pouët.net

Smoking Kills by Loonies [web]
screenshot added by Psycho on 2009-07-20 12:40:49
platform :
type :
release date : july 2009
release party : Solskogen 2009
compo : 4k procedural gfx
ranked : 2nd
  • rulez 49
  • is ok 10
  • sucks 2
popularity : 0%
 0%
  • rulez 0.77
alltime top: #2251
added on the 2009-07-20 12:40:49 by Psycho Psycho

popularity helper

increase the popularity of this prod by spreading this URL:

or via: facebook twitter google+ pinterest tumblr

comments

smoking kills .... so what? :)
rulez added on the 2009-07-20 12:59:17 by gopher gopher
I approve this message.
rulez added on the 2009-07-20 13:03:26 by break break
Piggy.
added on the 2009-07-20 13:05:57 by xeron xeron
Hasn't killed me yet. But I got the message :)
rulez added on the 2009-07-20 13:29:13 by datsua datsua
Nice
rulez added on the 2009-07-20 13:31:44 by aizen aizen
Loonies is the new Bono.
rulez added on the 2009-07-20 13:36:19 by decipher decipher
Smoking is bad except in france.
rulez added on the 2009-07-20 14:11:26 by xernobyl xernobyl
I've already had enough of the media and the new no-smoking legislation (in adult places like PUBS...ffs) telling me what's good for me and what's not. so i don't need to see it on the scene.

theme is irritating, so piggy.
added on the 2009-07-20 16:23:21 by button button
how about you do an image which depicts the authorized use of carsinogenic chemicals and food additives which are known to be cancer causing agents. ooooh, no...just pick on the smokers. :/
added on the 2009-07-20 16:28:11 by button button
Cool idea.
rulez added on the 2009-07-20 17:14:28 by Preacher Preacher
I like it :)
rulez added on the 2009-07-20 17:28:52 by Zeila Zeila
I like it .. to kill myself .. actually smoking a cigarette :D
rulez added on the 2009-07-20 17:32:50 by yumeji yumeji
What rtype said. Hope this doesn't make me look like a bastard. ;)
added on the 2009-07-20 18:12:08 by doomdoom doomdoom
Smokers are lame bastards anyway.
I hate smoke, but I'm forced to breathe their shit, and I didn't ask to.
I can control what I drink and eat (most of the times at least), but I can't control you being an idiot in front of me with your fucking cigarettes! ;)
rulez added on the 2009-07-20 18:19:49 by skan skan
cool
this is really great.
The bonuses are cool too!
rulez added on the 2009-07-20 18:43:48 by wullon wullon
Somehow interesting.
rulez added on the 2009-07-20 19:30:44 by stan_1901 stan_1901
Oh there are bonuses too?
rulez added on the 2009-07-20 21:22:32 by loaderror loaderror
Heh. I like stage 1 and 2 the most actually :)
added on the 2009-07-20 21:24:44 by loaderror loaderror
Haha, excellent.
rulez added on the 2009-07-20 21:27:08 by ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
kign
rulez added on the 2009-07-20 22:31:03 by aha aha
I find this nice - but the small graphics that build up the picture didn't really come through on the bigscreen :)
rulez added on the 2009-07-20 22:33:13 by Puryx Puryx
Good one
rulez added on the 2009-07-20 22:38:20 by Dano Dano
 
rulez added on the 2009-07-20 22:39:43 by v3nom v3nom
Thumb up for annoying those annoying smokers! ;)
rulez added on the 2009-07-20 22:48:15 by Sdw Sdw
they should print and use this one in every party from now on.

I hate when somebody decides I'm going to breath their smoke. Since some years now I usually respond to such citizens by going in front of them and doing my best to fart in their face.
rulez added on the 2009-07-21 00:35:36 by iq iq
What skan & iq said :) (thumb is for pic, not message)
rulez added on the 2009-07-21 00:53:55 by psonice psonice
brennebrenne
rulez added on the 2009-07-21 00:58:15 by T$ T$
btw, i'm a non-smoker, and i fucking hate cigarette smoke. but still, a piggy.
added on the 2009-07-21 10:13:58 by xeron xeron
nice pic, didn't notice the detail at the party unfortunately.
rulez added on the 2009-07-21 20:38:21 by thec thec
Nice technique. I am a bit surprised by the strong reactions in this thread. I would consider the message to be a pretty uncontroversial one, but maybe that is just because I am a non-smoker with no strong hatred for smokers.
rulez added on the 2009-07-22 13:48:23 by Blueberry Blueberry
Nice thingy.

Quote:
I hate smoke, but I'm forced to breathe their shit, and I didn't ask to.


Not that I'm much of a smoker nor a fierce proponent of "smoker's rights" - but how about your exhaust fumes?

We're all breathing eachother's fumes one way or another. I wonder what's worse, some cheap fuck's old diesel car or a few cigarettes :)
added on the 2009-07-22 14:00:48 by superplek superplek
*sounds of trying to tune radio but failing and only hearing interference*
plek: find me a way to get to work without a car that doesn't take 3 hours and cost a small fortune and I'll happily stop using my car. In the meantime, I'm happy to find you plenty of ways to get high without risking giving other people cancer :)
added on the 2009-07-22 14:09:40 by psonice psonice
Before going any further, let it be clear: thumb for the prod, comment for the message (if that's seriously meant or not, I really don't care).

That said...'nuff said! :)
added on the 2009-07-22 14:23:25 by skan skan
psionic: people who choose to smoke are the least factor causing the massive increases in cancer amoung non-smokers in recent years - I can assure you. You'd be better off moaning to your national Food Association/Authority who give licence to food manufatures who use chemicals, presservatives and processes known and proven to cause cancer.

strange that you've been told to be aware of "passive smoke" (which is proven to cause insignificant risk), yet noone tells you about the dangers of the food your're stuffing your face with every day.

smokers are the least of your worries as far as getting cancere is concerned
added on the 2009-07-22 20:00:50 by button button
but having said that, if you are in public and a non-smoker objects to inhaling your fumes...any smoker with a sense of decency should put his fag out _immediately_. i have actually never met a smoker who wouldn't do this.

so, really, i'm not sure what all this legal legislation and media demonization of smoking is about. it's ridiculous and just diverts the attention away from the REAL health issues in society.
added on the 2009-07-22 20:10:58 by button button
you should probably move this discussion elsewhere...
added on the 2009-07-22 20:17:26 by Puryx Puryx
Blueberry: It would have been uncontroversial before the smoking bans. Today it looks like a thumbs up to nonsensical, oppressive legislation and the BS arguments behind it. Sure smoking is horrible, but there's a categorical difference between banning tobacco in places where other people have to be (like say hospitals or schools), and places where other people could just decide not to be (like a given pub or other private establishment). If any significant number of people wanted a smoke-free environment to drink poison (the irony is subtle, isn't it), then that's a business opportunity right there! Why not be the first to open one of these smoke-free pubs? In fact open a whole chain of them if they're really in such high demand, make millions!

But the supporters of the legislation don't really want smoke-free establishments - because they could have had those decades ago. They simply want it their way, on their terms, anywhere they go and whoever else might be there too. And because democracy is the worst form of government (except for all the others) and politicians are opportunistic bastards, sometimes the bad guys win. That's what the symbol stands for. So it's not quite a swastika, but when it's used as a symbol in some artistic context of course it provokes a reaction.

Eh, sorry for polluting the comments. But I'll make up for it with constructive criticism: If it had been a smoking-allowed symbol made up of little skulls rather than a no-smoking sign, it wouldn't have been controversial.
added on the 2009-07-22 21:21:17 by doomdoom doomdoom
Hooray to smoking bans in bars. meh for the 4k
added on the 2009-07-22 21:33:12 by raer raer
Quote:
plek: find me a way to get to work without a car that doesn't take 3 hours and cost a small fortune and I'll happily stop using my car. In the meantime, I'm happy to find you plenty of ways to get high without risking giving other people cancer :)


Just trying to make the point that the "smokers give me cancer!" argument is, exceptions notwithstanding, a bit hollow :)
added on the 2009-07-22 21:47:18 by superplek superplek
BB Image
rulez added on the 2009-07-22 21:55:10 by Sir Sir
Quote:
you should probably move this discussion elsewhere...


why? the producers of this demo have made a conscious effort to mix demo with political propaganda. and as such this is an ideal place to discuss the demo's content.

+ what Doom said.
added on the 2009-07-23 20:31:17 by button button
rtype: oh come on "political propaganda" jesus motherfucking christ!.. oh shit.. now I posted religious propaganda too...
added on the 2009-07-23 20:59:08 by Puryx Puryx
see how easy it is to be brainwashed. and i bet you're not even a religious person. good propaganda becomes reflex reaction for the masses...and they don't even stop to analyse what they're doing or saying :D

meh, i'll stfu now
added on the 2009-07-23 21:17:21 by button button
Quote:
meh, i'll stfu now


\o/
added on the 2009-07-23 22:20:47 by skan skan
doom, we non smokers don't complain about the poluting/posining properties of your tobaco in our health, as we are usually drinkers for example and do get many other poluting gases during the day from cars etc.

What we complain about is that tobaco smoke is really __disgusting__ for those who don't smoke. The level of "disgustness" is such, just so you get an idea, that when Im in a colsed place I would pray so the smoker next to me was farting instead of smoking.

For me, this smoking thing is a matter of being physically annoying/disgusting to your neighbour or not (just like shouting or farting), or politeness in another word. It's not about health or whatever.
added on the 2009-07-23 22:34:01 by iq iq
EXCEPT IN FRANCE!
rulez added on the 2009-07-23 22:44:30 by __ __
iq: So, if I found drunk people really annoying, disgusting and dangerous (which they are), yet I liked hanging out in pubs because of the ambience, should I try to have alcohol banned from pubs? Would that be reasonable in any way? If I found homosexuality disgusting, should I demand that gay clubs and bars be turned into regular clubs and bars so I could go there without feeling sick? .. etc.

You have every right to be angry with smokers who disrespect you. That's fine. Fart in their faces if you like, that's very poetic. But you can't treat anywhere you go as your private property. Pubs, bars and clubs have certain policies, like, beer costs a certain amount of money, you can't bring your own drinks, sometimes there are dress codes, until recently smoking was generally allowed, etc. And you can't just demand that those policies you don't like are changed so they suit you better. That's not how it works. You can, however (unless you're part of a tiny little insignificant niche group) find some other establishment that caters to people like you.
added on the 2009-07-24 01:45:19 by doomdoom doomdoom
I find smoking far more annoyinh, disgusting and pointless than anything else. There is a big difference than the rest of the examples. I can't breath, it smells really bad, there is a fog of smoke in pubs that hurt my eyes and throat, I get into the pub and wish to leave the place as soon as I can but it doesn't happen just because half of my friends are smokers and I can't just leave the place or send my friends outside in the cold. And that's only because of the most pointless habit in the world, I mean you ignite a paper cylinder and inhale and exhale the smoke, I could never understand that! Of course I'd have to be addicted to it to understand it but I never did. I have a really bad feeling about this and here in greece a lot of people were smoking and I saw it also like a stupid trend, so it seemed more stupid that a meaningless habit (I mean, igniting a cylinder and eating the smoke, I know the description sounds crazy, but wtf? It's like there comes a trend that you are cool if you eat shit and everybody else is eating shit because it's cool).

In fact I would prefer that someone farted constantly in my face than being in a crowded place that half of the people smoke heavily. Other things are not so characteristically annoying, alcohol doesn't smell so bad, car emmisions cannot be avoided and are necessary and in open places and they don't feel so bad, all other examples given here are not as annoying and senseless as smoking. I am happy that it's finally banned in greece.

When I read the arguments of some smokers I see an addicted person behind them who tries to defy logic, like ok you get car emmisions and food poisonings so what's your problem with smoking in your face? Ahh,. it's not about the cancer, it's just that it's more annoying and disgusting than all other counter-examples and yet more of a useless trend here and you couldn't avoid it anywhere you go.
rulez added on the 2009-07-24 02:09:51 by dataguru dataguru
riiiight, so the real reason for the ban was because you and the government and these ant-smoking NGOs find smokers "annoying"? funny, that was never mentioned in the media propaganda buildup to the bans. it was all about how dangerous "passive smoke" is.

but anyway, the real problem for us (and all the other selfish non-smokers who agree with these draconian bans) is that these nanny-state anti-smoking legislations - like so many other similar situations with authority - will set a precedent. think of it as an acid-test to demonstrate our willingness to be dictated to. other bans will follow in the years to come and no doubt your precious alcohol will be another item on the ban-hammer hitlist. after all, "passive smoke" kills faaaar less people than violence and accidents caused by drunken drinkers and many would even say that smoke is less annoying than those loud-mouthed drunkards you often see wanting to start a fight with everyone in the bar.

In fact, I have already noticed the "anti-drink brigade" (they look strangely similar to the "anti- smoke brigade", for some reason!) winding up their propaganda through the general media. demonizing drinkers, just as they have done with smokers. let's see how you like the drink ban when it comes...

hmmmmm, let's see...what next? banning and restricting the internet because government finds its freedom and flow of information "annoying"? oh, wait a minute, they're already in the process of doing that! but then, it's no wonder they are shamelessly doing this - since they have already told people that they cannot allow smoking in their OWN business premiss. it's not such a big step from that to dictating to people what they can and can't read on the internet in their own homes....i guess..

you see, all these little infringments on our right to "choose" and make decisions lead to a wider road. you let them start with the small things through utter selfish reasons (ie: because YOU personally do not smoke and find it "annoying") and it becomes a trend. and one day - it wont be "eating shit" which gets banned - it will be something YOU enjoy.

but, yeh...hooooray for the smoking ban!! \o/
added on the 2009-07-24 04:17:30 by button button
Quote:
I get into the pub and wish to leave the place as soon as I can but it doesn't happen just because half of my friends are smokers and I can't just leave the place or send my friends outside in the cold


Uhm, so it's OK to force your friends to change their habits just so you can be comfortable around them? "can't just leave the place". Right, cause you have to be around your friends, so naturally they have to go out of their way to make you comfortable. And if they don't then let the police deal with them! Maybe you should look up the definition of "friend" somewhere.

Quote:
alcohol doesn't smell so bad


That's not the point. Drunk people are dangerous (far moreso than passive smoking), not to mention loud and obnoxious (to me at least, far moreso than passive smoking). They can be properly disgusting lowlives sometimes - scary, smelly, aggressive, embarrassing. Personally I don't mind, but I know people who are genuinely upset by drunken behaviour and I understand them perfectly well. But you know what they do? They make sure not to hang around in places that serve alcohol.

I find homophobia less understandable, but I can accept that some people simply can't watch two men kissing, say. I assure you that there are people every bit as disgusted by that as you are by tobacco smoke. But you know what they do? They stay away from gay establishments. It's simple when you think about it.

Quote:
and you couldn't avoid it anywhere you go.


Of course you could. We gave you almost all public buildings and all public transport. We didn't even really complain, cause it's only fair, right? And in the private sector there were plenty of smoke-free establishments. You had everywhere to go. But naturally your smoking friends would much prefer to go to some of those few remaining places they could still light up. Solution? Ban smoking fucking everywhere! Now your friends have to go out with you on your terms. Arrhahahahaha!

And rtype is right, it sets a terrifying precedent. All you people so happy that you managed to bully your friends into making you more comfortable, you'll see something banned soon enough that you liked, and it'll make you sad. I'll be the first to rub it in your faces with inappropriate procedural graphics. :P
added on the 2009-07-24 15:29:23 by doomdoom doomdoom
Ok, maybe alcohol and attitudes/violence is a bigger problem in some northern countries. Here in my place it's an uncommon thing but I hear that in places like UK people get drunken and become violent to other people all the time and it's common to see a lot of bad attitude near these places.

Ok, maybe I get a bit crazy about it but I see some smokers also reacting to the new law in a Zamanfou way. Smoking is such a problem in greece as alcohol might be in other european countries. There is some kind of attitude from some smokers here, like "I wanna do what I want, whether you like it or not, I don't give a rats ass!". When I can't understand the habit of smoking I can't get into the smoker's mentality. It seems a useless habits that also do so much harm to me (especially in greece where it's so common and trendy). I deliberately tried to get into smoking several times in my life but never liked it, my throat burned, it didn't taste anything, I couldn't understand what the hell is this? Maybe I should insist burning my throat till it doesn't feel it?

Look, I am not in the smoker's mentality, I am in the "can't understand why the fuck people smoke" mentality, plus this thing is plague here and I am suffering wherever I go (and it's not like a psychological suffering (oh gays kissing, I feel uneasy) or suffering from after effects (oh he got drunk and beat the crap of people). This one is direct suffering from the substance of smoking alone.

If I can ever understand this thing and can get into smoker's mentality I will be able to see it from another perspective. Else our arguments will never reach a point.

I only have to agree with the ban thing. I think they will ban more and more and more till all hell breaks loose, revolutions happening and the cycle starts again. I don't know what to say about this. I'd say I personally don't care till I will start to care because they banned something I enjoy. I will be hapilly waiting for your procedural graphics then :)
added on the 2009-07-25 00:53:08 by dataguru dataguru
Dobre jest.
rulez added on the 2009-07-26 17:28:02 by Pirx Pirx
:(
I'm reading my book in a park, somebody kindly asks me for a bit of room in the bench, and I say "sure go on"; then he starts smoking, and I have the leave the place and find another bench for myself, just as if he had switched on a radio to the max volume while I read, or started insulting me with no reason.

It has nothing to do with drunk people being dangerous or goverment or ngo propaganda crap. The situation of the bench in the park is nor rare. My complain has to do with the most basic and simple principle of minimal politeness towards your neighbour.

It's true that this procedural gfx does not criticize that, but makes a more serius statement, and that's another story. I might see doom's and other's point.

Yetl, please stop smoking in my face, please. Thx so much.
added on the 2009-07-29 01:52:41 by iq iq
iq: The smoking ban isn't about the right to smoke in public. Public open spaces are open to debate (although I'd argue you're being too touchy), but it's the one place that isn't affected by the ban that the symbol in question represents. Whereas private establishments, where non-smokers could completely protect themselves from this ambush you're describing by simply staying away, that's where the policy applies. If you think that's not insane enough, look into the reasons why healthier, less annoying alternatives to cigarettes are being banned altogether in many countries.
added on the 2009-07-29 14:04:33 by doomdoom doomdoom
Being too touchy if somebody sits next to you and starts smoking? When it's going to make your cloths and hair stink at the very least, and possibly damage your health too?

I don't think moving away is being touchy. Touchy would be following your advice and farting in his face (yes, while he's smoking a lit cigarette ;)

The whole 'smoking in pubs is fine' argument is pretty flawed too. If you want to go out and drink beer with your friends, you have to go to a pub or bar. Before the smoking ban, that bar was guaranteed to be full of smoke, it's not like you could choose to go to a smoke-free place, they didn't really exist, and if you found somewhere with a 'non-smoking' area you're sure to find some people in the group smoke so you end up in the smoking part. Sure, drunk people can be annoying, but you go to the pub to drink. That's what a pub is for. i won't complain about smoke when i go to a smoking club :)

Anyway, smokers, the argument is over and you lost - it's now illegal to smoke in pubs :)

Epic demo comments flame wars ftw!
added on the 2009-07-29 15:04:04 by psonice psonice
fart
Smokers are stupid.
rulez added on the 2009-07-29 16:34:13 by Zplex Zplex
Quote:
it's not like you could choose to go to a smoke-free place, they didn't really exist


So what you're saying is, you're a tiny little fringe group, so insignificant that the market couldn't provide you with a single smoke-free place to get drunk. Alright. So let's change the entire market by law so it suits you and your little fringe group better. Never mind the overwhelming majority of people who created the demand for smoking establishments. I mean, fuck what most people want as long as you can have what you want, right? And fuck all the people who lose their jobs because the policies you're forcing their businesses to adopt aren't profitable. And fuck all the principles of liberal democracy while we're at it - why should people be allowed to choose what sort of business they run anyway, whose silly idea was that?

No no, really, I like this way of thinking. Because you see, I absolutely hate loud music in pubs. Really, I hate that it's impossible to find a drinking establishment where I can go and talk to people. And all that loud music can't be good for my health either. And if I should ever happen to find a quiet pub, you know, my friends probably don't want to go there. They actually like loud music, see. Some of them even dance, and I definitely don't want to go dancing with them. So since I have no other options...

.. ah but, no, as much I'd love to advocate a mandatory no-music policy, I'm just not enough of a selfish prick. Can you teach me? :(

Quote:
you're sure to find some people in the group smoke so you end up in the smoking part.


Oh. See I thought you said you didn't have a choice. But now I understand - the problem is rather that you do have a choice and so do your friends, but your friends don't choose what you want them to choose. Ah, in that case, ignore the sarcasm above and try this sarcasm instead: what a good friend you are. I'm sure your mates are delighted that you're helping to strip them of their liberties so they can enjoy the benefit of your company.

Quote:
but you go to the pub to drink


Well, I believe the function of a business was traditionally decided by the owners of that business, but that was of course a long time ago. I think it's good that as you say the purpose of a pub doesn't include loud music, cause that will help me in my campaign to have music banned. I only need to learn to prioritise my own comfort above the rights and wishes of my friends and the majority of all other people. That's a little hard for me because I have a conscience, but you'll help me with that, won't you?
added on the 2009-07-29 20:53:28 by doomdoom doomdoom
It's so painful to see addicts trying to do everything to justify their dirty habits instead of just quitting...
people who smoke deserve to die, but only after say 80-90 years.
added on the 2009-07-29 21:22:57 by farfar farfar
yeah let me know when loud music gives you ear cancer
What's wrong with you people?

Quote:
It's so painful to see addicts trying to do everything to justify their dirty habits instead of just quitting...


And it's so painful to see otherwise decent people turn into self-righteous dicks when they feel they have a little bit of power over others. What business is it of yours? Nobody asked you to hang around in places that allow smoking, and from what I gather the problem isn't a lack of alternatives. So what exactly is it?

"Smoke annoys me tremendously"
- Then stay away from smoke
"But I want to go to pubs, shouldn't I be allowed?"
- Then go to no-smoking pubs
"But my friends all want to go to smoking pubs"
- Is it friendly to deny them that option?
"But they have a filthy habit!!!"
...

The arguments invariably jump all over the place because there is no single coherent argument that would possibly justify a smoking ban in private establishments. Like I say, outdoor smoking bans make some degree of sense, but if you honestly feel that smokers are disgusting creatures, why do you insist on going to the same pubs that they go to? Why not let them be disgusting all by themselves if that's the way they want it? Oh, because they're your friends so you have a right to be around them, even if it means they have to be forced to go out of their way to accomodate you. "Friends." Pfft.

Quote:
yeah let me know when loud music gives you ear cancer


Are you saying very loud music isn't harmful? Are you serious?

*sigh* thank you for missing the point, though. Which is that whether or not it's harmful (and it is), I can easily avoid it if I don't like it. And I have no right to demand that other people adjust and businesses cater to what I want. Unless I'm almost completely alone in wanting what I want, then there will either be other businesses catering to me, or there will be at least a niche market waiting to be exploited - either way there is no need for legislation. If I'm really only one of few people who want quiet pubs (as it seems I am), then there is no justification for legislation - I can't in good conscience demand that a very large number of people give up something they like so that I can have something I like. But then that's just me being oldschool. I know free democracies are very untrendy these days.

I don't smoke anymore, BTW, haven't in a good while.
added on the 2009-07-30 00:02:51 by doomdoom doomdoom
:Q
rulez added on the 2009-07-30 00:07:45 by texel texel
"I hate smokers and smoke and believe it can kill me but I'll still follow my smoker 'friends' into smoke filled rooms"

= a human lemming

"I follow them because I need to be around them no matter what"

= a person with childish emotional dependancy and a need to "belong" to a group at all costs. Basic herd mentality.

"I lack the social skills/confidence to simply let smokers know that I would prefer them not to smoke around me. So, like a child who wants to please everyone, I pretend I do not mind when asked that common question: "is it ok if I smoke?" I need laws to be enforced so I dont have to speak for myself and say that unfriendly word: NO!"

= an immature person with little social skills nor the ability to handle and manage minor/avoidable irritants in his OWN life.

"I listen to mainstream misleading propaganda about 'passive smoke' and bogus claims about the health issues it causes, when there is a mountain of evidance and research to the contrary"

= a media spoon-feed, fully passive consumer of BS....without a mind of his own.

Pro-ban types really are the weakest minded nitwits I've ever com across. Sorry, but you really are!

How on earth can you agree with government authority banning ANY activity between and among CONCENTING ADULTS, in their OWN premises? Do you people have no spines or sense of autonomy? ffs. uuuurgh.

AS Doom has already said, if you don't like smoke - FUCK OFF!! All you had to do was quite following us around like fking leeches. It's not difficult.

There is no outdoor smoking ban, so in theory I can still walk up to IQ, sit beside him and begin smoking. So, really, what good has this ban done apart from you having "power" to dictate to people what they can't and can't do in private buildings which they own?

anyways, you will pay for your feebleminds, because I'm pretty certain I can see a hightech technocratic dictatorship springing up all around us right now. it may be early days, but with compliant lemmings like the "proban" masochists just BEGGING for their liberties to be taken away, it wont take long to be implimented. And it's not going to be nice when we all finally reach the stage where we can't walk down the street withoput a permit. not even for you blinkered nitwits.

unfortunately I;m also going to have to suffer the consequences of your weak compliance to nanny-state authority and that's what pisses me off the most. MUCH more than the isolated issue of me and my friends and the rest of a bar not being "allowed" to smoke.

go live on an isolated isaland somwhere, ffs!
added on the 2009-07-30 05:40:22 by button button
yeah, that was a rant and i don't care.
added on the 2009-07-30 05:42:43 by button button
Just wondering. 20 years ago it was perfectly normal to smoke inside office buildings, all work places, etc. Do you also think it is nonsense that that isn't allowed anymore?
Nice picture.

I was a non-smoker for a long time before I started, and I have completely stopped smoking again by now. It seems my body can't handle the nicotine anymore, I just get sick.

That said, I really don't understand this self righteous bullshit. If people want to smoke, let them smoke. If people want to wear lots of cheap perfume, let them wear lots of cheap perfume. If people want to listen to music on the metro, let them listen to music on the metro. There is something called "tolerance" which can be practiced to great effect. You don't have to like what everyone around you is doing, but you can put up with most of it in the name of common courtesy, because we live in a society and if we want any kind of liberty and diversion we have to be tolerant of each other.

Of course that doesn't mean that you should accept any kind of odd intrusive behaviour, but you can at least try to be reasonable.
rulez added on the 2009-07-30 08:41:00 by Radiant Radiant
Nice pic. And it's wonderful to be able to visit a restaurant without having people smoking around you. The smoking ban rules.
rulez added on the 2009-07-30 08:49:35 by evil evil
CrossProduct: Bullcrap, 20 years ago company owners had the _freedom_ to allow their employees to smoke if they chose to. but at the end of the day, courtesy and common sense won and 99% (at least in most of Europe) chose NOT to allow smoking in their buildings. For the other 1% that DID allow smoking the solution for intolerant non-smokers, again, was simple: DO NOT WORK THERE - GTFO!

It worked the same with restaurants; very few even before the ban allowed customers to smoke because (believe it or not) even SMOKERS do not enjoy the smell of smoke while eating. The same was also true for most other businesses which dealt with the public, such as public transport. In the UK, smoking on buses and trains has not been permitted for well over 20 years.

These rules were decided by the people who owned and controlled their business because it made good business sense - and everyone was happy until they recently became infected by media lies and the government's more recent push to intensify their Lord-like stewardship over every aspect of our everyday lives and the choices we make.

It's so discusting to see people blindly agreeing to this ban, it really is! Not because I’m personally upset about not being able to smoke “in your face” but because the only thing that will prevent us _all_ being treated like children by governments and losing our basic freedoms is if we all stick together and speak out when we see other people's right to live their lives freely being threatened. Even if you find smoking "mildly irritating", you should have the sense to see that it is in your OWN interest to defend the right of your neighbour to choose the way he wants to live his life. it has very little to do with what YOU like or do not like. It should be part of your own natural survival instinct.

I can't stand alcohol, but if it was the other way around and drinking in privately owned bars was banned, I would be just as pissed off and concerned. why? because I would be sensible enough to realize that once all that banning nonsense begins, it won’t be long before something *I* like doing gets banned. That’s the way it works and is GOING to work.

but don't worry, personally I will still be in your corner voicing my discust at the drinking ban when it comes, even if it "doesn't effect me". I may even sit down in a pub with you and share a pint of beer, just as a symbolic two finger salute to Big Brother so that he knows we can't be pushed around so easily. :P
added on the 2009-07-30 14:53:53 by button button
doom: look, it's simple. Before the smoking ban, the majority (non-smokers, at least in this country) had a choice when going to a pub: go to a smoking place, or stay at home. There were pretty much zero non-smoking pubs. Why? because if you set up a non-smoking pub, smokers go elsewhere, and for any group of people going out there's most often one or more smokers. You can rant as long as you want, but the reality was that there really wasn't any choice.

And as for all the other bullshit arguments about loud music is annoying, or whatever else: yeah, I agree. But loud music will only damage my hearing a little, and I can wear ear plugs. Wearing a gas mask isn't so practical, and risking a horrible death from cancer is perhaps just a bit more serious than risking some ear damage.

Hence why smoking in such places is now banned :) You're still free to smoke, you're just not allowed to do it where it's harming + annoying lots of people. A bit inconvenient for you when the weather is bad perhaps, but you're no longer risking other people's health and making their clothes and hair stink. Surely a win?
added on the 2009-07-30 15:10:55 by psonice psonice
how did you manage to miss the point for a second time?

you HAD plenty of choices, you CHOSE to be among smokers in adult establishments where the owners should have the right to decide which customers they CHOOSE to cater for. as long as everyone is consenting, it's called freedom.

Just because all of your "friends" enjoyed and CHOSE to attend smoking pubs and there were few non-smoking alternatives (due to pathetically weak demand, even from non-smokers) that doesn't MORALLY give you the right to lay down laws which FORCE people to cater to your niche requirements.

I think that was the general point being made and you telling us that it was banned simply because you - and a few others - personally would prefer not to have to tolerate smoke doesn't change the fundamental and sound principle of Doom's point.

bloody hell
added on the 2009-07-30 19:03:33 by button button
yay \o/ :D
added on the 2009-07-30 19:16:15 by button button
rtype: "niche" requirements? weak demand? wtf are you on about - non-smokers are the majority by a long way, at least in this country. The fact that all pubs are now smoke-free suggests that there's actually huge demand, or these laws wouldn't have happened.

And yeah, before i had a choice. In theory. I could have told my friends to fuck off (which i would do, if they weren't friends, but they are). I could have not gone to the pub, but I like to go out and have a few beers and a laugh with my friends. I could have told them to stop smoking, but I wouldn't do that because it's their choice to do so and I respect that. Better still, they could have respected my choice to not smoke, and smoked outside where it causes zero issue - but when the pub is already full of smoke, there's no point.

Basically, I think the vast majority agreed on this:
- You have a right to smoke
- I have a right to not smoke, and shouldn't be forced to breath in your smoke after you've smoked it too
- We both have a right to visit the pub

Solution: the smokers smoke outside or in a separate place, everyone drinks beer and has a laugh inside. I don't get why people have any problem with that.
added on the 2009-07-31 12:29:34 by psonice psonice
Quote:
rtype: "niche" requirements? weak demand? wtf are you on about - non-smokers are the majority by a long way, at least in this country.


And this is why arguing for a ban is so pathetic. Don't you get it? It's perfectly possible to run tiny-niche businesses like vegan restaurants, vinyl record stores, specialist freaky sex toy shops, Lada dealerships, you name it.

But what you're saying is that even though the majority of people (the biggest fucking niche you can imagine) really wanted smoke-free pubs to go to, not one business-minded individual realised it! Not one! No one stopped to think, "oh hey, there are millions of pub-goers out there desperate for someone to provide them with a smoke-free pub - if I open a chain of smoke-free pubs I'll make billions! Yay!" Not one person had this idea which, according to what you're saying, is probably the best idea ever, and certainly a very obvious one.

Quote:
The fact that all pubs are now smoke-free suggests that there's actually huge demand, or these laws wouldn't have happened.


No, the fact that these pubs are now smoke-free by law proves that the demand was not only not "huge", it was far too tiny for smoke-free pubs to work. If there had been demand, there would have been supply.

Moreover, if what you say were true, then the smoking ban means pubs are now catering to a larger group than they were before. So profit should be up, not down. Well guess what, it's down, way down. Pubs are struggling, closing down, people are losing their jobs or finding themselves in huge amounts of debt because the businesses they invested their lives in are suddenly no longer profitable. But at least you're happy and that's what counts. :/

There's a further implication that I'm sure has already crossed your mind: if what you say about the demand for smoke-free pubs is true, then the smoking ban is no longer necessary. You see, now that pubs have realised they're catering to a much larger number of customers than before, why would most of them not keep the no-smoking policy even if the ban were lifted?

You can't blame McDonalds for serving junk food if nobody ever wants the salad.

Quote:
I could have told them to stop smoking, but I wouldn't do that because it's their choice to do so and I respect that.


So... you're saying you passed on the opportunity to work out your differences in a polite and friendly manner, out of "respect", but you feel justified in supporting a law that sorts it all out for you with threats of fines and criminal prosecution. And you really don't see an inconsistency there? Where did the "respect" go? Where did "their choice" go?

Quote:
- You have a right to smoke


Yes.

Quote:
- I have a right to not smoke, and shouldn't be forced to breath in your smoke after you've smoked it too


Check.

Quote:
- We both have a right to visit the pub


D'oh. You have no more right to demand entry into a private establishment than I have a right to demand entry into your home. There are laws to prevent discrimination specifically based on race and such, but there is no law that says you can demand that a business accepts you as a customer.
Your right not to smoke is guaranteed by your freedom not to go into places where there is smoking going on.

And before you start whining about "your friends" again, no, you don't have a right to be around your friends, either. In fact if you need to argue that it's your right to be around your friends, then you have a pretty fucked-up friendship going on there. Friends work things out. If you can't find a way to be around each other that you can all agree to, then you're not friends.

Quote:
Solution: the smokers smoke outside or in a separate place, everyone drinks beer and has a laugh inside. I don't get why people have any problem with that.


Solution: Talk to your friends instead of letting the law talk for you. I know, your solution is simpler. But mine is better.

Quote:
cancer is perhaps just a bit more serious than risking some ear damage.


The difference in risk is actually not that obvious. Ear damage is pretty much guaranteed with continued exposure to loud music, whereas the dangers of secondhand smoke are seen as slight statistical tendencies. Whether you breathe secondhand-smoke constantly or not, you're very unlikely to get lung cancer. Not saying the difference in risk is insignificant, of course, but it's meaningless without some perspective. Just the fact that you guys keep bringing up cancer shows your perspective is way off, since cancer is not the main danger associated with tobacco (that would be heart disease).

Another thing to consider is that tobacco is not the main danger associated with going to the pub - that would be ethanol, the neurotoxin in your beer. It seems a bit stupid to complain that the guy sitting next to you is elevating your risk of getting cancer from 0.0056% to 0.0057% while you're voluntarily drinking large amounts of poison which will do permanent damage to your brain and other internal organs. Not to mention you're doing it deliberately to lose control over your actions. Maybe you'd care if mentioned ethanol is known to cause cancer? Or is that too much perspective for you.

Even so, risk is completely besides the point. The point is, if I don't like the risk I can GTFO. You know, sometimes we have to take a little responsibility for our own safety. You'll be well aware if smoking is going on the second you enter a pub, and it's been explained to you quite thoroughly by the state how bad this is for you. So you have all the information you need to protect yourself, and the freedom to do so. In fact protecting yourself is a NON-action, less effort than putting yourself at risk, what the fuck more could you ask for? Oh right, your friends...

"But I want to be with my friends and my friends don't respect me enough to go to a smoke-free place with me and I'm really too afraid to tell them how I feel about their smoking and boohoohoo". Is it any wonder that your friends don't respect you a whole lot if that's your attitude? Be a man! Tell them the smoke bothers you - unless they're complete bastards then they'll respect that. Really.

Quote:
Hence why smoking in such places is now banned :) You're still free to smoke, you're just not allowed to do it where it's harming + annoying lots of people.


I can harm and annoy IQ in the park if I want. I don't really want to, though. I'd much rather go to some closed-off designated smoking area like, dunno, a pub...

Quote:
A bit inconvenient for you when the weather is bad perhaps, but you're no longer risking other people's health and making their clothes and hair stink. Surely a win?


Not getting through here...

Eh. Sorry for the rant. At least this prod will have the tallest comment page ever. ;P
added on the 2009-07-31 15:27:24 by doomdoom doomdoom
BB Image for the prod.

BB Image to the above commenters. :)
rulez added on the 2009-07-31 15:59:28 by micksam7 micksam7
Yep, nothing like a good epic argument in the comments :D

Quote:
But what you're saying is that even though the majority of people (the biggest fucking niche you can imagine) really wanted smoke-free pubs to go to, not one business-minded individual realised it! Not one! No one stopped to think, "oh hey, there are millions of pub-goers out there desperate for someone to provide them with a smoke-free pub - if I open a chain of smoke-free pubs I'll make billions! Yay!" Not one person had this idea which, according to what you're saying, is probably the best idea ever, and certainly a very obvious one.


...probably because, as a business, it wouldn't have worked out. All the smokers would go elsewhere for a start, that's 25% or whatever of the customers gone. Next, all the groups of people containing some smokers would probably end up in the smoking pubs. That's probably another 70%. You'd be left with couples, families and small groups, the atmosphere would be gone.. it's looking like a failed business already. Note that there were plenty of 'family' type pubs that were either no-smoking or had a separate smoking area, that were pretty successful. But for a good drinking pub, I doubt it would work except in big cities where there's enough people.

Quote:
Moreover, if what you say were true, then the smoking ban means pubs are now catering to a larger group than they were before. So profit should be up, not down. Well guess what, it's down, way down. Pubs are struggling, closing down, people are losing their jobs or finding themselves in huge amounts of debt because the businesses they invested their lives in are suddenly no longer profitable. But at least you're happy and that's what counts. :/


Some perhaps, others seem to be more profitable now. Pubs have been in decline for a long time anyway :(

Quote:
There's a further implication that I'm sure has already crossed your mind: if what you say about the demand for smoke-free pubs is true, then the smoking ban is no longer necessary. You see, now that pubs have realised they're catering to a much larger number of customers than before, why would most of them not keep the no-smoking policy even if the ban were lifted?


I'm sure a lot would.

Quote:
You can't blame McDonalds for serving junk food if nobody ever wants the salad.


I heard the salad was as unhealthy as the burgers there ;) I don't get the point though - I go to mcdonalds to eat crap, i go to the pub to drink crap. I don't want to smoke in either.

Quote:
So... you're saying you passed on the opportunity to work out your differences in a polite and friendly manner, out of "respect", but you feel justified in supporting a law that sorts it all out for you with threats of fines and criminal prosecution. And you really don't see an inconsistency there? Where did the "respect" go? Where did "their choice" go?


I'm not going to make anyone stop smoking, that's what I mean by 'respect' - I respect their choice, and expect them to respect mine. Nobody is threatened with anything if they smoke - only if they smoke where it could harm other people who don't want to smoke. I.e. it's stopping smokers from forcing non-smokers to smoke. It's giving some choice back, not taking it away.

Quote:
D'oh. You have no more right to demand entry into a private establishment than I have a right to demand entry into your home. There are laws to prevent discrimination specifically based on race and such, but there is no law that says you can demand that a business accepts you as a customer.
Your right not to smoke is guaranteed by your freedom not to go into places where there is smoking going on.


Huh? Pub = public house, the whole point of a pub is to welcome everyone in and serve them food and drink. If they're going to allow only certain people in, it's a club.

Quote:
And before you start whining about "your friends" again, no, you don't have a right to be around your friends, either. In fact if you need to argue that it's your right to be around your friends, then you have a pretty fucked-up friendship going on there. Friends work things out. If you can't find a way to be around each other that you can all agree to, then you're not friends.


Huh? What is there to work out? I don't mind if they smoke, they're happy to not smoke around me. If the pub is full of smoke already, it makes no difference to anyone if or where they smoke, and there's no issue between me and my friends. Now, they go outside to smoke, and come back when they're done, everyone is happy.

Quote:
Solution: Talk to your friends instead of letting the law talk for you. I know, your solution is simpler. But mine is better.


It would be better, if it wasn't pointless :) Even if they all stopped smoking, we'd still be sitting in a smoky pub.

Quote:
The difference in risk is actually not that obvious. Ear damage is pretty much guaranteed with continued exposure to loud music, whereas the dangers of secondhand smoke are seen as slight statistical tendencies. Whether you breathe secondhand-smoke constantly or not, you're very unlikely to get lung cancer. Not saying the difference in risk is insignificant, of course, but it's meaningless without some perspective. Just the fact that you guys keep bringing up cancer shows your perspective is way off, since cancer is not the main danger associated with tobacco (that would be heart disease).


I know the risk is pretty low. But I don't see why I should live with that risk without any actual benefit. There's a risk from drinking beer too, but at least I enjoy that. And I don't drink a lot, so the risk is pretty minimal too.

The risk to one person is the wrong way to look at it anyway, across the whole country a lot of people are going to die a long and horrible death. That's a bad thing.

Quote:
Maybe you'd care if mentioned ethanol is known to cause cancer? Or is that too much perspective for you.


No, that's something I'm aware of, and it's a risk I'm taking. Everything in life has a risk attached, so I accept the ones that give me benefit or pleasure, and avoid the ones that don't.

Quote:
"But I want to be with my friends and my friends don't respect me enough to go to a smoke-free place with me and I'm really too afraid to tell them how I feel about their smoking and boohoohoo". Is it any wonder that your friends don't respect you a whole lot if that's your attitude? Be a man! Tell them the smoke bothers you - unless they're complete bastards then they'll respect that. Really.


..? Do what? Tell my friends "right! we're not going to the pub anymore!"? Or tell them all to quit smoking? I'm not going to tell them how to run their lives, or I'd be the complete bastard. I'm not going to stop going to the pub either, as annoying as the smoke is, having a good laugh and a few beers with friends makes it worth it.

If I tell them the smoke bothers me - well, I have done before now, but so what? What can we do about it? Nothing - if they stop smoking the pub is still full of smoke, and it's not like there used to be a good smoke-free pub. See? There wasn't a choice there - it was go, and live with the smoke, or stay at home. It's not like I could stand outside in the fresh air, and just go in when I've finished not-smoking. But the smokers among them can go outside and come back a minute or two later if the pub isn't full of smoke. Considering there's only a couple of them that smoke, that makes a whole lot more sense.

Quote:
Eh. Sorry for the rant. At least this prod will have the tallest comment page ever. ;P


Nothing better than a good ranty argument. Especially when work is super boring like now ;)
added on the 2009-07-31 16:50:23 by psonice psonice
 
rulez added on the 2009-07-31 16:52:05 by rbz rbz
Quote:
Huh? Pub = public house, the whole point of a pub is to welcome everyone in and serve them food and drink. If they're going to allow only certain people in, it's a club.


No. Public House, as in "hello respectful friend! my PRIVATE house is open to the public, as long as you appretiate my rules and can tolorate the mild irritation caused by smoking customers I have CHOSEN to serve. I know you will respect my rules or go elsewhere. Thank you!"

But you non smokers (and the gov) didn't respect that kind landlord, did you. oh no you didn't!

You see, Public House isn't "public", as in: "a public state building, such as a hospital, which is OBLIGED to ensure the health & safety of ALL due to the unfortunate fact that sometimes people cannot AVOID going to hospitals and have no CHOICE"

there's a difference. a big important difference which you can't seem to grasp. oh well.
added on the 2009-07-31 21:28:14 by button button
Choices:

1)
- Wanna go to the club?
- No, too loud music, better go to the cafeteria where we can talk.

2)
- Do you want to go to the pub for a drink?
- No, I'd like to go to the cinema to see a movie.

3)
- Do you want to go to the pub?
- They'be smoking.
- The disco?
- They'be smoking.
- The cafeteria?
- They'be smoking.
- My home?
- You'be smoking.

Pub is for drinking and eating.
Club is for loud music and dancing.
Cinema is for watching a movie.

There is no such a thing as a smokery or smoketeria :)

Smoking is a secondary habit that goes with everything. You drink your coffee and smoke. You drink alcohol and smoke. You play online games on a netcafe and smoke. You read your newspaper and smoke. You fuck your girlfriend and then smoke on the bed. You just sit there waiting for the bus and smoke.

It doesn't have it's own place. Would the choice dialogues above be like: "Do you want to go to the smokery?", "No, I don't smoke, let's better go to the cinema". It's not the same thing. It's not a primary choice with it's own special places that people go there just for that. It's not going to work this way.
added on the 2009-08-03 12:59:10 by dataguru dataguru
BB Image for the prod.

BB Imageto the above commenters. :)
added on the 2009-08-03 20:41:44 by StingRay StingRay
Quote:
3)
- Do you want to go to the pub?
- They'be smoking.
- The disco?
- They'be smoking.
- The cafeteria?
- They'be smoking.
- My home?
- You'be smoking.


A) Yes, smoke-free pubs have been rare in the past, but there's a reason for that. Specifically, lack of demand, as discussed above. It's the same reason that it's hard to find a vegan restaurant - if you belong to as small a group as vegans, you'll have to do a little bit extra to find the right place to eat. What could be more natural? How else would you expect a market economy to work? When your wishes align with the mainstream, you get catered to everywhere you go. When you have niche requirements, it's a little harder.

B) Same goes for discos. If you can't find one, it's because there's no demand. If you insist that there's demand but no supply, then you're either deluded, or you've stumbled on a goldmine, and I can hardly feel sorry for you for having such an amazing an opportunity. I'd say you're probably deluded because you're suggesting that you know more about the industry than people with a lifetime of experience in the industry and who make it their business to stay in touch with the market. But even if you were right, you should use this special knowledge to fill the gap in supply - not only would you be providing a (as you see it) valuable service, you'd solve the problem without taking away other people's choices, and as a bonus you'd get filthy rich doing it. How could you not want that?

C) Smoke-free cafeterias were not rare before the smoking ban. Again you have the same supply/demand issue as before, but this was one area where nonsmokers cared enough to actually create demand. And because what they wanted were smoke-free cafes, then consequently there were lots of smoke-free cafes.

See here for more.

Quote:
Pub is for drinking and eating.


And loud music and alcoholics and the smell of piss and pulling birds and playing games. Or is that not allowed because that's beyond what your dictionary says?

Quote:
Club is for loud music and dancing.


And drinking etc.

Quote:
Cinema is for watching a movie.


And for secret blowjobs.

Sorry, you don't get to define what business another person's business does. It's none of your business, literally because it's not your business, it belongs to someone else. "Pub is for drinking and eating" - except if the owner says it's also for karaoke, pub quizzes and bingo nights, then it's also for karaoke, pub quizzes and bingo nights. If he buys a pinball machine, you can add pinball to the list of that pub's functions.

Even if for some odd reason we were to respect your arbitrary definition of what a pub is, calling for a law to enforce that definition is still bullshit. You see smoking pubs have always been in high demand, whereas nonsmoking pubs have always been in low demand - so it's natural that pub owners have mostly wanted to allow smoking in their pubs. They don't care about your definition of a pub, in fact they don't care about anyone's definition. They care about providing the service that their customers want.

So if we did enact a law that legally defined the function of a pub the way you describe, the first action I would take as a pub owner would be to declare that my business is no longer a "pub", it's a "smub" - which I would then define as a place for eating, drinking and smoking. And how would you justify a smoking ban in a smub, since a smub by definition is a place where you can smoke?

Do you see where I'm going with that? You're talking about a law that forbids indoor smoking in any business, arguing from definitions, even though definitions were never the issue. A pub could arbitrarily redefine itself as a smub, or even stop selling drinks and just become a "smokery", but smoking still would not be allowed since the new smoking ban - and that's what we're taking issue with. We don't mind if you have a place to go where you can drink in a smoke-free environment. By all means, go to that smoke-free pub down the road. Or open your own. But what you're trying to justify is a law that takes away other people's choice of what type of business to run, and other people's choice of what type of pub to go to, because you personally wanted them to make different choices. It's pure selfishness.
added on the 2009-08-03 22:07:14 by doomdoom doomdoom
Thumbs up for banning smoking, piggie for the prod.
rulez added on the 2009-08-07 16:00:55 by Optimus Optimus
smoking sucks
rulez added on the 2009-08-29 16:52:26 by NeARAZ NeARAZ
.
sucks added on the 2009-09-01 22:55:20 by Queen_Luna Queen_Luna
Whoah, a looong discussion..
The gfx itself is nice! :)
rulez added on the 2009-09-20 23:39:30 by remageFrs remageFrs
:D
rulez added on the 2009-09-20 23:58:45 by src src
let's quote gloom:
Quote:
Whine whine whine.


weak thumb for the pic.
rulez added on the 2009-09-21 00:17:01 by dalezy dalezy
Smoking kills psyche.
rulez added on the 2009-09-24 12:35:18 by Manwe Manwe
nice!
rulez added on the 2009-09-24 12:43:46 by zeebr zeebr
Cool prod, nice message. Also: hugely ironic that prods can comment on America or surveilance or communism and nobody cares, but when it's about smoking.. WHOA! :)

Also: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8267523.stm
Quote:
But the latest work, based on the results of numerous different studies collectively involving millions of people, indicated that smoking bans have reduced heart attack rates by as much as 26% per year.
rulez added on the 2009-09-24 13:59:25 by gloom gloom
For the message.
rulez added on the 2009-09-24 15:34:58 by KK KK
I smoke, and I'm not dead. Fakers! :-)
rulez added on the 2010-01-25 22:21:54 by 3mph 3mph
идите нахуй со своей социалкой
sucks added on the 2010-01-25 22:29:36 by BiTL BiTL
'non smokers die everyday'
added on the 2010-01-25 23:36:22 by comankh comankh
DEATH TO SMOKERS!
rulez added on the 2010-01-26 06:19:57 by unc unc
For making commenters introduce the concept of a "smokery"
rulez added on the 2010-04-11 00:18:49 by stijn stijn
looks good
rulez added on the 2011-06-27 00:00:58 by phobium phobium
LOL!

BB Image
added on the 2011-07-03 00:56:30 by Optimus Optimus
nice pic!
rulez added on the 2014-04-24 15:53:48 by psenough psenough
Actually, I'd prefer they farted on my faces all day. I went back to greece for holidays, several pubs while there is anti-smoking labels, people ignore it like the law is not there. I got allergies and closed throat again (but maybe it was my brother's cats :P). Farting is natural. I think if I breath that, it's ok. Or not?
added on the 2014-04-25 19:29:47 by Optimus Optimus
lol thread escalated...
anyways, nice pic
rulez added on the 2016-11-16 20:00:34 by EviL EviL

submit changes

if this prod is a fake, some info is false or the download link is broken,

do not post about it in the comments, it will get lost.

instead, click here !

[previous edits]

add a comment