Skip to comments.Scientists debate a license to smoke cigarettes
Posted on 11/16/2012 8:26:21 AM PST by Renfield
They do it for coal-burning power plants. So how about something for what many consider to be a walking smokestack -- the cigarette smoker?
Yes, a license to smoke. Simon Chapman, a professor of public health at the University of Sydney in Australia, offers this radical proposal to help reduce the damaging health effects of tobacco, both for the user and the recipient of second-hand smoke.
You may think this is brilliant -- or crazy -- or both. Chapman's proposal appeared Tuesday in the online journal PLoS Medicine, accompanied by an opposing view put forth by Jeff Collin, a professor of global health policy from the University of Edinburgh in Scotland....
(Excerpt) Read more at cbsnews.com ...
What sort of license does someone have to possess to show they’re a “scientist?”
Scientists debate smoking licenses.
Lawyers debate new CAFE standards.
The world is upside-down.
How would it be enforced?
But no license to smoke pot in CO and WA?
A person smoking outside poses no measurable risk to anyone else.
In fact, the “scientific evidence” showing significant health risks indoors from second-hand smoke is at best dubious.
And I hate tobacco smoke as much as anybody.
I'm of the opinion that like the TSA, the smoking laws are primarily there to condition society.
Hmm...looks like another way for despotic governments to tax the hell out of the productive and give to the unproductive, metastasizing, cancer that infects most of the world.
Next on the agenda will be a license to drink alcohol or surpass your daily recommended salt allowance.
You’d have to have a license to purchase them, I guess. America is no longer a free country. They probably want to ‘register’ smokers so they can put them in line FIRST at the 0bamacare death camps. They might as well put tattoos on smokers arms. How far do they go until we fight back?
“How would it be enforced?”
Any store selling cigarettes would have to see your license before you could buy them. I read about this yesterday and they also said they could limit the amount of cigarettes you could buy at one time.
After that, expect to see a license to buy alcohol and limiting the amount you may buy. After that, expect to see a license to buy what they determine to be “junk food”. Maybe you could only buy one hamburger and a small fries.
How about a license to breathe? After all when we exhale we all emit carbon dioxide, which is now classified as a pollutant thanks to the EPA and SCOTUS. Every mammal on earth will have to purchase carbon credits just for the privilege of being alive.
Even Jonathan Swift couldn’t have dreamed up anything as nuts as the real life we’re going through now.
A very illustrative post.
The world has gone mad.
Passing the license test is the one to figure out. rofl
The last bastion of alleged objectivity, the scientific community, believes they should have a hand in legislation.
Well, this is not new.
They’ve been trying to influence legislation by lying about global cooling/global warming/global cooling/global...er, ‘climate change,’ yeah, THAT’S the ticket. WHENEVER the climate changes, it’s because of the behavior of people in western, industrialized, free-market countries.
Yeah, THAT’S the ticket.
It's coming, just wait. You will be "required" to wear a mask with a meter at all times. That meter is to determine just how much air you have consumed.........you will be taxed on that. SEE?
Failure to comply, they turn off you mask.......
What, you don't think they can legislate scientific advances?
They need to legislate faster than light travel along with their Muslim outreach.
He is Professor in Public Health at the University of Sydney. Chapman is a sociologist whose PhD examined the semiotics of cigarette advertising.
IOW, not a scientist, academic activist with phoney-baloney degree.
Sounds like just another tax on cigarettes.
I’ve never smoked. This kind of crap is tempting me to start. I’m thinking there is an enormous amount of money to be made in untaxed tobacco.
Ingest, not necessarily smoke. One can eat pot while but not tobacco.
Breathing will be cause for a personal carbon tax and instead of getting a deduction for your children they will constitute an additional tax.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.