- This topic has 92 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated April 3, 2008 at 12:14 pm by Jon 79.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 28, 2008 at 4:01 am #1216828boothy wrote:he does… it’s not a pretty sight :hopeless:
Blasphemy, he shits golden nuggets.
March 28, 2008 at 11:47 am #1159052Dom_sufc wrote:Blasphemy, he shits golden nuggets.omg .. king midas must of shit gold ..think about it :crazy:
March 28, 2008 at 11:47 am #1216815Dom_sufc wrote:Blasphemy, he shits golden nuggets.omg .. king midas must of shit gold ..think about it :crazy:
March 28, 2008 at 2:50 pm #1159031Dom_sufc wrote:Well, you say that but still smoking is wank and Imo should be treated like drug addiction. Its just a giant contradiction.nowadays it is treated as a drug addiction. smackheads have methadone smokers have nicotine patches.
the difference between smoking and drug addiction is that smoking only affects the said person, kills them slowly but doesnt make them irrational or a dickhead, or willing to hurt/steal for their addiction.
March 28, 2008 at 2:50 pm #1216793Dom_sufc wrote:Well, you say that but still smoking is wank and Imo should be treated like drug addiction. Its just a giant contradiction.nowadays it is treated as a drug addiction. smackheads have methadone smokers have nicotine patches.
the difference between smoking and drug addiction is that smoking only affects the said person, kills them slowly but doesnt make them irrational or a dickhead, or willing to hurt/steal for their addiction.
March 28, 2008 at 2:53 pm #1159033Dom_sufc wrote:Blasphemy, he shits golden nuggets.he shits cereal? :crazy:
March 28, 2008 at 2:53 pm #1216794Dom_sufc wrote:Blasphemy, he shits golden nuggets.he shits cereal? :crazy:
March 28, 2008 at 4:32 pm #1159022I feel that anyone who takes or enjoys any recreational substance (including tobacco or alcohol) or has done so in the past has to tread carefully about suggesting any further controls
we have high taxes on the legal drugs, and plenty of reliable health advice. That IMO is quite enough.
Yes people will still die, but the taxes would pay for the costs to NHS were they all ringfenced for this purpose rather than being spent on other things
there is also a mindset amongst some (many?) social conservatives that even US-style increased prohibition and discouragement of even tobacco and alcohol will work provided enough resources are thrown at it
they don’t need to even overtly reduce freedoms, it can be done fairly subtly and is being done (for instance pre-employment lifestyle screening is becoming very good at weeding out drinkers, smokers and plain hedonists)
by denying these people “better” jobs, the power shifts to the puritans
this is already happening in many countries…
March 28, 2008 at 4:32 pm #1216783I feel that anyone who takes or enjoys any recreational substance (including tobacco or alcohol) or has done so in the past has to tread carefully about suggesting any further controls
we have high taxes on the legal drugs, and plenty of reliable health advice. That IMO is quite enough.
Yes people will still die, but the taxes would pay for the costs to NHS were they all ringfenced for this purpose rather than being spent on other things
there is also a mindset amongst some (many?) social conservatives that even US-style increased prohibition and discouragement of even tobacco and alcohol will work provided enough resources are thrown at it
they don’t need to even overtly reduce freedoms, it can be done fairly subtly and is being done (for instance pre-employment lifestyle screening is becoming very good at weeding out drinkers, smokers and plain hedonists)
by denying these people “better” jobs, the power shifts to the puritans
this is already happening in many countries…
March 28, 2008 at 4:53 pm #1159053General Lighting wrote:they don’t need to even overtly reduce freedoms, it can be done fairly subtly and is being done (for instance pre-employment lifestyle screening is becoming very good at weeding out drinkers, smokers and plain hedonists)by denying these people “better” jobs, the power shifts to the puritans
this is already happening in many countries…
yeah i have noticed that some of the bigger companys seem to be going down that route allready here ..
March 28, 2008 at 4:53 pm #1216816General Lighting wrote:they don’t need to even overtly reduce freedoms, it can be done fairly subtly and is being done (for instance pre-employment lifestyle screening is becoming very good at weeding out drinkers, smokers and plain hedonists)by denying these people “better” jobs, the power shifts to the puritans
this is already happening in many countries…
yeah i have noticed that some of the bigger companys seem to be going down that route allready here ..
March 29, 2008 at 6:39 pm #1159065Scouse wrote:no. They would have only got them somewhere else anyway.No they wouldn’t have.
Kids have ask me before:
”scuse me mister… can you buy 20 silk cut for me? … it’s not for me, it’s for me nan. … she’s ill’Whatever.
If there were more people like me in the world there’d be fewer kids with a nicotine addiction.March 29, 2008 at 6:39 pm #1216829Scouse wrote:no. They would have only got them somewhere else anyway.No they wouldn’t have.
Kids have ask me before:
”scuse me mister… can you buy 20 silk cut for me? … it’s not for me, it’s for me nan. … she’s ill’Whatever.
If there were more people like me in the world there’d be fewer kids with a nicotine addiction.March 29, 2008 at 7:11 pm #1159060Jon 79 wrote:No they wouldn’t have.Kids have ask me before:
”scuse me mister… can you buy 20 silk cut for me? … it’s not for me, it’s for me nan. … she’s ill’Whatever.
If there were more people like me in the world there’d be fewer kids with a nicotine addiction.#
i have to say i agree just like i wouldn’t buy anyone underage alchol.
Thing you have to think is how would you feel if they were your kids and someone was doing it for them behind your back.March 29, 2008 at 7:11 pm #1216824Jon 79 wrote:No they wouldn’t have.Kids have ask me before:
”scuse me mister… can you buy 20 silk cut for me? … it’s not for me, it’s for me nan. … she’s ill’Whatever.
If there were more people like me in the world there’d be fewer kids with a nicotine addiction.#
i have to say i agree just like i wouldn’t buy anyone underage alchol.
Thing you have to think is how would you feel if they were your kids and someone was doing it for them behind your back.March 29, 2008 at 7:55 pm #1159024Up here we have many 16 year olds who are no longer old enough to buy their own nicotine :you_crazy [minimum age limit went up to 18]
Where do you stand on those folks? it was legal only a few months back :crazy:
March 29, 2008 at 7:55 pm #1216785Up here we have many 16 year olds who are no longer old enough to buy their own nicotine :you_crazy [minimum age limit went up to 18]
Where do you stand on those folks? it was legal only a few months back :crazy:
March 29, 2008 at 8:01 pm #1159042Raj wrote:Up here we have many 16 year olds who are no longer old enough to buy their own nicotine :you_crazy [minimum age limit went up to 18]Where do you stand on those folks? it was legal only a few months back :crazy:
Haha i find it all to be very humorous. When my mates younger sister found out about this (She’s 16) she went mental absolutely mental and wrote a letter to the PM, called him a fat cunt and everything (Slight over-reaction and i doubt the prime minister ever got the letter but i thought it was brilliant) Whenever this issue comes up i always think of her and laugh now! She still has the arse about this even now…..Might text her and remind her!!:devil_wag
March 29, 2008 at 8:01 pm #1216804Raj wrote:Up here we have many 16 year olds who are no longer old enough to buy their own nicotine :you_crazy [minimum age limit went up to 18]Where do you stand on those folks? it was legal only a few months back :crazy:
Haha i find it all to be very humorous. When my mates younger sister found out about this (She’s 16) she went mental absolutely mental and wrote a letter to the PM, called him a fat cunt and everything (Slight over-reaction and i doubt the prime minister ever got the letter but i thought it was brilliant) Whenever this issue comes up i always think of her and laugh now! She still has the arse about this even now…..Might text her and remind her!!:devil_wag
March 29, 2008 at 8:58 pm #1159023Raj wrote:Where do you stand on those folks? it was legal only a few months back :crazy:no point in standing on them any more, its not as if you can get them to hand over their cigarettes :laugh_at:
March 29, 2008 at 8:58 pm #1216784Raj wrote:Where do you stand on those folks? it was legal only a few months back :crazy:no point in standing on them any more, its not as if you can get them to hand over their cigarettes :laugh_at:
March 29, 2008 at 9:21 pm #1159025:laugh_at::laugh_at::laugh_at:
March 29, 2008 at 9:21 pm #1216786:laugh_at::laugh_at::laugh_at:
March 30, 2008 at 5:47 am #1159054General Lighting wrote:I feel that anyone who takes or enjoys any recreational substance (including tobacco or alcohol) or has done so in the past has to tread carefully about suggesting any further controlswe have high taxes on the legal drugs, and plenty of reliable health advice. That IMO is quite enough.
Yes people will still die, but the taxes would pay for the costs to NHS were they all ringfenced for this purpose rather than being spent on other things
there is also a mindset amongst some (many?) social conservatives that even US-style increased prohibition and discouragement of even tobacco and alcohol will work provided enough resources are thrown at it
they don’t need to even overtly reduce freedoms, it can be done fairly subtly and is being done (for instance pre-employment lifestyle screening is becoming very good at weeding out drinkers, smokers and plain hedonists)
by denying these people “better” jobs, the power shifts to the puritans
this is already happening in many countries…
personaly .. i wish there wasn’t a fucking governing body that gets to dectate this shit to me … but seens as there is .. i’m gonna fuck them off as much as i can get away with .. with out getting in trouble ….if it means smoking my self to death … the nhs will be more than payed for by my fucking tobbaco police tax :laugh_at:
March 30, 2008 at 5:47 am #1216817General Lighting wrote:I feel that anyone who takes or enjoys any recreational substance (including tobacco or alcohol) or has done so in the past has to tread carefully about suggesting any further controlswe have high taxes on the legal drugs, and plenty of reliable health advice. That IMO is quite enough.
Yes people will still die, but the taxes would pay for the costs to NHS were they all ringfenced for this purpose rather than being spent on other things
there is also a mindset amongst some (many?) social conservatives that even US-style increased prohibition and discouragement of even tobacco and alcohol will work provided enough resources are thrown at it
they don’t need to even overtly reduce freedoms, it can be done fairly subtly and is being done (for instance pre-employment lifestyle screening is becoming very good at weeding out drinkers, smokers and plain hedonists)
by denying these people “better” jobs, the power shifts to the puritans
this is already happening in many countries…
personaly .. i wish there wasn’t a fucking governing body that gets to dectate this shit to me … but seens as there is .. i’m gonna fuck them off as much as i can get away with .. with out getting in trouble ….if it means smoking my self to death … the nhs will be more than payed for by my fucking tobbaco police tax :laugh_at:
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.