Keira Forums - View Single Post - Photo Sightings
Thread: Photo Sightings
View Single Post
Old 11-06-2006, 01:42 PM   Attended an OMGWTFKKWBBQ! KKWiki Contributer Senior Registered Member #1020
Sponsored Cunt
Hazzle's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 5,168
Originally Posted by Flightfreak
Never stated any thing like that. And here is a difference when I go in a pub I don’t have troubles with someone drinking a few beers but I do have a problem with everyone who’s smoking in there as it has a direct impact on me. Driving under the influence of alcohol is prohibited. As far as I know blowing smoke in my face direct or indirect not.
So? People don't do it anyway just because it's prohibited? The FACT remains that you're more likely to die from the effects of alcohol than the effects of cigarette smoke. If you were a non-drinker, you'd have a leg to stand on, but you're actually doing more damage to your body drinking than the passive smoke is. You can say you choose to do one sort of damage and don't choose the other...what sort of argument is that? You enjoy drinking, you don't enjoy smoking, if you did, you'd smoke. The fact you didn't choose to have it impact you is irrelevantl; the thing you CHOOSE will impact you to such an extent that the cigarette smoke is meaningless by comparison.
Heh, yeah why not make the use of alcohol a hell lot stricter too. Make it completely impossible for kids to buy alcohol pops. Your arguments are typically for a smoker who does not want to take responsibility for the act of smoking.
No, yours are typical of a non-smoker who doesn't recognise that it's a freedom. If the government wants to ban smoking, let them ban smoking, but they don't want to, and why should they? The act of smoking kills less people per year than the act of drinking alcohol. So why not ban alcohol first? Because you choose to have it impact you? Right, so when a drunk driver kills you, you chose for him to be pissed, right? Doesn't matter if it's illegal if you're already fucking dead, does it?

Your arguments are also a perfect example of why a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. If you knew how many people died from so many other causes compared to cigarette smoke, you'd see how ridiculous you look. And no, not all of those are by choice.
But smoking is not, all thought it causes a more DIRECT impact on your surroundings than the ones stated
Proof please? How many people die of Heart Disease a year? How many of them smoked, and how many of them drank? I think you'll find that the biggest killer of people in the world has as many smokers dying from it as non-smokers, and yet a lot less non-drinkers compared to drinkers. Your points are naive and lack a true understanding of the statistics.

If smoking was so dangerous, how come so many doctors smoke? But no, you're right, believe the medical research that not even doctors necessarily believe...
above and indeed depending how you interpreted the statistics and compare them to other figures, smoking costs a fortune to the social care system and rises the chance on cancer with 20% for passive smokers already ABOVE the bad air quality. As the research on these things not happen in an isolated 100% good Air quality live tank.
Which means it proves nothing. Lung cancer can be caused by lots of things. Tobacco is as old as the hills, and the fact is, the increase in lung cancer has coincided with a DECREASE in the amount of cigarettes being smoked. Kinda blows that theory out of the water. These studies, as you point out, cannot be conducted in a vacuum, and as such, we'll never know how much of the effect is down to the smoke, and how much down to other factors that the studied don't even take acound of.
Let a smoker trade his cigarette for alcohol, or take the chance of getting caught with illegal drugs! Those two at least don't influence my health.
Tell that to the families of people who die from drink drivers, or the people who get stabbed by junkies who mug them to pay for their next fix. Didn't influence their health, did it? Alcohol is actually a lot more addictive than we realise, it's just that it's far more socially acceptable for some reason. Stats show that binge drinking is a far worse health problem in Europe right now than smoking. I guarantee you that you have more chance of dying from an alcohol-related cause than smoke. So stop whinging. You're gonna have to die some day, and I can tell you that passive smoking is the least of your worries.
We better all start smoking than ay haz? because if I need to follow you’re way of thinking than I believe the smoke of a cigarette is healthier than the air I breath.
Because that's what I said, of course. Seriously Pete, that's the most retarded thing you've said on this thread, and that means a lot. You're usually someone who can argue a good point convincingly, but you're crap at this. I've heard lots of good anti-smoking arguments, but you're coming at this from entirely the wrong direction. You're making baseless statements with no facts to back you up, you're coming at this from a naive position, and as usual, you believe everything you're told, without actually doing the research yourself.

The irony is that you always support freedom and yet you're denying freedom. Frank's a non-smoker, but he and I thrashed out a solution that could please both parties. If non-smokers weren't so fascist about it there's room for compromise, but clearly that isn't something your feeble little brain can comprehend. Seriously Pete, I used to respect you a lot, this argument has shown you up. Rhetoric and sarcastic beligerance, with no intelligence. Come back and try again, cos I know you're a smart man and can do better than this.

We should give you a statue Haz, such a honourable person.
Luckily cigarettes smoke improves the all-round air quality.
Yet more rhetoric. That's always a sign that you know you're losing the argument when it comes down to facts. I never said that, and you know I didn't, but of course you won't admit that I'm right about the air quality being bad generally, because that weakens your case. And yet you're ironically an environmentalist. Maybe I should change that to just "mentalist" after this response.

My point was simply that if you're exposed to passive smoking it's actually your fault. You can do something about it. My friends don't suffer passive smoking unless they want to. There are pubs that don't allow it, places you can go that don't allow it, and you don't have to be near a smoker unless YOU want to be. The idea you have no choice in the matter is a myth. Oh, and hot air rises, so the further you are from a smoker, there's no chance of it getting into your lungs, before you say "No matter how far away I am, it's still in the air". Smoke dissipates in the air, you have to be DAMN close to get smoke in your face. That's why a lot of bars that allow smoking just ban smoking AT the bar, which I think is a GREAT policy as it protects the bar workers, and non-smokers (who can sit at the bar) and yet allows smokers some freedom too.
or your girlfriend with one breast when she reached the age of 40? I'm glad you can see the sunny side of it.
Fucking hell Pete. That's it, you've gone too far with the retarded arguments. At least before I could put it down to passion over intelligence, and respect that passion, just hoping you'd add some facts to the argument at a later point. But that's just ridiculous. No study ANYWHERE has ever shown a link between breast cancer and smoking. Lung cancer, throat cancer, cancer of the mouth, but not breast cancer. Go away and do some fucking research, stop fear mongering with no back up.
Originally Posted by kingdumbass
A couple of smokers are going to laugh their balls off at you when you get hit by a bus while jogging.
EXACTLY. The truth of Pete's figures is that they're estimates worked out in conjunction with studies designed to show the dangers of passive smoking. As such there is an inherent bias. The truth, as accepted by the medical profession, is that correlation between drinking and Heart Disease is higher than that between smoking and Heart Disease. You can blame the deaths of smokers due to Heart Disease on the smoke, but more likely it's the alcohol that did it. However the Road deaths in the UK total 3,500, which is a FACT. Shall we ban driving too?
Originally Posted by Flightfreak
haha, someone who can't leave an expensive, unhealthy cigarette is the pussy. Not the other way around.
Typical patronising non-smoker. I couldn't possibly WANT to smoke rather than HAVING to because I CAN'T leave it. I ENJOY smoking, I have quit several times when I was no longer enjoying it. Addiction is a state of mind for pussies.
Originally Posted by Flightfreak
Well yeah have one...for now at least.
A Boston University study states that people who smoke have a drastic withdrawal from their penis length in erection.
Erm, no. All they have is a CORRELATION. A correlation does not equal causation. It MAY cause problems with getting an erection. But it may not. And the fact is, I have no trouble getting one and I smoke . I plan to quit when I'm older, but right now, I don't fucking feel like it.

And after that ESSAY of a post (nearly hit the post limit don't you know) shall we get BACK on topic? We're dragging this off, and anyway, isn't Keira entitled to do whatever she wishes in her own home? EXACTLY. Now let's leave it at that
Hazzle is offline   Reply With Quote