I like you to read this.
75 percent of Americans overweight by 2015. "Obesity is likely to continue to increase, and if nothing is done, it will soon become the leading preventable cause of death in the United States."
I would like to say this it's not about caring it's about money
"Obesity is one of the thing that will kill people,guns kills
but do you see them talk about all that, all they talk about
is smoking, smoking is going to kill you we will all die one day
and it will not matter if you did smoke are if you didn't smoke.
Right now they are talking about going up on the price of cigarettes
is this the salutation to what needs to be done, if smoking is so bad then why don't they stop selling them,I think you know and I know why.
If they don't give a rats ass about the kids that are dieing in this dam war,what makes you makes you think they care about you are me smoking a dam cigarettes. I don't know about you ,,,,,,,,,but I'm not a kid.
----- Original Message -----
From: The Smokers Rights Newsletter Issue
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 9:21 AM
Subject: The Smokers Rights Newsletter Issue
The United Pro Choice
Smokers Rights Newsletter
August 3, 2007 - Issue #444
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible
will make violent revolution inevitable."
- John F. Kennedy
Lighting up at the movies. By Jacob Sullum. If anyone is making smoking seem cool, it's self-righteous busybodies like Stanton Glantz.
In the Name of “Public Health.” By Jacqueline S. Homan. In the rush to pound the public health pulpit, Antis would have the public at large in a panic over the “dangers” of ETS. Let us analyze a few real threats to public health that are not based on junk science and fuzzy math, and see how they stack up...
75 percent of Americans overweight by 2015. "Obesity is likely to continue to increase, and if nothing is done, it will soon become the leading preventable cause of death in the United States."
Tobacco may help fight cervical cancer. The tobacco-based vaccine still in the works would cost an estimated $3 for three doses, compared with $360 for three doses of Gardasil. This would make it affordable for developing countries like India, where the disease is the most common malignancy among women.
Glaxo in Nicotine Drug Pact. The agreement gives the European drug maker access to Targacept's neuronal nicotinic receptor compounds, including an experimental drug in midstage Phase II clinical trials for acute postoperative pain.
Anti-Smoking Campaign Achievements Exaggerated. Korea. "It's excessively political to only emphasize decrease in men's smoking rate since the recent trend is that smoking rate amid women and teenager is on a significant increase,'' Choi said.
From The International Mailbag
The Canadian Smokers Rights Newsletter.
Australia: 14 smoking mums fined for smoking in cars.
Western Australia: Outdoor smoking ban inevitable.
Bahrain: Malls ban on smoking is stepped up.
Demark: Against Ban, 700 bar owners legal challenge.
Germany: A ban comes into force in three of the 16 federal states.
India: Delhi High Court reserves order on smoking in films.
Scotland: Plan to ban 'traditional' cigarettes in drive to cut fires.
UK: Government "duped by fake and twisted science."
From The USA Mailbag
IA: Des Moines Smoking wars move into condo complex.
IL: Tax bill has shown true colors and why there is a rush on it.
NV: Smoking foes questioning Nevada tax breaks.
SC: Issac J. Bailey, Smoking ban not the way to go.
TN: State updates on Congress, tax, ban, drinkers.
USA: Federal Tax, SCHIP, update on cigarette tax.
Defiance And Ban Damage Hurts Everyone
DC: Late-night noise at Jack's draws neighbor protests.
NV: Barkeeps ways to keep smoking without running afoul of the law.
TX: Beaumont Smoking ban has many businesses in the hot seat.
UK: James Oyebola dies by gunshot while enforcing the ban.
UK: Call Paul Toole for the Protest March on August 11.
The Slippery Slope After Tobacco
Alcohol: 100 a day admitted to UK hospital over drinking.
Office printers health risk, should come with a health warning.
New Gallup Poll Reveals that Nearly Half of Smokers Feel Discriminated Against As a Result of Smoking Restrictions.
The Club Forum is now 96 Forums listed on one page.
Post at topics with everyone, and in geographical areas to talk with other local smokers.
Join FREE - Home - Events - Forum - Videos - Please Help - ©
Sunday, August 26, 2007
Friday, August 10, 2007
Read this people.
The E-mail address that you see is people I sent this too.
Sammantha is with smoker rights.
Some of you may not like what she is doing and what I'm doing
But I like to add this I don't like what the government is doing we are paying taxes
and it's like we are paying them to tell us what we can or cannot do.
we send kids to war and die for freedom and this is what freedom is, taking away your rights, I fine something wrong with that.
Now I know government worker smoke what do they get for smoking a pat on the hand
when they get stop.
Hello....
Samantha
I don't know how much good this will do but anything is better than nothing.
They do like we are kids not taxs payer,I think if they are going to take away people rights then take away the taxs we pay.
They are sending kids to die and fight for freedom and this is
what they call freedom.
----- Original Message -----
From: Roy & Lori
To: hinesd@legis.state.la.us ; Hebert, Rep. (District Office) ; fieldsc@legis.state.la.us ; fontenoc@legis.state.la.us ; gautreauxn@legis.state.la.us ; dardennej@legis.state.la.us ; Cook, Colby ; contact@la.gov ; cainj@legis.state.la.us ; Burrell, Rep. (District Office) ; Burns, Rep. (District Office) ; Boasso, Sen. (District Office) ; barhamr@legis.state.la.us ; adleyr@legis.state.la.us ; websen@legis.state.la.us ; boassow@legis.state.la.us ; lasen15@legis.state.la.us ; smithcheek@legis.state.la.us ; duplessisa@legis.state.la.us ; Reggie Dupre ; ellingtn@legis.state.la.us ; lasen21@legis.state.la.us ; heitmeierf@legis.state.la.us ; hollisk@legis.state.la.us ; jacksonl@legis.state.la.us ; kostelka@legis.state.la.us ; lentini@legis.state.la.us ; malonem@legis.state.la.us ; lasen17@legis.state.la.us ; lasen29@legis.state.la.us ; lasen23@legis.state.la.us ; lasen27@legis.state.la.us ; murraye@legis.state.la.us ; quinnj@legis.state.la.us ; romeroc@legis.state.la.us ; schedlet@legis.state.la.us ; smithmi@legis.state.la.us ; theunisg@legis.state.la.us
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2007 9:06 PM
Subject: House Bill 1010
Posted: Wed May 17, 2006 11:13 pm Post subject: URGENT/ALERT: LA Senate To Vote On Smoking In Car Ban
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
House Bill 1010, that seeks to ban smoking in cars should there be a child on board, passed the house 66 to 31! Outrageous!
I would like to add this, If you are going to take away my freedom
my wife freedom and my rights, then maybe you need to start paying my bills and taking care of my family, we didn't vote you
in office so you can dictate to us, we or not kids.
Who will give a ticket to the people that works for the state the parish or government enforcement officers that smoke?
Because just like the seatbelt law you pass we see them not wearing it, when they are in their policecar.
Below is what I wrote. You can use as example or just send the same thing... Do try to add your own stuff at the front and inbetween so they look different.
I am writing to express my deep concern in regards to HB 1010.
I feel the bill infringes upon several rights. One being the rights of a parent. Another being the rights of a smoker.
This bill is taking away the rights of parents and how they choose to raise their children. Most unsettling is the thought of where this bill will lead. To make it a crime for a person to smoke with his or her child in their own car will open the door for it becoming a crime for a person to smoke within their own home in the presence of their child. What is to stop that from happening? This is where it all starts.
Even in the car alone! I am outraged that this bill passed the House. Already I have wrote everyone in the House who approved this bill expressing my extreme disappointment. Likewise, those who didn't approve it with praise. It is troubling to me that such a bill that infringes upon the rights of parents even passed.
Equally troubling is the purpose of this bill.
The baby-boom generation was raised mostly by smokers. Parents who smoked at home. At work. In the car. Around their kids. Those of the baby-boom generation have lived the longest. As children, they weren't plagued by any adverse health issues.
Today... Today most people don't smoke. Most children are raised in smoke-free cars and homes. Yet, today's kids are suffering from diabetes, obesity, laziness, heart disease and more.
So where is the logic behind this bill?
Let's also look at scientific facts.
The World Health Organization launched an extensive study to find the health affects of ETS (Environmental Tobacco Smoke). What did they find? They found that children raised in a home where both parents smoke are at a 22% less risk of developing lung cancer.
It must also be noted they failed to find any adverse health affects related to ETS among adults. ETS is virtually free of threatening the health of anyone, both young and old, according to their study.
Of course their findings were not exactly what they were hoping to find so they concealed the study from the public until the British press got hold of it. Unfortunately for that reason, they do not offer the study on their website but I can offer you an abstract on the study found here.
Another, much more extensive 39 year study done by the British Medical Journal shows there is no risk to anyone's health from ETS as well.
A quote from the two who conducted the study says it all: "No significant associations were found for current or former exposure to environmental tobacco smoke, before or after adjusting for seven confounders, and before or after excluding participants with pre-existing disease." -- Enstrom & Kabat, British Medical Journal, Vol. 326
To view that study in it's entirety you can do so here.
Looking at the scientific evidence, and simple logic in comparing today's youth to yesteryears, I can not even begin to comprehend the reasoning behind this bill other than to take away the rights from parents. Already parents have lost many rights in raising their children... We have young girls being escorted out of state by their teacher to have an abortion without their parents being notified. Parents living in fear of ever disciplining their children due to political correctness run amuck and the term "child abuse" being exploited. Public schools not allowing packaged lunches from home containing foods that have been deemed "less than ideal" by the government. And so forth... The list is endless.
It comes down to, simply said, the bill is unconstitutional. Wrong. Disgusting... Goes against everything America stands for. Un-American sums it up best.
How many more rights of parents must we steal before we can be content? And for those without kids who smoke... Knowing they can no longer smoke around their kids, and not just in the car as we both know should this pass it will stem to the home as well, who is going to even want a child? Not to say the pleasure of smoking comes before raising a child but.... Why would I want a child in this country knowing I can not raise him or her how I see best?
The decision for a parent to smoke around his or her child needs to be left up to the parent. Not the government. Especially considering the lack of scientific evidence to back any claims of justifying this bill of stealing parent's rights as Gary Smith, the one who proposed the bill, likes to say, "I'm just trying to protect those who cannot protect themselves." Care to back that by any scientific evidence Gary?
I urge you to strongly consider the repercussions of this bill. How this measure will eventually stem to the home and other areas outside the car. How this measure will take away rights from parents. Other rights too that soon may be infringed upon of both the parent and smoker should this bill pass.
I thank you for your time and consideration on the matter.
-- NAME
The E-mail address that you see is people I sent this too.
Sammantha is with smoker rights.
Some of you may not like what she is doing and what I'm doing
But I like to add this I don't like what the government is doing we are paying taxes
and it's like we are paying them to tell us what we can or cannot do.
we send kids to war and die for freedom and this is what freedom is, taking away your rights, I fine something wrong with that.
Now I know government worker smoke what do they get for smoking a pat on the hand
when they get stop.
Hello....
Samantha
I don't know how much good this will do but anything is better than nothing.
They do like we are kids not taxs payer,I think if they are going to take away people rights then take away the taxs we pay.
They are sending kids to die and fight for freedom and this is
what they call freedom.
----- Original Message -----
From: Roy & Lori
To: hinesd@legis.state.la.us ; Hebert, Rep. (District Office) ; fieldsc@legis.state.la.us ; fontenoc@legis.state.la.us ; gautreauxn@legis.state.la.us ; dardennej@legis.state.la.us ; Cook, Colby ; contact@la.gov ; cainj@legis.state.la.us ; Burrell, Rep. (District Office) ; Burns, Rep. (District Office) ; Boasso, Sen. (District Office) ; barhamr@legis.state.la.us ; adleyr@legis.state.la.us ; websen@legis.state.la.us ; boassow@legis.state.la.us ; lasen15@legis.state.la.us ; smithcheek@legis.state.la.us ; duplessisa@legis.state.la.us ; Reggie Dupre ; ellingtn@legis.state.la.us ; lasen21@legis.state.la.us ; heitmeierf@legis.state.la.us ; hollisk@legis.state.la.us ; jacksonl@legis.state.la.us ; kostelka@legis.state.la.us ; lentini@legis.state.la.us ; malonem@legis.state.la.us ; lasen17@legis.state.la.us ; lasen29@legis.state.la.us ; lasen23@legis.state.la.us ; lasen27@legis.state.la.us ; murraye@legis.state.la.us ; quinnj@legis.state.la.us ; romeroc@legis.state.la.us ; schedlet@legis.state.la.us ; smithmi@legis.state.la.us ; theunisg@legis.state.la.us
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2007 9:06 PM
Subject: House Bill 1010
Posted: Wed May 17, 2006 11:13 pm Post subject: URGENT/ALERT: LA Senate To Vote On Smoking In Car Ban
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
House Bill 1010, that seeks to ban smoking in cars should there be a child on board, passed the house 66 to 31! Outrageous!
I would like to add this, If you are going to take away my freedom
my wife freedom and my rights, then maybe you need to start paying my bills and taking care of my family, we didn't vote you
in office so you can dictate to us, we or not kids.
Who will give a ticket to the people that works for the state the parish or government enforcement officers that smoke?
Because just like the seatbelt law you pass we see them not wearing it, when they are in their policecar.
Below is what I wrote. You can use as example or just send the same thing... Do try to add your own stuff at the front and inbetween so they look different.
I am writing to express my deep concern in regards to HB 1010.
I feel the bill infringes upon several rights. One being the rights of a parent. Another being the rights of a smoker.
This bill is taking away the rights of parents and how they choose to raise their children. Most unsettling is the thought of where this bill will lead. To make it a crime for a person to smoke with his or her child in their own car will open the door for it becoming a crime for a person to smoke within their own home in the presence of their child. What is to stop that from happening? This is where it all starts.
Even in the car alone! I am outraged that this bill passed the House. Already I have wrote everyone in the House who approved this bill expressing my extreme disappointment. Likewise, those who didn't approve it with praise. It is troubling to me that such a bill that infringes upon the rights of parents even passed.
Equally troubling is the purpose of this bill.
The baby-boom generation was raised mostly by smokers. Parents who smoked at home. At work. In the car. Around their kids. Those of the baby-boom generation have lived the longest. As children, they weren't plagued by any adverse health issues.
Today... Today most people don't smoke. Most children are raised in smoke-free cars and homes. Yet, today's kids are suffering from diabetes, obesity, laziness, heart disease and more.
So where is the logic behind this bill?
Let's also look at scientific facts.
The World Health Organization launched an extensive study to find the health affects of ETS (Environmental Tobacco Smoke). What did they find? They found that children raised in a home where both parents smoke are at a 22% less risk of developing lung cancer.
It must also be noted they failed to find any adverse health affects related to ETS among adults. ETS is virtually free of threatening the health of anyone, both young and old, according to their study.
Of course their findings were not exactly what they were hoping to find so they concealed the study from the public until the British press got hold of it. Unfortunately for that reason, they do not offer the study on their website but I can offer you an abstract on the study found here.
Another, much more extensive 39 year study done by the British Medical Journal shows there is no risk to anyone's health from ETS as well.
A quote from the two who conducted the study says it all: "No significant associations were found for current or former exposure to environmental tobacco smoke, before or after adjusting for seven confounders, and before or after excluding participants with pre-existing disease." -- Enstrom & Kabat, British Medical Journal, Vol. 326
To view that study in it's entirety you can do so here.
Looking at the scientific evidence, and simple logic in comparing today's youth to yesteryears, I can not even begin to comprehend the reasoning behind this bill other than to take away the rights from parents. Already parents have lost many rights in raising their children... We have young girls being escorted out of state by their teacher to have an abortion without their parents being notified. Parents living in fear of ever disciplining their children due to political correctness run amuck and the term "child abuse" being exploited. Public schools not allowing packaged lunches from home containing foods that have been deemed "less than ideal" by the government. And so forth... The list is endless.
It comes down to, simply said, the bill is unconstitutional. Wrong. Disgusting... Goes against everything America stands for. Un-American sums it up best.
How many more rights of parents must we steal before we can be content? And for those without kids who smoke... Knowing they can no longer smoke around their kids, and not just in the car as we both know should this pass it will stem to the home as well, who is going to even want a child? Not to say the pleasure of smoking comes before raising a child but.... Why would I want a child in this country knowing I can not raise him or her how I see best?
The decision for a parent to smoke around his or her child needs to be left up to the parent. Not the government. Especially considering the lack of scientific evidence to back any claims of justifying this bill of stealing parent's rights as Gary Smith, the one who proposed the bill, likes to say, "I'm just trying to protect those who cannot protect themselves." Care to back that by any scientific evidence Gary?
I urge you to strongly consider the repercussions of this bill. How this measure will eventually stem to the home and other areas outside the car. How this measure will take away rights from parents. Other rights too that soon may be infringed upon of both the parent and smoker should this bill pass.
I thank you for your time and consideration on the matter.
-- NAME
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
