H.R. 1256: No More "Light," "Low," or "Mild" Cigarettes

[Lucky7000]

You know, you'd think with all this "regulation" there'd be something useful as opposed to everything just being a way to squeeze more tax money from people when they buy cigarettes. Oh. Did I just spoil their fun?

 

[meesterperfect]

You know, you'd think with all this "regulation" there'd be something useful as opposed to everything just being a way to squeeze more tax money from people when they buy cigarettes. Oh. Did I just spoil their fun?

yeah how much is a pack of cigs now?
6 or 7 bucks?
how much of that is taxes?
like 4 dollars per pack?

that is some serious annual money, gotta be many billions.
"its bad for you, so were gonna make as much money off of it as we can"

i think about the money states make in cig and licor taxes plus lottery sales and wonder where the hell does it all go.

 

[YumiYumi_1988]

I know the number of smokers on this board is pretty negligeble

I think the number of smokers these days period is pretty negligible.

 

[ThatRedWing]

Light and ultra light have nothing to do with the carcinogens in the cigarette. The terms simply referred to the taste. Is there less crap in them? Yes, marginally. If you have a full glass of toxic waste and half a glass and you choose to drink the half a glass, you still just drank toxic waste.

 

[YumiYumi_1988]

Light and ultra light have nothing to do with the carcinogens in the cigarette. The terms simply referred to the taste. Is there less crap in them? Yes, marginally. If you have a full glass of toxic waste and half a glass and you choose to drink the half a glass, you still just drank toxic waste.

Great point.

 

[ForumModeregulator]

The demonization of a crop America was built on continues...whats next? No more "light" beer?

 

[meesterperfect]

Light and ultra light have nothing to do with the carcinogens in the cigarette. The terms simply referred to the taste. Is there less crap in them? Yes, marginally. If you have a full glass of toxic waste and half a glass and you choose to drink the half a glass, you still just drank toxic waste.

and no ones saying that cigs are good for ya.
and a full glass of toxic waste is twice as bad for you as a half glass.
just like 1mg of tar is twice as bad as .5 mg.

i found this chart, the differences vary about 50% to 100%+ in many brands of full and ultra light so in my mind those terms do have meanings and a purpose.
Alphabetical List of Cigarette Brands
http://www.erowid.org/plants/tobacco/tobacco_nic.shtml

 

[ThatRedWing]

The demonization of a crop America was built on continues...whats next? No more "light" beer?

Please, let's hope so. Light beer is an abomination that needs to be stopped at any cost.

 

[ForumModeregulator]

Menthol's were the first cigaretts I smoked at 18, and I had to stop because I was coughing up blood, from the fiber glass. But I haven't smoked since Feb this year.

The notion that menthol cigarettes are worse for you than regular flavors is incredibly naive...All cigarettes contain additives, otherwise they couldn't be smoked...

There is NO fiberglass in ANY cigarettes. Period. Just silly rumors.

 

[bustybbwlover]

^not all cigarettes have additives take american spirits for example (however, keep in mind their label says something along the lines of: additive free doesn't mean safer) but all cigarettes are bad for you and tho menthols or cloves may be a bit worse for you all cigarettes it's probably a negligible 'worse'...and indeed no fiberglass in cigs or filters

 

[ForumModeregulator]

I stand corrected, I guess my point was that all cigarettes do not contain only tobacco. There are levels of toxic chemicals even in pure additive-free tobacco and its smoke, such as American Spirits.

 

[bustybbwlover]

^unquestionable toxins are in all cigarettes...hell breathing smoke isn't healthy for you

 

[24788]

smokers are jokers - one of the flanders kids.

 

[D-rock]

Maybe as a form of protest they should now start making heavy, high, and harsh cigarettes and start advertising them.

 

[ForumModeregulator]

hahaha...i would definitely buy the "high" variety...

 

[MyBabeHub]

The government here in Australia they want to remove all branding pretty much, they want it to just be a plain white box with some writing on for every brand, so they look the same.

I mean its a stupid idea... They already raised the price of cigs to $15 a pack, I doubt that will stop people buying them. They are raising the price again in the coming years, which is going to suck.

 

[PlumpRump]

I think the number of smokers these days period is pretty negligible.

That's not true at all. The anti-smoking goons just prefer to depict it that way. According to statistics gathered in a 2009 study, apparently only 3 states have a smoking populace of less than 17% of the whole (Idaho 16.8%, California 14.9% and Utah 9.8%), so, essentially no matter where you go in the United States, even Alaska (24.2%) and Hawaii (17.5%), nearly 1 out of every 5 people smokes. I would not call that negligible in the least. In Kentucky the percentage of smokers is the highest in the country (28.6%), which means that nearly 1 in every 3 Kentuckians is a regular smoker. Also, these statistics don't even account for the "casual," or "social," smoker, of which there are several, which would make these percentages even higher across the board without a doubt.

This interactive map shows percentage of each state's population that smokes, ranked 1-50 percentage-wise, the average cost per pack in each state, and also has a feature that allows you to see what kind of smoking bans each state has in effect...
http://awesome.good.is/transparency/013/UpInSmoke/index.html

 

[YumiYumi_1988]

That's not true at all. The anti-smoking goons just prefer to depict it that way. According to statistics gathered in a 2009 study, apparently only 3 states have a smoking populace of less than 17% of the whole (Idaho 16.8%, California 14.9% and Utah 9.8%), so, essentially no matter where you go in the United States, even Alaska (24.2%) and Hawaii (17.5%), nearly 1 out of every 5 people smokes. I would not call that negligible in the least. In Kentucky the percentage of smokers is the highest in the country (28.6%), which means that nearly 1 in every 3 Kentuckians is a regular smoker. Also, these statistics don't even account for the "casual," or "social," smoker, of which there are several, which would make these percentages even higher across the board without a doubt.

This interactive map shows percentage of each state's population that smokes, ranked 1-50 percentage-wise, the average cost per pack in each state, and also has a feature that allows you to see what kind of smoking bans each state has in effect...
http://awesome.good.is/transparency/013/UpInSmoke/index.html

I'm going by what my eyes tell me, not statistics. Maybe just people are doing it more in private than in public. Or the fact that smoking in bars is illegal here.

 

[pete rose]

I'm indifferent. Most lights are just called "blues."

 

[PlumpRump]

I'm going by what my eyes tell me, not statistics. Maybe just people are doing it more in private than in public. Or the fact that smoking in bars is illegal here.

I honestly believe its this:

...Day to day, there are fewer and fewer places in public OR private where smoking is permitted... and the degree to which society shuns you as if you were lepers will increase. I'm only slightly exaggerating with that last point.

Smokers, increasingly, will go around the corner, or off to the side of a public place (even where smoking is allowed) as to decrease the chances that some ill-mannered, non-smoker will see them and undoubtedly make a snide remark or drop the ever pretentious "fake cough," on them.