no ash tray

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jeri\";p=\"54848)</div>

There may not be a cigarette lighter, but there are two power outlets, one at the bottom of the dashboard and the second in the center console.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Areometer\";p=\"54556)</div>

Damn . . . I hope this isn't your motivational speech to
drug addicts and alcoholics. As far as I know, nicotine
is considered to be as addictive as heroin. Then again,
perhaps you have disdain for people addicted to
drugs like heroin and alcohol.

FYI, I do smoke and I've tried to quit in the past. I did
manage to quit for over two years. Just like any other addiction,
however, it requires constant vigilance.

Esther

 

They should put smoke alarms in cars, like they have in the bathrooms of airplanes. On detecting smoke, it should immediately shut down the car, apply all the brakes at full force, sound an ear-splitting siren, and douse the car with a high-pressure sprinkler. I guess you can tell I don't like smoke. My father used to smoke in the car. I got carsick under the best of conditions, but the smoke made it pure hell. If I waved my hand to break up the stream of smoke that always came right to me, he would scold me for being inconsiderate!!!

Yes, it's an addiction. Yes, they deserve our sympathy and support. But just like heroin and crack, tobacco should be illegal and the tobacco pushers should be in prison for the rest of their lives. Tobacco is addictive, deadly, and has no legitimate use whatsoever. At least opiates and marijuana and amphetamines have some legitimate medical uses.

As for a change holder, I use the hand-hold in the door for bridge tokens.

P.S. Smoking in the presence of a child is child abuse. People who do that belong in prison also.

P.P.S. I kissed a smoker once, also. I just about had to barf afterwards.

 

I have no friends that smoke anymore and have not for many years. They all quit or the bonds of shared interests have been broken. (that happens, some grow out of the idiocy of youth, some continue to dwell in the gutter life and fail to accomplish anything other than imposing misery on the rest of us)

Actually I could smell the smoke from another car at an intersection recently. When no one smokes in the office, home, stores or personal space it becomes noticable even when coming from another vehicle with my windows up.

Its a dying habit!

 

Each to his own however I have friends and family who smoke. Don't know if they are still friends 'cause when they ask to hitch a ride with me I oblige... handing them an old dog leash hitched to the door handle and a pair of roller blades. I do leave the passenger window open a crack so they can enjoy the JBL music as we speed along the freeway. :lol:

 

Re Smoking's Addictive Qualities:
The vast majority of smokers who can quit easily already have. Eastercat is right about the degree of addiction associated with nicotine. This is in large part due to a discovery made by the tobacco industry in the early 1960s. Can't remember who made the discovery first, but to retain market share, all the others were forced to follow.

What was this grand discovery of the tobacco industry... It was treating the tobacco with ammonia. What this does is strip a couple of hydrogen atoms off the nicotine which in turn allows it to penetrate the blood-brain barrier much faster, 100 micrograms within 3 seconds of lighting up. The smoking cessation counselor that I refer my patients to refers to this as freebasing nicotine. The faster it hits the more addictive a substance tends to be. This counselor feels that this is why nicotine patches and gums tend to be a poor substitute for the truely addicted.

Why bring this up? As much as I hate smoking, and as much as I rant and rave and cajole my patients, I do feel that they deserve some empathy and not just distain. It takes much more than just a little willpower to quit and stay quit. Most ex-smokers even years later will tell you that they still think about how nice a cigarette would be in a particular situation. My smoking cessation counselor herself mentioned that feeling when she was sitting in a traffic jam. So this is just a plea for a little understanding of how difficult it is to be a nicotine addict and to stay in remission.

 

ashtray shouldnt be in a new car. smoking is out...

no two ways about that. if you smoke, quit.

i use the door compartment as a trash can although i admit to throwing very little away in my car.

most of the garbage collected in my car is fast food stuff which all goes back into the bag from whence it came and is removed at the first opportunity (or close to it)

 

I agree with Jchu 100% (though the ammonia thing is news to me). We should not, and I do not, blame the addict. We should just put the pushers in prison for the rest of their lives and confiscate all their assets and all the assets of their families that can be connected with reasonable certainty to their drug-pushing activities. From the CEOs and boards of directors and shareholders of tobacco companies to the store owners who choose to sell (i.e. push) tobacco. They belong in jail, right along with the perverts who hang around schools to entice kids to try/buy illegal drugs.

 

I hate smokers.

Aerometer:
Hate the smoking not the smoker. I know...that's what you meant, right?
Peace,
Paul <----- has seen the light re: smoking -- long ago

 

As a blanket statement, I would have to agree that smokers are losers. For some reason, most smokers I have known have had some related objectionable habits--- like the previously mentioned habit of tossing lit butts out the window, dumping ashtrays in public areas, etc. Vile.

I had two previous boyfriends who smoked. I disposed of them (the boyfriends, not the smokes) pretty quickly once I had my full use. Kissing an ashtray is, again, just vile. Good thing men have some other uses... but, as happened with one, a hole burned in the upholstery of my Camry is not high on the list of pluses.

More recently I was showing a smoker friend the Prius brochure and she immediately noted (aghast) there was no ashtray. I smiled and said, "Yeah! About f-----g time, huh?" She was unimpressed.

 

people smoke because they choose to. remove the right to choose and what do you have?

I think all drugs should be legal. Nature has a way of naturally selecting the types of people who should survive. If someone wants to kill themselves via drug use, then they don't deserve to live and mess up the gene pool. Imagine if the tendancy to use drugs was not passed on through the generations because all drug users were killed off by nature. the addictive gene would be weeded out by natural selection. That would be nature WORKING.

That's why I think rescues and life saving treatments are also naturally wrong. If someone gets cancer, or any other life threatening disease, then they should die, not live to pass on their defective genes. Why must humans constantly mess with nature? likewise, if someone gets seriously injured while being stupid (risking their life) they they should be left to die. Thats nature removing the stupid people from the gene pool so they don't produce more stupid people. Think how much better the human race would be if idiots were weeded out by nature.

Humans are obsessed with saving other humans lives. I sometimes wonder why. Can anyone tell me?

 

Roger, I think you are essentially correct. Someone dying of their own stupidity is one thing--- that's Darwinism in action and a beautiful thing to behold.

However, smokers are polluting air that I must also breathe, which puts me at risk. If smokers could just have a personal tent to keep the offensiveness to themselves, that would be awesome. In fact, I suspect that many would suffocate and die faster that way plus they would get a more intense loser experience.

Hey, we should market this idea...

 

Man, smoking is out. So is fast food. Go watch Supersize me. I've haven't touched a bite of fast food since...

 

Education. A lil' forceful I admit but the answer is education which is for their own good. Let's swap smoking w/ killing in your statement just for a sec. Extreme yes but both kill. Killing kills faster & smoking kills slower. So the notion is the same although the pace is different. So can one go out & kill his boss who just fires him? The answer is no in a civilized & sane world as this act affects ANOTHER PERSON. So does smoking. If you lock yourself in a self-sustained recycled A/C room and affects no one else, smoke all you wish & I wouldn't care. If your smoking behavior kills other people slowly, then I think it is a very selfish & weak thing to do. This is the way I look at it.

Ha, a lil' crooked theory but hey, it contains some senses too, doesn't it? People are killing themselves like you described via various stupid habbits ALREADY. It is us the responsible onlookers / passers-by / concerned ones, who cling onto the silly belief that one day, they will wake up from the slow suicidal process. You're right, we may be wasting our time and our intentions may be too noble to be practical in reality. But we just got to do what we got to do.

Modern day cancer is mostly caused by artificial pollutants/toxins in our food & water chains, so developing cancer is NOT natural. We humans are genetically-engineered to resist dying or hurting ourselves & to fulfill our lives on earth. Unfortunately along our life journeys, we have corrupted & detrimental 'artificial' habbits to shorten our lifespans. Should we let these bad habbits prevail & call it unnatural to stop them? I don't think so. The contrary is truth.

Sure, as this is one trait that seperates humans from most animals. Secondly, we cannot survive individually, we need other humans as well for us to survive. So like I said, we are genetically-engineered to aid other beings in surviving so that we can ALL survive as long as Nature permits.

 

The key here is to achieve a balance. Sure car emission kills, but the invention of cars benefit the human race more so than killing it, so cars stay for a just reason. Argue with me the same way w/ smoking. Tell me WHO benefits in the smoking world and that if the 'Beneficiary' deserves it.

 

efusco, you entirely missed the point. But it doesnt matter.

 

To those who say that people with cancer should just die since this is the best way to prevent the spread of defective genes... This will only work if they die before they have kids. Which is almost never the case. Or do you plan to kill or sterilize the kids?

Plus, this assumes all cancer is genetic, which it is not.


To all those who say all cancer is caused by the pollutants in our environment. Again, science does not completely agree. Some cancer certainly is like lung cancer almost exclusively is. (ie, As little as 1% of lung cancer is not explained by either smoking, or secondhand smoking, or radon or coal mines.)

But it is also quite possible that a lot of cancer is simply one of the ways for humans to die naturally. Thus, some of the increases in cancer rates could simply be due to our longer lives. Cancer is really just cell division that has run amock to the point that the cancerous tissue eats up or starves out the non-cancerous tissue. In some ways it's a mutation of our normal cells. The longer any organism lives and their cells divide oer and over, the more the risk of an aberation like cancer.

And if cancer really is simply a "normal" consequence of cell division after cell division after cell division, what is so wrong with arresting that process still further? In other words, if we can find ways to arrest cancer, what is so wrong with that?

 

it isnt THAT wrong... people like people and so want them to live. However some people do not get cancer and they live in the same environment. there are many many children who develop cancer. these are the ones who should not live to reproduce. natural selection. do not mess with it.

oh, and I think you also missed the point (as soooo many people do) about it all, evidenced by your comment about not all cancers being genetic. it doesn't matter if the cancer itself is genetic or not, what matters is that the suceptibility to getting it is genetic. eg. highly alkaline people don't get cancer, while the more acidic people do.

 

Acidic people?

Alkaline people?

Genetic cancer vs genetic susceptibility to cancer?
And the difference is?


It's posts like this that make living worthwhile. Thanks for the humor.