pan6467

So because someone has decided that sodas are unhealthy for me, my choice to drink them maybe limited and harrassed?

I find people riding my ass as I do the speed limit on the Interstate life threatening I have to slam my brakes they plow into me. And the cops we pass don't seem to share my beleif as they allow these drivers to do that.

I find it offensive anyone would support the government dictating to and taxing us on, what we can put into our bodies.

While they allow companies to pollute our air, water, and load our produce and meats with known carcinogens.

While they allow pharmaceuticals to push through drugs that do far more harm than good.

While they allow gun advocates to conceal and carry, to buy semi autmatics, to buy just about anything..... because if they didn't allow that would infringe on those people's Constitutional rights.

WTF about my rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Where are my rights to enjoy my life the way I deem fit.

I pay my taxes, I pay my insurance prememiums and I pay my bills. So why the fuck can I not consume any legal product I choose to?

How can anyone who fights for rights believe this attitude of "protecting the people from themselves" is ok?

I have news for all you....... FROM THE DAY WE ARE CONCIEVED WE HAVE AN INCURABLE DISEASE CALLED AGING AND DEATH.

Some of us may die before we are born, others may live to 90 BUT we are all going to fucking DIE, people. We are all going to get sick and go to a doctor a few times in our lives. And yes, we are all going to die of something. Government dictating what we can or cannot consume, or taxing things so that we cannot afford them will not protect us from the end result...... DEATH.

I am more scared of what government allows our food companies to put on our produce or in our meats or allows companies to dump in our ground water supplies or into our Earth than I am about what I knowingly put into my body, for enjoyment.

I may get run over tomorrow, my apt. may catch on fire because of faulty wiring, a terrorist or nut job may come into work and decide that we addiction counselors destroyed their lives and kill us........ Government cannot feasibly not be expected to protect every scenario of my death. Yet by their incessent taxings, telling me where when and how much I may consume, making my consumption a pariah in society, is them trying to control certain scenarios.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Willravel

Is a sticker harassment?
There are plenty of bad cops out there. I don't see the connection.
Do you support the existence of the FDA? I know it isn't free of corruption, but it does a lot of good, too.
So, because things are so bad we shouldn't try to stop any bad things?
Soda rights are not covered in the constitution. I checked.
It's the same princepal that made suicide illegasl for centuries. Just as you don't have a right to harm others, you don't have a right to harm yourself. Yes, it is your body, and as such, suicide is no longer illegal. That doesn't mean people shouldn't be warned. Had there been a warning on that infamous cup of hot coffee, that idiot woman wouldn't have been able to extort money from Mc Donalds. I don't support McDonalds, but that woman was wrong for what she did. Following that logic, the main reason for this is surely to make sure Pepsi and Coke aren't liable for poor health of it's customers. Is that wrong? I dunno. It's buisness.
It's not illegal to drink coke. No one is taking that right from you.
If your friend were going to blow his head off, wouldn't you try to talk him or her out of it? I'm not saying you wrestle the gun from them, but simply try to talk to them. That's not forcing anything.
I don't see that as a valid argument (no offence). Along that logic, one could say that murder is fine because we'll all die some day.
I'd rather live to 90 than 55. I just asked my wife and she said the same. I IMed a friend of mine, and he agreed. What if a food you were eating or drinking were shortening your life and endangering your health, and you didn't know it? I know this is mostly about legal liability, but if one person looks at his or her coke and says, "This can give me diabetes?! F*** that!!", than it's worth it.
Would you make the same argument for ex? or heroine? Substances that do harm to the mind and body that provide pleasure?
I might get run over by a Coke truck tomorrow. That's irony, btw. It's not about control. If it were, you'd be drinking more soda, because the soda special interest groups would pay off politicians and hold biased studies that say soda is fine and healthy. That's not the case.

kutulu

It's not just superstar athletes that need medical attention because of their physical activities. Regular people that play sports just to stay in shape break bones, get concussions, and wear out body parts, and strain muscles. They go to the hospital, doctor, whatever and get surgery, treatment and medication to deal with those problems. It's not chump change and my health care costs are higher to incorporate their activities. If we can tax smoking then why not sporting goods?


A general comment on second hand smoke:

People bitch and moan about how smokers are killing them. Cigarette smoke is not significantly different from vehicle exhaust, campfire smoke, and emissions from your grill. Why aren't we suing the makers of parking garages also? How about suing car manufacturers?

pan6467

I start by saying some of your arguments I just find silly and you wanting to make a point just to argue. (I admit I am guilty of this also.)

I think you miss my point. I stated at the beginning of this that some 40 years ago it was just a warning and then the cigarette Nazis took over.

So you are saying EVERY cop that allows someone to ride my ass as we pass him is bad? I never even insinuated that, I simply said if they were truly worried about my welfare they wouldn't allow that to happen.

Do I support the FDA, I support what the FDA was once, now I am very weary of their decisions. I find having companies police themselves and not have independant researchers is eventually the death of the agency.

Silly.

Silly. But driving is not covered in the Constitution, neither is landownership really. Neither is anything mentioning pay, use of a telephone, cable, computer or any utility, nor is there mention of marriage, drug use, murder etc. Very little is truly covered in the Constitution, the founding fathers made it that way so that the federal government would have minimal powers.

SUICIDE is still very much illegal. People who try are often locked up, whether in jail or a mental hospital for some time. Ask the people trying Euthanasia by themselves or assisted suicides (which should be legal) how legal suicide is.

Good luck prosecuting the suicide..... but it is still very much illegal.

I think the contrary, I think where there were never even lawsuits considered this opens the door to massive lawsuits against the soda companies. People can now say the soda manufacturers knew the health problems and refused to give warning. One problem with the US is that people don't take personal responsibility for their actions. I am a heavy soda drinker, I know the risks and I know what it has done to me, however, I am in relative good health and what issues I have are not those of the soda but my choices.

Labels = automatic liability and therefore lawsuits.

You missed the beginning where I stated that 40 years ago it was cigarettes with labels and eventually look what happened. The same WILL happen to soda, fast food and whatever government can find to fill tax downfalls.

So let's tax soda fast food and whatever to where the people can barely afford it, then watch as more industries in the US go bankrupt because we have to regulate and tax the Hell out of things that the government deems unhealthy.

I deal with this weekly, in my job, (drug users hitting rock bottom sometimes wish to do harm to themselves) what's your point?

Huge difference between me talking to them and trying to stop them than there is government dictating.

Silly, in that I was stating that if it's not the smoking, the soda, the fast food..... it will eventually be something, caused by one's exposure to life. How you want to twist that to murder being ok, just to argue is beyond me, and not worthy of more comment.

I'm sorry I guess you missed where I said I would rather live to 50 and enjoy life than live to 90 and have lost all that I enjoy to government regulation and taxation. I don't know but I think if you ran a poll on here asking the question: WOULD YOU RATHER DIE AT 50 AND HAVE ENJOYED LIFE FULLY OR LIVE TO 90 AND HAVE GOVERNMENT REGULATE AND TAX EVERYTHING TO WHERE YOU COULDN'T ENJOY THOSE THINGS;

Have a feeling 50 would win by a nice margin.

So you are comparing soda to illegal harmful drugs, to a drug counselor..... Gee that's just silly.

Yes very ironic. And yes it is about control. I can assure you there are those (on both sides) looking into lawsuits and finding ways to tax the Hell out of soda, fast food and everything else, THE GOVERNMENT deems is unhealthy for you.

And it is more about making tax revenue than for any other reason.

And if you don't think soda companies have special interest groups already looking out for them..... then I guess you miss all those soda machines in school lunch rooms (which no, I do not agree with, but the parents of those students should make the call and get the school boards to remove them, not have government step in), in government buildings and so on. The government didn't just put those there freely and say let's serve the people.


It's all about how much government control YOU want in your life. I don't want that much.

I want a federal government that does their best to make sure:

the air, water and food I eat is clean:

that education is at a level unsurpassed:

that I feel reasonably safe that noone will invade:

that the roads are driveable:

that I can enjoy spending my paycheck how I wish:

that helps those who need it, and makes sure that retirees can afford to live and enjoy life:

that punishes those that rip off or do other people harm in situations like Enron, Tyco, Adelphia, organized crime:

a healthcare system on a sliding scale (based on income) that will not bankrupt the nation and provide every person without prejudice the best healthcare possible:

that ensures and protects those rights guaranteed me in the Constitution:

and that does their best to make sure the people have more say over government than the companies.

Everything else is regulated to the states and localities.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Locobot

Wow the level of hyperbole and sarcasm in this thread has long ago passed the point allowing for any kind of meaningful dialogue.

Sporting goods along with almost everything else are taxed in my state upon purchase. The difference between sporting goods and cigarettes, it's kind of sad I actually need to tell you this, is that sporting goods are not produced with known flaws which the companies have tried to hide from consumers for the past 100 years. If a company did produce faulty sporting goods that resulted directly in the injury of those who use them then there would be a recall and or resulting lawsuit. Until the 1990s Tobacco companies denied that their products caused harm and were successful in being impervious to lawsuits.

For your sporting good analogy to work there would have to be a company hypothetically that produced boxing gloves that came with a warning stating: "there is no known relation between repeated blunt head trauma and brain damage." If you actually look at the warnings, that come with almost every piece of sporting gear, I think you'll find them to be a little more honest.