FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Electronic Cigarettes ?'s
Electronic Cigarettes ?'s
Jump to: Newest in thread
 | |||
"As an ex-smoker who really enjoyed the habit…… I’m just curious to know if anyone’s tried these E-cigarettes or uses them regularly….? If so, what are they like…? and do you think they should be regulated like other smoking related products? "We use them regularly to replace ciggies, but haven't given up completely. I don't think they should be regulated under the same terms as smoking related products, because they don't produce smoke, or the harmful airborne particulates that come from burning tobacco. I think they should be regulated under the same rules that apply to other nicotine loaded products, like patches, gum etc. | |||
 | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"As an ex-smoker who really enjoyed the habit…… I’m just curious to know if anyone’s tried these E-cigarettes or uses them regularly….? If so, what are they like…? and do you think they should be regulated like other smoking related products?
We use them regularly to replace ciggies, but haven't given up completely. I don't think they should be regulated under the same terms as smoking related products, because they don't produce smoke, or the harmful airborne particulates that come from burning tobacco. I think they should be regulated under the same rules that apply to other nicotine loaded products, like patches, gum etc."Ah,,, OK....this might sound daft here but...are they refillable or one use only…. ? and can you restart them if you leave them un-sucked for a period of time…..?  | |||
| |||
"As an ex-smoker who really enjoyed the habit…… I’m just curious to know if anyone’s tried these E-cigarettes or uses them regularly….? If so, what are they like…? and do you think they should be regulated like other smoking related products?
We use them regularly to replace ciggies, but haven't given up completely. I don't think they should be regulated under the same terms as smoking related products, because they don't produce smoke, or the harmful airborne particulates that come from burning tobacco. I think they should be regulated under the same rules that apply to other nicotine loaded products, like patches, gum etc.
Ah,,, OK....this might sound daft here but...are they refillable or one use only…. ? and can you restart them if you leave them un-sucked for a period of time…..? "Some are refillable with flavoured "juice" - others have pre-made cartridges, there are different strengths of nicotine content available too. | |||
| |||
A | |||
| |||
"According to a BBC news article, they are to become regulated and used as a medicine from 2016." yeah well, bet the big pharma companies can't wait. money - it's a gas | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"I do not doubt for one second that this decision has come off the back of massive lobbying from both the tobacco and pharmaceutical industries." Ok but here’s the thing,….. With so many smokers happy to buy cut-price counterfeit fags that are said to contain highly dubious products mixed with poor grade tobacco ….. So without proper regulation of E-Cigarettes how long before unscrupulous counterfeiters start making those too… ,,, | |||
| |||
"According to a BBC news article, they are to become regulated and used as a medicine from 2016." If they as classified as a medicine will the likes of Weatherspoons be forced to allow the use of them in their pubs? Surely it would be iimmoral to prevent someone taking their medicine  | |||
| |||
"According to a BBC news article, they are to become regulated and used as a medicine from 2016. If they as classified as a medicine will the likes of Weatherspoons be forced to allow the use of them in their pubs? Surely it would be iimmoral to prevent someone taking their medicine "As far as I know they are already allowed. They are not real cigarettes. There would be no grounds to ban them. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"They should be regulated... at the moment any skank can make and sell them. I wasn't of this opinion at first when only a few companies made and sold them, but that soon changed. Now you can buy them in bright colours and in the flavour of fruits and sweets.... no doubt to target the kiddy market... yes kids are taking them to school. With no idea what the fuck is in them, the design and flavours being introduced to appeal to kids and many coming from countries you wouldn't trust to make dog food....... yes they should be regulated. " Completely took the words out of my, erm, fingertips | |||
| |||
 | |||
"As far as I can recall,cigarettes were banned in pubs,and the workplace,to prevent the passive smoking of non smokers. So if e cigs do not create passive smoke. has the law banning smoking been changed,to include,just crucify the smoking bastards at every opportunity,even if they're trying to do the right thing,just drive another nail in,get that crown of thorns on their heads, and lets get this cross into the air. "Ultimately, pubs can ban what they like. Their rules, their license. My pub bans the use of E-cigarettes, the pub down the road bans the wearing of onesies. Personally I'd rather refuse to serve someone wearing a onesie, but my pub rules state I can't!! | |||
"As far as I can recall,cigarettes were banned in pubs,and the workplace,to prevent the passive smoking of non smokers. So if e cigs do not create passive smoke. has the law banning smoking been changed,to include,just crucify the smoking bastards at every opportunity,even if they're trying to do the right thing,just drive another nail in,get that crown of thorns on their heads, and lets get this cross into the air.
Ultimately, pubs can ban what they like. Their rules, their license. My pub bans the use of E-cigarettes, the pub down the road bans the wearing of onesies. Personally I'd rather refuse to serve someone wearing a onesie, but my pub rules state I can't!! "Now the onecie rule I completely agree with,I don't think that will lead to many thousands of pubs closing. Whereas,the banning of cigarettes,and now e cigs,has been the cause of many thousands of pubs closing. As I said,the mentality now seems to be,lets crucify the smokers at every opportunity,even when they're trying to do the right thing ,let's make that wrong to. ;-) | |||
"I do not doubt for one second that this decision has come off the back of massive lobbying from both the tobacco and pharmaceutical industries. Ok but here’s the thing,….. With so many smokers happy to buy cut-price counterfeit fags that are said to contain highly dubious products mixed with poor grade tobacco ….. So without proper regulation of E-Cigarettes how long before unscrupulous counterfeiters start making those too… ,,, "Said to contain dubious substances, by who? The government? The ones that make all that money from "proper" tobacco sales? I think they might just be telling little white lies. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"As far as I can recall,cigarettes were banned in pubs,and the workplace,to prevent the passive smoking of non smokers. So if e cigs do not create passive smoke. has the law banning smoking been changed,to include,just crucify the smoking bastards at every opportunity,even if they're trying to do the right thing,just drive another nail in,get that crown of thorns on their heads, and lets get this cross into the air. " | |||
"I do not doubt for one second that this decision has come off the back of massive lobbying from both the tobacco and pharmaceutical industries. Ok but here’s the thing,….. With so many smokers happy to buy cut-price counterfeit fags that are said to contain highly dubious products mixed with poor grade tobacco ….. So without proper regulation of E-Cigarettes how long before unscrupulous counterfeiters start making those too… ,,,
Said to contain dubious substances, by who? The government? The ones that make all that money from "proper" tobacco sales? I think they might just be telling little white lies."Tobacco companies are investing in this market. | |||
"ive seen some posh ones you can refill with liquid nicotine. how long til liquid pot or hash comes on the black market " Oooooooooooooo | |||
| |||
" Said to contain dubious substances, by who? The government? The ones that make all that money from "proper" tobacco sales? I think they might just be telling little white lies." So are you suggesting the findings of laboratory controlled scientific analyse is being fudged on government orders and the scientists involved are happy to risk their reputations and credibility by publishing false information having studied and worked so hard to become qualified….. yeah that sound right!!!!  | |||
"It looks like soxy is feeling the nicotine drag! As an ex-smoker stay strong and resist the lure, they may have less crap (debatable till tested to medicine standards) but they are just a step to aid kicking nicotine." Oh noooooo I've been off them for years,,,, I was quite lucky too as, I never suffered from any major cravings or withdrawls symtoms either..... But I'm happy to admit I did enjoy smoking at the time..... | |||
" Said to contain dubious substances, by who? The government? The ones that make all that money from "proper" tobacco sales? I think they might just be telling little white lies. So are you suggesting the findings of laboratory controlled scientific analyse is being fudged on government orders and the scientists involved are happy to risk their reputations and credibility by publishing false information having studied and worked so hard to become qualified….. yeah that sound right!!!! "As you know soxy,nobody asks any questions,if your putting the boot into those smoking. bastards., In fact,soon it'll be ok to kill a smoker,and use their smoking habit as a defence. after all,they were already killing themselves,case dismissed.lol | |||
" Said to contain dubious substances, by who? The government? The ones that make all that money from "proper" tobacco sales? I think they might just be telling little white lies. So are you suggesting the findings of laboratory controlled scientific analyse is being fudged on government orders and the scientists involved are happy to risk their reputations and credibility by publishing false information having studied and worked so hard to become qualified….. yeah that sound right!!!!
As you know soxy,nobody asks any questions,if your putting the boot into those smoking. bastards.,
In fact,soon it'll be ok to kill a smoker,and use their smoking habit as a defence.
after all,they were already killing themselves,case dismissed.lol
"I suppose it could be argued that because passive smoking has undoubtedly harmed and killed many non-smokers in the past we should have a widespread campaign aimed at prosecuting the smokers who caused that situation and seek compensation for their victims.... But we cant realistically do that !…. So I guess these E-ciggie things might be a good thing, but they should be regulated with the cost of regulation born by the users rather than by the state.... That way everyone who should win does win... | |||
| |||
| |||
"I quite like them but I found as I wasn't going outside, I would sit inside and smoke constantly which was different to my real cigarette smoking habit. Only other thing I have to say about them is on the news this work apparently children can buy them which can't be good. " Not here they can't, over 18s only.  | |||
| |||
| |||
"ive seen some posh ones you can refill with liquid nicotine. how long til liquid pot or hash comes on the black market " already a reality as it happens ..... started in California and spread east to europe | |||
"I quite like them but I found as I wasn't going outside, I would sit inside and smoke constantly which was different to my real cigarette smoking habit. Only other thing I have to say about them is on the news this work apparently children can buy them which can't be good. Not here they can't, over 18s only. "I thought news reports were saying this week it is a loophole? | |||
"As an ex-smoker who really enjoyed the habit…… I’m just curious to know if anyone’s tried these E-cigarettes or uses them regularly….? If so, what are they like…? and do you think they should be regulated like other smoking related products? "Ex-smoker too! But so sorry I never used them as I went the Champix route. Friends of mine use them but not as a mean to help stop smoking! | |||
| |||
| |||
"Champix has a reputation for causing aggression doesn't it?" The main side effects for me were very vivid and real dreams of a sexual nature!! Did not get much rest x no aggression but side effects are different depending on people I suspect. | |||
" Said to contain dubious substances, by who? The government? The ones that make all that money from "proper" tobacco sales? I think they might just be telling little white lies. So are you suggesting the findings of laboratory controlled scientific analyse is being fudged on government orders and the scientists involved are happy to risk their reputations and credibility by publishing false information having studied and worked so hard to become qualified….. yeah that sound right!!!!
As you know soxy,nobody asks any questions,if your putting the boot into those smoking. bastards.,
In fact,soon it'll be ok to kill a smoker,and use their smoking habit as a defence.
after all,they were already killing themselves,case dismissed.lol
I suppose it could be argued that because passive smoking has undoubtedly harmed and killed many non-smokers in the past we should have a widespread campaign aimed at prosecuting the smokers who caused that situation and seek compensation for their victims....
But we cant realistically do that !….
So I guess these E-ciggie things might be a good thing, but they should be regulated with the cost of regulation born by the users rather than by the state....
That way everyone who should win does win... "like the noxious substances they put in coca cola you mean? | |||
"As an ex-smoker who really enjoyed the habit…… I’m just curious to know if anyone’s tried these E-cigarettes or uses them regularly….? If so, what are they like…? and do you think they should be regulated like other smoking related products? I'm puffing on one now! It's great, I'm getting all the nicotine and losing all the toxic shit x " | |||
| |||
| |||
" Said to contain dubious substances, by who? The government? The ones that make all that money from "proper" tobacco sales? I think they might just be telling little white lies. So are you suggesting the findings of laboratory controlled scientific analyse is being fudged on government orders and the scientists involved are happy to risk their reputations and credibility by publishing false information having studied and worked so hard to become qualified….. yeah that sound right!!!!
As you know soxy,nobody asks any questions,if your putting the boot into those smoking. bastards.,
In fact,soon it'll be ok to kill a smoker,and use their smoking habit as a defence.
after all,they were already killing themselves,case dismissed.lol
I suppose it could be argued that because passive smoking has undoubtedly harmed and killed many non-smokers in the past we should have a widespread campaign aimed at prosecuting the smokers who caused that situation and seek compensation for their victims....
But we cant realistically do that !….
So I guess these E-ciggie things might be a good thing, but they should be regulated with the cost of regulation born by the users rather than by the state....
That way everyone who should win does win...
like the noxious substances they put in coca cola you mean?"Ye but that just makes you comfortable numb | |||
 | |||
" Said to contain dubious substances, by who? The government? The ones that make all that money from "proper" tobacco sales? I think they might just be telling little white lies. So are you suggesting the findings of laboratory controlled scientific analyse is being fudged on government orders and the scientists involved are happy to risk their reputations and credibility by publishing false information having studied and worked so hard to become qualified….. yeah that sound right!!!!
As you know soxy,nobody asks any questions,if your putting the boot into those smoking. bastards.,
In fact,soon it'll be ok to kill a smoker,and use their smoking habit as a defence.
after all,they were already killing themselves,case dismissed.lol
I suppose it could be argued that because passive smoking has undoubtedly harmed and killed many non-smokers in the past we should have a widespread campaign aimed at prosecuting the smokers who caused that situation and seek compensation for their victims....
But we cant realistically do that !….
So I guess these E-ciggie things might be a good thing, but they should be regulated with the cost of regulation born by the users rather than by the state....
That way everyone who should win does win... "Go for it soxy,take that compensation out of the 12billion pounds revenue we pay every year. everything a smoker does,they already pay for 10 fold +,so paying for any regulation,won't be anything New. Maybe if non smokers were less hypocritical,and stopped pointing the finger,whilst still accepting our money,their criticism would be more credible. | |||
" Said to contain dubious substances, by who? The government? The ones that make all that money from "proper" tobacco sales? I think they might just be telling little white lies. So are you suggesting the findings of laboratory controlled scientific analyse is being fudged on government orders and the scientists involved are happy to risk their reputations and credibility by publishing false information having studied and worked so hard to become qualified….. yeah that sound right!!!!
As you know soxy,nobody asks any questions,if your putting the boot into those smoking. bastards.,
In fact,soon it'll be ok to kill a smoker,and use their smoking habit as a defence.
after all,they were already killing themselves,case dismissed.lol
I suppose it could be argued that because passive smoking has undoubtedly harmed and killed many non-smokers in the past we should have a widespread campaign aimed at prosecuting the smokers who caused that situation and seek compensation for their victims....
But we cant realistically do that !….
So I guess these E-ciggie things might be a good thing, but they should be regulated with the cost of regulation born by the users rather than by the state....
That way everyone who should win does win...
Go for it soxy,take that compensation out of the 12billion pounds revenue we pay every year.
everything a smoker does,they already pay for 10 fold +,so paying for any regulation,won't be anything New.
Maybe if non smokers were less hypocritical,and stopped pointing the finger,whilst still accepting our money,their criticism would be more credible.
"wow you go girl......but gota agree if we all stopped who gona pay for the nhs Hmmmmm | |||
"I have one and find it just OK. Great invention, but it can't replace the real thing. I probably need to give it more of a try and go a couple of days using it rather than having a cigarette." sounds like my vibrator! | |||
"I have one and find it just OK. Great invention, but it can't replace the real thing. I probably need to give it more of a try and go a couple of days using it rather than having a cigarette.sounds like my vibrator! "Lmao love it  | |||
"sounds like my vibrator! " | |||
" Said to contain dubious substances, by who? The government? The ones that make all that money from "proper" tobacco sales? I think they might just be telling little white lies. So are you suggesting the findings of laboratory controlled scientific analyse is being fudged on government orders and the scientists involved are happy to risk their reputations and credibility by publishing false information having studied and worked so hard to become qualified….. yeah that sound right!!!!
As you know soxy,nobody asks any questions,if your putting the boot into those smoking. bastards.,
In fact,soon it'll be ok to kill a smoker,and use their smoking habit as a defence.
after all,they were already killing themselves,case dismissed.lol
I suppose it could be argued that because passive smoking has undoubtedly harmed and killed many non-smokers in the past we should have a widespread campaign aimed at prosecuting the smokers who caused that situation and seek compensation for their victims....
But we cant realistically do that !….
So I guess these E-ciggie things might be a good thing, but they should be regulated with the cost of regulation born by the users rather than by the state....
That way everyone who should win does win...
Go for it soxy,take that compensation out of the 12billion pounds revenue we pay every year.
everything a smoker does,they already pay for 10 fold +,so paying for any regulation,won't be anything New.
Maybe if non smokers were less hypocritical,and stopped pointing the finger,whilst still accepting our money,their criticism would be more credible.
"Sorry I don't get your argument that this hypothetical compensation should be paid from the revenue raised in tax on fags,,,,, nor do I accpet that non-smokers are hypocrictical …… The hypothetical compensation claim I suggested would need to be funded directy by the charging the individuals who caused the harm….. You cant seriously expect to pass the buck and shift guilt from the individual smokers who's actions and inaction have caused damage to the health of non smokers….. People who developed passive smoking related decease did not get it from exposure to taxation on fags,,,, | |||
"These e cigs are great, just thinking forward to next club nite.. Won't have to go outside with next to nothing on and freeze my fn tits off for a smoke "You might however want to find out what the rules of the club are first as some places won't allow you to smoke e-cigarettes in them | |||
"As an ex-smoker who really enjoyed the habit…… I’m just curious to know if anyone’s tried these E-cigarettes or uses them regularly….? If so, what are they like…? and do you think they should be regulated like other smoking related products? We see them as a real positive step in the right direction to encourage people to quit smoking or at least use this less harmful alternative. And yes, as ex smokers we do know what we are talking about and realise how difficult quitting is. " | |||
"As an ex-smoker who really enjoyed the habit…… I’m just curious to know if anyone’s tried these E-cigarettes or uses them regularly….? If so, what are they like…? and do you think they should be regulated like other smoking related products? We see them as a real positive step in the right direction to encourage people to quit smoking or at least use this less harmful alternative. And yes, as ex smokers we do know what we are talking about and realise how difficult quitting is. " | |||
| |||
| |||
"I switched to electronic cigarettes back in December. I found that I used them less and less as the week's went on and have since kicked a 15 year habit. Works for me and I have certainly noticed the difference in my bank balance. " Thats really good to hear..... well done!! | |||
"I switched to electronic cigarettes back in December. I found that I used them less and less as the week's went on and have since kicked a 15 year habit. Works for me and I have certainly noticed the difference in my bank balance. "
That's great to hear! I started vaping 5 days ago and already notice i'm using it less than I would have smoked (although I only smoked around 10 a day)
I've been on a night out with it (which is where I normally would have buckled) and didn't even miss smoking.
I have 2 nicotine cartridges left then I'm going to try the non nicotine ones.
*Her* | |||
"I switched to electronic cigarettes back in December. I found that I used them less and less as the week's went on and have since kicked a 15 year habit. Works for me and I have certainly noticed the difference in my bank balance.
That's great to hear! I started vaping 5 days ago and already notice i'm using it less than I would have smoked (although I only smoked around 10 a day)
I've been on a night out with it (which is where I normally would have buckled) and didn't even miss smoking.
I have 2 nicotine cartridges left then I'm going to try the non nicotine ones.
*Her*"Good for you and I hope it continue's to help you kick the real gaspers ..... well-done.... | |||
" Said to contain dubious substances, by who? The government? The ones that make all that money from "proper" tobacco sales? I think they might just be telling little white lies. So are you suggesting the findings of laboratory controlled scientific analyse is being fudged on government orders and the scientists involved are happy to risk their reputations and credibility by publishing false information having studied and worked so hard to become qualified….. yeah that sound right!!!!
As you know soxy,nobody asks any questions,if your putting the boot into those smoking. bastards.,
In fact,soon it'll be ok to kill a smoker,and use their smoking habit as a defence.
after all,they were already killing themselves,case dismissed.lol
I suppose it could be argued that because passive smoking has undoubtedly harmed and killed many non-smokers in the past we should have a widespread campaign aimed at prosecuting the smokers who caused that situation and seek compensation for their victims....
But we cant realistically do that !….
So I guess these E-ciggie things might be a good thing, but they should be regulated with the cost of regulation born by the users rather than by the state....
That way everyone who should win does win...
Go for it soxy,take that compensation out of the 12billion pounds revenue we pay every year.
everything a smoker does,they already pay for 10 fold +,so paying for any regulation,won't be anything New.
Maybe if non smokers were less hypocritical,and stopped pointing the finger,whilst still accepting our money,their criticism would be more credible.
Sorry I don't get your argument that this hypothetical compensation should be paid from the revenue raised in tax on fags,,,,, nor do I accpet that non-smokers are hypocrictical ……
The hypothetical compensation claim I suggested would need to be funded directy by the charging the individuals who caused the harm…..
You cant seriously expect to pass the buck and shift guilt from the individual smokers who's actions and inaction have caused damage to the health of non smokers…..
People who developed passive smoking related decease did not get it from exposure to taxation on fags,,,,
"that surprises me soxy,you usually get it,i'll try again. on the hypothetical compensation,there can be no more direct way of charging an individual,than point of sale,you know,like smokers pay every time they buy a packet cigarettes. how that could be construed as passing the buck is beyond me,the money is taken directly from smokers,to the tune of 12 billion pounds a year. on saying non smokers are hypocritical. they vilify smokers at every opportunity,and yet they are happy to use the facilities,and services,the 12 billion pounds helps provide,no questions asked. the effects of passive smoking have only recently become apparent,and hopefully the new laws will prevent any future occurrences. to be honest,i don't believe any smoker has ever lit up,with the intention of harming others,to suggest otherwise would just be so wrong. after all that,my main gripe is pubs and workplaces,banning the e cig under the pretext,we don't know enough about them. they've been on the market for over 10 years,why ban them now,and why don't we know enough about them. as i said above,smokers are crucified at every opportunity.even when they try to do the right thing,by using the e cig,the rules are changed,making even that wrong. | |||
"They should be regulated... at the moment any skank can make and sell them. I wasn't of this opinion at first when only a few companies made and sold them, but that soon changed. Now you can buy them in bright colours and in the flavour of fruits and sweets.... no doubt to target the kiddy market... yes kids are taking them to school. With no idea what the fuck is in them, the design and flavours being introduced to appeal to kids and many coming from countries you wouldn't trust to make dog food....... yes they should be regulated. " Hmmmmmmmmm bad, bad countries who we can't even trust to supply dog food, tut tut tut ..... Horseburger anyone? | |||
" Said to contain dubious substances, by who? The government? The ones that make all that money from "proper" tobacco sales? I think they might just be telling little white lies. So are you suggesting the findings of laboratory controlled scientific analyse is being fudged on government orders and the scientists involved are happy to risk their reputations and credibility by publishing false information having studied and worked so hard to become qualified….. yeah that sound right!!!!
As you know soxy,nobody asks any questions,if your putting the boot into those smoking. bastards.,
In fact,soon it'll be ok to kill a smoker,and use their smoking habit as a defence.
after all,they were already killing themselves,case dismissed.lol
I suppose it could be argued that because passive smoking has undoubtedly harmed and killed many non-smokers in the past we should have a widespread campaign aimed at prosecuting the smokers who caused that situation and seek compensation for their victims....
But we cant realistically do that !….
So I guess these E-ciggie things might be a good thing, but they should be regulated with the cost of regulation born by the users rather than by the state....
That way everyone who should win does win...
Go for it soxy,take that compensation out of the 12billion pounds revenue we pay every year.
everything a smoker does,they already pay for 10 fold +,so paying for any regulation,won't be anything New.
Maybe if non smokers were less hypocritical,and stopped pointing the finger,whilst still accepting our money,their criticism would be more credible.
Sorry I don't get your argument that this hypothetical compensation should be paid from the revenue raised in tax on fags,,,,, nor do I accpet that non-smokers are hypocrictical ……
The hypothetical compensation claim I suggested would need to be funded directy by the charging the individuals who caused the harm…..
You cant seriously expect to pass the buck and shift guilt from the individual smokers who's actions and inaction have caused damage to the health of non smokers…..
People who developed passive smoking related decease did not get it from exposure to taxation on fags,,,,
that surprises me soxy,you usually get it,i'll try again.
on the hypothetical compensation,there can be no more direct way of charging an individual,than point of sale,you know,like smokers pay every time they buy a packet cigarettes.
how that could be construed as passing the buck is beyond me,the money is taken directly from smokers,to the tune of 12 billion pounds a year.
on saying non smokers are hypocritical.
they vilify smokers at every opportunity,and yet they are happy to use the facilities,and services,the 12 billion pounds helps provide,no questions asked.
the effects of passive smoking have only recently become apparent,and hopefully the new laws will prevent any future occurrences.
to be honest,i don't believe any smoker has ever lit up,with the intention of harming others,to suggest otherwise would just be so wrong.
after all that,my main gripe is pubs and workplaces,banning the e cig under the pretext,we don't know enough about them.
they've been on the market for over 10 years,why ban them now,and why don't we know enough about them.
as i said above,smokers are crucified at every opportunity.even when they try to do the right thing,by using the e cig,the rules are changed,making even that wrong.
"I saw where your argument was going…. However I also saw its fails to take into account the legal responsibility of the individual who is liable for their own action and inaction…. Whereby ignorance of a law is no defence, as is behaving in way that causes harm to others……. The harmful effects of passive smoking were known about long before the public area smoking ban were implemented and it would be utterly churlish of smokers to suggest they were oblivious about the risks of passive smoking until the first government backed TV campaign in 2007 …… Therefore it would follow that anyone who did smoke in an closed environment where the effects of their smoke caused harm to others would be responsible for knowingly risking the health that person…. So basically prosecuting the individual smoker would be the logical approach rather than adopting some nonsensical argument defending all smokers who by having paid point of sale tax on the product have then somehow become no longer accountable for their actions and inaction whilst using that product….. Obviously the law could never advocate any supposition whereby “I’ve paid tax on my fags, therefore I also get government backed licence to harm or kill others, which also grants me financial cover against any compensation claims that might be paid as a result of my actions and inaction whilst using that product”,, ….. It's a nonsensical premise and in no walk of life would it be acceptable…. As for you saying the general public are “ happy to take the tax raised from the sale of cigarettes to fund facilities and service including the NHS” I'm afraid that is simply a blanket statement that bares no credibility because its just your opinion rather than a provable fact,,, As it would be if I were to make a blanket statement on behalf of the non smoking public suggesting,… “ we’d all be much happier without that tax money, if it meant we weren’t stuck on the wrong end of hospital waiting lists because the facilities were being over-stretched treating people with self inflicted smoking related illness”….. See where I'm coming from there? Yeah its just an opinion,,, ! Anyway,,,, trying to playing a joker card suggesting smokers are the real victims here, because they are constantly having to deal with public outrage is such a lame hand,,,,, Smokers are not the victims! they are the willing accomplices to the problems they create !… You’ve passionately argued your points and I respect you right to an opinion… But it’s not one that has bares enough rational explanation to change my views…. I'm not down on smokers,,,, but having read many positive comments about the virtues of E-Ciggies on this thread, I genuinely hope many more smokers find them to be an invaluable aid towards helping kicking the habit of real smoking…. But I do feel any cost of necessary regulation of those products should be born within the sale price and a fail to see any logical argument that justifies against that … | |||
| |||
"Nicotine, alongside heroin are two of the most addictive substances on the planet, yet successive governments were more than happy to let tobacco companies (mainly American, funny that) continuously market them virtually everywhere you looked - therefore, sorry, I have to disagree with your 'self inflicted' stance - especially as smokers are now & have been - thee biggest taxpayers on the planet!!! Cannabis, which causes only a fraction of the harm as tobacco is illegal, so why weren't cigarettes banned accordingly? There is only one feasible answer to that question & its government greed - with backhanders from tobacco giants, no doubt!! Get them hooked & cream in the billions!! Therefore yes, the government has to take full responsibility whether it was their party in power when these catastrophic decisions were made or not. Society took trillions off of smokers over many decades - now, I'm afraid society has to pay the price!!!" Ohhhhh the poor smokers awwww bless them ….yeah…. pfft So surely we should maybe hold the government accountable for the actions of every motoring offence committed by a qualified driver too…. Oh and every firearm offence where a licence gun was used ,,,,,, Ohhhh and every criminal act caused by anyone under the influence of alcohol….etc etc…… Ohhhhh those poor smokers……. pffft | |||
"Nicotine, alongside heroin are two of the most addictive substances on the planet, yet successive governments were more than happy to let tobacco companies (mainly American, funny that) continuously market them virtually everywhere you looked - therefore, sorry, I have to disagree with your 'self inflicted' stance - especially as smokers are now & have been - thee biggest taxpayers on the planet!!! Cannabis, which causes only a fraction of the harm as tobacco is illegal, so why weren't cigarettes banned accordingly? There is only one feasible answer to that question & its government greed - with backhanders from tobacco giants, no doubt!! Get them hooked & cream in the billions!! Therefore yes, the government has to take full responsibility whether it was their party in power when these catastrophic decisions were made or not. Society took trillions off of smokers over many decades - now, I'm afraid society has to pay the price!!! Ohhhhh the poor smokers awwww bless them ….yeah…. pfft So surely we should maybe hold the government accountable for the actions of every motoring offence committed by a qualified driver too…. Oh and every firearm offence where a licence gun was used ,,,,,, Ohhhh and every criminal act caused by anyone under the influence of alcohol….etc etc…… Ohhhhh those poor smokers……. pffft "Strange how "just my opinion" only applies to your 'high self', isn't it? It was fathers day yesterday - and I lost mine to a smoking related illness as have millions of others - but unlike yourself, I do accept that everyone has the right to there own opinion. But your lack of understanding of severe addiction astonishes me. Like I said, (which you chose to ignore) Why wasn't tobacco banned like the far less addictive/harmful cannabis decades ago? A ten year old child can work that one out!!! | |||
| |||
"I can't wait for electronic cocaine. "LOL
Just think green - it's tax free!!! | |||
"Nicotine, alongside heroin are two of the most addictive substances on the planet, yet successive governments were more than happy to let tobacco companies (mainly American, funny that) continuously market them virtually everywhere you looked - therefore, sorry, I have to disagree with your 'self inflicted' stance - especially as smokers are now & have been - thee biggest taxpayers on the planet!!! Cannabis, which causes only a fraction of the harm as tobacco is illegal, so why weren't cigarettes banned accordingly? There is only one feasible answer to that question & its government greed - with backhanders from tobacco giants, no doubt!! Get them hooked & cream in the billions!! Therefore yes, the government has to take full responsibility whether it was their party in power when these catastrophic decisions were made or not. Society took trillions off of smokers over many decades - now, I'm afraid society has to pay the price!!! Ohhhhh the poor smokers awwww bless them ….yeah…. pfft So surely we should maybe hold the government accountable for the actions of every motoring offence committed by a qualified driver too…. Oh and every firearm offence where a licence gun was used ,,,,,, Ohhhh and every criminal act caused by anyone under the influence of alcohol….etc etc…… Ohhhhh those poor smokers……. pffft
Strange how "just my opinion" only applies to your 'high self', isn't it?
It was fathers day yesterday - and I lost mine to a smoking related illness as have millions of others - but unlike yourself, I do accept that everyone has the right to there own opinion.
But your lack of understanding of severe addiction astonishes me.
Like I said, (which you chose to ignore)
Why wasn't tobacco banned like the far less addictive/harmful cannabis decades ago?
A ten year old child can work that one out!!!"Firstly if your wanting to make this personal and hoping to berate me saying that I choose to ignore areas of opinion that you feel vindicate your argument or that I’m insensitive or lack understanding of addiction … I’ll leave you to it…. But, in answer to the point of addiction…. Addiction does not give anyone the legal right to behave in a manner that causes harm to others… Non smokers do not by their actions or inaction’s contribute to the cause of smoking related harm other members of the general public….. Only smokers do that! As for questioning the continuing legal availability of tobacco products. If you have issues with that, have you considered asking you local MP to champion the case for banning them? Do you feel the behaviour of a government who allows the continued sale of cigarettes is tantamount to them giving smokers special privilege over and above the rights of non smokers whereby its ok for smokers to risk the health of non smokers?… Would you’d like to see the government take away individual freedom choice by making the sale of tobacco products illegal? If they were made illegal, would you countenance the prosecution of anyone caught dealing cigarettes or indeed just smoking cigarettes in order to demonstrate it’s the governments responsibility to control the behaviour of individuals choosing to use harmful products that were previously sold under licence…? I have no problem with smokers….. but I do have issues with shelfish smokers who feel the harmful effects their habit / addiction on other people, is not a problem of their making or responsibility ….!. Sox age,,,,,,, above 10 | |||
| |||
"Im afraid your post " awwwwwe poor smokers........" did make you sound extremely ignorant & childish - yes!! That was a damn good thread untill you brought in that adolescence - you killed it! Of course it should have been banned decades ago when the serious health concerns were there in black & white - but they chose the greedy route instead. Now it's time to pay it back!!! " Ok…. Well I will leave you to it,,,,,,, But before I do, its only fair that I take this opportunity to defend the my use of the term that you feel makes me sound ignorant and childish,,, I used that phrase in a illustrative way to highlight the self-pitying nature of comments made earlier in the thread claiming smokers were the constant victims of unfair public derision…. My comment was general and aimed at no one person… However its now apparent you don’t feel the need to keep this discussion going without resorting to your 2nd use of a direct personal criticism aimed at me So I really don’t mind if or how you respond to this post, but basically I’m no longer interested in continuing a discussion with anyone who makes direct personal criticisms attempting to effect some kind of moral victory… | |||
