b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » XXX » Message 9092675 (Thread)

# Haha, I see what you did there
And the last thing you want is science and medicine to get involved in things like what dyslexia are, they just over-complicate it.
(, Wed 14 Jan 2009, 14:00, archived)
# the government don't believe in science, it's much easier to make policies based on what Daily Mail readers think.
Hence the smoking ban. Ignore the science, people smoking in public places pisses some people off, so let's fucking ban it and pretend it's for medical reasons.
(, Wed 14 Jan 2009, 14:02, archived)
# In summer, I shall be asking non smokers to remove themselves from my 'smoking area'.
(, Wed 14 Jan 2009, 14:03, archived)
# I won't
because in my country there are indoor smoking areas, as this country, ironically, is much less fascist than your little island.
(, Wed 14 Jan 2009, 14:04, archived)
# Bully for you.
This country's got me in it. We win.
(, Wed 14 Jan 2009, 14:05, archived)
# *recalls voting for this before*
*considers this a vote well cast*
(, Wed 14 Jan 2009, 14:25, archived)
# /smoker rant
And what this shit with putting mr beard and his fucking tumor or my cigs? Either give an actual shit about our health and ban em totally so I can get them cheaper of dealers or just let us get on with it

*huf huf*
(, Wed 14 Jan 2009, 14:05, archived)
# We play snap now.
'Oooh, I've got lungs, what have you got?'
'foetus.'
(, Wed 14 Jan 2009, 14:06, archived)
# Hahaha,
Or maybe just finding the most grotesque pictures and putting them where children will see

maybe we should have a smokers warning label image challenge, or bindun? Can't remember any in my time on b3ta...
(, Wed 14 Jan 2009, 14:12, archived)
# Mine'd all be pictures of the Fonz and Jesus and John Peel.
*loves smoking*
(, Wed 14 Jan 2009, 14:14, archived)
# I'm quitting soon...
but, I still don't think that there is enough objective evidence that passive smoking is dangerous enough to afford a ban on all smoking in all public areas, especially since there is a WHO study showing that there is no significant difference between the likelihood of contracting lung cancer for someone who doesn't work in a smokey environment compared with someone who does. It is however, a study that is completely ignored by legislators.
(, Wed 14 Jan 2009, 14:18, archived)
# Quit if you like, I'm not.
Not yet anyway, I enjoy it too much.
(, Wed 14 Jan 2009, 14:19, archived)
# I enjoy it too.
but I smoke waaaay too much, so I'm going to try quitting... seems like a good idea just now.
(, Wed 14 Jan 2009, 14:21, archived)
# You always say that.
I smoke more than you do, and you never bitch at me for it. If you quit then I'm not being sorry for smoking around you, you'll just have to deal with it.
(, Wed 14 Jan 2009, 14:22, archived)
# you don't smoke more than me...
Since about this time last year i've been on 1.5-2 packs a day. Beat that.

(I shall only be giving up smoking of the cigarettes, which may or may not lead to being considerably more stoned more often)
(, Wed 14 Jan 2009, 14:25, archived)
# I smoke weed, remember.
God knows how much baccy goes into one of those spliffs.

I didn't realise you'd gone up to that though. Alright, give up, then come home and get stoned with your good old pal Captain.
(, Wed 14 Jan 2009, 14:30, archived)
# yes please :D
(, Wed 14 Jan 2009, 15:38, archived)
# or...

(, Wed 14 Jan 2009, 14:14, archived)
# Haha

(, Wed 14 Jan 2009, 14:16, archived)
# Christ
You suck photoshop
(, Wed 14 Jan 2009, 14:17, archived)
# haha, what?
(, Wed 14 Jan 2009, 14:20, archived)
# You say that all my images
*feels complimented*
(, Wed 14 Jan 2009, 14:26, archived)