The… Nicotini??
Comments
Me personally, no. Actually, I think it’s ridiculous that the most addictive substance I can think of is legal and subsidized while other drugs of equal potency are labelled as illegal and dangerous. No, I’m not a Green Party hoohaa or whatever, and I don’t think that other drugs should be legalized because of the stance on tobacco--I think that this more powerful drug should be illegalized along with the rest.
Or at bare minimum the government should stop subsidizing the tobacco industry, but that’s besides the point. As to whose choice it is? If the community doesn’t want it, then it sounds to me like the choice that needs to be made is for the business owner to take his business somewhere that the community has a different perception. A community to me, has every right to decide what they do and don’t want in their area, right or wrong.
......the most addictive substance I can think of is legal and subsidized while other drugs of equal potency are labelled as illegal and dangerous. (This is not a logical sentence: “most” addictive “susbstance” I can think of and others of “equal potency”?) Do you mean that you dislike “all” drugs no matter if they are legal or illegal? As far as more addictive goes, if “all” drugs were not somewhat addictive, then would people keep doing them? “More” addictive is a relative notion, really. All users can become addicted to various drugs at a lesser or greater degree. The question is: Do you think any drugs should be legal? Do cheeseburgers count as well? They are of course a deadly witches brew of heart clogging components. And after all isn’t your stance to save lives? My point is that, although I disagree with drugs in general, I am sure no law will stop people from doing drugs. No law has ever stopped murder, rape, persecution, or suicide. What you should invest in rather is mind control, drugs already figures that out.
Uh, yeah, heh, that sentence was structured poorly. But no, there are very realistic and tangible differences in the addictive properties of different chemicals and drugs. Niccotine is not only more addictive than heroine, coke, meth, etc., it’s the fastest acting, and the quickest for the brain to form a dependancy to.
And since you’re asking: I really don’t give a flying flip whether or not drugs are legal or illegal. My major problem is with hipocrisy of government. Tobacco is only legal in the U.S. because of the money involved in the industry, and the government tie-in. The FDA regularly turns down pharmaceutical companies’ newly developed prescription medicines for being dangerous, addictive, or having bad side effects. These drugs that they say are “unsafe” to market are much less harmful to your health than cigarettes.
Look how quickly the government has acted and the money that they have spent on potential society health risks from medicines or foods. It’s a no brainer that as a whole, society would live longer, be able to work longer, and cause less financial burden on families and the health care system if cigarettes were illegal.
Of course, my logic here also applies to obesiety. Good luck using that in the real world. Can’t wait to see the new “Fat Tax”. 
As for your comparison to a cheeseburger? A cheeseburger is actually quite healthy, as long as you don’t sit down to a plate of them every meal. But yes, the government did insist, and the food industry complied, that palm and coconut oils, which were pinpointed as heart killers, be removed from foods. There are very very few items you can buy anymore that have these two very tasty oils. And those are using greatly reduced amounts (Cool Whip being the only one I can even recall that still uses either.)
I’m a realist as well--I don’t think that any legislation will dramatically change people’s behavior--in this generation. But one, especially two generations from now, yes, laws affecting behavior will stop that behavior. Just like countries that adopt the metric system, or have a major change in waste management, fuel or electricity consumption, our children’s children won’t think that it’s strange or intrusive--it’ll be all they know.
And for the record, Larry, that’s a very inventive drink, and you deserve some sort of entrepreneur of the year award, if you haven’t already gotten one.
In all seriousness, what do you think would happen if the FEDS or FDA outlawed cigarrettes? Oh, and I think I agree with you on the silliness of an obesity tax. Although I would definetly vote for a “verbosity” tax. Many intellectuals seem to be suffering from that nowadays.
Seriously? I think that if the FDA outlawed it that you’d have a second Civil War on our hands, and I’m not kidding. That, along with the original topic of this thread makes me roll my eyes at the entire human race.
Your tongue in cheek dig only affirms my point. Modern society looks down on people that think. It’s not cool to have an opinion that’s not PC, or to imagine that we as a worldwide society can be any better than we already are. We must be infallible because we’re happy, right? That’s the type of thinking that makes Americans the last people on the planet to think about conserving energy. And god forbid the we expect leaders to not have double standards.
Verbosity Tax? How about an “Avoiding Issues and Replacing with Insults Tax”? That seems to be real trendy, especially on the internet. It r0x0rZ! Heh, since Chris tends to prefer that I only be argumentative with him, I’ll leave this topic for a more appropriate forum, or to email if you want to actually comment on any of the points I made instead of just posting a snide quip.
Derek, I sense in you a certain noetic poetry, neither defeciant in cerebral asthetic, as pertaining to good taste, nor aphoristic intent, appertaining to your pure damn’ed determination. Though your resolve merits citation, surely it is humbler than your more originative endowments. Those being afforementioned , in spirit only, I confess. Nevertheless, you are a fellow human being and we all await your recalcitrantic sentiments. Though that definetly puts you in the “norm” and disqualifies you from “master insurrectionist” - though the gun be a pen mind you. And without further ado I hereby offer request of a federal “verbosity” tax of which I myself, in this commencement, shall pay the going rate, be they words per page or by minute I know not, under the guise of renumeration for vilification.
Man, I sure could go for a nice Cuban cigar and a beer right about now. All this talk about tobacco and alcohol… 
Go Nocotini! :beer:
Who said anything about booze? Booze is metabolized by the body and turned into energy. A.k.a. not a drug.
per chris curtis’s quote:
“Soak tobacco leaves in vodka overnight, deaden the juice’s harshness by adding a couple other liquors, and voilà, the nicotini...” :idea:
caesar, put down your thesaurus and actually speak to the points I raised. Prove that you are more than just a facade persona of a social reject who flies a banner of flame. You’re not cool, and you’re never going to score.
Derek, my hero. Dunt dunt duhhhh dunt dunt duh duuuuhh dunt dunt duhhhh dunt duhhhhhh ROCK!!
Alas, Derek, if you had only “picked up” your thesaurus you would have known I was complimenting you and apologizing for my unfortunate “snide quip”. Which was not directed at you to begin with. You are overly sensitive and lack a sense of humor, for sure. And for that reason you will be just like the people John Lennon spoke of in “revolution” when he asks “So you say you wanna revolution, well you know.....We’d all love to see the plan.” You seem to be content with the endless debating of issues, which is very cerebral. You get off on it because you lack the fortitude to do something “real” for our society. You are forever badgering the “complacent citizen” and think yourself some sort of social preacher - ie. a Zealot. But unless your out there voting and picketing and standing in the line of fire for all these things you say you believe in, then your just as complacent as the next guy - and therefore guilty of your own condemnation. I will not speak to the points you raised because “you” are just no fun. :cool:
Nah, Derek’s the man, He has a great since of humor, Lennon’s dead, his wife was lame, so are you, your still not cool and you still won’t score.
Greg you obviously are his lover.....
Wait.... i guess i need my third-grade level thesaurus… were down to “gay” jokes.
You have a third grade level thesaurus?
I would mock yet again, but the challange is gone. Zzzzz....
My appologies to Chris for his nice site getting cluttered with flame…
Le’ poo poo occurs.
Go Nicotini! :beer:
That’s quite enough now. Back to the real, original topic with relevant comments or nothing at all.
Gladly. So anyway, there are some heavy smokers at work who I asked if they’d go for a Nicotini....and they actually said, “gross!”
...and then proceeded to stick the dead plants and paper back in their mouth and set fire to it.
Point observed. Have you seen this new thing in liquer stores thats a caffiene drink with a poo-load of alcohol in it? Gimme a bit and ill find the name. Im just curious as to how that would affet your motor skills.... would you get drunk in a hyper sort of way?
IF its who im thinking of derek, as nice as they are, i think the nicotini would reject them as well.
That’s not much different than the current trend of Red Bull and Vodka. It wouldn’t be much different than getting drunk on beer, which is actually a stimulant, and not a depressant as most people think.
i just want to know how to make the darn thing.you know the nicotini.a person can overdose on nicotine.i’ld like a safe recipe.thanks.
Don’t you think it is a “little excessive” that those people who are offende by smoke resort to passing a law instead of just not patronizing a business that is smokey? The worst environment for second hand smoke is at homes with children- that is where the ban should be enforced- NOT my business where I invented the NICOTINI
By Larry Wald on December 8, 2003 at 12:51pm link