Can gun owners please stop acting like theyre going to go to war with the government?

[Sheik]

was that while you were trying on those skinny jeans and drinking your fufu diet drink?

Close, it was while I was putting out the fire in your wife's panties that I started.

 

[dbair1967]

Close, it was while I was putting out the fire in your wife's panties that I started.

You checked my boo?

 

[lons]

He could ban cigarettes and save more lives, but doesn't. 400,000 people a year in the US die of smoking basically.

Hell, I'm a smoker and while it would drive me freaking insane, banning tobacco products would save more lives than banning every gun made. heh

Wonder why he doesn't do that?

 

[dbair1967]

He could ban cigarettes and save more lives, but doesn't. 400,000 people a year in the US die of smoking basically.

Hell, I'm a smoker and while it would drive me freaking insane, banning tobacco products would save more lives than banning every gun made. heh

Wonder why he doesn't do that?

Doesnt help with his master plan.

 

[Hoofbite]

Wish I would have gotten in on this before it got diverted into a dozen other topics.

But yes, these fucking idiots who think they can fight the government are ridiculous. The only chance they would have is that the person ordering the troops would have too much heart to make such a call or that the troops themselves would disregard such orders.

Other than that, they wouldn't stand a fucking a chance.

 

[Hoofbite]

He could ban cigarettes and save more lives, but doesn't. 400,000 people a year in the US die of smoking basically.

Hell, I'm a smoker and while it would drive me freaking insane, banning tobacco products would save more lives than banning every gun made. heh

Wonder why he doesn't do that?

Oh.....cigarrettes. And swimming pools too, right? That was one I heard because "X" number of kids die in them each year. People actually said this with dignity and thought it made sense. Here, I'll throw another on there for you. Fast food.

But here's my response.

Until some fucking nut-job kid walks into a school with a swimming pool, carton of cigarettes, or bag of french fries in their backpack and drowns, suffocates or force-feeds a class full of kids to death, lets go ahead and leave these bullshit comparisons out the discussion.

 

[peplaw06]

CDC says 3,400 nonsmokers die from lung cancer each year from second hand smoke exposure. And 46,000 nonsmokers die annually from heart disease caused by second hand smoke exposure.

 

[Iamtdg]

CDC says 3,400 nonsmokers die from lung cancer each year from second hand smoke exposure. And 46,000 nonsmokers die annually from heart disease caused by second hand smoke exposure.

How would they know that? I mean, how do they quantify the amount of second hand smoke it takes to qualify for a participant in the smoke/cancer research? 77% of statistics are all made up.

 

[peplaw06]

Well, 90% of lung cancer occurrences are caused by cigarettes. If someone wasn't a smoker and got lung cancer, then that person is part of this stat.

As far as heart disease, http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5745a3.htm

 

[Iamtdg]

Well, 90% of lung cancer occurrences are caused by cigarettes. If someone wasn't a smoker and got lung cancer, then that person is part of this stat.

As far as heart disease, http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5745a3.htm

Things get created, stats-wise, when there is an agenda.

How would they get those numbers? But, I suppose all you need is numbers and it sways the general public.

Not saying the numbers aren't right, but more questioning how the numbers are acquired.

 

[peplaw06]

Things get created, stats-wise, when there is an agenda.

How would they get those numbers? But, I suppose all you need is numbers and it sways the general public.

Not saying the numbers aren't right, but more questioning how the numbers are acquired.

What do you mean how would they get numbers? The same way everyone gets numbers. By counting.

When someone is diagnosed with lung cancer caused by smoke exposure, they are asked if they are/were a smoker. If not, that's one.

 

[Iamtdg]

I more meant the claims of second hand smoke.

 

[peplaw06]

Not sure I follow. They can determine what caused lung cancer... It's 90% of all lung cancer cases. If the person was not a smoker, then it's gotta be caused by second hand smoke.

 

[dbair1967]

smoking is bad

 

[superpunk]

Oh.....cigarrettes. And swimming pools too, right? That was one I heard because "X" number of kids die in them each year. People actually said this with dignity and thought it made sense. Here, I'll throw another on there for you. Fast food.

But here's my response.

Until some fucking nut-job kid walks into a school with a swimming pool, carton of cigarettes, or bag of french fries in their backpack and drowns, suffocates or force-feeds a class full of kids to death, lets go ahead and leave these bullshit comparisons out the discussion.

nah man it's legit.

remember that great war where they threw cigarettes at each other?

 

[Theebs]

Wish I would have gotten in on this before it got diverted into a dozen other topics.

But yes, these fucking idiots who think they can fight the government are ridiculous. The only chance they would have is that the person ordering the troops would have too much heart to make such a call or that the troops themselves would disregard such orders.

Other than that, they wouldn't stand a fucking a chance.

Yea like you didn't see the 90210 episode where Scottie killed himself and have a life altering moment like us.

 

[Iamtdg]

Not sure I follow. They can determine what caused lung cancer... It's 90% of all lung cancer cases. If the person was not a smoker, then it's gotta be caused by second hand smoke.

They can't prove the second hand smoke theory because of the huge range of the second hand smoke that could be ingested in various environments. So, it's mostly throwing darts with second hand smoke.

BTW I don't smoke, so I'm not advocating one way or the other.