Skip to comments.Big Government Gets Ugly
Posted on 06/26/2011 7:17:21 AM PDT by Kaslin
It's not unusual for the federal government to provoke widespread retching among its citizens, but it rarely does so intentionally. The new warning labels required on cigarette packs, however, have that goal. Designed to evoke disgust with smoking, they may also induce revulsion at excessive uses of power.
The old cigarette warnings inform consumers of straightforward facts, such as: "Smoking Causes Lung Cancer, Heart Disease, Emphysema, And May Complicate Pregnancy" and "Quitting Smoking Now Greatly Reduces Serious Risks to Your Health." Thanks in part to such labels, Americans today fully grasp that smoking is unsafe.
But the point of the new labels is not to ensure that potential and actual smokers understand the hazards of the habit and make an informed choice. The point is to get people to avoid cigarettes whether they want to or not.
The Food and Drug Administration finds it intolerable that despite all the efforts to stamp out smoking -- through tobacco taxes, advertising restrictions, educational campaigns and smoking bans -- nearly 50 million Americans continue to puff away. The hope is that repeated assaults with nauseating photos will kill the urge.
So anyone electing to smoke will have to run a gauntlet of horrors: a corpse, a diseased lung, rotting gums and a smoker exhaling through a tracheotomy hole.
All this is made possible thanks to legislation passed in 2009 and signed by President Barack Obama. If it sounds like the sort of bossy, intrusive, big-government approach championed by Democrats, it is. But it passed by overwhelming majorities in both houses, with most Senate Republicans in support.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
If the “federal” government can tell us what to buy when we don’t want to buy it, they should be able to tell us what not to buy when we do want it. It’s all in that Commerce Clause.
I can see the return of elegant cigarette boxes.
If they outlawed this legal product government would fall from the loss of tax revenues.
If this is how government thinks to ‘educate’ people, maybe we should require Planned Parenthood to put photos of aborted babies on their brochures and such?
Those labels aren’t going to make a bit of difference. I loved smoking.......I enjoyed smoking......I’d be smoking today if the choice were mine but it was taking toll on my health (and his) so Hub and I quit together. My question is, how is the feral gooberment gonna make up for all those tobacco taxes that they’ll lose when everyone quits smoking? I smell alot of rats.
Thanks for posting this.
As an exsmoker of 40 years (I quit on Feb 24, 1999), I can testify that putting disgusting pics on cigarette packs will have little, if any, effect. Smokers don’t look at the pack. Oh, they will when the pics first come out. But after that, nope.
I smoked Barclays for years. I looked at that pack as I removed a cigarette between 40 and 60 times a day. All I can remember about that pack is that it had the word Barclay on it (duh?) and was light brown/yellowish in color.
Little, if any, effect. Cigarettes are horribly addicting. I have read that nicotine is more addictive than heroine or cocaine. I can believe that. For a person hooked on nicotine, giving up smoking is like an alcholic giving up booze (been there, done that, too). It will only happen when the addict (not the government) hits rock bottom and truly and genuinely wants to quit.
I hear a lot of teenagers swap these gore picks like trading cards.
I was thinking about putting the Weiner pics on Democrat campaign signs.
That's the first thought that came to my mind as well.
The feds are creating a new industry (actually reviving an old one) by doing this. If they keep doing what they have been to gas prices, I wouldn't be surprised to see a resurgence in the buggy-whip manufacturing industry as well.
All the graphic warnings that are now on the cigarette packs are portrayed with actors in makeup and are photoshopped.
The government has applied ‘false advertising’ to a product.
If you look at a cereal box and that said cereal is portrayed in a bowl with milk and blueberries on top - the manufacturer has to write “Serving suggestion” on the box (to not confuse consumers that there is a bowl - milk and blueberries inside-duh...lol)
But with these fake graphic pictures the government has swept aside these truth in advertising endeavors to replace them with scare mongering marketing.
Also, If a child finds a discarded cigarette pack with mocked-up R-rated/PG-13 pictures on it - who can be prosecuted? the government? Is it still classified as just littering? hmmm
That was the first thing that popped into my mind when this bs started.
Suppose this might need a /sarc tag.... ;)
I personally hate those things but I think we should all buy some butts for for the sake of liberty.
Anybody remember the “Garbage Pail Kids?” Young teens and preteens loved to collect them. Today, many in their twenties and thirties seem to have the same mindset of those teens and preteens of yesterday.
Once again, a poorly thought out, emotional action will backfire.
Warning: Excessive Government Nannyism Can Be Hazardous to your Health, Economy, Personal Liberty, Property, and Finances.
Mercy, why am I not suprised? :(
Let’s see.. So far, they’ve raised federal taxes on tobacco to about a dollar an ounce, they’re raising cigarette taxes again in July, and in the case of NYC, taxes are 900% more than the production cost of cigarettes.
To further ‘decrease’ sales, they’re going to seize part of the package for a government controlled full color advertisement. At the same time, mandatory jail time is going in for those who smuggle cigarettes.
I’m sure someone is already writing a enormous penalty for anyone caught with an unapproved cigarette transport device that excludes the mandated cigarette tax stamp and federal graphic.
If you think the people who are trying to bring 'gay sex education' to K-12 have any shred of decency left, think again. A little gore and gross is right up their alley. They might even get off on it.
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.