Let me get this straight... (936 hits)
Category: NoneRating: 0.52 on 41 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by Foolproof (View user info) at 2009-07-14 07:40:07 EDT
It's bad enough an 18 year old kid can be sent to war to die in "defense" of his/her country, yet can't drink alcohol legally on American soil - NOW - they want to ban said "adult's" right to smoke if he'she wishes?
Maybe ETS was right.
Maybe we are becomign a police state.
Reference: http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/2009-07-09-smoking_N.htm
User Reviews
Submitted by THERAPlST (user info) at 2009-07-15 17:21:46 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Fuckkkinnnn government. I don't smoke. I'm not in the army. I'm not even old enough to buy cigarettes but this shit is ridiculous. The government that has spent over 870 Billion dollars on this war are worried about the cost of cigarettes? and calling it a health risk is ludicrous in this instance. it's not about the health. its about a stress reliever. these men risk their lives DAY AND NIGHT for these pencil pushing douchenozzles who want to take more away from them. its bull shit.
Submitted by haikumikoo (user info) at 2009-07-15 15:47:42 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by EmissionImpossible (user info) at 2009-07-14 05:20:17 PDT (#)
Ranking: 0
and what about the non smokers in the army who are being affected by second hand smoke?
===
Yeah, I'm sure that's a major concern for them right now.
Are you high again?
Submitted by haikumikoo (user info) at 2009-07-15 15:45:29 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
We spend more money on our military than any other country in the world, and they can't afford to give those poor fools some god damned cigarettes?
Fuck that.
Submitted by sicosemen (user info) at 2009-07-15 15:17:50 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Thanks for the original content.
Submitted by Liquidice281 (user info) at 2009-07-15 14:39:43 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
In WWII (The 'Greatest Generation BTW) -- cigs were included with your rations.
Submitted by sage104 (user info) at 2009-07-15 11:08:22 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Oh my fucking god everyone says that.
Submitted by Foolproof (user info) at 2009-07-15 07:13:45 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Locksly,
The ETS comment was posted erroniously in a fit of rage.
It has been retracted.
The negative is founded and accepted.
Submitted by locksly (user info) at 2009-07-15 05:12:16 EDT (#)
Ranking: -1
you should only be allowed to smoke if you have private health care.
the negative rating is because ETS is never right.
Submitted by iambetteratit (user info) at 2009-07-14 19:58:50 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Aparantly they want a military full of faggots who don't smoke, don't use naughty language, don't drink, talk about their feelings, call time out when they are to stressed out because their drill instructor yelled at them, and are accepting of evreything and evreybody.
The pussification of the military. Frankly I thought I signed up for the Marine Corps, not the fucking peace corps. If I wanted to live with a bunch of gay pussies I would go back to college.
Submitted by PlatinumScarecrow (user info) at 2009-07-14 19:25:15 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
LOL if this had tangel's name on it, it wouldn't stay on the front page an hour.
Submitted by pandora (user info) at 2009-07-14 18:56:56 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
The servicemen who smoke the most are the ones who've seen combat, suggesting that it's something they use to reduce stress. I don't think it's right to just take cigarettes away from them without addressing this. They deserve an alternative. I vote for marijuana. Or, barring that, canteens full of whiskey.
Submitted by inion_de_trua (user info) at 2009-07-14 16:39:35 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
oh, all tobacco. nm. well, don't enlist then. or enlist, smell better, be healthier in one way and save money. also save american taxpayers' money when you sign up later at the VA without lung/mouth/throat cancer and heart disease.
Submitted by inion_de_trua (user info) at 2009-07-14 16:37:53 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
well... on the one hand, it's a really personal decision to smoke or not. on the other hand, it's bad for your cardiovascular health which is fairly important in the military. nicotine withdrawl can make people jittery and pissy and puts stress on the body so if they didn't get their fix they'd be worse off and you can't alway smoke (especially in battle). also they are military property which pretty much does give the gov't the right to tell them what to do.
maybe give them chaw instead? it's an equally disgusting habit but with adverse health effects that aren't as immediate (lungs) while providing with a withdrawl killing nicotine fix. also there's no second hand dip. in fact the thought of that made me barf a little in my mouth.
you can't really argue that whole we're becoming a police state when the law only effects people who VOLUNTEER to be part of that police state.
Submitted by sandmantate (user info) at 2009-07-14 16:28:59 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Foolproof (user info) at 2009-07-14 10:00:46 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Or, icarus, how about this. Stick with me here.
American citizens can decide for themselves what they can and cannot do to their own body. Healthcare isn't a part of it because, now this is important, Americans pay for their own health care. It isn't socialized. You don't pay for my medical treatment. I pay maney every month out of my pocket for insurance. MY money. From MY job. I wish people would let this old, invalid, uneducated, propaganda thought go already.
Of course, their medical is funded by taxes...that may be an argument. But y'know what? They volunteered to die. Let them do what they want.
PS - This isn't aimed at cigarettes. ALL tobacco.
-------------------------------------------------------
When I was in the Army, my pay was taxed, so MY taxes paid for my medical bills. Also, I had to ask for permission to go to the doctor.
Submitted by icarus1987 (user info) at 2009-07-14 15:49:07 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Again, I agree completely. If you're facing roadside bombs every day, a pack of reds is the least of your insurance worries. All I'm saying is that I can see their logic (even though I disagree with it). You've likely got some politicians who want to push some hot-buttons issues to further their chances of being noticed above the rest of the suits and making it into office.
Really, it's just like IT. I can tell you exactly how a firewall operates, what our risk factors are, and how many times per month some random bot attempts to hack us (three). That doesn't change the fact that, every meeting, I have to deal with at least two cretinous and benighted executives who try to tell me just how many scary, pimply-faced HAXORZ there are out there JUST WAITING TO GET THEIR HANDS ON OUR VALUABLE DATA, and how their cousin (who was very tech savvy) said we should INCREASE SECURITY and be more WEB 2.0 or SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
Everything relates to IT. Or war.
Submitted by Foolproof (user info) at 2009-07-14 15:37:27 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by icarus1987 (user info) at 2009-07-14 15:34:52 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
I can see the logic; we the people are paying their insurance. Insurance rates would likely be lower if the military were a non-smoking environment.
---
But then you should factor in other things the military does that gets them injured; airborne operations, weapons training, hand to hand combatives, physical training, etc, etc.
You can't factor in insurance premiums into this because, as we vets know, you do so many things on a day to day basis that gets you hurt anyway. Insurance is a moot point.
Submitted by icarus1987 (user info) at 2009-07-14 15:34:52 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
I can see the logic; we the people are paying their insurance. Insurance rates would likely be lower if the military were a non-smoking environment. It all makes sense until you bring free will into the thing, and start to reckon the effect it would have on morale... and who the hell would enforce it.
Patrick O'Brian put it this way (through Jack Aubrey) with grog: "I'd rather have them three sheets to the wind on occasion than than a mutiny on my hands."
Submitted by Can_Always_Trust_A_Liar (user info) at 2009-07-14 15:27:48 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
this is idiotic beyond belief, the effect on morale alone is reason to throw this out.
Submitted by SkullBiter (user info) at 2009-07-14 14:56:16 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
I'm twenty and recently gained two MIPS in one month, cop calling little faggots anyway.
I got probation for a year, a $350 fine, and my license suspended for a year. I have to take random UAs and goto drug and alcohol class once a week.
What the fuck??!?!??!?!?
Its just fucking booze.
/facepalm
Submitted by Shlongy (user info) at 2009-07-14 14:39:51 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Smoking kicks ass. I wish I could smoke 24/7.
Submitted by rob_berg (user info) at 2009-07-14 14:05:33 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Most of the "laws" we have in place as a society are enacted in order to prevent us from killing ourselves. The idea of having to wear a seatbelt was OUTRAGEOUS a couple decades ago - now it's illegal not to. It's the same kind of argument for most traffic violations - society has dictated that you CAN NOT DO (whatever) and we the people conform - or we pay hefty fines or go to jail.
There are LOTS of things that people do that endanger themselves and the people around them - and guess what - MOST of them have some sort of active regulation in place - even more of them are enforced (or at least should be given the finite ability to catch people breaking the law.)
Still, I think smoking is gross and will celebrate it's eventual banning.
Submitted by icarus1987 (user info) at 2009-07-14 13:49:15 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by i_can_get_you_a_toe (user info) at 2009-07-14 11:23:57 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
But you are breathing someone else's fumes, everytime you walk down the road - you breathe the fumes of every person that drives a car, you breathe the fumes of every factory that is in your area. Just because you can't see it and smell it in your immediate vicinity doesn't mean that it's not affecting you. Jeez.
---------------
Right... except, and this is the part where you use something called common sense, one could easily debate that those emissions, much like the co2 or methane you excrete on a daily basis, can, to an extent, not conveniently be prevented unless you intend to tell people they can't drive or work. Your lighting up in my living room can conveniently be prevented.
I can see the logic of asking someone not to smoke in your living room, or in public restaurants or airplanes; improves public health. Telling someone they can't smoke at all is something different. I do think we have the right to tell people they can't endanger others. I don't think we have the right to tell people they can't kill themselves; particularly when it's good for the economy.
Submitted by BLITZKREIG_BOB (user info) at 2009-07-14 13:36:23 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Hell..50 years ago the military rations had cigarettes inside.
Submitted by lungfish (user info) at 2009-07-14 11:41:09 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Our governor just signed a bill into law that allows people to bring guns into bars. People carrying guns in bars can't drink, however. Frankly, I don't think they should allow non-drinkers into bars.
Submitted by scourge (user info) at 2009-07-14 11:34:53 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
i don't think it'll ever happen.
the idea sure is fucking stupid though.
Submitted by i_can_get_you_a_toe (user info) at 2009-07-14 11:23:57 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by icarus1987 (user info) at 2009-07-14 11:15:34 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
As long as I don't have to breathe someone else's fumes, I don't really care what they do.
---
But you are breathing someone else's fumes, everytime you walk down the road - you breathe the fumes of every person that drives a car, you breathe the fumes of every factory that is in your area. Just because you can't see it and smell it in your immediate vicinity doesn't mean that it's not affecting you. Jeez.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2009-07-14 11:22:24 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
lots of studies show that smokers cost a lot less to the healthcare systems since they simply die earlier. their bad habit providing taxes on top of that.
most of the time, these measures are not for cost cutting but for the nanny govt to further expand. bureaucrats need something to do.
Submitted by icarus1987 (user info) at 2009-07-14 11:15:34 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
That's effectively what I'm saying, FP. I think the anti-smoking campaign is ridiculous. As long as I don't have to breathe someone else's fumes, I don't really care what they do.
Submitted by Shlongy (user info) at 2009-07-14 11:12:18 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
...You put the lime in the coconut, drink 'em both together, put the lime in the coconut AND you feel better..."
Submitted by i_can_get_you_a_toe (user info) at 2009-07-14 10:05:43 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
It's just politicians pandering to the easily swayed.
At the end of the day - it's ineffectual to the point of absurdity. They can't stop people smoking tobacco, they can't stop 14 year olds drinking beer and they can't stop people taking drugs - no matter how many laws and rules and policies they put out there.
Submitted by Foolproof (user info) at 2009-07-14 10:00:46 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Or, icarus, how about this. Stick with me here.
American citizens can decide for themselves what they can and cannot do to their own body. Healthcare isn't a part of it because, now this is important, Americans pay for their own health care. It isn't socialized. You don't pay for my medical treatment. I pay maney every month out of my pocket for insurance. MY money. From MY job. I wish people would let this old, invalid, uneducated, propaganda thought go already.
Of course, their medical is funded by taxes...that may be an argument. But y'know what? They volunteered to die. Let them do what they want.
PS - This isn't aimed at cigarettes. ALL tobacco.
Submitted by icarus1987 (user info) at 2009-07-14 09:54:32 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
I'm torn. In the country's defense, it's a volunteer army, and the kid chose to join. In the kid's defense, he (or she) shouldn't be asked to fight in a war that is so ridiculously unjustifiable. In the country's defense, smoking=increased chance of various health problems. In the kid's defense, they're supporting the economy via the tobacco industry, and if they want to risk their life in a way that doesn't endanger anyone else (yeah yeah, secondhand smoke &tc), that's their call.
Submitted by monkeyswithguns (user info) at 2009-07-14 08:38:17 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Saw the absurdity as well.
Submitted by EmissionImpossible (user info) at 2009-07-14 08:26:26 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
oh,.......whatever, I dont really care.
Submitted by Foolproof (user info) at 2009-07-14 08:23:51 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Second hand smoke is sucj=h a cop out. Unless somebody has you locked in a room and blowing the smoke in your face, it's an invalid argument. Besides, smoking is not allowed in government facilities, to include barracks and vehicles. And you must be 50 feet from any government building to smoke.
Submitted by EmissionImpossible (user info) at 2009-07-14 08:20:17 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
and what about the non smokers in the army who are being affected by second hand smoke?
This isn't my argument BTW but.....
Submitted by Foolproof (user info) at 2009-07-14 08:05:05 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by EmissionImpossible (user info) at 2009-07-14 08:01:18 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
im not sure you can compare going to war and smoking
---
People that want to ban tobacco cite costs, not health.
The comparison is apt.
Submitted by skrapmetal (user info) at 2009-07-14 08:02:08 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
It is ridiculous that the gov is taking all this preemptive action to protect we the people from our own choices, and I too find that concept repulsive. If you're healthy enough for military service at 18 years old, it's going to be very difficult for you to damage yourself enough to become a tactical liability during your service in the war zone simply by smoking tobacco. Let 'em light up when they can. It is possible to place yourself temporarily or permanently out of commission with alcohol. That's why during my military service they limited us to two cans of beer each at the steel beach parties*.
Small point: thus far no one is sent without first making themselves available for the sending. There is no draft; it's an all-volunteer military.
*Big cookout and party on the flight deck of the aircraft carrier I served aboard. Jet engine shipping containers converted to big coolers and grills, steaks and chicken and soda and two cans of beer, and swim call over the Mariana Trench. Good times, good times.
Submitted by EmissionImpossible (user info) at 2009-07-14 08:01:18 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
im not sure you can compare going to war and smoking
Submitted by AsshOly (user info) at 2009-07-14 07:44:47 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
not to mention the fact that the frequency of traffic tickets showing up in the mail is hiking way up...
yeah, could be.
Submitted by Foolproof (user info) at 2009-07-14 07:41:53 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
If people are worried about the taxpayer cost here, remember this:
$400,000 - Life insurance paid per death of servicemember.
$Untold Billions - Cost of wars.
Maybe we should ban war to cut costs, fucknuts.