I don’t think that word means what you think it means.
As Miller so helpfully pointed out, there is a clear difference between a legal product and a product being used legally.
maybe if non-smokers weren’t so hypocritical lyers. here in Cleveland, the sin tax on alcohol and tobacco is NOT used for anti-smoking measures (note nothing about drinking) but money is used to subsidize sports teams
It’s perfectly legal to get drunk. Does that mean a drunk driver isn’t to blame if they injure someone?
A product, when used legally- is always legal.
It is absolutely not. It is the “I hate the effect the sin has on me” defence.
A huge problem with “hating the sin” when it comes to homophobia is that they hate something that in no way harms them.
I hate getting holes burned into me. I hate not being able to breathe. I hate that someone cares about me, but not more than they care about their next cigarette. I am directly hurt and harmed by smokers. My reaction is a usual reaction when someone you care about hurts you: it makes me feel sad.
A mother two doors down smokes inside with her three kids. I know she feels love for them from what I see. But smoking inside with them is not acting lovingly.
Smoking around children is child abuse, plain and simple.
I’ve yet to meet a smoker who coughed and hacked that didn’t insist that their smoking “had nothing to do with it.” At least most other addicts can keep quiet.
Wait, the smokers you know cough and hack and then somehow don’t blame smoking?
LOL, ridiculous (them, not you).
When I noticed this thread it suddenly occurred to me that I almost never see cigarette smoking anymore here in Thailand. What there is is done in private and certainly not in any building open to the public.
I’ve never understood the argument that taxes should be used in connection with their source. Funds from a gasoline tax should be used to promote alternate energy? The tax itself is already promoting alternate energy! Revenue from cigarette tax should be used to promote cessation of smoking? The cigarette tax already encourages cessation! Should taxes on rich people be used only to help rich people? How best to raise revenue and where spending is needed are two separate problems. Is a barber, half of whose customers are plumbers, obligated to spend half his income on plumbing?
Which is not to say that I approve of government subsidizing sports teams! 
Do you mean Thai people smoking? I go to Thailand every year and there are 1000s of expats and visitors smoking everywhere.
I think the point originates in how the tax was “sold” to the voters. The lottery in Virginia, for instance, was sold to us as a revenue stream to support best-in-class education in the Commonwealth. And technically its true, that all the money from the lottery was funneled into the education budget. But the the amount going in from the general tax revenue was decreased proportionally, so that the overall education expenditure was not increased at all.
Sin taxes are almost always sold to citizens as a way to counteract the harm done in society. Cigarette taxes were supposed to support the healthcare and rehabilitation of addicts (tobacco and other substances.) But now we are seeing this opioid meltdown occur, and the available beds for rehab and detox are not increasing.
The money should have been properly earmarked for the use described to the voters. We made our decision by balancing those factors.
The one exception to my “hardly ever see smoking” observation is an expat who lives near me and is almost a chain-smoker.
I live “up-country.” Smoking may be much more common in prosperous resort areas. Note that cigarettes, while much cheaper than in the U.S. in absolute terms, are more expensive relative to the minimum wage. Locals who do smoke usually roll their own.
There’s also the issue of how to spend the $246 billion dollar Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement money.
This was supposed to compensate states for Medicaid spending on sick smokers. You’d think this money should go to, you know, Medicaid budgets and smoking cessation/prevention programs. Nope, there’s apparently no restriction on how states spend the money (being allocated over a 25-year period), and it’s convenient to dump it into the general fund.
“For example, New York decided to utilize its MSA payments in an elaborate scheme that would have made Bernie Madoff proud. New York receives approximately $800 million every year from the MSA and spends about $40 million on tobacco education, or 5 percent. On top of that scam, instead of creating a separate fund for the settlement money, the state government decided that it would be a terrific idea to disperse the settlement money into its general fund. New York then granted Wall Street the power to begin issuing risky bonds backed by the MSA settlement money. The only problem is that the settlement money continues to decrease every year as the number of cigarette users decline.”
Likewise, raising cigarette taxes with the stated goal of lessening the impact of smoking-related diseases should mean that most of that dough benefits both sick smokers and the rest of us who pay for health care, not funneled into somebody’s pork barrel highway project.
I don’t hate all the people who smoke.
If you’re older than 30 or so then it’s sad you started before you knew how bad it is. If you’re younger than 30 then I think either you aren’t smart or you’re an ass who doesn’t care. You have been told numerous times that smoking is bad for you and the people around you. Why the hell did you ignore that, start a habit, never try to quit, and not care if you smoke right by other people. (Sorry, angry at a specific person there)
I do not hate or even dislike smokers. I hate and dislike those who sell, make and transport cigarettes.
Cigarette advertising was banned from American TV Jan 1, 1971 IIRC, so anyone of age then knew smoking was bad for you, despite the best efforts of the poisoners who ran the tobacco companies. So I’d put the cutoff a bit higher. Ads were still making health claims for tobacco in the early '50s.
More and more, smokers nowadays are just the low-class shlubs I hate for a variety of other reasons. Might as well add smoking into the mix.
Smoking does actually reduce stress… but only in a twisted and nefarious way.
Not long after a smoker finishes a cigarette they began to move back into nicotine withdrawal. The time varies from person to person but by 30 minutes or so the smoker is feeling stress due to the anxiety of nicotine withdrawal. When they light up the next cigarette, that particular stress is relieved… until it’s time for the next cigarette.
Smokers keep reaching for the next cigarette because it perfectly manages the discomfort they feel from withdrawal pains, which they are only feeling because they smoked the previous cigarette. Etc., etc.,
It’s Lucky’s all the way down. 
Well, yes. Lighting up and getting your fix does reduce the stress from nicotine withdrawal.
But your *overall stress *level goes up.
That’s what makes it so insidious.
Seriously? It’s not legal to drive drunk, so if you drive while drunk, you are not using alcohol legally. This is weaksauce, I give this gotcha a 2/10.
False. Cocaine can be used by a licensed doctor as a topical anesthetic legally. It is still not a legal product.
It is for that Doctor. Can he be arrested for using it properly?