Political Crossfire Forums

[antonio62]

Ssushi wrote: Lord Hargreaves wrote: Ssushi wrote: LHG, what on earth are you talking about?!? Nicotine is addictive, pain and simple. Heroin is addictive plain and simple. This is not about blaming others, it's a fact!

http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=22807
"As is now well known, nicotine is also powerfully addictive"

Heroin is addictive, smoking is not. Smoking is not compulsive, it doesn't create a pscycological need in the user. Its not addictive. Its a habit. I'm trying to use "addictive" in some sort of proper way, not in way the word has become interchangable with the word "habit", so we get people saying insane things like "I'm addicted to chocolate/TV etc"

I'm sure you are and I agree with choc and TV and the like BUT nicotine is a chemical!

http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=22807
"As is now well known, nicotine is also powerfully addictive"

Chocolate is a chemical as well. Nicotine is only physically addictive and you can stop of you want. Heroine you cant stop doing the only way to get off it is to either be weaned off of it or to get it from some thing else.

[Ssushi]

antonio62 wrote: Ssushi wrote: Lord Hargreaves wrote: Ssushi wrote: LHG, what on earth are you talking about?!? Nicotine is addictive, pain and simple. Heroin is addictive plain and simple. This is not about blaming others, it's a fact!

http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=22807
"As is now well known, nicotine is also powerfully addictive"

Heroin is addictive, smoking is not. Smoking is not compulsive, it doesn't create a pscycological need in the user. Its not addictive. Its a habit. I'm trying to use "addictive" in some sort of proper way, not in way the word has become interchangable with the word "habit", so we get people saying insane things like "I'm addicted to chocolate/TV etc"

I'm sure you are and I agree with choc and TV and the like BUT nicotine is a chemical!

http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=22807
"As is now well known, nicotine is also powerfully addictive"

Chocolate is a chemical as well. Nicotine is only physically addictive and you can stop of you want. Heroine you cant stop doing the only way to get off it is to either be weaned off of it or to get it from some thing else.

So it's impossible to quit heroine? Oh come on! It's very very hard but not impossible, as per nicotine...

Anyway this is all by the by and well off topic. This line of debate came from:

Quote: LHG Well in my mind the link between drug abuse infringing the liberties of others who don't take them is much more solid,

When was the last time anyone here had their liberties taken by someone on drugs and also someone smoking... Smokers do it all the time when they smoke in public...

[Jajo]

Lord Hargreaves wrote: Jajo wrote:
Main Entry: ad•dic•tion
Pronunciation: &-'dik-sh&n
Function: noun
: compulsive physiological need

The above quoted is how addiction is defined, the bits I deleted are in my view inaccruate attempts to clarify the definition to the reader.

An addiction is utterly compulsive; having another cigarette when you're trying to give up smoking is not "compulsive", rather, it just may be easier to have another than not.

An addiction must also be psychological to qualify - to be addicted to something, you literally need it, and this need is created in the brain. With smoking there is virtually no psycology involved (establishing it as different to alcohol and drugs), aside from say the usual difficulties of giving up old habits. Even if you have been smoking for 80 years, your body will not have developed a "need" for tobacco smoke, any more than if you're a serial self abuser your wrists will eventually develop a "need" to be slit. Rather, when you quit smoking and you experience a withdrawal symptom, this is merely when your body reacts to great change, it will need time to get used to not being pumped full of smoke at all hours of the day every day. Quite understandable really.

Jajo wrote:
I do agree with you though on the idea that the government should not force pubs to be non smoking as the pub is a private building where you are have inferred permission to be, it is not a public place however for major streets owned by government and are public property smoking should be banned.

You want to ban smoking in the street - as in, outside? Who are you, Stalin reincarnate? Sheesh :roll:

You are disagreeing with a dictionary on the definition of a word, I have provided evidence that the word addiction is not just a 'buzz word' and it is being used correctly. But you are saying that you know better than a Merriam-Webster dictionary, companies whose name has passed into the public domain and become a generic term for the dictionary and a subsidiary of the Encyclopædia Britannica. This is large and well respected company.

The definition even mentions nicotine in it, how can you deny that the word addictive can be use to describe smoking correctly, I do not see the logic. You say that part of the definition I supplied is 'in my view inaccurate attempts to clarify the definition to the reader.' Unless you work as a leading scholar in a field of English Language I feel that the view of a leading dictionary is much better than your own. In the same way that my view on how to treat the cancers smoking causes is greatly inferior to that of a Doctor.

Further more you then use an emotive argument where by you attempt to discredit me by comparing me to a man like Stalin, you seem to be so far against this I that you are have to resort to these tactics as a reply other than admit that you maybe wrong or supply a convincing argument to change my mind.

[battleax86]

Lord Hargreaves wrote: battleax86 wrote: Lord Hargreaves wrote: Smoking is not an addiction because any smoker can stop smoking whenever they feel like it. An addiction is something you find impossible to give up, but people stop smoking all across the country every day. Smoking is much better and more accurately described as a habit.
I don't know if the British have some super-strong willpower that Americans don't possess, but over here, people usually need help to quit smoking, be it through a patch, special gum, or some other method. Smoking is indeed addictive and tobacco is on the same level as any other narcotic, albeit one that takes longer to kill.

Those things can help some people, but it isn't necessary to buy patches to quit smoking. You just... stop. When you give up smoking, it is true you'll probably feel withdrawal symptoms, but this does not make it "addictive".
If it were not addictive, why does one go through withdrawal symptoms? I've seen smokers who've gone too long without a cigarette. Many of them begin low-level, uncontrollable shaking, quickly become irritable, and can think of nothing but getting another cigarette. It's almost the same type of withdrawal symptoms (albeit lesser in scale) that a heroin addict goes through. If tobacco were not addictive in the same way that, say, going to the cinema every Friday night is not addictive (just a social habit), then people would not need these chemical devices to quit smoking. They could just stop.

Lord Hargreaves wrote: An addiction is utterly compulsive; having another cigarette when you're trying to give up smoking is not "compulsive", rather, it just may be easier to have another than not.
If something that you know has the potential to kill you can override your will to stop doing it and get you to do it again, it is truly addictive.

[antonio62]

Ssushi wrote: antonio62 wrote: Ssushi wrote: Lord Hargreaves wrote: Ssushi wrote: LHG, what on earth are you talking about?!? Nicotine is addictive, pain and simple. Heroin is addictive plain and simple. This is not about blaming others, it's a fact!

http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=22807
"As is now well known, nicotine is also powerfully addictive"

Heroin is addictive, smoking is not. Smoking is not compulsive, it doesn't create a pscycological need in the user. Its not addictive. Its a habit. I'm trying to use "addictive" in some sort of proper way, not in way the word has become interchangable with the word "habit", so we get people saying insane things like "I'm addicted to chocolate/TV etc"

I'm sure you are and I agree with choc and TV and the like BUT nicotine is a chemical!

http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=22807
"As is now well known, nicotine is also powerfully addictive"

Chocolate is a chemical as well. Nicotine is only physically addictive and you can stop of you want. Heroine you cant stop doing the only way to get off it is to either be weaned off of it or to get it from some thing else.

So it's impossible to quit heroine? Oh come on! It's very very hard but not impossible, as per nicotine...

Anyway this is all by the by and well off topic. This line of debate came from:

Not impossible but incredibly difficult to go cold turkey where as smoking isn't really difficult to do if you really want to. Your right this has gone off topic so I'll leave it at that.

[johnz]

Lord Hargreaves wrote: It is none of your business what I smoke

greavesey
If you are a public place it is because in public you are subjecting other people to your habit and we cant have that.

[Pebble]

johnz wrote: Lord Hargreaves wrote: It is none of your business what I smoke

greavesey
If you are a public place it is because in public you are subjecting other people to your habit and we cant have that.

Also on that note...do you support the legalisation of Cannabis and Crack then?

[johnz]

Pebble wrote: johnz wrote: Lord Hargreaves wrote: It is none of your business what I smoke

greavesey
If you are a public place it is because in public you are subjecting other people to your habit and we cant have that.

Also on that note...do you support the legalisation of Cannabis and Crack then?

I dont support anything that brings drug use into any public areas including parks and other isolated areas, its also unfortunate because i know people will be smoking cannabis and crack untill the day george bush blows the world up.

[antonio62]

johnz wrote: Pebble wrote: johnz wrote: Lord Hargreaves wrote: It is none of your business what I smoke

greavesey
If you are a public place it is because in public you are subjecting other people to your habit and we cant have that.

Also on that note...do you support the legalisation of Cannabis and Crack then?

I dont support anything that brings drug use into any public areas including parks and other isolated areas, its also unfortunate because i know people will be smoking cannabis and crack untill the day george bush blows the world up.

Why cant people do what they want with their own body?

[johnz]

antonio62 wrote: johnz wrote: Pebble wrote: johnz wrote: Lord Hargreaves wrote: It is none of your business what I smoke

greavesey
If you are a public place it is because in public you are subjecting other people to your habit and we cant have that.

Also on that note...do you support the legalisation of Cannabis and Crack then?

I dont support anything that brings drug use into any public areas including parks and other isolated areas, its also unfortunate because i know people will be smoking cannabis and crack untill the day george bush blows the world up.

Why cant people do what they want with their own body?

Who has said they cant?

As long as they keep it in private i have nothing to say but when they bring it into a public area its bringing people who choose not to take drugs into the equation and thats just wrong, punishable by a roundhouse to the face.

[Pebble]

johnz wrote: antonio62 wrote: johnz wrote: Pebble wrote: johnz wrote: Lord Hargreaves wrote: It is none of your business what I smoke

greavesey
If you are a public place it is because in public you are subjecting other people to your habit and we cant have that.

Also on that note...do you support the legalisation of Cannabis and Crack then?

I dont support anything that brings drug use into any public areas including parks and other isolated areas, its also unfortunate because i know people will be smoking cannabis and crack untill the day george bush blows the world up.

Why cant people do what they want with their own body?

Who has said they cant?

That was directed at LHG by the way, I wasn't criticising you ;)

[battleax86]

johnz wrote: its also unfortunate because i know people will be smoking cannabis and crack untill the day george bush blows the world up.
Get ready. His finger's on the trigger. :wink:














:roll:

[antonio62]

johnz wrote: antonio62 wrote: johnz wrote: Pebble wrote: johnz wrote: Lord Hargreaves wrote: It is none of your business what I smoke

greavesey
If you are a public place it is because in public you are subjecting other people to your habit and we cant have that.

Also on that note...do you support the legalisation of Cannabis and Crack then?

I dont support anything that brings drug use into any public areas including parks and other isolated areas, its also unfortunate because i know people will be smoking cannabis and crack untill the day george bush blows the world up.

Why cant people do what they want with their own body?

Who has said they cant?

As long as they keep it in private i have nothing to say but when they bring it into a public area its bringing people who choose not to take drugs into the equation and thats just wrong, punishable by a roundhouse to the face.

How dose it affect you if it is in say a public park?

[johnz]

antonio62 wrote: johnz wrote: antonio62 wrote: johnz wrote: Pebble wrote: johnz wrote: Lord Hargreaves wrote: It is none of your business what I smoke

greavesey
If you are a public place it is because in public you are subjecting other people to your habit and we cant have that.

Also on that note...do you support the legalisation of Cannabis and Crack then?

I dont support anything that brings drug use into any public areas including parks and other isolated areas, its also unfortunate because i know people will be smoking cannabis and crack untill the day george bush blows the world up.

Why cant people do what they want with their own body?

Who has said they cant?

As long as they keep it in private i have nothing to say but when they bring it into a public area its bringing people who choose not to take drugs into the equation and thats just wrong, punishable by a roundhouse to the face.

How dose it affect you if it is in say a public park?

It doesnt because i don't go into parks, but for anyone who does then needles littered on the floor cant be very nice, or walking past groups of smack heads that hang around.
I guess It's all about respect in both directions, people who take drugs cant help themselves and locking them up in prisons for petty crimes to feed the habbit is not the answer in my book.