h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Strange thing, that name of yours, Peet: you're pedantic allright, but you're punctuation could be better... You've got what it takes to be a policeman too (warning: this is NO compliment), and I can see (or read) you want to program everyone else, but I can't imagine you giving anyone ideas, certainly not lateral ones (or maybe they are SO lateral I don't understand them anymore, although in THAT case, they're usually called "irrelevant".)
(Just kidding, I'm sorry if I offended you, but your views offend me, and I couldn't let it pass.)

I'll tell you (= all non-smokers) one thing: I'm a smoker, and I don't plan to quit. I claim my right to smoke anywhere I like, even in places where it's "forbidden" (what a stupid word, it just just makes me want to do whatever it's about even more), that's a risk I take, not you. I claim this right because as a smoker I pay a lot more taxes than non-smokers, and I'll pay even more if I ever get fined for smoking in a no-smoking-zone. (All passive smokers can smoke for free.)
Stop bugging us (= smokers).
I'm pretty sure there's things YOU like that I would disapprove of, so stop throwing rocks until you can claim you're without sins (THAT's a biblical reference).

Another thing, for ALL researchers (smokers AND non-smokers): for any history of smoking (wether you consider it a vice or a pleasure), please take into consideration the Hashishim, an Islamic sect that smoked something other than tobacco, long before Columbus... And what about the "dreamquests" of the American natives, who locked themselves in a "smoky room" to get visions? That could be considered as smoking too...

And remember the Rasta who was out of ganja to smoke! The first thing he said was: "What IS this shitty music?"

In the ten months since that posting my user name has changed many times; my opinion of the vast majority of smokers has not. Thank you - any time I might doubt my fervour, a fool like you comes along to strengthen it.

Very glad to be of service. See ya.

Pffft.

quote: "When people raise the point "what if an innocent bystander is really offended, even though you didn't aim the phrase at them", I point out the similarity between that situation and smoke fall-out. Someone who lights up in a public place always risks seriously offending people they have never met. I take the same risk."

Isn't this the same mentality (in seed form) that promts the anti-abortionists to bomb clinics full of people? I just hope you don't get mad about anything more dangerous than cigarettes. using your logic, should I go out and get a gun and take a few potshots in the park to protest war? (after all , war has killed many more people over the years than tobacco.)

Are you sure of that?

Yes.

So does drunk driving.

By the way.. Research has shown that research causes cancer in lab rats.

'Nonnie

Smeagol,

World War 2 is recognised as the bloodiest conflict in history. According to Encyclopedia Britannica online, the death toll for the entire conflict is estimated as falling between 40,000,000 and 50,000,000.

( http://www.britannica.com/bcom/eb/article/5/0,5716,118865+1+110199,00.html )

In 1999, the World Health Organisation stated in a press release that "Every week, more than 50,000 people die from tobacco-related illness worldwide".

At that rate, matching the upper estimate of the death toll for WW2 would take 1000 weeks - just short of twenty years. For war to kill more people than smoking would require the amount of conflict in the world to add up to at least the equivalent of WW2 every twenty years.

The WHO press release came before there was conclusive proof of the connection between infant death syndrome and secondary smoking, so a large number of child deaths are not included in their figures.

Still sure?

Oh, and remember that my utter hatred of people smoking around me has nothing to do with the health implications - it's simply that the stench turns my stomach.

btw, would you accept those people shot by snipers while lighting cigarettes as "smoking-related deaths"?

I despise your response and opinions.
I would be pleased to hear that you had been randomly shot in the street, and would smoke at your funeral.
Have a nice (sound of Zippo flicking) day.

Statistically, though, Peet is more likely to not smoke at yours.

Dance, perhaps...

In my opinion the author of this article has a right to their own opinion (although maybe they should have changed the title to suit their opinion better) Everyone of you also has a right to your own opinion, as you have expressed very openly in this discussion (or should I say debate?) I find it very funny when you accuse the author of preaching his/her opinion while at the same time preaching your own. I on the other hand also have an opinion. I think that in a perfect world all smokers would respect non-smokers air space. Or maybe in a perfect world there would be no cigarettes. I would also like to add that tabacco itself is not as harmful as all of the chemicals that the cigarette companies add to it.

I agree that the added chemicals are dangerous, but their sole purpose is to increase the addictive factor and increase the consumption of tobacco, which is solely responsible for the stench. Manufacturers claim they are adding chemicals to "improve flavour"... They could probably add dogsh*t and still make the same claim!

The 'light' varieties have more added chemicals in an attempt to make up for the flavour, and those are the most dangerous (despite the encouragement of the non-smokers to, "If you must smoke, smoke lights." ... trying to kill smokers off quicker, I assume.

Btw, I hate the stench of second-hand alcohol.. it makes me ill.. not to mention the obnoxious behaviour of those who carry it, but do you hear an outrage to ban alcohol? No, of course not. They tried it once in the States (see: prohibition) and it failed miserably.

Most perfumes make me ill, as well as impede my breathing, but do you find laws which heavily tax any product with an added scent? No. Are restaraunts and other public places required to add an 'unscented section'? No. Do people even -care- that their perfume baths are destroying my sinuses and lungs? No, they're more afraid of someone catching a whiff of their natural human odour.

Don't preach to me about smoking. Thanks for not bitching.

'Nonnie

'the encouragement of the non-smokers to, "If you must smoke, smoke lights"'

That's absurd.

Admit it, 'Nonnnie, you've never actually talked to a non-smoker, have you?

Oh, but I have. And that was a common thread among magazine adds for the Red Cross and other 'organizations' which discouraged smoking even before they proclaimed it -is- 'bad for your helth' instead of it -may-be-.

'Nonnie.

Odd. That sounds like the sort of thing an ex-smoker would say, as distinct from a non-smoker...