Pontiac GTO Forum banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,017 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
A San Francisco lawmaker is hoping to stomp out the nasty and dangerous habit of smoking cigarettes by enacting more stringent rules to keep people from lighting up in public places.

It's already banned in workplaces, bars, taxicabs and city parks and if new legislation is approved, smoking will be off limits in areas near the doors, vents and windows of restaurants, shops, offices and housing complexes, the Chronicle reports.

It would also be a much easier breathing experience at outdoor dining tables, farmers' markets, lines for movies theaters, concerts and sporting events, near cab stands and ATMs.

San Francisco Supervisor Eric Mar introduced the legislation to protect the City's, "most vulnerable residents from secondhand smoke," he told the Chronicle.

If Mar has his way, smoking will also be a no-go in common areas of shared housing units, such as courtyards, elevators, hallways and laundry rooms. Anyone smoking in their own apartment would have to keep their doors shut.

Smokers won't have much luck polluting areas in other Bay Area cities either if the ban is passed. Belmont, Palo Alto, Hayward, Novato and Berkeley also have similar rules against smoking in public places.

Some of the strictest smoking bans in the Bay Area are in Alameda County, Contra Costa County, Dublin, Emeryville, Hayward, Healdsburg, Los Gatos, Marin County, Martinez, Newark, Novato, Oakland, Pleasanton, Richmond, Ross, San Anselmo, San Jose, San Ramon, Santa Rosa, Union City and Windsor.

While the possible ban is likely good news to those opposed to smoking, it will no doubt have the "cancer stick" addicts thinking like Cedric the Entertainer, who told the audience on The Original Kings of Comedy, "You can't smoke on Earth anymore."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,445 Posts
Pot is probably safer since it's not laced with more chemicals than it was born with......
I can't quite understand why people want to ban cigarettes but think marijuana is ok.

You need to do a little more research on pot.

The type of pot that is grown now has at least 10 times the THC in it that the natural cannibis plant had in the 50's. It's a genetically altered and enhanced plant/drug that is designed to get you addicted and really high. A lot of times the plant is specifacally fertilized to enhance the amount of THC in it.

One good sized joint has the same amount of tar as 1 pack of cigarettes. A blunt is the equivilant of 3 packs of cigarettes.

The mind altering effects of THC have a half life of 72 hours. That means that half of the chemicals that create the "high effect" that everyone wants to smoke pot for, are still in your system 3 days after you smoke it. This varies depending on body fat. Body fat stores THC, and the fatter you are the longer it lasts.

In addition long term use of THC has shown to cause short term memory loss, and psychosis.

The French have determined that cannabis use causes schizophrenic disorders in humans especially if used before the age of 15.

Here's another study on the human brain. It found that brain activity was stunted and that brain size in key regions were smaller:

A 2008 study by the University of Melbourne of 15 heavy marijuana users (consuming at least 5 marijuana cigarettes daily for on average 20 years) and 16 controls found an average size difference for the smokers in the hippocampus (12 percent smaller) and the amygdala (7 percent smaller). It has been suggested that such effects can be reversed with long term abstinence. However, the study indicates that they are unsure that the problems were caused by marijuana alone.

While there are some good medical reasons to use Cannabis, including relief for glaucoma patients and for cancer patients on chemotherapy, the risks are much worse than cigarettes for normal daily consumption.

Again I really can't understand why someone that thought cigarettes are dangerous would not think that the smoke from another dried up leaf that is rolled up in newspaper and lit on fire and sucked deep into your lungs is ok.

Both are bad for you. Cigars are bad for you too.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,777 Posts
It can't be any better or worse than drinking every day. Granted the effects aren't the same, but one health problem is just as bad as another. All chemicals affect different people in different ways. Look at the pharmies you see on TV all the time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,445 Posts
It can't be any better or worse than drinking every day. Granted the effects aren't the same, but one health problem is just as bad as another. All chemicals affect different people in different ways. Look at the pharmies you see on TV all the time.
Don't get me wrong, I don't smoke cigarettes or pot, I drink very little alcohol.

I think people should have the right to do what they want to themselves and the government should butt out.

If I want to open a place to eat, what business is it of the governments if I allow people to smoke??? None!!! If you don't want to eat in a place that smells like an ashtray then go somewhere else.

If a person wants to snort a bit of coke what business is that of the governments??? None unless the impaired state causes you to do something criminal.

If a person doesn't want to wear a seatbelt, again no business of the government's. Now when they smash their face in an accident, they should lose the right to sue for injuries due to their own negligence. Their insurance company shouldn't have to pay for their injuries either unless the bought a high risk policy for people that don't want to wear seatbelts.

Our government is way too large and intrusive and these laws like this control freak in San Fran wants to enact are wrong.

In the late 70's we had a department of energy created to figure out how to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. There were 14 employees. Now there are more than 10,000 and we spend billions on this department and we have only increased our imports. We don't need them.

We have a department of education in the federal government that is duplicitous of every state governments department of education. We waste billions and they accomplish nothing. Do away with them.

We have laws requiring airbags in cars. When the automakers started offering airbags, the cars with them sold faster. So they added more airbags and better airbags. We don't need stupid laws like that. Demand and the free market work.

The government wants to stop Gays and Lesbians from marrying. It's no business of the governments wether or not two people that love each other want to be committed to each other. If a company doesn't want to recognize the relationship for benefits, that's their business. When they can't get the talent they need they will change their tune.

The government needs to butt out of peoples lives. There is no reason for the federal government to regulate college football and require them to have playoffs. They are looking into it and that is why this country is bankrupt.

:mad::mad:

Rant off, I'm done.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
8,433 Posts
Back in the 60's there was a song that reflected the times. It held a story that when you listened to it, it made you think. This same song is now suited for the times we are NOW experiencing. The lyrics of this song which reflected the Viet Nam era can be changed to reflect the current times.....

The song:

Eve of Destruction by Barry McGuire. Listen to it, really listen to it and think about the road our government has us on.
While Evil in the world continues to build in strength world leaders are pu$$yfooting around allowing them to get stronger and stronger.

 

·
64-67 Expert
Joined
·
8,569 Posts
Some great posts here. It all boils down to POWER and how to get it and hold onto it. The well-being of the masses be damned. I personally got sick of the fascist liberal socialist one-sided view of the world when I lived in the SF bay area for over 40 years. Glad to be out of there. What I need to do with my life does not neccessarily parallel the choices made by a 65 year old angry lesbian with an agenda. I have nothing against gay people. I just don't care to hear about it all the time. Let them marry. Who cares? Their sexual orientation is none of my business. Give them the same tax breaks that regular couples get. Give ME a tax break. I'm single, and of no burden to the system. I have no kids. Why should I pay MORE taxes than folks with kids?? I'm in a 31-44% tax bracket and it sucks. I like my freedom. I enjoy actually going into the wilderness. I work hard, and don't want to be restricted if I'm not impacting anybody else. Obama is a disgrace to this country and has no business apologizing for America to anybody. Thank God I didn't vote for him. More and more "people" are becoming dependant on the government to raise their kids, feed them, supply them with housing. They feel entightled. And, if they keep giving their votes, they will keep getting free stuff. The Host can only support the Parasite for so long before it shrivels up and dies. That's where America is right now. I hate racists, yet racism is becoming more popular than ever. Look at the polititians and the newspapers. As a white guy living in Oakland most of my life, I was the victim of racism many, many times. And, yeah, WHO THE #$^% LISTENS TYO THE FRENCH??
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,777 Posts
More and more "people" are becoming dependant on the government to raise their kids, feed them, supply them with housing. They feel entightled. And, if they keep giving their votes, they will keep getting free stuff.
Why not take back from the government when you've paid into the system forever? If that's the system they want to run, take advantage of it. The government is 100% responsible for our current economic climate, through deficit spending and printing money, and letting Alan Greenspan play God with a FIAT money system. I don't like Obama, Bernanke, or Geithner in any way, but to blame them for the mess we're in now isn't fair, because that belongs with Reagan, Bush 1 & 2, and Clinton.
 

·
64-67 Expert
Joined
·
8,569 Posts
I agree. This isn't simply an Obama problem. He is merely part of the problem. Our current economic crisis has been about 30 years in the making. We've been asleep at the wheel too long. It's time to wake up, get educated, and take action.
 

·
Former Moderator
Joined
·
3,523 Posts
Back in the 60's there was a song that reflected the times. It held a story that when you listened to it, it made you think. This same song is now suited for the times we are NOW experiencing. The lyrics of this song which reflected the Viet Nam era can be changed to reflect the current times.....

The song:

Eve of Destruction by Barry McGuire. Listen to it, really listen to it and think about the road our government has us on.
While Evil in the world continues to build in strength world leaders are pu$ around allowing them to get stronger and stronger.
:agree Exactly...... What else is there to say.............
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
779 Posts
Don't get me wrong, I don't smoke cigarettes or pot, I drink very little alcohol.

I think people should have the right to do what they want to themselves and the government should butt out.

If I want to open a place to eat, what business is it of the governments if I allow people to smoke??? None!!! If you don't want to eat in a place that smells like an ashtray then go somewhere else.

If a person wants to snort a bit of coke what business is that of the governments??? None unless the impaired state causes you to do something criminal.

If a person doesn't want to wear a seatbelt, again no business of the government's. Now when they smash their face in an accident, they should lose the right to sue for injuries due to their own negligence. Their insurance company shouldn't have to pay for their injuries either unless the bought a high risk policy for people that don't want to wear seatbelts.

Our government is way too large and intrusive and these laws like this control freak in San Fran wants to enact are wrong.

In the late 70's we had a department of energy created to figure out how to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. There were 14 employees. Now there are more than 10,000 and we spend billions on this department and we have only increased our imports. We don't need them.

We have a department of education in the federal government that is duplicitous of every state governments department of education. We waste billions and they accomplish nothing. Do away with them.

We have laws requiring airbags in cars. When the automakers started offering airbags, the cars with them sold faster. So they added more airbags and better airbags. We don't need stupid laws like that. Demand and the free market work.

The government wants to stop Gays and Lesbians from marrying. It's no business of the governments wether or not two people that love each other want to be committed to each other. If a company doesn't want to recognize the relationship for benefits, that's their business. When they can't get the talent they need they will change their tune.

The government needs to butt out of peoples lives. There is no reason for the federal government to regulate college football and require them to have playoffs. They are looking into it and that is why this country is bankrupt.

:mad::mad:

Rant off, I'm done.

Good points. The Peoples Republic of California strikes another blow against individual rights. Smoking is unhealthy, but pot is probably worse in general. Keep an eye on the PCers -- the First and Second amendments are next..........
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,445 Posts
Why not take back from the government when you've paid into the system forever? If that's the system they want to run, take advantage of it. The government is 100% responsible for our current economic climate, through deficit spending and printing money, and letting Alan Greenspan play God with a FIAT money system. I don't like Obama, Bernanke, or Geithner in any way, but to blame them for the mess we're in now isn't fair, because that belongs with Reagan, Bush 1 & 2, and Clinton.
It started with Rosevelt. Johnston and the great society. Nixon and Ford and abolishing the gold standard and price controls and the government trying to engineer prosperity. Carter was just an idiot.

Reagan tried to rein in the size of government. He settled for enacting tax cuts. The Congress eagerly cut taxes and blamed Reagan for deficits while they spent money like drunken sailors. The Reagan tax cuts enabled the economy to grow. Tax revenue doubled from 1980 to 1990 from 500 billion to just under 1 trillion. The problem was the government spent the windfall that was created.

The problem with taking back from the government is that it empowers them. They take our money and put all kinds of stipulations on how you can get bits and pieces of it back. That power is what keeps the system from getting fixed. End it all.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
779 Posts
Why not take back from the government when you've paid into the system forever? If that's the system they want to run, take advantage of it. The government is 100% responsible for our current economic climate, through deficit spending and printing money, and letting Alan Greenspan play God with a FIAT money system. I don't like Obama, Bernanke, or Geithner in any way, but to blame them for the mess we're in now isn't fair, because that belongs with Reagan, Bush 1 & 2, and Clinton.

Poncho -- President Reagan passed one of the best stimulus packages ever and you know what it was? The Tax Reform Act of 1986 that fixed the economy by -- gulp -- putting more money in the hands of citizens in the form of lower taxes. The rest of the Presidents you mentioned didn't do anything near the magnitude of the Tax Reform Act of 1986 but benefitted from it over the long term. How about a Tax Reform Act of 2009? That's the ticket. Regards, Paul.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top