View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Uma Minor Poster
Joined: 26 Apr 2006 Posts: 87
|
Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 8:18 am Post subject: Ray LaMontagne |
|
|
I suppose there'll be a barrage of " WTF... "'s at this, but chill out just a lil' bit.
Good stuff is being done here my friends, but some times I think it's healthy to grab a hold of the person you value most, crack open a good bottle of Merlot, spark up somethin' a little on the mellow side and set a little time aside.......
It won't hurt ya much.
http://www.myspace.com/raylamontagne
Peace isn't so bad. _________________ loving you... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006 Posts: 1873 Location: Upstairs
|
Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 8:57 am Post subject: Re: Ray LaMontagne |
|
|
Uma wrote: |
Good stuff is being done here my friends, but some times I think it's healthy to grab a hold of the person you value most, crack open a good bottle of Merlot, spark up somethin' a little on the mellow side and set a little time aside.......
It won't hurt ya much. |
Excellent observation, the single act of inhaling concentrated poisons will in itself, be of little harm. However, it is the fact that human beings tend to adopt addictive personalities and few can limit their intake of mind altering fluids and smoke to a bare minimum.
I am completely and totally against any form of smoking and to subject them to passive smoking as suggested above is a bizarre concept. How many times have you witnessed someone pull up outside a school to drop off the kids, only to see the driver smoking with the windows shut?! I view this as assault, no different to hitting a child - can you really profess to loving someone and then force them to breathe carcinogenic compounds?
Bring on the ban, can't be soon enough.
As for Ray's 'music', can you honestly see him getting through the first audion of X Factor? Nasty, raucous noise. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Newspeak International Validated Poster
Joined: 18 Apr 2006 Posts: 1158 Location: South Essex
|
Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 10:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's ok uma, if the neo cons Zionists had a spliff every now and then, I don't think the world would be in the state it's in now.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
marky 54 Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006 Posts: 3293
|
Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 10:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i agree with tele about smoking, but getting rid of it dosnt really limit the nonsense you breath in. look around the roadsides see how black things get on busy roadways, run you finger across them, or brush a piece of cloth over one and see what happens.
yes we are also breathing that in to and it carnt be doing any good, should drivers be looked on as being creul to kids also? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
marky 54 Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006 Posts: 3293
|
Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 11:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"Bring on the ban, can't be soon enough."
i also agree with this and i smoke unfortantly, but a ban would mean i carnt and that can only be good. but where does it stop? or do we just move on to targeting other groups of people when the cancer rate continues to rise and it becomes obvious it wasnt just smoking causing it and damaging peoples health.
will people have the same passion about banning what ever else is exposed as damaging? even if its something you do now and like doing? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
flamesong Major Poster
Joined: 27 Jul 2005 Posts: 1305 Location: okulo news
|
Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 12:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Things don't seem as bad thse days because a lot of the pollution is 'clean'. I remember the first time I went to London about 30 years ago and experienced the 'black snot' - I was pretty horrified - but they didn't call London 'The Smoke' for nothing. Nowadays everything seems cleaner but allergy related illnesses such as asthma and eczema are more common than ever.
As for the smoking ban, I have been to Scotland a lot over the last year or so and I feel liberated from the smell and general anti-social aspect of smoking when I am there. You are even prohibited from smoking on railway platforms. Bliss.
I have some sympathy for smokers (as a former smoker) but I think that if the LVA had got its shít together five years ago, when they first smelt the coffee, they could have introduced a voluntary code of having one room in every pub nominated as a smoking room (not a non-smoking corner - smoke doesn't recognise conceptual barriers) and there might not be a blanket ban around the corner.
For me, it isn't just the demand for the right to poison oneself I can't understand, it's the pathetic dependency and the exploitation of the multinational drug dealers who keep replacing all the dead smokers with ever younger addicts.
Nobody who is in the slightest enlightened should defend the tobacco industry any more than the arms industry. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
karlos Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Feb 2007 Posts: 2516 Location: london
|
Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
You still get black snot everytime you travel by tube _________________
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
marky 54 Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006 Posts: 3293
|
Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
flamesong wrote: | Things don't seem as bad thse days because a lot of the pollution is 'clean'. I remember the first time I went to London about 30 years ago and experienced the 'black snot' - I was pretty horrified - but they didn't call London 'The Smoke' for nothing. Nowadays everything seems cleaner but allergy related illnesses such as asthma and eczema are more common than ever.
As for the smoking ban, I have been to Scotland a lot over the last year or so and I feel liberated from the smell and general anti-social aspect of smoking when I am there. You are even prohibited from smoking on railway platforms. Bliss.
I have some sympathy for smokers (as a former smoker) but I think that if the LVA had got its shít together five years ago, when they first smelt the coffee, they could have introduced a voluntary code of having one room in every pub nominated as a smoking room (not a non-smoking corner - smoke doesn't recognise conceptual barriers) and there might not be a blanket ban around the corner.
For me, it isn't just the demand for the right to poison oneself I can't understand, it's the pathetic dependency and the exploitation of the multinational drug dealers who keep replacing all the dead smokers with ever younger addicts.
Nobody who is in the slightest enlightened should defend the tobacco industry any more than the arms industry. |
i agree but it raises issues at the same time, to me it seems people only complain(or the majority) because they dont do it and never think of the effect they are having in other ways, always easier to point the finger and target a group.
i agree with you about not smoking in public places but i have to ask what the differance is between standing near a smoker on a platform and stand near a car with its exhaust fumes pouring out, why is one acceptable and the other not in peoples minds?
sit in a tobacco smoke filled car and it will take years to kill you, sit in a car exhaust filled car and your dead in hours, so i have to wonder which is more harmful yet i hear noone really kicking up a fuss about breathing car fumes, and the reason for that you will find is because the vast majority of people drive.
anyone smoking in public places should be banned i agree but dont expect cancer rates to drop as a result. the number of smokers are dropping all the time yet cancer rates go up, when there is no smokers left to blame that will become obvious, so i carnt wait for a ban for that to be obvious, because i know where the lost tax will be put and where it will be increased at a alarming rate(like it was on cigerettes).
people dont want to breath my smoke and i think thats fair enough so i dont smoke around them, but at the same time i dont get a choice but to breathe everyone elses smoke and theres no such thing as a no driving area....... yet! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
marky 54 Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006 Posts: 3293
|
Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
anyone who dosnt get why i see driving as the same as smoking heres why!
its bad for my health if i breathe in car fumes.
it sticks to your cloths and makes them smell(not as bad as tobacco smoke but its still dirty)
and if you brush the railings or walk into them like i did then unless your wearing black you will have a dirty black mark down the lenght of your trousers that has accumilated from car fumes on the railings
and the number one reason is the planet which cars have had a larger effect on than any amount of smokers could manage even if they chain smoked.
i realise its impratical to stop people driving etc but before people go of their rocker about smokers they should think about what they are doing also and what effect that has.
but i find its a case of justifying(because you do it) one thing, whilst complaining about and other because you dont fit in that catergory.
regardless ban smoking i agree, but dont make me feel guilty for it by using words that can also be applied to car fumes also if you drive, i want future generations to have a planet left to live in.
if you dont smoke and dont drive call me what you like you have ever right to . |
|
Back to top |
|
|
marky 54 Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006 Posts: 3293
|
Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 2:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
how the hell did this get to smoking anyway? i clicked the original link and i carnt see anything to do with smoking |
|
Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006 Posts: 1873 Location: Upstairs
|
Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 8:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Whenever the smoking debate is raised (this time prompted by 'sparking up something mellow' in the opening gambit), the direct comparison is always drawn with cars and their output. I have always believed this to be the playing of the justification card, in other words, I do this, but you do something equally as bad.
The internal combustion engine, whilst highly flawed with many inherent and associated problems, pumps water to dry areas, takes sick people to hospital, brings teams of dedicated fire fighters to your house when there is a fire, allows your local supermarket to keep stocked with foods from around the globe and without it, society would collapse as it currently exists. Smokers don't smoke because the internal combustion engine exists - they do it because they are drug addicts.
Global pollution from car exhausts is totally another subject and smoking unquestionably stands on its own, to compare it to a method of transport is totally unequivocal. I have yet to see a debate where smokers list the wonderful things smoking brings to society, it can only ever be debated by including 'other' bad things that non-smokers do.
Having said that, I do own a car, but it has the lowest possible fossil fuel emmissions, 35 quid a year road tax and 65mpg because I acknowledge that I don't need to drive around in a 'badge' to impress the neighbours. I walk to the shops where possible and use public transport where practical.
In my experience, most smokers are thoughtless and selfish, with little to no regard to anyone else around them. It is a habit/addiction like no other as it directly impacts everyone in the immediate vicinity and it isn't done for any other reason than to get a fix. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
marky 54 Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006 Posts: 3293
|
Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 9:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
telecasterisation wrote: | Whenever the smoking debate is raised (this time prompted by 'sparking up something mellow' in the opening gambit), the direct comparison is always drawn with cars and their output. I have always believed this to be the playing of the justification card, in other words, I do this, but you do something equally as bad.
The internal combustion engine, whilst highly flawed with many inherent and associated problems, pumps water to dry areas, takes sick people to hospital, brings teams of dedicated fire fighters to your house when there is a fire, allows your local supermarket to keep stocked with foods from around the globe and without it, society would collapse as it currently exists. Smokers don't smoke because the internal combustion engine exists - they do it because they are drug addicts.
Global pollution from car exhausts is totally another subject and smoking unquestionably stands on its own, to compare it to a method of transport is totally unequivocal. I have yet to see a debate where smokers list the wonderful things smoking brings to society, it can only ever be debated by including 'other' bad things that non-smokers do.
Having said that, I do own a car, but it has the lowest possible fossil fuel emmissions, 35 quid a year road tax and 65mpg because I acknowledge that I don't need to drive around in a 'badge' to impress the neighbours. I walk to the shops where possible and use public transport where practical.
In my experience, most smokers are thoughtless and selfish, with little to no regard to anyone else around them. It is a habit/addiction like no other as it directly impacts everyone in the immediate vicinity and it isn't done for any other reason than to get a fix. |
you sound like a man with a grudge against smokers, remind me again why making people breathe car fumes and destriying the planet is any differant?
i agree smoking is bad and agree with everything everyone has said about it, how can you point blame and hatred at one whilst totally justifying the other? they are both the same and both have the same effects, both are a form of making other people who dont have a choice breathe your fumes which effects their health.
my only point is people should think about that before lashing out at smokers like they are the scum of the earth or something.
but i did say above its fine to lash out at certain groups but if its something the person who is lashing does then it totally fine. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
marky 54 Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006 Posts: 3293
|
Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 9:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
i also agree that certain transport is far to important to be fussy, however if i smoked a cigertte in the street on the way down to the shop is differant to a man to lazy to walk to the shop so goes in his car why? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006 Posts: 1873 Location: Upstairs
|
Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
marky 54 wrote: |
you sound like a man with a grudge against smokers, remind me again why making people breathe car fumes and destriying the planet is any differant?
i agree smoking is bad and agree with everything everyone has said about it, how can you point blame and hatred at one whilst totally justifying the other? they are both the same and both have the same effects, both are a form of making other people who dont have a choice breathe your fumes which effects their health.
my only point is people should think about that before lashing out at smokers like they are the scum of the earth or something.
but i did say above its fine to lash out at certain groups but if its something the person who is lashing does then it totally fine. |
I am in no way justifying the internal combustion engine - it accounts for much pollution and death on the roads. However, that is where it stands, a mode of transport, a means of generating power that is flawed. Society, or more accurately, the oil conglomerates, dictate that we have no current viable alternatives if we own a vehicle. They have intervened in the development of the electric car and that is the status quo - like it or not.
This is another subject entirely and I see no direct correlation between taking drugs and modes of transport. To draw comparisons indicates that cigarette smoking cannot stand on its merits and barrels must be scraped.
Yes - the internal combustion engine is far from perfect and if you own a car - your choices tend to be limited to size of engine. I am obligated to own a car for a number of reasons - no-one is obligated to ingest drugs. If I didn't need a car, I wouldn't own one.
As for my 'grudge' against smokers, it is more of an educated insight;
When I joined the police in 1974, I was a cadet. On something called 'third phase', I used to tag along with regular officers and attend scenes of crime, road accidents/whatever basically as an observer. There had been a sudden death and when we arrived it was a little girl of just eight years old.
The parents lived in flat, I remember the walls being a nasty yellowy colour. The ambulance crew had arrived some time after the girl had died, and despite attempts at resuscitation, they had failed to revive her. She had had a severe asthma attack and suffocated very quickly.
As was the system, an officer called to a death, suspicious or otherwise, would then follow the thing through until completion attending any subsequent medical exam or inquest. I was asked to go along for the useful experience.
Nothing quite prepares a seventeen year old for an autopsy and having open the chest cavity, the coroner showed the PC and myself the contents of the girl's lungs. They were coated in a dark tar-like substance. He stated that the cause of death was asthma exacerbated by passive smoking. One parent would put one out and the other would light up - the coroner estimated that this was the equivalent of the child smoking around 20 cigarettes a day herself.
Bear in mind that this was over 30 years ago and I can clearly recall every detail of that entire episode. So it isn't about 'grudges' - it is about a clear understanding that regardless of the fact that the child had asthma and regularly suffered in front of the parents, as drug addicts, nothing would stand in the way of their fix. This is what I am against and unless a car is reversed into a house and the rooms filled with concentrated poisons, then there is no comparison.
If someone wants to smoke in the privacy of their own room - fine - no problem whatsoever - but as I pointed out in my first post, forcing passive smoking onto anyone is assault.
I fully agree that people shouldn't use their cars for short 'to the shops' journeys', but that is another subject completely - I am saying that no-one should be forced to participate in drug taking. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
marky 54 Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006 Posts: 3293
|
Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 5:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i understand now why you sound alittle mad about smoking, but unfortantly it not just people who are selfish with smoking around others than kill people or children is it.
you keep saying cars are in no way the same, what you keep doing is telling me smoking is bad but driving is fine.
tele your trying to justify driving because you do it. cars kill more children that cigerettes and who knows how many children develop illnesses from breathing car fumes and that sicky petrol smell that gives you an headache. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
marky 54 Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006 Posts: 3293
|
Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 5:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
smoking should be banned and is bad my only point is others should think about the things they do that are just as bad!
drunk drivers, speeding drivers any form of pollution that can lead to deaths(including children) no body can claim to be perfect tele and i dont care if you think driving is somehow differant in your world, it isnt. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
rodin Validated Poster
Joined: 09 Dec 2006 Posts: 2224 Location: UK
|
Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 5:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
marky 54 wrote: | i understand now why you sound alittle mad about smoking, but unfortantly it not just people who are selfish with smoking around others than kill people or children is it.
you keep saying cars are in no way the same, what you keep doing is telling me smoking is bad but driving is fine.
tele your trying to justify driving because you do it. cars kill more children that cigerettes and who knows how many children develop illnesses from breathing car fumes and that sicky petrol smell that gives you an headache. |
Tele's points are valid IMO and I hardly drive at all. As for kids' lungs, I bet carpets, especially synthetics, do much more harm than car fumes. That and the filthy school bus!
It's all a bit academic if the bees are being poisoned...
http://goldismoney.info/forums/showthread.php?t=109977 _________________ Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com |
|
Back to top |
|
|
marky 54 Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006 Posts: 3293
|
Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 5:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
rodin wrote: | marky 54 wrote: | i understand now why you sound alittle mad about smoking, but unfortantly it not just people who are selfish with smoking around others than kill people or children is it.
you keep saying cars are in no way the same, what you keep doing is telling me smoking is bad but driving is fine.
tele your trying to justify driving because you do it. cars kill more children that cigerettes and who knows how many children develop illnesses from breathing car fumes and that sicky petrol smell that gives you an headache. |
Tele's points are valid IMO and I hardly drive at all. As for kids' lungs, I bet carpets, especially synthetics, do much more harm than car fumes. That and the filthy school bus!
It's all a bit academic if the bees are being poisoned...
http://goldismoney.info/forums/showthread.php?t=109977 |
i bet you drive to dont you? ah yes you did say so, dont want to feel guilty? you defend on killer and blame another? nobody is perfect so before pointing the finger at smokers take a good look at yourselves and think about the bad things you do also even if it isnt driving. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
marky 54 Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006 Posts: 3293
|
Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2007 6:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
im a smoker (scum of the earth with no regard for anybody if you like, even though i do think of others around me and smoke away from them but i smoke so im scum) and im saying and agree smoking should be banned but at the same time ask people to think about the things they are doing that are also bad before thinking they are somehow perfect compared to smokers(which was my only point and driving was my example).
i carnt for the life of me understand why drivers are so defensive and dont like being put in the same postion smokers are in even though they know what damage cars are having on the enviorment and peoples health.
im sure smokers reacted this way also in the 1930's to anyone suggesting smoking should be considered bad.
like i said way way above now in thread and one of my first posts, those who do it try to justify it and only attack the things they dont do.
i cannot wait till a ban for smoking comes in then when im at the end of my tether i carnt walk 300 yards to buy some, it is an addiction and should be banned and certainly in public places(i never smoke there anyway but have seen others), but people have to think about what they are doing to and ways they can lessen their bad effects on other people before hunting smokers as though they are witches.
justify driving all you like and im sure more drivers will turn up to defend their hobby but like it or not it is just as bad.
millions of people manage without cars and if people only used them when absoultly amust then we would all be healthier and better of.
i will not take abuse while lots of mr idle bones take the car everywhere they go when they could easily of walked, its no differant to smokers having no regard to others and the people around them. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Uma Minor Poster
Joined: 26 Apr 2006 Posts: 87
|
Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 8:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well I guess it's my turn to use the "WTF" euphemism.
I mean, what the FUCH ? are the majority of you respondents on about?
Let me backtrack just a tincy wincey bit......
I said you're all doing good things.
And that sometimes you ought to indulge yourselves in a little pleasure to offset the strain of this seriousness.
It's about music.
Not cigarettes.
Not marijuana.
Not even Merlot.
Ray LaMontagne is a human being .
We sorta need a few............... _________________ loving you... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Graham Moderate Poster
Joined: 30 Jul 2005 Posts: 350 Location: bucks
|
Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 10:48 am Post subject: Re: Ray LaMontagne |
|
|
telecasterisation wrote: | How many times have you witnessed someone pull up outside a school to drop off the kids, only to see the driver smoking with the windows shut?! |
But you have no problem with being forced to inhale the noxious fumes from cars at the school, and the dirty horrible diseasel coaches that bring the kids in?
Why is smoking being banned, yet in the same places you can't smoke, ie a factory, you can spend all day breathing in fumes due to industrial work!
BAN CARS AND BUSES TOO!
Also... ban alchohol. _________________ "All we are asking for is a new International investigation into 9/11" - Willie Rodriguez |
|
Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006 Posts: 1873 Location: Upstairs
|
Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 11:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Uma wrote: |
It's about music.
Not cigarettes.
Not marijuana.
Not even Merlot.
Ray LaMontagne is a human being .
We sorta need a few............... |
You say that this has nothing to do with inhaling drugs?
I quote your first post in this thread;
Quote: | ...spark up somethin' a little on the mellow side and set a little.... |
Explain how 'sparking up' is not related to lighting a reefer or any other kind of smoking related pursuit? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006 Posts: 1873 Location: Upstairs
|
Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 11:42 am Post subject: Re: Ray LaMontagne |
|
|
Graham wrote: | telecasterisation wrote: | How many times have you witnessed someone pull up outside a school to drop off the kids, only to see the driver smoking with the windows shut?! |
But you have no problem with being forced to inhale the noxious fumes from cars at the school, and the dirty horrible diseasel coaches that bring the kids in?
Why is smoking being banned, yet in the same places you can't smoke, ie a factory, you can spend all day breathing in fumes due to industrial work!
BAN CARS AND BUSES TOO!
Also... ban alchohol. |
Again we are off on a tour de force of justification simply because smoking cannot stand on its own merits - it HAS to be compared.
I can drop litter then because paedophiles exist, or slap my kids because there are drunk drivers, or set fire to houses because people illegally cut down the rainforest for profit?
Society exists the way it does simply because of the internal combustion engine - without it - the shops would be empty, people would starve, society would cease to function. If there was an alternative to the burning fossil fuels that the oil companies couldn't/hadn't blocked then we would be using it - there isn't so we can't.
Yes, yes, yes - the internal combustion engine creates tremendous pollution based problems - I take issue that we are obligated to inhale vehicle exhaust output, but the subject is drug taking - inhaling concentrated poison smoke and forcing those around to do the same JUST to get a fix.
Smoking is being banned because it serves no positive benefit to society whatsoever. It is a pointless foolhardy senseless pursuit, a flawed delivery system designed to get a drug into the body of the addict. It is unpleasant to be around for non-smokers, it can impact asthma sufferers, it makes your hair and clothes smell, it unquestionably gives me a sore throat if I am placed in a smokers' environment.
As for pregnant smokers - they should be shot on sight. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|