Any smoker who knowingly exposes a family member to this deathly pollution should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. By making smokers absolutely miserable, we will stop this scourge. In many offices today even CEOs are forced to stand outside in the street in the rain like lowly beggars to get their nicotine fix.
quote name='onnig' date='Dec 23 2005, 01:25 PM' post='160432']
Here we go....
I don't own any stock or work for any tobacco companies, blah blah blah blah. The only brainwashing here is the good kind because I can see through personal tragedy and still perceive the truth by objective reasoning and not personal experiences so my brain has been washed from that kind of clouded sight. Read my earlier posts on how my non-immediate family has been affected by smoking since I believe there might be a lapse in your short-term memory. OK, so, I have made clear that there is no bias or partiality toward tobacco companies; now let's press onto the real issue.
You mentioned a "precedent" and yet you have not stated one court case to that fact. I have not seen one smoker being arrested for murder, yet. Therefore you either are misinformed as to the current law, or are confused as to the term "precedent", or just plainly don't know what the heck you're talking about. I think all three are the case.
Second hand smoke does NOT kill 100% of the people 100% of the time. If it did then every death today would be related to second hand smoke. It sounds like an absurd fact to point out since common knowledge points to this reality but I think I must state these ridiculous facts since the accusation is itself ridiculous: "They (smokers) should be prosecuted for murder if they pass second-hand smoke to others."
There are certain things today that should be considered murder but that's for another time on another thread.
Conclusion: Phantom22, look at the facts, not the fluff.
Edited by phantom22, 23 December 2005 - 03:16 PM.