Friday, June 24, 2011

Property Rights Newsletter

The Property Rights Newsletter

June 24, 2011 - Issue #618

"Man is free at the moment he wishes to be."
- Voltaire
Property Rights for all include Smokers Rights! Nevada Governor signs bill to allow smoking in standalone bars that serve food. Despite opposition from health officials, taverns and standalone bars have won the right to permit both smoking and food service under a bill signed into law Friday by Gov. Brian Sandoval. The new law becomes effective immediately. Under Assembly Bill 571, those under 21 will be barred from taverns where food and smoking is permitted. Under the bill, taverns and bars also could offer two sections: one where adults could smoke and eat, and a second, completely enclosed, no-smoking area for families and adults who prefer that option.

Meanwhile, in New York: The Daily Show with John Stewart. Sam Bee reports on the smoking ban in NYC parks. The video shows how silly the Anti's are demanding a smoke free park when there are so many real problems around! Great job!!!
Your Cigarette Packages!
Property Rights for all include Smokers Rights! USA FDA Cigarette Health Warnings. Beginning September 2012, FDA will require larger, more prominent cigarette health warnings on all cigarette packaging and advertisements in the United States. These warnings mark the first change in cigarette warnings in more than 25 years and are a significant advancement in communicating the dangers of smoking.
No ifs, ands or butts FDA warning photos faked. There is only one problem with the federal government’s great campaign of graphic images aimed at combating the deceit of tobacco companies and rescuing us from our stupid selves. The images are fabricated. The dead man with the zipped-up chest? “It’s not a dead body,” the spokesman assured me. "It’s an actor. It’s supposed to be a cadaver after an autopsy." The man with the wispy smoke coming out of the hole in his throat? "That’s a Photoshopped illustration." The baby in an incubator is a creepy drawing. More...
The Black Pig Lung Hoax. It was an outright bald-faced lie. "Pankiw described the centerpiece of his anti-smoking display as the diseased lung of a 150-pound man who smoked for 15 years. Actually, it was a pig's lung shot full of various carcinogens on purpose, but, Pankiw said later, his lesson was made stronger by not passing along that tidbit of truth."
International Smokers Rights Conference. Caesars Palace, Las Vegas, June 27-29, 2005. Read what was presented by The Smoker's Club in 2005. Listen to Luc Martial saying that Canada forgot to check the facts on their new cigarette packs! They had to look around after the packs came out to find any doctor who would sign off on the facts with no checking.
More Package Warnings Articles from The Newsletter.
Property Rights for all include Smokers Rights!
Have your say at the Club Forum!

Wednesday, June 22, 2011

The new images for packs are fake pics (editorial)


For decades, the federal government has accused tobacco companies of running a campaign of relentless deception in order to sell cigarettes and convince customers that their product will make you sexy, skinny, cool or whatever.

On Tuesday, the government unveiled its latest salvo in its campaign against these companies.

Tobacco peddlers will soon be forced to emblazon every package of their product with graphic new warnings that show what the government says will happen to you if you smoke cigarettes.

One warning shows a cadaver lying on a steel table, chest zipped closed by giant staples. Another, a pair of nastily corroded lungs. In another image, an infant is confined to an incubator and hooked up to a breathing tube. In one startling image, a man is puffing on a cigarette with wisps of smoke escaping a tracheotomy hole in the center of his throat.

There is only one problem with the federal government’s great campaign of graphic images aimed at combating the deceit of tobacco companies and rescuing us from our stupid selves.

The images are fabricated.

“Some are photographs; some are illustrations,” a spokesman at theDepartment of Health and Human Services explained to me Tuesday when I called about the new pictures.

The dead man with the zipped-up chest? “It’s not a dead body,” the spokesman assured me. “It’s an actor. It’s supposed to be a cadaver after an autopsy.”

The man with the wispy smoke coming out of the hole in his throat? “That’s a Photoshopped illustration.”

The baby in an incubator is a creepy drawing.

As for the corroded lungs? Who knows, given their track record so far? Maybe it is a real picture and that of a smoker. Or, perhaps they are the lungs of someone who handled asbestos in a Navy yard for the federal government. Or maybe it is altogether faked.

The government unveiled the bogus pictures at a White House event staged to look like a press conference.

William Corr, a deputy secretary at HHS, lamented the formal setting, saying: “We should be having a party to celebrate!” He went on to testify how the new pictures “tell the truth.”

Another government official called the tobacco company advertising “non-factual and controversial.” The government’s falsified pictures, he said, “speak the truth.”

Not that these government officials had to defend themselves or their campaign from anyone sitting in the audience section. Most questions began with a glowing congratulations or an emotional thank you.

“What languages will be available on the quit line?” inquired one of the questioners about the hotline number that will be plastered beneath each of the haunting images.

The gruesome nature of the pictures call to mind the deeply disturbing and bloody pictures pro-life protesters blow up and carry on picket signs outside political events.

A tiny fist, clenched as if around a finger - or in agony - ripped from its wrist, trailed by bloody veins. Or the unmistakable image of a baby’s face, squished and distorted and wrenched off its skull.

Few people find themselves exposed to these horrific images more often than reporters here in Washington, who travel the countryside chasing after political candidates.

When a bus full of reporters pulls into a political rally, these pictures bob up and down right at bus window level. A quiet falls over everyone.

Reporters recoil internally and give a shiver. They look away from the windows. One will invariably spit, “That should be illegal.”

Visually, in terms of repulsiveness, there is little difference between the tactics of the abortion protesters and those of the federal government. In fact, the only difference is that the government doctored its pictures.

And you paid for them.

Tuesday, June 21, 2011

Can a state ban images on cig packs?

Tennessee recently banned images that cause "emotional distress."

Among all the recent efforts to criminalize free speech, Tennessee's Legislature gets the top award for sheer chutzpah. As Ars Technica reports, the state's governor, Bill Haslam, this month signed a bill making it a crime to "transmit or display an image" that is likely to "frighten, intimidate or cause emotional distress" to anyone who sees it. Importantly, Ars notes that "if a court decides you 'should have known' that an image [would] be upsetting to someone who sees it, you could face months in prison and thousands of dollars in fines."

While the whole statute stands on weak constitutional grounds, that last nuance seems particularly shaky -- and dangerous. That's because of the special jurisprudential protections granted to core political speech -- much of which is consciously intended to upset those who are exposed to it. Indeed, you may be upset by that antiabortion group mailer showing a photo of a fetus, or you may be upset by the antiwar ad showing graphic images of battlefield violence, but that's constitutionally protected speech (as is, by the way, your right to subsequently express your outrage at the images).

At least some Tennessee lawmakers who support the statute would no doubt insist that those examples have a "legitimate purpose," which would exempt them from punishment. However, as Iowa State Daily columnist Claire Vriezen astutely points out, "the phrase 'legitimate purpose' is open to interpretation." That "interpretation" part is no theoretical problem -- it's one that could hit courts very soon, thanks to Tuesday's tobacco-related announcement by the Food and Drug Administration.

Tennessee is a major tobacco-producing state, which suggests there will be no small number of Tennesseans who may feel "frightened, intimidated or emotionally distressed" by new FDA-mandated warning ads that, according to the Associated Press, "depict in graphic detail the negative health effects of tobacco use." These ads, announced Tuesday, include images of "rotting and diseased teeth and gums and a man with a tracheotomy smoking" after a World Health Organization survey found more than 25 percent of foreign smokers said such graphic labels led them to consider quitting. (You can view all nine warning labels below).

The ads, in other words, pose a genuine threat to a major Tennessee industry that has lots of eager-to-litigate lawyers and lots of clout with politicians. Now, thanks to Tennessee's criminalization of free speech, that industry can wield a new statutory weapon against the speech it doesn't like. In a tobacco-state court composed of tobacco-state judges and tobacco-state jurors, this industry could realistically hope that such ads would be ruled illegitimate -- and further, that those who disseminate the ads are criminals. By design, that would undoubtedly create both a chilling effect of self-censorship among tobacco distributors (convenience stores, vending machine owners, etc.), and an innovative legal rationale for the industry to ignore the FDA's new warning-label mandate.

Of course, this all remains hypothetical right now. Big Tobacco, in fact, may not even be interested in such a court case, fearing that any extra attention to the FDA ads will only serve to educate more Americans about the negative health effects of smoking. But that's not the point, because if it's not the tobacco industry that attempts to hijack government censorship power then it will certainly be another industry -- as has already happened in other states including Iowa, Florida, Ohio and Minnesota, where agribusiness has recently been trying to statutorily bar revelations about factory farms. In all of these cases, the bottom line remains the same: When the government criminalizes First Amendment expressions, all it is really doing is using state power to preference one set of voices over another.

By definition, that is the opposite of "freedom" and, when inevitably done for industry objectives, the hallmark of a Corporate Police State

FDA releases the new graphical images for USA cig packs

Today is the day when the FDA released the graphic images for the USA packs. I hear these images are cartoon-like images. I dunno when the packs with images will hit the market. But I take it sometime this fall is when I'll see packs with the new images on them?

I think the images won't have any serious effect on the USA smoking rate. They might encourage more smokers to buy cigarette cases so they won't have to bother seeing the images. But most people who smoke already know about black lungs for instance.

It would actually be neat to see more women use cig cases. Cig cases used to be a lot more common to see among smoking ladies a few decades ago. I dunno if I want a cig case. I intend on ignoring the graphical images anyway. All I care about are the cigs IN the pack. Not what's on the OUTSIDE of the pack.

If a teen wants to smoke, he/she is going to. Regardless of what images are on the pack itself.

Sunday, June 19, 2011

Nevads bar patrons can enjoy cigs with their meals

CARSON CITY, Nev. (AP) - Bar patrons will soon be able to enjoy a cigarette with their meal while eating out in Nevada.

Republican Gov. Brian Sandoval signed a measure Friday allowing food service in adults-only bars and taverns.

The law also allows smoking and eating within family restaurants if the smoking area is physically enclosed.