Smoking Bill in Oregon

Last Updated:

  1. Bob Maxey

    Bob Maxey Well-Known Member

    A new bill is being proposed by the idiots in Oregon that would make possession of cigarettes without a written doctor's prescription punishable by one year in prison and/or a $6300.00 fine.

    Oregon wants to make cigarettes a schedule 3 drug.

  2. Mayhem

    Mayhem Well-Known Member Contributor

    Idiots is right.. Even as a non-smoker (former, that is) I feel smokers are getting a bad rap and have to put up with a bunch of crap that they otherwise shouldn't have to.
  3. jefboyardee

    jefboyardee Well-Known Member

    Never seen a prescription for smoking...
  4. MoodyBlues

    MoodyBlues - Crazy peacock person -

    Well, the logical thinker in me sees a big problem here--doctors aren't supposed to do anything to harm a patient, so how could they prescribe something that kills? :confused: I mean something whose only effects are harmful, unlike drugs that do good but may have harmful side effects.

    I can understand that, sort of, but it still doesn't make the logic of it all work, as physicians are supposed to "first, do no harm."
  5. Bob Maxey

    Bob Maxey Well-Known Member

    Smokes are legal and there is likely a way a doctor can prescribe should the law pass. And I doubt it will. There will be likely a few in the Cig Prescription business just like the dopers have in those quasi-legal MJ states.

    The whole thing is a mess.
  6. MoodyBlues

    MoodyBlues - Crazy peacock person -

    But would they? I mean, any physician worth her/his salt should refuse outright to prescribe cigarettes! There isn't one single argument that can make cigarettes necessary or warranted for a patient. So how would this work? :confused:

    Oh...maybe that's how it'd work! Like those 'pain management' clinics where the doctor walks in, asks the 'patient' if they're in pain, the 'patient' says yes, and the doctor writes a prescription--which has to be filled on premises--for oxycodone or similar. And, of course, they don't accept health insurance...or cards...just CASH. :rolleyes:

    No kidding.
  7. Bob Maxey

    Bob Maxey Well-Known Member

    This shows why we need to make following politics a full time job. We just do not know what laws they want to pass.
  8. big_z

    big_z Well-Known Member

    If this passes, which I doubt, I assume that because they will have "ended" smoking in their state that they will opt out of future payments from the tobacco lawsuit settlement fund.
  9. Bob Maxey

    Bob Maxey Well-Known Member

    People do not believe just how much smoking benefits their state fiscally. Not just Oregon, either.
  10. kool kat2

    kool kat2 Well-Known Member

    Bull x 1000
  11. Gmash

    Gmash Well-Known Member

  12. Gmash

    Gmash Well-Known Member

    I don't know about other states, but in Ohio the politicians sold off their rights to future tobacco money for a lump sum long ago. Now Kasich is trying to sell off the highways and turnpikes to private companies who will collect all of the tolls. Short sighted idiots.
  13. jefboyardee

    jefboyardee Well-Known Member

    Can’t drink Big Gulps in New York. Can’t smoke in Oregon. And they call this a free country.
  14. Speed Daemon

    Speed Daemon Disabled

    No, there is no such thing as a "bad rap" for people who insist on being reckless and rude in public.

    1. First of all, smoking isn't an inalienable right. The privilege of being able to inhale noxious fumes doesn't negate personal responsibility when it comes to not poisoning others.

    2. The technology to keep your smoke to yourself exists. Pot smokers have been very clever about coming up with devices for this purpose. Smokers have no excuse for not using these tools to keep their smoke to themselves.

    3. When it comes to selfish indulgences, the burden is always on those who indulge themselves, not the people who they harm with their selfishness. Asking people to leave the environment no worse than when they found it is hardly an unreasonable expectation.

    I've seen enough militant smokers hanging around doorways and other places where others must pass, blowing their smoke on others on purpose. There is no excuse for this! Hurling poisons at people is a criminal act under most states' laws already. I say that they should step up and enforce those laws and put militant smokers in prison, where they can smoke to their hearts' content.
  15. A.Nonymous

    A.Nonymous Well-Known Member

    The law is beyond ridiculous and that's coming from a non-smoker. It's beyond preposterous. The facts on smoking are out there and are well known. If people choose to harm themselves, that's their business. Nanny state much?
  16. kool kat2

    kool kat2 Well-Known Member

    Not all smokers are rude in public. Some deliberately smoke in the vicinity of squeamish people. Some people also deliberately use profanity in front of those offended by it. Rudeness isn't a smokers exclusive.

    1) i imagine its pretty hard to poison someone in the open air, especially with a cigarette or cigar.

    2) i imagine this is more inconvenient than carrying around a pack of cigarettes.

    3)so because its their burden they should be inconvenienced beyond reason? They already pay ridiculous taxes. What next? Wear a badge at all times to show that you're a smoker?

    Is cigarette smoke really that much worse than all those cars burning fuel? Is walking by someone who is smoking a cigarette gonna suddenly cause more damage than all the years of inhaling the toxic air in our cities? And is a rude blow of smoke really bad enough to be punished by a date with Bubba? Might as well send anyone who uses excessive profanity that way too. Its just as rude.
  17. Speed Daemon

    Speed Daemon Disabled

    1.) Levels of toxic and/or malodorous substances that you're happy to belittle as being no big deal are unacceptable by many.

    2. Not my problem, and it shouldn't be. I like to listen to loud music, and I make sacrifices so that I may indulge my pleasure without harming others. It's called being a responsible adult.

    3.) Not my slippery slope. :rolleyes:

    The last time I checked, in the US it was mandatory for cars made since the late '60s, and catalytic converters since the late '70s. These standards are getting increasingly tough. If car owners can live with it, then so can tobacco smokers.

    4.) There's smokeless tobacco, gum and patches for the addicts. You don't have to smoke to get your fix.
  18. kool kat2

    kool kat2 Well-Known Member

    1)no big deal when there's a whole planet to accommodate smokers and non smokers.

    2)again, with a place big enough for both sides, why the fuss? Walking by isn't gonna kill you. "but its offensive". But those courteous enough don't do it in areas where the offended have nowhere to go.

    3)fair enough. Still, inconvenience beyond reason for something that can easily be avoided and most smokers don't go above and beyond to piss off people. Like i said, rudeness is available in variety. My new job has the most smokers ive seen in one place in my life. The non smokers deal with it. The smokers have their smoking areas that aren't little glass boxes like some would like them to be. Everyone gets by just fine there so why not other places? Just because one smoker behaves a certain way doesn't mean we should pass laws that prohibit that behavior and more. Not all smokers are inconsiderate or rude.

    Standards or not, the smell of tobacco isn't any worse.

    4) there's also beer and vodka, krispy kreme and mom's donuts, hockey and chess, android and apple. If i prefer one to the other then ill get what I prefer. At least until its outlawed.
  19. A.Nonymous

    A.Nonymous Well-Known Member

    Being offensive is a bogus argument. I can walk through the mall and see tshirts that are offensive to me. Heck, I can see 12 yr olds who dress like whores in the mall. That's offensive to me, but 100% legal.

    I don't buy the second hand smoke argument. It's bogus at all. You might have an argument if you sat around in a smoke filled room all day long, but spending 10-15 seconds walking by someone who is smoking hurts no one.
    Bob Maxey likes this.
  20. Gmash

    Gmash Well-Known Member

    Regardless, this bill won't go anywhere. Nothing to get bent out of shape about unless a politician craving publicity is actually surprising to anybody.
  21. Mayhem

    Mayhem Well-Known Member Contributor

    And I've seen a large number of militant non-smokers go out of their way to harass smokers who are nowhere near them. And I work for a company that mandates that you cannot smoke in your own car in the parking garage. Sure, you have a right to breathe clean air but that doesn't give you the right to harass someone who chooses to pollute themselves.
  22. Bob Maxey

    Bob Maxey Well-Known Member

    You are likely correct. That said, bad laws are passed every day. No reason to automatically assume this one will fail. Again, it likely will.

    This is why we must police the politicians and pay attention to the laws being considered.

    Here in Utah, the state decided that they own the rainwater that falls in Utah. Therefore, the state wanted to charge us for the rain. It almost passed.
  23. rootbrain

    rootbrain Well-Known Member

    Nope, can't smoke in prison now. Have to go outside on your break, just like downtown, LOL.
  24. Speed Daemon

    Speed Daemon Disabled

    I'm fine with that too. ;)
  25. BrianJB

    BrianJB Well-Known Member

    I was just talking with a friend about this the other day...

    I remember being a kid back in the mid 80's and still seeing cigarette machines everywhere, and I remember every other person would be smoking a cigarette and drinking a mountain dew....

    Boy how things have changed.

    Now you see more people with granola bars and water bottles....

    I remember people thought the people who ate granola and didn't drink pop were fruitcakes....

    lol, crazy how much things have changed.

Share This Page