Why are tobacco companies evil but not alcohol companies?

[Jeff7181]

There's a proposed law in Michigan to ban smoking from all restaurants, whether the owner wants a non-smoking restaurant or not.

 

[Goosemaster]

The general population has a large percentage of uneducated dunheaps of people that get hooked on the power they feel when offloading responsibility on others.

Tobacco Companies are not evil. Neither are Alcohol Companies.

I would say people are evil, but they're not. People are just greedy in their search for a better quality of like. Many people find that through education and its results, while others find it through inadequacy and the fleeting power that endeavors such as Anti-tabacco give them.

<----drives him more and MORE to become and engineer and escape classification as a member of the genreral populous.

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
There's a proposed law in Michigan to ban smoking from all restaurants, whether the owner wants a non-smoking restaurant or not.

Damn asshats. Let people do WTF they want. I am absolutely fine with smoking/Non-smoking sections.

Telling businesses what clients to cater too is f'd up, if not illegal.

 

[minendo]

Originally posted by: kami333
Alcohol should be banned from bars, it's really annoying when you want to watch a game but can't because there are all these annoying drunk people around you.

Certain people should be banned from life, but I don't see that happening in the near future.

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
There's a proposed law in Michigan to ban smoking from all restaurants, whether the owner wants a non-smoking restaurant or not.

Damn asshats. Let people do WTF they want. I am absolutely fine with smoking/Non-smoking sections.

Telling businesses what clients to cater too is f'd up, if not illegal.

More like unconstitutional.

 

[Cerb]

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
There's a proposed law in Michigan to ban smoking from all restaurants, whether the owner wants a non-smoking restaurant or not.

Damn asshats. Let people do WTF they want. I am absolutely fine with smoking/Non-smoking sections.

Telling businesses what clients to cater too is f'd up, if not illegal.

Agreed. If there were decent guidelines for non-smoking areas, it we'd all be happy. 'Cause you know the restaurants where you can be 10ft from the guy smoking and not get a whiff...and then you're 30ft away in the nonsmoking section and can't breathe in another place.
Of course here there are many businesses complaining since a law was passed that alcohol cannot be served within 100 yards of a church. We're having a lot of fun with that one. GL to all the nicotine addicts in Michigan.

 

[OulOat]

Smoking in public affects everyone around the smoker. They all inhale the same smoke that the smoker does, without their permission. However, unless you physically force it down their throats, drinking alcohol in public will only affect you.

 

[kalster]

Originally posted by: OulOat
Smoking in public affects everyone around the smoker. They all inhale the same smoke that the smoker does, without their permission. However, unless you physically force it down their throats, drinking alcohol in public will only affect you.

well driving under influence is way more harmful than passive smoke i think

 

[OulOat]

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: OulOat
Smoking in public affects everyone around the smoker. They all inhale the same smoke that the smoker does, without their permission. However, unless you physically force it down their throats, drinking alcohol in public will only affect you.

well driving under influence is way more harmful than passive smoke i think

Well, that is illegal already.

 

[kalster]

Originally posted by: OulOat

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: OulOat Smoking in public affects everyone around the smoker. They all inhale the same smoke that the smoker does, without their permission. However, unless you physically force it down their throats, drinking alcohol in public will only affect you.

well driving under influence is way more harmful than passive smoke i think

Well, that is illegal already.

how does not being legal reduce its potential danger

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: kalster
how does not being legal reduce its potential danger

I think you are missing the point of the thread. Drinking and driving can be called "evil" - I use that term since that was used by the original poster. Who's fault is it if someone drinks and drives? Thats right, the driver, not the alcohol company. So drinking and driving is an evil of the drinkers who drive. The alcohol company is not evil if someone drinks and drives. If people use alcohol responsibly no one would ever be hurt by it.

Now lets look at smoking. There is no way of using it without hurting someone. So are all the smokers "evil"? I say no. Who is the evil then? The companies that make getting your nicotine harmful - the tobacco companies.

 

[kalster]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: kalster how does not being legal reduce its potential danger

I think you are missing the point of the thread. Drinking and driving can be called "evil" - I use that term since that was used by the original poster. Who's fault is it if someone drinks and drives? Thats right, the driver, not the alcohol company. So drinking and driving is an evil of the drinkers who drive. The alcohol company is not evil if someone drinks and drives. If people use alcohol responsibly no one would ever be hurt by it. Now lets look at smoking. There is no way of using it without hurting someone. So are all the smokers "evil"? I say no. Who is the evil then? The companies that make getting your nicotine harmful - the tobacco companies.

oh ok, i understand, your are right

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: kalster
how does not being legal reduce its potential danger

I think you are missing the point of the thread. Drinking and driving can be called "evil" - I use that term since that was used by the original poster. Who's fault is it if someone drinks and drives? Thats right, the driver, not the alcohol company. So drinking and driving is an evil of the drinkers who drive. The alcohol company is not evil if someone drinks and drives. If people use alcohol responsibly no one would ever be hurt by it.

Now lets look at smoking. There is no way of using it without hurting someone. So are all the smokers "evil"? I say no. Who is the evil then? The companies that make getting your nicotine harmful - the tobacco companies.

Yeah... and guns kill people

 

[IGBT]

What about the Tobasco companies..their not in trouble are they??...........

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Yeah... and guns kill people

Guns can be used responsibly and not harm anyone. Cigarettes cannot. So I have to disagree with you there. Gun makers aren't responsible for people misusing their product.

 

[Ladies Man]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Yeah... and guns kill people

Guns can be used responsibly and not harm anyone. Cigarettes cannot. So I have to disagree with you there. Gun makers aren't responsible for people misusing their product.

there are plenty of cigs that have never harmed anyone.... you just don't hear about that in the news.