Bill proposed in Oregon would make cigarettes prescription-only drugs

BTW

Please be aware that during alcohol prohibition, alcohol could still be legally obtained. By prescription!!!

This is not a "new" idea. Its a very very old one.

cocktails.about.com/od/history/a/prohibition_2.htm

Tired of Control Freaks

I doubt he even has the authority to do this, seeing as how for the USA it's legal and the USA depends on those taxes on the sales of cigarettes. Just saying you can't override a US law unless you secede.

reply to post by ldyserenity


Idyserenity

Again, you are failing to learn from history.

Anti-smokers need money to live on and pay their mortgages. They must continuously, year by year, come up with "new" ideas to "help" smokers quit.

The current legislative proposal is merely a flag. It won't pass yet. First, there will be plain packaging. Then there will be license fees for retailers to want to sell tobacco. Then will come the proposal that only certain stores may sell tobacco. Then will come the prescription laws.

Then they will lose it all. Smoking will become popular among the youth as a sign of rebellion. At some point the smoking rate will increase to the point where a ban is no longer tenable. At that point, smoking will be accepted again.

Tired of Control Freaks

Originally posted by ldyserenity
I doubt he even has the authority to do this, seeing as how for the USA it's legal and the USA depends on those taxes on the sales of cigarettes. Just saying you can't override a US law unless you secede.

Actually no. It can be done if someone were to push it hard enough.

For example, it's legal for you to purchase and consume alcohol in the US as long as you are of legal age.

However, there a a host of counties in many states in the US where the purchase (and even possession and consumption) of alcohol is illegal. We refer to them as 'Dry Counties"

Here's a link to the list of them:

List of dry communites

PS: I'm a smoker myself.

I am a non-smoker and I oppose this law, just like I oppose any laws prohibiting a vice (including ones that are already on the books for other substances that I am not allowed to name). What I can't see is that I see people as being for this law, yet are vehemently pro-gun or some other anti-government stance on other issues. So basically you people are saying that it is ok to take away the things that you don't like, but GOD forbid they take away the things that you like? Hypocrisy much?

The way I see it, if cigarettes are so bad for you, how about having the FDA crack down on what tobacco companies can put into the cigarettes? We are attacking the wrong problem here. Have the tobacco companies only put tobacco into their cigarettes and things will change drastically. Heck without the nicotine in them, I bet even their usage would drop significantly as well. But no we can't have that now can we? Can't upset the big tobacco lobbyists and all. Let's make the people suffer.

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
bloody oath, 100% agree with this step!
Good on him, he'll get the normal flack and abuse people cop when talking about cigs and their REAL effects.

Thumbs up, slowly but surely peoples health with be considerd more important than company profits.

I love it..

You'll love it even more when people have finally had enough of drunk drivers. There goes yer booze.

You'll love it even more when people have finally had enough of loud motorcycles. Get out yer peddle bike.

You'll love it even more when people have finally had enough of sex in ads, on TV, in schools where young teens are showing more and concealing less. Say hello to the Amish lifestyle.

They're already gunning for our guns.

If you don't stand up for the freedoms of others, who will be there to stand up for yours?

nothing short of an outright ban is acceptable. unless the law implies that no one needs cigarettes, so no prescription for them will ever be filled. that would be fine. but i doubt that is the case from the way the article comes across. they raise taxes on cigarettes(you pay HOW much for a pack of those??) and then put another middle man between the consumer. crafty.

reply to post by eriktheawful


As far as I have seen personally dry counties don't sell but cannot stop you from drinking. Or they don't enforce those laws very well, or anymore (we have dry counties in NJ, Ocean City is one and they bring it in from other towns and drink).

Wow I think I need to have a smoke, brb

They're loco about not smoking; thanks for the awareness! s&f

I hope this doesn't spread this side of the border, but somehow I think it will.

Using Organic tobacco, exercising usage with moderation, combined with healthy living that includes daily exercise can result in a positive, long, and disease-free lifestyle, as easily attained as that which a non-smoker can enjoy. The hard part is finding and affording that organic tobacco!

Originally posted by ldyserenity
reply to post by eriktheawful

 

As far as I have seen personally dry counties don't sell but cannot stop you from drinking. Or they don't enforce those laws very well, or anymore (we have dry counties in NJ, Ocean City is one and they bring it in from other towns and drink).

Bingo!

Just like the "speak easys" during prohibition!

But, the fact remains, there are places where the laws on the books not only prohibit the sale, but also having and consuming the alcohol. Even though as you said, it's hard for them to enforce, the laws are there.

My point was: laws like that can get passed (though I don't agree with them!)

You know I went back and reread that article again, 3 times to make sure I had what the reporter said correctly, and my gods, I wonder where the reporter got their background info from.. while they got Ketamine and Anabolic Steroids correct on their DEA Schedule, they were WAY off on '___', which is a DEA Schedule 1 substance, which means there's no accepted medical use in the United States, and therefore not available even with a prescription.

Me thinks there's much more to this bill now than just protecting people from big bad butts.

I don't see how cigarettes, in particular, could be added to the Controlled Substances list when they aren't a substance but rather a delivery method. Wouldn't it have to be Tobacco or maybe nicotine they'd have to schedule?

Im a smoker and I dont really have an issue with it. I wish I could quit. I have quit in the passed. I know that they are the most addictive thing I have ever done (and I have done everything besides heroin, but I think I did that one time without knowing it).

I would love to quit smoking if it was easy. I quit smoking weed, I quit meth, I quit coke, I quit smoking coke and meth with no problem. But Smoking Cigs is way harder than any of those.

Drinking is way easier to quit, besides smoking weed, than any of the mentioned above. Just giving you all a first hand understanding (not happy for that either).

reply to post by vkey08
I would make everything you mentioned legal compared to Cigs. Take all the chemicals out of Cigs than of course you wouldnt ban them. The nicotine is the key. Right??

Well just goes to show how stupid origamies really are heck they still drive 55!!!! havnt they heard of sammy hagar yet!!!

This was a hot thread until....

Cigs are evil people. Unless you have done every drug available you really cant compare. I dont have a problem with anyone smoking cigs any where they want. Indoors, I make the choice not to go there. Outdoors, smoke your self out.

Dennys doesn't care if the person does meth, coke, sterioids, EPO, HGH, etc. But they dont want people smoking in there establishment. Mcdonalds, JC Penny's, Best Buy, Costco, etc. They all feel the same way. Otherwise no one would step foot in those places.

Think about it!!!!

reply to post by Northwarden
Please, expand your comments based on mine. This a good thread. What if organics werent available??

reply to post by Josephus
Than why dont they ban Pipes?? They deliver all kinds of bad. Ban needles.

reply to post by hoochymama
Where are all the smokers in this thread?? I am one of you. But you run away fighting a good law?? ATS used to have some substance to it. Where is that at??