It is pretty ridiculous to discuss "Rights to Smoke" from either side.
There's no written specific or even hinted rights to do a million things. Find the right to Tie Shoelaces, for instance...or to make tea or have a cup of coffee or stay up late watching TV or to even own a TV. Did you just blink? Do you have an established right to blink?
What IS encoded in law are prohibitions on secretly poisoning people...such as with the plethora of highly toxic and carcinogenic etc stuff cig firms put into cigarettes, with full implicit approval of AWOL public officials...most who now are in the vanguard of the "no smoking" crusade. (Google up "Fauxbacco" for more.) We are talking about Reckless Endangerment, Complicity in Mass Health Damages, even Complicity in Mass Murder. That those who perpetrated all that, and more, now work to persecute and prosecute those who'd like to have a smoke with their beer in a bar,or while paying pool in a pool hall, or while walking contemplatively on a beach, is...beyond contemptible.
But it's tolerated and irrationally believed even by Anti Ban activists, like the Pro-Ban side as well, that typical cigarettes are tobacco, or just tobacco. There are religious beliefs that are more plausible than that.
By the way...hasn't anyone been taught in school about how cannabis Prohibition...an atrocity that still fills our prisons and fractures society....was initially imposed by draconian TAX HIKES?
The Corporatocracy is in all out war, more than even in Reefer Madness days, on anything and everything that is public...such as public-domain tobacco.
There are clear prohibitions against poisoning, defrauding, killing, and evading civil and criminal consequences for doing that. If smokers, non-smokers, and anyone who supports honest law and science, don't work to demand enforcement of those prohibitions, they've given up their rights to justice....and rights to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. They've ceded their rights to private corporate entities which are, after all, non-living, non-feeling, abstract, on-paper entities that ought have no more rights than a thumb tack. (Just because corporations are served by humans does not make a corporation a person deserving of rights.)
Hilarious. Hypocrisy is always somehow funny to observe.
How many films, if not beyond countable, glorify war, and "advertise" killing as a legitimate and "cool" Problem Solving tool?
How many "advertise" Big Bad cars as "cool" too? How many "advertise" psychopathic lack of empathy towards others. And on and on.
We need some films that A) show the horrors of how the cigarette industry got legally permitted (often by those who now don the halo of "no smoking") to adulterate tobacco and typical cigarettes with some of the worst of the worst industrial substances...pesticides, dioxin-producing chlorine, fire-causing burn accelerants, addiction-enhancing substances, carcinogenic radiation from phosphate tobacco fertilizers...and so forth, and B) show that plain tobacco, as has been used on these shores for about ten thousand years, has not been indicted for anything that merits Public Interest Prohibitions, and has indeed multiple medicinal properties (as does cannabis).
We need a film showing how Big Chlorine (pharms, pesticides, petrochems, etc.), mostly, concocted the entire "anti smoking" crusade to blame others...mostly the victims... for the effects of its chemicals (in cigarettes or elsewhere), and to scapegoat the conveniently "sinful" public-domain, unpatented tobacco plant.
The film could be part of a series under the heading "Industrial War on Nature"...added to others about war on organics, war on cannabis, war on forests, war on wildlife, war on free speech about such things, and ...on and on.
There is already radioactive waste in typical (VERY non-organic cigarettes) because US Legislators and regulators still permit use of mined phosphate fertilizers on tobacco....despite the contamination with PO-210 rads.
Search up terms like "tobacco radiation" for plenty.
Our "concerned" officials dare not condemn, warn about, or prohibit those carcinogenic fertilizers lest the firms responsible (including cigarette makers themselves) get hit with astronomical liabilities and significant criminal charges.
It's So Much Easier to blame the victims for "smoking", and to blame an unpatented, public-domain, conveniently 'sinful' natural plant for all the deaths and diseases caused by the Industrially-Contaminated-Cigarette industry.
There is no law prohibiting even the most deadly industrial substances in cigarettes...nor is there any law to require listing such things or warning about them.
Google up "Fauxbacco" for more....w/ ample references.
To say that the undefined, un-described tobacco is "the most lethal consumer product" is either to outright lie, or to omit a lot of integral details.
* Most cigarettes are contaminated with combos of any of about 450 US Registered tobacco pesticides...tobacco being about the sixth most pesticide-intensive crop.
* Many of those pesticides are chlorine chemicals that, when added to smoke from the chlorine-bleached paper, produce high levels of No-Safe-Dose dioxin. Are Agent Orange and Times Beach etc atrocities deleted from our history books?
* Virtually all diseases said to be "tobacco related" are impossible to be caused by smoke from any plant...but are already notorious effects of dioxin exposures.
* If any patient diagnosed with "smoking related" illness (i.e., illness caused by the patient) has been checked for body-burdens of dioxins, radiation, or pesticides (from the cigarettes or elsewhere), that news hasn't been published.
* Most "tobacco products" are contaminated with any of about 1400 untested, often toxic, sometimes carcinogenic, non-tobacco additives.
* For decades, typical so-called "tobacco products" have "legally" contained burn-accelerants...to speed up use, improve sales, and boost "sin" tax revenues. The thousands of so-called "smoking related" fires each year are said to be about "smoking" (by the victims), not about the psychopathic arsonists who put the burn accelerants into the cigarettes, and failed to offer a word of info or warning about that.
* Most cigarettes contain added addiction-enhancing substances.
* Most cigarettes contain any number of Kid-Attracting sweeteners, flavors, and soothing substances.
* Most cigarettes may be contaminated with radiation (PO-210) from still legal (!) phosphate fertilizers.
* Low-end cigarettes may contain not a shred of tobacco...but, instead, "tobacco substitute material" made, in Patented ways, from all sorts of industrial waste cellulose...none of that likely to be organic...pesticide or chlorine-free. Measured shot of nicotine added, of course.
To say that tobacco is the most lethal product is absurd...not to mention that tobacco is a traditionally-used Natural Plant...a "product" of the earth. That's Quite Different from the industrial concoctions sold to defrauded and deceived millions as "tobacco products".
Incidentally...not one study submitted in courts or legislatures makes clear if it's about plain tobacco, or about grotesquely adulterated tobacco, or even about tobacco at all. We do not know yet what is studied...or what all the legislation is about.
Pesticide-contaminated, dioxin-delivering, radiation-contaminated, burn-accelerated, kid-attracting, addiction-enhanced, possibly tobacco-free cigarettes may be the Most Lethal Consumer Products...but, to blame...scapegoat...tobacco plants for that is to accept liability-dodging "science" from those with so much to loose if the additives and adulterants were brought into the discussion.
An easily-Googled site called "Fauxbacco" has ample references for the above.
Getting one of "those" invitations, with no plausible excuse for "regrets." :-(
Hilarious. Hypocrisy is always somehow funny to observe.
How many films, if not beyond countable, glorify war, and "advertise" killing as a legitimate and "cool" Problem Solving tool?
How many "advertise" Big Bad cars as "cool" too? How many "advertise" psychopathic lack of empathy towards others. And on and on.
We need some films that A) show the horrors of how the cigarette industry got legally permitted (often by those who now don the halo of "no smoking") to adulterate tobacco and typical cigarettes with some of the worst of the worst industrial substances...pesticides, dioxin-producing chlorine, fire-causing burn accelerants, addiction-enhancing substances, carcinogenic radiation from phosphate tobacco fertilizers...and so forth, and B) show that plain tobacco, as has been used on these shores for about ten thousand years, has not been indicted for anything that merits Public Interest Prohibitions, and has indeed multiple medicinal properties (as does cannabis).
We need a film showing how Big Chlorine (pharms, pesticides, petrochems, etc.), mostly, concocted the entire "anti smoking" crusade to blame others...mostly the victims... for the effects of its chemicals (in cigarettes or elsewhere), and to scapegoat the conveniently "sinful" public-domain, unpatented tobacco plant.
The film could be part of a series under the heading "Industrial War on Nature"...added to others about war on organics, war on cannabis, war on forests, war on wildlife, war on free speech about such things, and ...on and on.
[Edited to fix a few typos.}
To say that the undefined, un-described tobacco is "the most lethal consumer product" is either to outright lie, or to omit a lot of integral details.
* Most cigarettes are contaminated with combos of any of about 450 US Registered tobacco pesticides...tobacco being about the sixth most pesticide-intensive crop.
* Many of those pesticides are chlorine chemicals that, when added to smoke from the chlorine-bleached paper, produce high levels of No-Safe-Dose dioxin. Are Agent Orange and Times Beach etc atrocities deleted from our history books?
* Virtually all diseases said to be "tobacco related" are impossible to be caused by smoke from any plant...but are already notorious effects of dioxin exposures.
* If any patient diagnosed with "smoking related" illness (i.e., illness caused by the patient) has been checked for body-burdens of dioxins, radiation, or pesticides (from the cigarettes or elsewhere), that news hasn't been published.
* Most "tobacco products" are contaminated with any of about 1400 untested, often toxic, sometimes carcinogenic, non-tobacco additives.
* For decades, typical so-called "tobacco products" have "legally" contained burn-accelerants...to speed up use, improve sales, and boost "sin" tax revenues. The thousands of so-called "smoking related" fires each year are said to be about "smoking" (by the victims), not about the psychopathic arsonists who put the burn accelerants into the cigarettes, and failed to offer a word of info or warning about that.
* Most cigarettes contain added addiction-enhancing substances.
* Most cigarettes contain any number of Kid-Attracting sweeteners, flavors, and soothing substances.
* Most cigarettes may be contaminated with radiation (PO-210) from still legal (!) phosphate fertilizers.
* Low-end cigarettes may contain not a shred of tobacco...but, instead, "tobacco substitute material" made, in Patented ways, from all sorts of industrial waste cellulose...none of that likely to be organic...pesticide or chlorine-free. Measured shot of nicotine added, of course.
To say that tobacco is the most lethal product is absurd...not to mention that tobacco is a traditionally-used Natural Plant...a "product" of the earth. That's Quite Different from the industrial concoctions sold to defrauded and deceived millions as "tobacco products".
Incidentally...not one study submitted in courts or legislatures makes clear if it's about plain tobacco, or about grotesquely adulterated tobacco, or even about tobacco at all. We do not know yet what is studied...or what all the legislation is about.
Pesticide-contaminated, dioxin-delivering, radiation-contaminated, burn-accelerated, kid-attracting, addiction-enhanced, possibly tobacco-free cigarettes may be the Most Lethal Consumer Products...but, to blame...scapegoat...tobacco plants for that is to accept liability-dodging "science" from those with so much to loose if the additives and adulterants were brought into the discussion.
An easily-Googled site called "Fauxbacco" has ample references for the above.
Pages