Now, frisoites will do the opposite.
Only in libtard America.
Posted on 07/20/2012 5:22:21 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
SAN FRANCISCO (KCBS) – Smoking anything other than medically-prescribed marijuana at San Francisco street fairs, festivals and other outdoor events held on city property would be banned under new legislation before the Board of Supervisors.
Supervisor Eric Mar said he introduced the proposal because of the health impacts of secondhand smoke when people light up in public.
“It’s widely known that secondhand smoke is responsible for as many as 73,000 deaths among non-smokers each year in the United States, and there is no safe level of exposure,” he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com ...
So in San Francisco, it’s OK for children to get a contact high from the smoke from somebody’s wacky weed, but NOT OK for them to inhale secondhand cigarette smoke? Am I understanding this correctly?
Nanny State PING!
I’m not sure how libertarians can understand how anyone can be in favor of legalizing marijuana and banning cigarettes.
WTF? What whack jobs they are.
They know what they are doing. Cigarettes are for ‘those other’ people, the common people, while marijuana is for the ‘culturally sophisticated’ hipster.
Why not. Yippie logic 101 - cigarettes are mommy & daddy’s vice (not ok) and dope is their’s (ok, because they know everything).
Can't make this crap up
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2908665/posts
Lack of exercise kills roughly as many as smoking, study says
LATimes ^ | 7/17/2012
Posted on Fri Jul 20 2012 12:44:27 GMT-0400
So, the question is....When will San Francisco make outdoor public exercising mandatory?
Americans for Nonsmoker Rights claims that 53,800 people die every year from secondhand smoke exposure.
However, and importantly, this number is based on the midpoint numbers (50%) of mortality from those diseases. So they are *assuming* that half of all such deaths are caused by secondhand smoke.
http://www.no-smoke.org/getthefacts.php?id=13
The CDC says the combined heart disease and cancer mortality attributable to secondhand smoke is about 49,000.
http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/secondhand_smoke/general_facts/
Now, frisoites will do the opposite.
Only in libtard America.
Anyone who believes those stats is an idiot.
” “It’s widely known that secondhand smoke is responsible for as many as 73,000 deaths among non-smokers each year in the United States, and there is no safe level of exposure,” he said.”
There is NO evidence....they made this up. Harvard Med School proved that second hand smoke is merely an eye irritant.
” “It’s widely known that secondhand smoke is responsible for as many as 73,000 deaths among non-smokers each year in the United States, and there is no safe level of exposure,” he said.”
There is NO evidence....they made this up. Harvard Med School proved that second hand smoke is merely an eye irritant.
*************************
Agree with you! That idiot in SF is no different than the IPCC and other nutcases who claimed AGW was endorsed by hundreds or thousands of leading scientists.
Eric, you dumbass!
Do you have any credible source for that number? I stress the word credible.
That other neurotic doctor at UCSF who is obsessed with the subject is NOT a credible source.
The largest, longest scientific study of second hand smoke by the UN was quietly shelved when, after almost 20 years, it did not result in the answer that the activists expected.
Perceived damage from second hand smoke is not reality, certainly not science.
If you don't believe that, walk into a department store with a fake cigarette in your mouth and document the results. Psychosomatic distress all over the place. Guaranteed.
First the claim was that 3000 deaths per year in the US was due to SHS. That wasn’t scary enough, so they went to 50,000. Then 53,000. Now it’s 73,000 deaths per year from second hand smoke. If they’re just going to make up numbers why not just say that “zillions” of people die from SHS?
Eric, you dumbass!
Do you have any credible source for that number? I stress the word credible.
That other neurotic doctor at UCSF who is obsessed with the subject is NOT a credible source.
The largest, longest scientific study of second hand smoke by the UN was quietly shelved when, after almost 20 years, it did not result in the answer that the activists expected.
Perceived damage from second hand smoke is not reality, certainly not science.
If you don't believe that, walk into a department store with a fake cigarette in your mouth and document the results. Psychosomatic distress all over the place. Guaranteed.
Make the manufacture and use of nicotine products other than pesticides illegal within the United States. Period.
Of course that would require that several levels of government give up tons of tax revenue as well as thousands of jobs currently involved with collecting those taxes.
Why do I think we're a lot more likely to see taxes raised on smokes in direct proportion to growth of local regulations constricting their use?
It is time to just figure out a way to dispose of these people.
But wait, that would mean declaring TOFU a carcinogen. Well, turns out it may or may not be; but soy does cause some permanent shrinkage in the male genitalia, as well as other side effects involving involuntary production and circulation of female-type hormones.
Everybody in San Francisco at least and most other parts of these United States is obviously either on the rag or going througn menopause - male or female.
Sheesh!
I've been using that strategy to clear the fat chicks out of the candy aisle (but with a real, unlit cigarette) for years.
Works every time it's tried.
The liberal mind is so sick, reductio ad absurdum arguments don’t work...you can’t make stuff like this up.
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.