Schadenfreude's forum posts

Avatar image for Schadenfreude
Schadenfreude

1901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

31

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#1 Schadenfreude
Member since 2005 • 1901 Posts
Cigarettes are probably the most deadly drug in the world. It is harder to break the addiction to nicotine than it is heroine and most modern cigarettes contain thousands of chemicals and hundreds of carcinogens. Watch "The Truth" commercials and see me points.

Cigarettes are legal because the US makes massive BILLIONS of dollars off the industry... and money runs the west.
foxhound_fox
Cigarettes are certainly not the most deadly. Yes, the addiction is hard to break, but harder then heroin? Do cigarette smokers write in pain and scream when they can't get a fix? I think the real reason why it's hard to break cigarette/alcohol addictions is because they're both so readily available. If a heroin addict goes to live with his family in the country to break his addiction, he can't sneak into the pantry and shoot up when everyone's asleep. I bet if you had a heroin addict and a smoker both wanting to quit in rooms with their drug of choice sitting in front of them, the heroin addict would break first. There may be a lot of these carcinogens and chemicals that slowly kill you, but they aren't eating your brain alive and you're not going to overdose on cigarettes.
Avatar image for Schadenfreude
Schadenfreude

1901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

31

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#2 Schadenfreude
Member since 2005 • 1901 Posts

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/25/AR2006052501729.htmlhttp://www.webmd.com/content/article/23/1728_57309Caffeine_Trip

Interesting, I had no idea.  DARE fails me again.

Avatar image for Schadenfreude
Schadenfreude

1901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

31

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#3 Schadenfreude
Member since 2005 • 1901 Posts
[QUOTE="Schadenfreude"][QUOTE="chimpiki"][QUOTE="Schadenfreude"]

[QUOTE="ConManWithGun"]actually weed is safer than ciggarettes, weed has never technically killed someonekilltactics

And cigarettes have? Both simply create long-term unwanted degenerations of the lungs, mouth and throat. Since weed is normally unfiltered, weed smoke is normally way worse for you than the well-filtered cigarettes. Not that either is remotely close to being good for you.

A cigarette filter is no more than a cotton ball, don't kid yourself and drop the "well" out of "well-filtered".

Compared to weed, yeah, they're well-filtered. I'm not saying that the filter is keeping all the bad stuff out, but it's a helluva lot better than nothing at all. However I'm willing to be proven wrong. ConManWithGun, do you have a source other than Wikipedia that weed doesn't cause lung cancer, like a medical journal or something? I was under the opposite impression, but who knows.

hahaha did u just say cigarettes dont kill people??

"Not that either is remotely close to being good for you." I don't think so...
Avatar image for Schadenfreude
Schadenfreude

1901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

31

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#4 Schadenfreude
Member since 2005 • 1901 Posts
[QUOTE="Schadenfreude"]

[QUOTE="ConManWithGun"]actually weed is safer than ciggarettes, weed has never technically killed someonechimpiki

And cigarettes have? Both simply create long-term unwanted degenerations of the lungs, mouth and throat. Since weed is normally unfiltered, weed smoke is normally way worse for you than the well-filtered cigarettes. Not that either is remotely close to being good for you.

A cigarette filter is no more than a cotton ball, don't kid yourself and drop the "well" out of "well-filtered".

Compared to weed, yeah, they're well-filtered. I'm not saying that the filter is keeping all the bad stuff out, but it's a helluva lot better than nothing at all. However I'm willing to be proven wrong. ConManWithGun, do you have a source other than Wikipedia that weed doesn't cause lung cancer, like a medical journal or something? I was under the opposite impression, but who knows.
Avatar image for Schadenfreude
Schadenfreude

1901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

31

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#5 Schadenfreude
Member since 2005 • 1901 Posts

actually weed is safer than ciggarettes, weed has never technically killed someoneConManWithGun

And cigarettes have? Both simply create long-term unwanted degenerations of the lungs, mouth and throat. Since weed is normally unfiltered, weed smoke is normally way worse for you than the well-filtered cigarettes. Not that either is remotely close to being good for you.

Avatar image for Schadenfreude
Schadenfreude

1901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

31

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#6 Schadenfreude
Member since 2005 • 1901 Posts

Cigarettes are not around to be used as population control.  Cigarettes are still around because:

  • The agricultural tobacco industry in America would collapse otherwise.  Tens of thousands would be out of jobs and it would really be an economic disaster.  Entire primary, secondary and tertiary industries would be out of luck (from the farms, to transporting the tobacco, to the cigarette plants, to the convenience stores who make more than 50% of their profit on tobacco sales).  Can you say riots?
  • People have the right to smoke, there would be tons of legal cases counteracting the government's decision
  • The taxes that the government receives from tobacco sales are immense.  They aren't going to let go of that money

Besides, did Prohibition work?  Once people have a taste for something they're not just going to let it go, especially something as addictive as cigarettes.  A cigarette prohibition would simply lead to massive black market tobacco dealings, and this would lead to more crime.

It's illogical to smoke cigarettes, but even more so to make them illegal.

Avatar image for Schadenfreude
Schadenfreude

1901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

31

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#7 Schadenfreude
Member since 2005 • 1901 Posts
That we DIDN'T go to the moon is the stupidest conspiracy I've ever heard.
Avatar image for Schadenfreude
Schadenfreude

1901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

31

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#8 Schadenfreude
Member since 2005 • 1901 Posts
Pretty disapointing. To be honest, it wouldn't upset me one bit if this game got a score as low as a 7.0. I can name 15 things that makes the game horrible to me.FPSjohn
Care to go ahead and name those? I haven't played the game yet so I'm interested in seeing the pros/cons of the game.
Avatar image for Schadenfreude
Schadenfreude

1901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

31

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#9 Schadenfreude
Member since 2005 • 1901 Posts

Metroid Prime is the obvious choice for me.  The best game ever made, quite simply.  Graphics, audio, level design, controls and gameplay are all simply amazing.  I've never played a better game.

Contenders:  Baten Kaitos, Wind Waker, Resident Evil 4, Metroid Prime 2: Echoes, Pikmin 2, Super Smash Bros., Tales of Symphonia, Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes

The 'Cube had some damn fine games.  It's a shame to see it go.

Avatar image for Schadenfreude
Schadenfreude

1901

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

31

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#10 Schadenfreude
Member since 2005 • 1901 Posts

[QUOTE="LordAndrew"][QUOTE="MAILER_DAEMON"]Oh, and LordAndrew, I've been posting here since 2003, and moderating here since April 2005.:wink:
MAILER_DAEMON
I was talking to the guy who claimed to be adding sanity to GameSpot. And then I quoted your reason for locking Rate My Collection threads.

Might wanna be more clear next time... it looked like you posted above my quote by accident. You were almost moderated for that, because it looked like you were trying to insult me. :shock:

And insulting a Mod results in a swift, clean beheading, no questions asked.  You got lucky, LordAndrew, reeeeaal lucky.

And I like this idea.  If "rate my collection"  are no more, then people will hopefully be more encouraged to actually make discussion.