Which is worse?
4/18/2007 5:39:59 PM
smoking guns
4/18/2007 5:44:46 PM
for yourself or for people around you?
4/18/2007 5:54:39 PM
magic president killing bullets or no?
4/18/2007 6:51:38 PM
I just thought it was interesting that people scream for gun control, when in the US:12,500 people every year are killed from guns400,000 are killed from smoking
4/18/2007 11:54:59 PM
people scream for smoking bans alsobut when cigarettes kill you, it usualy takes multiple years, if not more than likely multiple decadeswhereas guns can kill in a split second, if not a few seconds or minutes
4/19/2007 12:04:09 AM
plus i can choose not to smoke or get away from smoky areas.i can't choose to not have some crazy motherfucker run up on me with a gun while im learning some german[Edited on April 19, 2007 at 12:10 AM. Reason : ,]
4/19/2007 12:10:13 AM
also from another perspective, guns can save lives...ie hypothetically shooting Cho before he shot the last 30 peoplei'm not aware that cigarettes can save lives]
4/19/2007 12:11:58 AM
Show me the man who's killed someone else with smoking and done so with malicious intent, and I show you the most patient crazy motherfucker in the world. That being said... it doesn't matter that much since you can't really ban either nor should you necessarily.[Edited on April 19, 2007 at 12:14 AM. Reason : ]
4/19/2007 12:13:16 AM
^i agree but i think the topic is worthy of discussionbtw i am a smoker and a gun owner]
4/19/2007 12:16:01 AM
Well, you can kill someone else with guns reasonably effectively. Killing someone with cigarettes (now at least) requires some impressive patience and tenacity. So... in terms of being a vehicle of evil I'd go with guns. I mean, you can't really do evil with cigarettes by using them as intended... except for suicide arguably and even that isn't a sure thing.[Edited on April 19, 2007 at 12:18 AM. Reason : ]
4/19/2007 12:17:40 AM
guns and cigarettes don't kill you, people using them do...
4/19/2007 11:28:39 AM
what a stupid comparison.
4/19/2007 11:30:05 AM
meh, only a little
4/19/2007 11:34:43 AM
not your post, the thread in general.
4/19/2007 11:39:01 AM
lol that's what i was referring to
4/20/2007 10:28:18 AM
Slowly dying by choice is completely different than being murdered.
4/20/2007 10:29:43 AM
clearly smoking saves liveshttp://www.theregister.com/2007/04/19/smoking_saves_lives/
4/20/2007 11:15:01 AM
4/20/2007 5:08:35 PM
^ whoever you quoted, is talking about "saving lives", not about "improving immediate quality of life".btw, that "improving immediate quality of life" comes with "deterioration of health of cardiovascular and pulmonary systems of body and dramatic increase in likelihood of various killer dieseases." so actually, smoking doesn't save lives, on the contrary, it takes life, albeit very slowly.which i am sure you know.btw, i am not calling for banning of cigarettes, lest you or anybody else jumps on me and tells me to mind my own business.[Edited on April 20, 2007 at 5:16 PM. Reason : just don't be delusional, that's all.]
4/20/2007 5:15:51 PM
^I understand all that.He's saying that guns can save lives. He's listing something good about guns.And I'm listing something good about cigarettes. Nicotine is actually a wonderful drug. It's also highly addictive and we smoke it, and it kills us and destroys our health. But it has its benefits.
4/20/2007 6:09:45 PM
nicotine saves the lives of tobacco plants because its a defense mechanism/poison against insects
4/20/2007 7:33:00 PM
Scenario:If I was stuck in a room with a crazy insane man with a gun and lifetime supply of bullets, then I wouldn't mind. Atleast I'll have the chance of a quick death.If I was stuck in an enclosed room with a insane man with a lifetime supply of cigarettes, then I would mind. To die a slow painful death where yacking blood and coughing until my face turns blue, does not sound like a fun experience.
4/20/2007 8:26:30 PM