Most awful hack job, but my kid likes it

Still, your honesty is refreshing.

Yuh-huh, ok, and?

Ah, so smoking is _good_ for you then. Well, great. Glad you cleared it up.

Whatever. I'm sure you're passionate about this issue, and I'm sure that I am not. Smoke all you want, I don't care. It annoys me that your stench interferes with my enjoyment of dinner, but that's my prolem, isn't it.

What, that a lawyer is now a scientific expert? What peer-reviewed studies has he authored? I can't seem to find any on his rampage. Webpage. Whatever. To be honest, I kind of lost interest when I read the bit about "Nazis blamed smoking for cancer", as if somehow the politics behind a study invalidate it's findings, and the findings of any other study. Trying to associate anti-smoking studies with nazis is, well, quite frankly, one of those "red flags".

Your choice.

Well, if you're going to go all rail-to-rail on me, then there's no point trying to have a rational discussion.

Thanks anyway, Rich

Defending smoking is having a rational discussion? How so?

*Please*, tell all of us:

What good has come from smoking aside from reducing the overpopulation? How can you defend something that has brought so much misery to humanity?

Harold (who used to smoke a pipe)

Glad to point out to you what your tactic is, and why it doesn't work.

Dave

On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 11:50:44 -0800, Harold and Susan Vordos wrote in Msg.

It's a common system in Europe (having originated probably in Germany, hence the name which is an abbreviation for "Schutzkontakt", meaning "protection contact", meaning ground).

It's not the best system all around (I like the Swiss better), but the whole socket is in a recess, so the live prongs cannot be touched by anything. Even if you wanted to it'd be near impossible to get to the engaged prongs with a piece of bent wire.

robert

["Followup-To:" header set to sci.electronics.design.] On 16 Nov 2005 16:04:13 GMT, Dave Hinz wrote in Msg.

Four years of absence of terrorism on US soil doesn't mean it won't happen again. Just how frequent were terrorist attacks in the US before the "strong response"?

And, quite honestly, do you think that the number of people who are mentally prepared to perform acts of terrorism against the West has decreased or increased since that response?

robert

On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 20:41:04 -0800, Harold and Susan Vordos wrote in Msg.

Nothing.

What should be defended is

1) The right to use drugs (for adults who know the consequences of their actions)

2) The right of everybody to stay unmolested by the effects of drug usage.

Both are politically difficult. 1) because of irrational, superstitious policymaking, and 2) because of the definition of what constitutes a direct effect of the drug usage, and of the circumstances under which someone can be expected to just avoid (for instance) smoke-infested areas. Of course the impact on the public health system, if applicable, is an impact in the sense of 2).

robert

["Followup-To:" header set to sci.electronics.design.] On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 18:01:42 GMT, Richard the Dreaded Libertarian wrote in Msg.

As much as I'd like to agree with you, smoking is an addiction and as such more comparable to a (possibly curable) illness than to just a bad habit.

That said, I think the anti-smoking campaigns don't do any good and are just a waste of money. I wonder, though, if they cost more tax money than the income from the tobacco tax. I doubt it.

robert

You are insane. Addiction isn't in the substance - _ANY_ substance. Addiction is in the person. I, for one, am an "addict". I'm "addicted" to anything I've ever done that I liked. I like to do it again. The antis and puritans and bluenosed neocons don't like me to do stuff they don't like, so they label me, guilt me, tell me what a miserable sinner I am, and generally try to convert me or otherwise make my life miserable.

Those people aren't addicted ot substances - they're addicted to the illusion of control.

Thanks, Rich

"Defending?" So, now, it's a crime, or a sin of some kind?

You antis are really addicted to your relegion, aren't you?

Thanks, Rich

It gives me pleasure. But you antis have somehow convinced yourselves that it's sinful to take pleasure, or that I have some kind of disease - you're trying to create a whole new class of lepers.

How can you? Religion has brought a HELL of a lot more misery to humanity than smoking ever could. Smoking is _voluntary_, religious crusades use _coercion_. That's one main difference. Remember "Free Will?"

Ah, there's nothing worse than a reformed sinner! ;-)

Cheers! Rich

problem

SED)

Thanks, Robert. Both sound better than what we use. While it's rare to have a problem with our system, it certainly isn't impossible. I can't help but wonder how many children are injured here in the US.

Harold

tax

help

getting

The good the campaigns do, hopefully, is to discourage young people from starting. I'm sure results are mixed. I remember all too well being young------although smoking and drinking wasn't a problem for me. Sure as hell did other bad things, though. It's what kids do, I guess.

One good thing comes from the higher taxes, though. Stores now protect their supply from theft, generally behind locked cabinets---and fewer kids are finding the money to buy smokes. The trend, at least here in Washington, is lower smoking rates. Something is working, although I don't know what.

Harold

From what I have read, only part of the addiction is due to the tobacco itself. Tobacco and cigarette manufacturers add extra ingredients with the specific aim of getting you more addicted to their brand rather than just the nicotine.

In the part you snipped, you'd see that I was interpreting _YOUR_ statement.

Pick a side. And then leave me out of it. I've got better things to do.

Oh, feh. What a bunch of nervous nellies. I submit that it's bad for society to protect people from their own stupidity. I still remember the time I learned to keep my thumb out from between the prongs of a lamp plug I was pluggin in! (Mom's assessment was, "More scared than hurt.")

And personally, I like to mount the outlets with the ground hole down, because it's like a little face. Problem is, it's an unhappy face. What we need is 3-prong plugs where the flat on the ground hole is up, so it's a happy face! =D

Cheers! Rich

Yeah, I notice you keep doing that. If you don't want me to continue in the thread, just say so.

I didn't say it won't happen again, I said that the constant escalation which we saw previously has stopped.

The weak response to events against our interests _elsewhere_, is why they progressed to attacking us _here_.

Evidence would seem to indicate that the number of terrorists attacking the US, in the US, has decreased since that strong response. Granted, it's a limited sample size. In this case, I think a small sample size is a good thing.

Are they pissed at us? Yes. Of course. They should be. Are they pissed at us enough to attack us here again? So far ,no.

I'd say that's improvement.

Please define for me, in little words if possible, what is the intrinsic value in manipulating children?

And please explain why taking my wages away to promote this ideology is justifiable?

Thanks, Rich