to smoking related emphysema and lung cancer (which is the vast majority of cases anyway - i'm not sure, i'll check on medline, but i believe that it is over 90%.)
and whatever the numbers, even if only 1% of all cases are caused by second-hand smoke - isn't that still a bad thing?

[froggystyle]

theres alot worse things out there to foccus on than us.....
and like i said before........there is no study that can show what percent of those to contract such illnesses wer exposed to other factors or predispoed genetically to such diseases not to mention what age those individuals were at.
I mean if your eighty and you contract emphysema is it really all that fair to blame smoking? I mean sh!t your 80

[welfareloser]

look at the studies. you are wrong. it can be fairly accurately determined about how many lung diseases are caused by smoking. some people are genetically predisposed, some have other factors involved - you run a statistical analysis based on lots of solid facts, and you come up with the number of people who would not have gotten the disease had it not been for smoking.

so we'll discount everyone over the age of 65 who dies, because what the hell, they were so old and had no business living any longer anyway. there's still lots and lots of people dying because of smoke and second hand smoke. smoke is a bad thing. it kills people. if you still wish to deny that, go to pubmed or medline, do a search for a string of words like "smoke death second hand" and just read the abstracts.

worse things to focus on... like what? the common cold? guns? (kill fewer people than smoke) so if i focus on something that does kill more people than smoke, like cars, does that mean i should ignore smoke? i should not say one word about smoke until the evil scourge of auto accidents has been eradicated?

i think tobacco smoke is bad. i think less of it in the world would be good. that's all i'm saying.

and don't worry. i'm not "focused" on "you people"... i'm not a focused person... i'm actually a frickin scatterbrained doofus who has spent the last 40 minutes looking for my damned keys... a little nicotine would definitely tighten up my synaptic recycling and boost my memory... what was i saying?

[froggystyle]

I think you shouldnt condemn smokers when you contribute vastly more serious contaminants into the common air... your car pollutes way more than my cigarettes do...and considering the fact that i make it a point not to smoke around people and not to force my choices on others i believe that you are as much if not more damage than me... what about the flouride contamination in our water supply....flouride has been proven super carcinogenic and is found in abundance in our tap water. doctors say that the daily alowance needed is smalle rthan a dime...about what we get in one use of toothpaste....then we go out and shower and drink the water saturating ourselves constantly with cancer water...not to mention the food that you eat...but yeah go ahead be ignorant about all forms of carcinogens and pollutants that we come in contact with every day and just focus on us smokers cause we try so hard to hurt everyone and we are so eveil...i mean Im not even sure were human the way you describe us...

[welfareloser]

you are feeling much more attacked than is warranted..

I think you shouldnt condemn smokers
-- i didn't condemn anyone. i said smoke is bad. you have yet to disagree with the point that i actually made; you are trying to disagree with things i didn't say.

your car pollutes way more than my cigarettes do...
-- i don't have a car. do you?

flouride has been proven super carcinogenic and is found in abundance in our tap water
-- fluoride is not carcinogenic. the fluoride supply with which we fluoridate things is, however, contaminated with carcinogens, and we as anation, are definitely over-fluoridated. i know a lot about the subject, so if you'd like to argue this point, i can supply you with more knowledge than you are probably interested in, but again, you are using very faulty "logic" here - just because other things are worse does not mean that tobacco smoke is not bad. let me repeat my mantra: tobacco smoke is bad. that is all i am saying.

go ahead be ignorant about all forms of carcinogens and pollutants that we come in contact with every day
-- i am actually very knowledgeable about carcinogens. did a lot of graduate research in the cancer center at the u of mich. there are lots of carcinogens everywhere and it is very scary stuff. let me reiterate a point that you may still be missing: some people would live longer if they were not inhaling tobacco smoke. as far as facts go, that is about as indisputable as it gets. scientific studies on the subject do a pretty darned good job of ISOLATING the single factor of tobacco smoke, and the hundreds of them that have been done are a very solid body of evidence. in a nutshell, you have group a and group b, both of which are, as far as is possible, exposed to the same amounts of the same stuff, except that one group is exposed to tobacco products and the other is not.

and just focus on us smokers
-- again, thank you, but i must insist that i am a very unfocused person.

cause we try so hard to hurt everyone and we are so eveil...i mean Im not even sure were human the way you describe us...
--did i describe smokers? when? where? once again, all together now: tobacco smoke is bad. i have made no statements about smokers in general or you in particular, about what they should or should not be doing.

[froggystyle]

you truly have a way with words.....
you didnt say any of these things you implyed them but
hey maybe thats just me....hell i dont even smoke haha
im just bored i work for a medcal group i deal with cancer deaths every day as well as emphysema i know how bad smoking is and i know how much it harms people cause my job is to verify that a patient is covered for medical treatment. im just patheitaclly enrapped in a job that sucks and i have nothing better to do than waste time....mine and yours...but im sure you get a kick out of it anyways....im sick of this argument your just too good...

[welfareloser]

wow, you said a lot more things up there that still need fixin...

in all this you assume that what the tv tells you is true
-- umm, no. i don't watch tv except for blue's clues. i cite only respected organizations and peer-reviewed medical and scientific journals.


because your facts are BS because you read highly biassed material trying to tell people what they want to hear.
-- peer-reviewed journals.

IF your pissed about spending government money to fund that, then I have more news for you. the government provides for poor people to sit on their ass instead of getting a job case it actually benefiets the poor to leech off the government over getting a job....after the cost of child care it becomes less profitable to work then to get less money from the govt but not have to pay child care
--whatever your opinion on how the government should spend its money, again, just because you think that something else is worse does not make the govt paying for needlessly sick people not bad.

third the ammount of money the govt gets from cigarettes is much more than you think....
--right. prove it.

make the smokers look like the most evil people on earth feed it to the public...
--hmm. all the ad campaigns i have seen have accused the tobacco industry of lying (they have) and begged people to quit smoking or never to start. i don't think the government is trying to make smokers seem evil any more than they are practicing mind control by putting fluoride in the water...

. now realize that me who smokes a pack a day gives the government 800 dollars a year. And thats not even to say that i will get sick....MOST of us dont (check the statistics... small percentage) figure int he # of smokers to the # of people who get sick and see that we more than pay our way.
-- as a whole, on the average, smokers do not pick up the tab for smoking-related illnesses. i have already addressed that point.
-- if you are trying, in your own special way, to make the point that it is unfair to raise taxes on a product to pay for the damage that product creates, that is a fair enough point. if you never get sick, and nobody ever breathes your second-hand smoke, you have "wasted" thousands of dollars, and it does indeed suck to be you. good point! well done!

[welfareloser]

i was in the middle of posting that last when you posted your last - i'm glad you gave up first, because i was about to call it quits too... i'm gettin tired!

[zoobee]

WOW I have to say that you guys had a heck of an argument and the art of debate is definitely not lost here. Anyway, I am a non-smoker, but this place said free lighters and hats and stuff, and I burn a whole lot of incense -- so Lighters are Good! Thanks for the post!

[siph]

yeah this is great
I liek to see backed up arguements and not those gay accusatory ones.
My father is a smoker and has been smoking in my presence since I can remember. I am now a varsity track athlete, so i dont think it affected me too badly, but i dont really midn what people do with there bodies. They tried some ciggarette buy back thing at school
they gave you candy for ciggarettes, but you could also get suspended for having the ciggarettes in school, so nobody actually bothered.
My opinion is to let people do whatever they want. The economy is not that bad yet, and as logn as the economy stays fairly solid, we dont even really need to bother smokers for there illnesses because we manage to pay for their bills without too much of a problem.
I think the taxes are annoying, but if you want to smoke I guess its a price you have to pay.
oh well, just my thoughts on the matter.
Sorry about the spelling

[^Ces]

Can I vote this one up for most long winded thread ever?

[welfareloser]

Originally posted by ^Ces
Can I vote this one up for most long winded thread ever?

no. no voting rights until you are at least a lieutenant. now get back in your cage.

besides, these are much more long-winded, and far more entertaining:
http://www.gotapex.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=21601
http://www.gotapex.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=17444
http://www.gotapex.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=21785

[mysterX]

final thoughts: Nobody point a gun to your head and forces you to smoke. Is your choice.

[TheLoneGunman]

Final words: my reason for the original comment which kicked this off was that free tobacco makes it easy to pick up a habit which is hard to quit and does affect others (mr. track star notwithstanding).

California taxes the heck out of cigarettes and one reason (at least for the most recent two taxes) is that the more expensive they are the less likely people are to start smoking and the more motivated they are to quit (Yes, independant studies proved this). Also, all the money from these specific taxes is earmarked for anti-tobacco ads, education programs, health, etc. and not just the general fund.