Show of HandsShow of Hands

Show Of Hands September 5th, 2012 12:00am

Should the government continue to broadcast graphic anti-smoking advertisements?

1 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

AlexD Respectful Debate
09/12/12 6:48 am

I hate smoking, but no. Find a better use of limited taxpayer funds. I think most people get it about smoking now. If the rest want to ruin their lives, so be it.

Plattinum
09/10/12 9:56 pm

No. I hate these commercials because they basically say if you smoke you will not die but suffer forever and then go to hell.


09/09/12 7:01 pm

No, put them on the boxes so only people who buy them have to see them

ketchupman Florida
09/07/12 8:35 pm

Skeptisys: the point of such graphic material is to scare you out of wanting to do it. Sometimes life isn't all pretty and everything, and sometimes people need to see the consequences of actions they are willing to prevent.


09/07/12 5:54 pm

Smoking should be illegal. It pollutes the air and trashes the environment. I'm sick and tired of seeing people flick their cigarettes on the ground like the earth is their ashtray.

skeptisys
09/07/12 2:57 pm

If people want to look at explicit images, they should be free to do so. But don't force me to watch, especially with no warning. Who designs these commercials? 4chan?

chrismisen atlanta
09/07/12 1:31 pm

no, go do some good with that wasted money.

anarchy GET OFF MY LAWN
09/07/12 3:59 am

RJ: please. Really? C'mon, you're better than that. You KNOW I'm right. Give it up. My response is logical and well-articulated. Yours is "but Coke advertises too!" ...come back with something of substance. Until then, it's not government's job and we can't afford to fund ads that tell people 2+2=4.

RJ1969 SoCal
09/06/12 10:39 pm

considering a budget of trillions of dollars, you're talking about fractions of a penny on the dollar.

RJ1969 SoCal
09/06/12 10:38 pm

anarchie, you've been at it for days now buddy. you're still not getting it. please realize that your arguments are only convincing one person....you. anti-smoking ads are paid for by specific taxes on cigarettes. nonetheless, saying that cutting a program that costs hundreds of millions when

bturney
09/06/12 7:34 pm

It's just another waste of money... Instead of blasting ads... Just pass a law that if you choose to smoke... You forfeit Medicare when you're older... And if you're healthcare is paid for with tax dollars (I.e. gom'ment employee) you forfeit all health insurance coverage... Problem solved...

vstorm
09/06/12 4:00 pm

Not the governments role.

producto
09/06/12 2:23 pm

SoH, the only tax dollars paying for any anti-smoking advertising is from that imposed on tobacco products only. Take a minute and Read my prior posts.

yepnope Maryland
09/06/12 1:06 pm

...that plus fewer people will suffer from their poor choice to begin smoking (or not quitting smoking).

yepnope Maryland
09/06/12 1:04 pm

I would like to see how effective it is and have someone run the numbers because if it really is effective it will actually save us money in the long run if we don't have to deal with all of the healthcare costs associated with smokers.

anarchy GET OFF MY LAWN
09/06/12 12:30 pm

*conclusion (3 paragraphs down - friggin auto correct)

anarchy GET OFF MY LAWN
09/06/12 12:30 pm

....knows that smoking is bad for you. No need to beat a dead horse when we're already over 16 trillion dollars in the red

anarchy GET OFF MY LAWN
09/06/12 12:29 pm

Not that it matters, because aside from being a sicko, mags misunderstood the question completely. Just because conservatives don't want to spend federal tax revenue on anti-smoking ads, doesn't mean they're pro smoking. It just means they're anti-pissing away money we don't have. Everybody....

anarchy GET OFF MY LAWN
09/06/12 12:27 pm

When somebody smokes a cigarette, a cigarette dies...when somebody gets an abortion, a baby dies. Mags made the (sick) argument that each is a choice for the participants body and are therefore parallel. One has to come to the convulsion that a cigarette and a baby are being valued as equals.

anarchy GET OFF MY LAWN
09/06/12 12:25 pm

acaveman: uhhhhh....nobody said anything about drugs.

acavemand The Burgh
09/06/12 12:11 pm

Anarchy: he's not saying they're equal he's saying smokers have the right to choose whether they want to destroy their own bodies with drugs and pregnant women should have the choice to destroy what is essentially an extension of their own bodies.

anarchy GET OFF MY LAWN
09/06/12 11:03 am

I find it both hilarious and sad that you are so unbelievably stupid and so emotionally and morally dead inside that you purposefully and knowingly value a human baby EXACLY the same as a cigarette. You, and any other twit that agreed with you, disgust me.

anarchy GET OFF MY LAWN
09/06/12 11:00 am

Maggs: you're an idiot if you really don't understand that.

SillyNiner New York
09/06/12 10:50 am

they should show ads of bodies from the morgue of people who died from alcohol related accidents..they are up in this area...seriously...they're showing a couple from some who survived texting accidents...

yepnope Maryland
09/06/12 9:26 am

No because smoking DEFINITELY doesn't cause cancer like those deceitful medical scientists wanted us to believe, just like humans DEFINITELY aren't contributing to global warming like those evil deceitful climate scientists want us to believe. Heck, it's not actually getting warmer you silly people!

caldude
09/06/12 8:06 am

Even if they reduce smoking rates by 10%, it's still important

TiltonAllStarz Outside Ur Comfort Zone
09/06/12 7:17 am

I'm a smoker and I said yes, it's so hard to quit. If those ads keep even one teenager from smoking..... It's worth it.

heyyjude NC
09/06/12 5:44 am

I don't think it will stop anyone from smoking but I think they're interesting and disgusting haha.


09/06/12 5:37 am

I don't see the point. Everyone knows it will kill you.

BriD Illinois
09/06/12 4:44 am

Mags99 -- EXACTLY!!! Repub. men are such hypocrites!!

glorfindel
09/05/12 11:54 pm

That's not the government's job.

dollyskid
09/05/12 11:45 pm

read about research showing that the ads have opposite of intended effect.

lmurder MDK
09/05/12 11:34 pm

If they air those ads. They should air ads about people overdosing and dying because of kidney failure do to the regulated and legal pills.
Then they should air ads about drunk drivers.
Then they should run ads about censorship. And how America is the only country not transparent in its journalism.

praetorianus65
09/05/12 11:25 pm

I remember in the 80 s there was a brand called Black Death showing a smoking skull.
It was immensely popular among teenage rebels.

praetorianus65
09/05/12 11:23 pm

Oh, women should be allowed to do with their body whatever they want to - I define their body as all cells that have their and only their genes plus hair, nails and epidermis.
Satisfied? ;) --- As for anti smoking ads : if ratinal arguments won't work neither will sensationalism or fearmongering.

Mags99
09/05/12 10:56 pm

Oh, so republicans want to have "choice" and it's their body to smoke or not smoke. Gosh, why can't republican men understand that is exactly what women want is choice over their body. And to think, they don't understand why there is a republican war on women. LOL

TabooGoose
09/05/12 10:48 pm

It would be so stupid to make it illegal. Can't we see that's not the answer? Illegalizing drugs promoted crime and reduces tax revenue.

TabooGoose
09/05/12 10:43 pm

@dflerm and others who said anti fast food adverts should be on tv is not thinking. Most of America who eats fast food to an extent that they gain weight isn't a choice it is a financial need. Also food is necessary for life. Cigarettes are purely a bad decision.

jlevans369
09/05/12 10:37 pm

Get the goverment out of our personal lives and spend time on other more important issues and stop spending MY money. Let the people decide.

kut17
09/05/12 9:52 pm

Yes. But I have to change the channel before that guy says not to bend down or food will fall out of your stomach through the hole in your throat.

because South Dakota
09/05/12 9:33 pm

no. it is not the governments job to worry about our health.

f13u2
09/05/12 9:29 pm

So, I guess you could say I don't care if they air the commercial or not.

f13u2
09/05/12 9:28 pm

If people smoke, they're going to smoke. A commercial isn't going to change that. I haven't heard of anybody quitting because of one.

dflem Arizona
09/05/12 9:10 pm

Keep showing them but I agree, anti fast food commercials should be allowed too. Strangers approach me telling me smoking is unhealthy, I know, but so is being fat. Never saw someone tell a fat person eating fast food being fat is unhealthy though