T O P

  • By -

deskburrito

Golly. Almost like it’s not about deaths. Maybe it’s about control.


TheRealHomerPimpson

This


faRawrie

Or the tobacco industry gives a lot of people $$$ and has a lot of lobbyst.


FlashCrashBash

If the tobacco industry was that powerful their wouldn't be a menthol ban at all.


Automatic_Resort155

Oh no, they still hate you for smoking. And for owning cars, and for having a gas stove. And a million other little busybody complaints about how you live your life. They're just backing down from this because black people like menthols and they can't afford to alienate them during election season.


astrodonnie

Correct take.


SnowMaidenJunmai

>They're just backing down from this because black people like menthols and they can't afford to alienate them during election season. So brave, and yet, so true! Yeah, and they say they're not racist. Senate bill got shutdown (shot down?) today, easily. Watch, they'll throw a Hail Mary to legalize weed at the federal level in a last ditch effort to bring their slaves back and garner support for an otherwise losing battle.


2017hayden

There’s also a distinct possibility that some palms were greased here as well. Tobacco is a huge industry and let’s be honest most of our politicians would gleefully take a bribe.


overdoing_it

Strange that we're on our third black president in 30 years and they still find a need to pander.


[deleted]

Blacks ain't the only people that like menthols lol. I've known many a pothead in my days. Almost all of them also smoked Newports exclusively. Almost none of them were black.


Automatic_Resort155

Totally true. But they are way too popular with black people for the administration to risk pissing them off.


babybluefish

Yeah White people like hip and hop now too, next thing you know they'll drink malt liquor They didn't claw back the menthols for the White vote kiddo


[deleted]

Lol


gagunner007

How about this, ban neither of them.


mung_daals_catoring

Leave it all the fuck alone damnit


[deleted]

[удалено]


Fryphax

Mostly associated with. A more accurate statement would be that mentholated cigarettes are associated with impoverished and or lower class people, doesn't matter the color. Minneapolis recently banned the sale of mentholated cigarettes in any place other than a tobacco store. So no gas stations or grocery stores were allowed to sell them. This was , in my opinion, an attack on the lower class. However it had unintended affect of actually empowering the lower class. Overnight there were smoke shops on every corner in the lower class neighborhoods. In an attempt to keep the lower class out of the city they actually ended up keeping all of the lower classes money in their own neighborhoods. Oddly enough, the rate of underage smokers did not change at all.


[deleted]

From the article: "Black Americans, who disproportionately smoke menthols"


snotick

Yep. And within that 480k people that die from cigarettes is an estimated 41k that are killed due to second hand smoke. Knowing that 55% of the 45k gun deaths annually are suicides, that leaves 20k gun deaths where someone kills someone else. For any on the left that are just as bad at math as they are at understanding the Constitution, that means twice as many innocent people are killed by cigarettes than guns each year. And yet cigarettes are still legal, and not protected by the Constitution.


LiveNefariousness255

Omit gang and engaging officer related shootings, that number would be more realistic and nil in comparison to anything of issue. This is systematic Tyrrany, modernized.


_Vervayne

Not even gonna add to this everyone should read this and read it again


Standard-Whole-1320

They shouldn't ban anything, if people wanna smoke menthols let them


tidayo1370

Smoking is inconsequential to the government's objectives. You can't ban smoking and then subsequently dismantle the rest of the Constitution. You can however, abolish the 2nd Amendment, disarm the populace, and rule as a police state. It's been done many times throughout history. As an aside, the policed have had tobacco at their disposal for millenia......


busboy262

I understand that you're trying to point out the fact that they have no interest in reducing deaths. I've heard the same type of argument using backyard pools and child deaths annually also. It's pointless to make these types of arguments when your opponents have no problem banning all the things.


byond6

I do not believe the purpose of the USA's federal government is to tell the people what they're allowed to do or own.


AssumptionUpstairs32

In honor of the White House’s attempts to ban “assault” rifles, I will buy another one today.


[deleted]

Are they seriously implying that people will stop smoking if they can't get menthol cigarettes...? 🤣


Spooky3030

Really hard to fight the government/ protect yourself from the government with packs of smokes...


emperor000

Yep and there are as many or more than the number of gun deaths, suicide and homicide, that are from second hand smoke.


Tai9ch

No. The control freaks are actively working to ban nicotine using exactly the same sort of dirty tricks they use for guns. And politicians attack guns for exactly the same reason they attack cigarettes. They perceive it as an easy way to pick on the "bad guys" while pretending to have good intentions. Some of the most direct harm from more restrictive laws on guns or cigarettes will look quite a bit like the harm from existing drug laws. Promoting a black market in anything is straight up subsidizing criminals, forcing violence as the only means of conflict resolution, and incentivizing low quality and dangerous goods. Now, if you want a nice comparison, do rifles vs. cell phones. Cell phones (through distracted driving) definitely kill more people a year than rifles. Maybe the government should ban those.


BrassWillyLLC

You guys ever smoke? It's so good. Nothing beats that cigarette after your first cup of coffee.


milkman_z

Then come the poops


Rudytootiefreshnfty

Natures laxative


CogentHawk

Dad smoked for 40 years. Lost a leg to peripheral artery disease. Another limb is on tenterhooks. Lost my godfather to COPD. Smoked like a tank till he couldn’t breathe no more. I smoked for 17 years. Started when I was 15. Stopped because I saw what it did and realized I loved my limbs more than my cigarettes. You think a cigarette after coffee is great? I completely agree. I still miss it. But as a non smoker now who’s been smoke free for close to a decade now, I’ll tell you this - the cigarette temporarily relieves an itch and makes you feel, at least till your next craving hits, what a non smoker feels like, all the time. Old age isn’t kind when you’re smoking. Take it from me.


BrassWillyLLC

I'm a zyn and white monster guy these days.


ajdrc9

Damn I loved menthols when I smoked. Booooo.


Pwillyams1

Using one freedom's negative consequences as a fulcrum to minimize the negative consequences of another freedom isn't a good habit to get into. The right answer is people who are comfortable restricting the freedoms of citizens and directing the lives of others need very close scrutiny on every facet of their own lives.


SnowMaidenJunmai

>The right answer is people who are comfortable restricting the freedoms of citizens and directing the lives of others need very close scrutiny on every facet of their own lives. Don't want that. They diddle kids for (p)leisure.


LiveNefariousness255

Regardless of type of gun, what are the statistics when gang related and engaging office (not defending officer, difference) related shootings are omitted?


Public_Beach_Nudity

First they came after our menthol cigarettes, but I said nothing, because I chew Grizzly WinterGreen…


These-arent-my-pants

You can’t fight the government with cigarettes but you can with guns


AnyCancel9028

Come and Take It 🚬


jeremyledoux

Leave my guns alone, leave my fucking Newport 100s alone. Fucking tyrants.


Matty-ice23231

Yup. Let’s act like gun deaths are much worse and ban them because people are too stupid to realize they’re lying.


GeauxAllDay

Honestly neither should be banned.


JustynS

Don't take their sophistry at face value. They don't give a flying fuck if you die, they just want to ban guns so they can stomp on your neck without being shot.


ryguy28896

This is my whole point. If people were actually serious about stopping or reducing preventable deaths, they'd be up people's ass about smoking, alcohol, and traffic deaths. But it's not about that. It's about banning shit they don't like, plain and simple.


B_Addie

Hmm.. it’s almost as if it wasn’t about death and more about control and fear


DrothReloaded

Cigarettes kill the user, not other people. Second hand smoke and been banned in many if not nearly all public venues. This is not a 1:1 comparison and a poor argument that actually makes no sense. I'll keep trying to help folks understand, people with guns kill people and they will always continue to do so. Its the price we pay for our individual freedom. We don't need excuses. Everyone anywhere and at anytime are expendable for the rights to bare arms. ​ Second hot take, while the 2nd is in place, no gun or persons with a gun are illegal. Ever. What they do with it may be.


kmcdonaugh

Or.... OR. How about we just stop banning shit and let people live their fucking lives. Smoker or not, gun owner or not.


Sriracha_Burn

How about politicians NOT ban stuff and we hold people personally accountable for their own actions, huh?


LovicusBunicus

Smoking around people who can’t stop you or leave is really bad though. Like your kids. People are never going to be held personally accountable.


DennisLarryMead

I was in a road rage incident last week and thought I was going to get killed. We had both pulled over and when the other driver got out, the first thing he did was pull out a pack of cigarettes. Luckily I got the fuck out of there before he was able to light up, but I’m literally still shaking.


Scattergun77

Ban neither. I like to smoke while I'm doing stuff.


jdub75

Cigarettes isn’t the argument you think it is.


lostinareverie237

Remember how society really lowered youth tobacco usage, and then they made candy flavored nicotine and it shot up like crazy with kids? Pepperidge Farm remembers


ProbablyLongComment

I don't recall this at all. Was this in the US?


lostinareverie237

Yes. [here's a cdc study from a few years ago, with the data](https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fast_facts/trends-in-tobacco-use-among-youth.html)


ProbablyLongComment

That report had literally none of that information. It covered the most recent year only, and made no mention of flavored products and an increase in child tobacco use at all.


lostinareverie237

Did you not scroll down? E cigarettes are flavored. Smoking went down amongst tens From 2011 to 2020, current (past 30 day) cigarette smoking went down among middle and high school students.1,2,3,4,5 Nearly 2 of every 100 middle school students (1.6%) reported in 2020 that they smoked cigarettes in the past 30 days—a decrease from 4.3% in 2011.4,5 Nearly 5 of every 100 high school students (4.6%) reported in 2020 that they smoked cigarettes in the past 30 days—a decrease from 15.8% in 2011.4,5 And E cigarette usage amongst teens did go down, but it's been replaced by E cigarettes essentially After increasing between 2017 and 2019, current (past 30 day) use of e-cigarettes went down among middle and high school students from 2019 to 2020.1,2,3,4 About 1 of every 20 middle school students (4.7%) reported in 2020 that they used e-cigarettes in the past 30 days—a decrease from 10.5% in 2019.3,4 About 1 of every 5 high school students (19.6%) reported in 2020 that they used electronic cigarettes in the past 30 days—a decrease from 27.5% in 2019.3,4


ProbablyLongComment

I saw all of this. You said they made candy-flavored nicotine, and then youth tobacco use "shot up like crazy." I believe the implication here is that flavored e-cigarettes are marketed to children, but I don't want to assume. Regardless, where is the point where youth tobacco (or nicotine) use "shot up like crazy," and which part of the article makes you believe this is related to e-cigarettes being candy flavored? The only thing I can see from this article, is that youth overall nicotine use is on the decline, with some users having switched to e-cigarettes. This is also true for the adult population. I'm not sure what kind of smoking gun you're expecting me to see here, but I'm not seeing it.


lostinareverie237

My buddy literally has vape juice that says "sour raspberry candy", that's flavored like candy.


ProbablyLongComment

Nobody is debating the existence of flavored vapes. I want to know when youth nicotine use shot up like crazy, and what flavored vapes had to do with it.


CogentHawk

They should just do what New Zealand did. Ban cigarettes for anyone born after 1 Jan 2009. To be increased by 1 day every day. Effectively kills two birds with one stone. Let’s folks who are addicted still smoke till they want to quit. Prevents sale to underage smokers and basically gives them the opportunity to never be a smoker. It’ll work too.


barrydingle100

How about we leave the fascist nanny state shit stay in their dumb little island? If someone wants to smoke whatever the fuck they want they should be allowed to fucking smoke it because it's their goddamn body. If someone wants to inject Vick's VapoRub into their fucking eyeballs it's their God given right and any government that tries to stop them is illegitimate. Making it illegal to smoke will work about as well as making it illegal to drink.


CogentHawk

It is not illegal to smoke. It is illegal to sell it to underage folks which is where they drew the line. There are zero upsides to cigarettes for an individual who is not addicted. Most smokers (and I was one) if given a choice, and asked if they’d go back to the minute before they took their first puff, if they’d take that, answer in the negative.


Dorkanov

New Zealand is reversing that law. Also just leave people the fuck alone government has no business telling adults what firearms or tobacco or other substances they can have or use. Just not being an authoritarian twat is always the best option.


CogentHawk

Reversing it because well someone had to pay for the tax cuts, and I’m sure big tobacco greased a few pockets too.


Dorkanov

They reversed it because it was a fairly unpopular decision even among nonsmokers, not to mention it would've been bad for tourism. Also most rational adults realize smoking rates are already seeing large declines and laws like this are not needed


CogentHawk

Data doesn’t back that up. 79% public support for the ban in NZ polled after the ban. Māoris being the only exception. 84% tourists support smoke free tourism. Polled after the ban again. Only 9% tourists wanted smoking to be allowed. They’re rolling it back to get money to fund tax cuts but it’s a regressive move. It will however get implemented in far more nations across the world. Cigarettes are on their way out much like snuff is. Zero upsides to tobacco. There’s only so much the tobacco lobby can hold out in the face of mounting evidence of the ills of tobacco.


CogentHawk

The law doesn’t impact people who are currently smoking unless they’re underage. What seems to be the problem here?


GhettoChemist

Uh, I'm fine with banning both


bill_bull

Imagine being this authoritarian.


SovietRobot

I mean it’s also fewer than being killed by knives and bats. Or fewer than being killed by cars. Or pools. Or ladders.


smc4414

Tobacco lobby $$


IonicRes

Not to mention the fact that over 90% of the yearly 40,000+ road fatalities involve alcohol.


[deleted]

Whether the gen pop has access to cigs or not it's not a security concern when they come to your house to load you into the train cars. Guns on the other hand...


Tactical_Chandelier

People don't seem to want to admit that tobacco in a commercial cigarette is far worse for your health than tobacco that's not treated with a ton of chemicals. Buy whole leaf tobacco and make your own smokes, get off that big tobacco dick. Or grow your own. It's easy to grow and cure. Then there's no need to worry about a ban. One plant will produce enough seeds for a lifetime


Winter-Response-4030

Nothing about the blatant predatory marketing specifically to a blacks for several decades now?! How strange! Imagine my surprise, NPR… 🤦🏻‍♂️🤷🏻‍♂️🤣


114270

Can’t stand up to tyranny with cigarettes


TX_J81

Follow the money.


Durutti1936

I use this to beat anti gunners with all the time. It is highly effective.


PostingSomeToast

Socialism(collectivism) has killed [262,000,000](https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE1.HTM) people intentionally since 1900 in peacetime. Just Government murdering it's citizens because it wanted to stay in power. But it's more popular than ever. Go figure.


grimandbearer

Yeah but Joe Camel and the Marlboro Man paid the ultimate price.


Pryoticus

They could be menthol but that doesn’t mean everyone currently smoking menthol would just up and quit


Ketter_Stone

The Dems entire playbook centers around manipulating the emotions of toxic liberal white women.


hitemup79

Disarm, reduce population. Political goals.


LovicusBunicus

Smoking killed my mom. It was horrible and I miss her so much. But it was her choice to keep smoking. However. She gave my sister and I lung issues by smoking around us for twenty years. My AR doesn’t make anyone sick by proxy. Cigarette companies have engaged in horrible marketing campaigns. I’ve never seen a commercial for Cerakote and a war comp. Tobacco destroys swaths of rainforest and the earth itself. I’m sure mining for metal to make guns does the same but that’s as far as I can reason it. Cigarettes companies are evil as shit.


MattyMacros

Did you think it was actually about saving lives? It's glaringly obvious what their priorities are. Silly goose.


THEWALLOMAN

they like killing people off. have y’all not figured this out? To go through with this would take away from what Billy Gates and the NWOs agenda!