Intermarkets' Privacy Policy
Support


Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!


Contact
Ace:
aceofspadeshq at gee mail.com
Buck:
buck.throckmorton at protonmail.com
CBD:
cbd at cutjibnewsletter.com
joe mannix:
mannix2024 at proton.me
MisHum:
petmorons at gee mail.com
J.J. Sefton:
sefton at cutjibnewsletter.com


Recent Entries
Absent Friends
Jon Ekdahl 2026
Jay Guevara 2025
Jim Sunk New Dawn 2025
Jewells45 2025
Bandersnatch 2024
GnuBreed 2024
Captain Hate 2023
moon_over_vermont 2023
westminsterdogshow 2023
Ann Wilson(Empire1) 2022
Dave In Texas 2022
Jesse in D.C. 2022
OregonMuse 2022
redc1c4 2021
Tami 2021
Chavez the Hugo 2020
Ibguy 2020
Rickl 2019
Joffen 2014
AoSHQ Writers Group
A site for members of the Horde to post their stories seeking beta readers, editing help, brainstorming, and story ideas. Also to share links to potential publishing outlets, writing help sites, and videos posting tips to get published. Contact OrangeEnt for info:
maildrop62 at proton dot me
Cutting The Cord And Email Security
Moron Meet-Ups





















« "Nerdcore:" Finally, Rap Music That Speaks To Me | Main | Nuking Mecca? »
July 27, 2005

California Bans Smoking In Prison

Not as a form of punishment; just to make all those prisoners healthier.

Guards are banned from smoking too:

The California Department of Corrections (search) has banned cigarette smoking indoors and outdoors for both inmates and employees. The Department of Corrections hopes this move will cut health care costs by hundreds of millions of dollars a year.

"It just helps reduce the risk of secondhand smoking, helps reduce the risk of tobacco illness not just for employees, but for inmates as well," said Lt. Ken Lewis (search), spokesman for the California State Prison, Los Angeles County.

Gee, if they can't control drugs and weapons in prison, won't it be hard to stop smoking?

But the ban may not get rid of all tobacco products in California prisons. A black market for chewing tobacco has already emerged. Tins that normally cost $11 can run as much as $200 on the cellblock.

Oh.

No doubt, smoking is bad for your and a nasty, stinky habit.

But this Fascism of Health and Niceness is getting out of hand.

Thanks to NickS.


posted by Ace at 01:00 PM
Comments



We now know that ace will make sure never to be arrested in California.

Posted by: max on July 27, 2005 01:07 PM

Hope they triple staff those prisons during the transition, 'cause there are going to be a lot of irritable fuckers in one tight space.

Posted by: TheDude on July 27, 2005 01:08 PM

A tin of chewing tobacco cost $11 a can in CA?! Whoa

Posted by: brak on July 27, 2005 01:17 PM

$11!! Those commies! I'll bet there's a nice, healthy black market in dip outside of prisons, too. In fact, since it's "only" $4.45 in PA...

Posted by: John on July 27, 2005 01:25 PM

Yeah, the cost of living is getting so high in California that even the inmates are feeling the pinch...
Poor guys have to pay $200 per can...

WTF??!!

How do these scumbags have $200 to throw around in the first place???!!!

Posted by: Uncle Jefe on July 27, 2005 01:37 PM

from selling drugs

Posted by: Dave in Prison on July 27, 2005 01:42 PM

They shouldn't let the inmates smoke. Prison life should be uncomrtable, and smoking is a luxruy. Plus, when the negative health effects set in, who pays for their care? The taxpayer

Posted by: brak on July 27, 2005 01:53 PM

I'm a huge smokers' rights advocate but I'll agree with brak here. Smoking is a luxury and prisons aren't anywhere near as harsh as they should be, at least not in the right way. Everyone in prison should suffer equally.

Far more offensive was the MSNBC Connected segment today in which some NJ dipshits were trying to make a case for stopping law-abiding citizens smoking in their own fucking cars. Wannabe fascists make me sick.

Posted by: Megan on July 27, 2005 02:14 PM

By that logic, brak, we should feed them nothing but vegetarian diets and enforce mandatory fitness programs, and that's just the beginning. Newsflash for you, but prison life already *is* uncomfortable. Being a nanny state warden needn't be part of the package.

Furthermore, I'd wager that the money spent on additional medical costs are offset by the reduction in years of providing 24/7 room & board. If smoking actually resulted in a net savings, then perhaps we need to let them smoke as much as they want to.

Posted by: NickS on July 27, 2005 02:16 PM

Maybe if the health care costs were less than the room and board, I'd change my mind. But I'm not sure about that.

Smoking is a luxury though. I don't think there should be cable TV in prison either.

Posted by: brak on July 27, 2005 02:22 PM

No smoking for prisoners, but let the guards smoke just to piss the prisoners off.

Posted by: John from WuzzaDem on July 27, 2005 02:33 PM

I smoked for more years than I'd care to mention and I think smoking should be banned in the prison system, if for no other reason that to save the taxpayers from footing the bill for sick inmates. We're already paying tens of millions for the cost of sick smokers now, if we can reduce that we (and they) will all be far better off.

I bought into all the same arguments to protect smoking before. But when I see through smoke free eyes how terrible the effects of smoking really are, I believe firmly that cigarettes should be illegal because they are, and have always been, an unsafe product. Someday they will be illegal and we'll all be better off without them.

Posted by: 72 3-legged dogs on July 27, 2005 02:39 PM

I don't have a problem with this, if the people who actually work with the prisoners don't. Especially since we're paying for their treatment. (As for feeding them vegetarian diets for their health, that sounds like a fine idea to me.)

I do think that we should try to make some aspects of prison bearable. I'm in favor of access to good books and movies and whatnot, because I want them to be in a sane state of mind when they're released. Most of all, I think that the amount of violence and rape in prisons is intolerable. It disturbs me for humanitarian reasons, and it worries me when I think about people being released after years in such an environment.

If it sounds like I'm being soft on crime, let me counter that by saying that I think prison sentences for violent crimes are typically way too short.

Posted by: SJKevin on July 27, 2005 02:42 PM

72 cigarettes:

I'm an ex-smoker, too. Cigarettes are a plague on humanity.

I still don't really think that outlawing them for adults is the right answer, although I wish it were.

The most important thing is to prevent minors from getting them, since most people start smoking when they're in their teens. When I was young, the lobby of the diner right next to my high school had a cigarette machine we all used. This is the kind of thing which needs to be prevented.

People talk about the dangers of cigarettes mainly in terms of a shortened lifespan. But to be honest, that doesn't bother me much. What bothers me most is the years of needless agony prior to the early death. Many non-smokers live long lives feeling good much of the time, then they get sick and die, never having spent a huge amount of time hospitalized. But smokers often spend years in bed, in pain, suffering asphyxiation, before they die young. For me, it's not about the early death, it's about all the pain that precedes it.

Posted by: SJKevin on July 27, 2005 02:53 PM

Unless TV and movies have lied to me (and they never, ever do that), cigarettes are sorta the currency in prisons, right? The lubrication, if you will, ensuring the system works as well as it does.

If you yank 'em all out, won't they need to find another basic unit of exchange? Where do they go from there? Bricks? Severed testicles? Bibles?

Seriously. It's a head-scratcher.

Posted by: Knemon on July 27, 2005 02:53 PM

Prison smoking? It's like getting your salad tossed by an ashtray.

Posted by: spongeworthy on July 27, 2005 03:01 PM

Spongey's right. Lips that touch cigarettes will never touch my squeakhole.

Posted by: Pretty Prison Baby on July 27, 2005 03:04 PM

SJKevin

Yeah, its only been three years for me and I've heard you're not out of the woods for 7-10 years!!! In Tom Wolfe's Look Homeward Angel there is a scence in which his brother dies of smoking and it is horrific. As to making cigarettes illegal, they are an unsafe product and always have been. If the government didn't make so much money on them they'd have been illegal 2o years ago. But eventually, they will be and we'll all be better off.

BTW - From the vantage point of a non-smoker when I see old movies now the thing that strikes me most about smokers is how often they smoke. They smoke one every fifteen minutes or so, all day every day! Going without a cigarette for half and hour to an hour used to seem a long time. Talk about addiciting!

Posted by: 72 VIRGINS on July 27, 2005 03:10 PM

Fortunately, this nanny state imposition took place AFTER Clint Eastwood filmed "The Dead Pool", which has one of the best EVER Dirty Harry scenes.

If you don't know what I'm talking about, go rent it.

"Oh, you see that greaseball down there? He says that smoking causes cancer and that anyone who smokes as much as you do is one *dumb* son of a bitch."

rotfl.

Posted by: NickS on July 27, 2005 03:17 PM

Ban smoking in prisons, just give them heroin.

Posted by: digitalbrownshirt on July 27, 2005 06:41 PM

Aw jeez digitalbrownshirt, you beat me.
I was going to suggest an opium tube in every cell. Just for the lifers.
Make them nice and pliable and nonviolent.

Posted by: lauraw on July 27, 2005 07:15 PM

How about curarie or ricin?

Posted by: 72 Twinkies on July 27, 2005 07:20 PM

There is one important thing to remember about the ill effects of smoking. The majority of deaths come not from lung cancer but rather heart failure. A smoker is more likely to have a fatal DRT heart attack and never spend a prolonged period in a cancer ward nor collect Social Security benefits.

The Los Angeles Times recently ran an article bemoaning the number of senior citizens behind bars with severe medical expenses. If we let those people have as many cigarettes as they like, for their sole use and not as trade goods, we could save a fortune by letting them off themselves.
http://www.latimes.com/features/health/consumer/la-tm-oldcons26jun26,1,5821557.story

Posted by: epobirs on July 27, 2005 08:22 PM

Yeah. let's force 'em to live nice loooooooooong lives so they can rip us off longer. Sheesh.

buncha old ladies in pantaloons.

Posted by: W.E.Todd on July 27, 2005 10:00 PM

No smoking in prison?

Gee, the next thing you know, they are gonna ban butt-sex in prison too...


Oh...

Posted by: cheshirecat on July 28, 2005 10:03 AM

cool site

Posted by: ebony on July 28, 2005 06:44 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?








Now Available!
The Deplorable Gourmet
A Horde-sourced Cookbook
[All profits go to charity]
Top Headlines
Oil prices plunge on bizarre realization that Eric Swalwell may actually be straight. A rapey molester, allegedly, but a straight one.
Classic Rock Mystery Click
This is super-obscure and I only barely remember it. Given that, I'll give you the hint that it's by the Red Rocker.
And I guess you think you've got it made
Oh, but then, you never were afraid
Of anything that you've left behind
Oh, but it's alright with me now
'Cause I'll get back up somehow
And with a little luck, yes, I'm bound to win

Now twenty people will tell me it's not obscure, it was huge in their hometown and played at their prom. That's how it usually goes. When I linked Donnie Iris's "Love is Like a Rock," everyone said they knew that one and that his other song (which I didn't know at all) Ah Leah! was huge in their area.
You know we "joke" about the GOPe just "conserving" leftist things?
David French just posted:

Populists ask what conservativism has ever conserved?
Well its about to conserve birthright citizenship!
Posted by: 18-1

I couldn't hate this queen of the cuck-chair more if it paid seven figures and came with a corner office.
CJN podcast 1400 copy.jpg
Podcast: CBD and Sefton talk birthright citizenship, the 14th Amendment and SCOTUS, no boots in Iran, Artemis II and refocusing NASA, the NBA's hatred of everything non-woke, and more!
In more marketing for Project Hail Mary, scientists say they've found the biosigns indicating life growing on an alien planet. It's not proof, just signatures of chemicals that are produced by biological metabolism, and it could be nothing, but scientists think it's a strong sign that this planet is inhabited by something.
In a paper published in the Astrophysical Journal Letters, a team of scientists announced the detection of dimethyl sulfide (along with a similar detection of dimethyl disulfide) in the atmosphere of an exoplanet called K2-18b. This is actually the second detection of dimethyl sulfide made on this planet, following a tentative detection in 2023.
Tons of chemicals are detected in the atmospheres of celestial objects every day. But dimethyl sulfide is different, because on Earth, it's only produced by living organisms.
"It is a shock to the system," Nikku Madhusudhan, first author on the paper, told the New York Times. "We spent an enormous amount of time just trying to get rid of the signal."

He means they tried to prove the signal was caused by things other than dimethyl sulfide but they could not.
Artemis moon shot a go, scheduled for 6:24 Eastern time tonight
Great marketing arranged by Amazon to promote Project Hail Mary. Okay not really but it does work out that way.
What? Skeleton of the most famous Musketeer, D'Artagnan, possibly discovered in Dutch church closet.
Dumas picked four names of real musketeers out of a history book, D'Artagnan, Athos, Aramis, and Porthos. So there was an actual D'Artagnan, though he made most of the story up. (Or, you know, all of it.)*
Charles de Batz de Castelmore, known as d'Artagnan, the famous musketeer of Kings Louis XIII and Louis XIV, spent his life in the service of the French crown.
The Gascon nobleman inspired Alexandre Dumas's hero in "The Three Musketeers" in the 19th century, a character now known worldwide thanks to the novel and numerous film adaptations.
D'Artagnan was killed during the siege of Maastricht in 1673, and there is a statue honoring the musketeer in the city. His final resting place has remained a mystery ever since.

A lot of Dumas's stories are based on bits of real history. The plot of the >Three Musketeers, about trying to recover lost diamonds from the queen's necklace, was cribbed from the then-almost-contemporaneous Affair of the Queen's Necklace. And the Man in the Iron Mask is based on real accounts of a prisoner forced to wear a mask (though I think it was a velvet mask).
* Oh, I should mention, Dumas says all this, about finding the names in an old book, in the prologue to his novel. But authors lie a lot. They frequently present fictions as based on historic fact. The twist is, he was actually telling the truth here. At least about these four musketeers having actually existed and served under Louis XIV.
Fun fact: You know the beginning of A Fistful of Dollars where the local gunslingers make fun of Clint Eastwood's donkey and Eastwood demands they apologize to the donkey? That's lifted from The Three Musketeers. Rochefort mocks D'Artagnan's old, brokedown farm horse and D'Artagnan is incensed.
A commenter asked which should be read first, The Hobbit of LOTR?
Easy, no question -- read The Hobbit first. It's actually the start of the story and comes first chronologically. It sets up some major characters and major pieces in play in LOTR.
Also, the Hobbit is Beginner-Friendly, which LOTR isn't. The Hobbit really is a delightful book, and a fast read. It's chatty, it's casual, it's exciting, and it's funny. In that dry cheeky British humor way. I love that the narrator is constantly making little asides and commentary, like he's just sitting next to you telling you this story as it occurs to him.
LOTR is a very long story. Fifteen hundred pages or so. The Hobbit is relatively short and very punchy and easy to read. If you don't like The Hobbit, you can skip out on LOTR. If you do like it, you'll be primed to read LOTR.
Oh, I should say: The Hobbit is written as if it's for children, but one of those smart children's stories that are also for adults. Don't worry, there's also real fighting and violence and horror in it, too.
LOTR is written for adults. (It's said that Tolkien wrote both for his children, but LOTR was written 17 years later, when his children were adults.) Some might not like The Hobbit due to its sometimes frivolous tone. Me, I love it. I find it constantly amusing. Both are really good but there is a starkly different tone to both. LOTR is epic, grand, and serious, about a world war, The Hobbit is light and breezy, and about a heist. Though a heist that culminates in a war for the spoils.
The Hobbit Challenge: Read two more chapters. I didn't have much time. Bilbo got the ring.
I noticed a continuity problem. Maybe. Now, as of the time of The Hobbit, it was unknown that this magic ring was in fact a Ring of Power, and it was doubly unknown that it was the Ring of Power, the Master Ring that controlled the others.
But the narrator -- who we will learn in LOTR was none of than Bilbo himself, who wrote the book as "There and Back Again" -- says this about Gollum's ring:
"But who knows how Gollum had come by that present [the Ring], ages ago in the old days when such rings were still at large in the world? Perhaps even the Master who ruled them could not have said."
In another passage, the ring is identified as a "ring of power."
I don't know, I always thought there was a distinction between mere magic rings and the Rings of Power created by Sauron. But this suggests that Bilbo knew this was a ring of power created by Sauron.
Now I don't remember when Bilbo wrote the Hobbit. In the movie, he shows Frodo the book in Rivendell, and I guess he wrote it after he left the Shire. I guess he might have added in the part about the ring being a ring of power created by "the Master" after Gandalf appraised him of his research into the ring.
I never noticed this before. I know Tolkien re-wrote this chapter while he was writing LOTR to make the ring important from the start. And also to make Gollum more sinister and evil, and also to remove the part where Gollum actually offers Bilbo the ring as a "present" -- Bilbo had already found it on his own, but Gollum was wiling to give it away, which obviously is not something the rewritten Gollum would ever do.
But I had no memory of the ring being suggested to be The Ring so early in the tale.
Finish the job, Mr. President!
Melanie Phillips lays out the case for the total destruction of the Iranian government and armed forces. [CBD]
Recent Comments
SMOD: " Joshua Hall @JoshHall2024 🚨BREAKING: ..."

Smell the Glove: "Can't watch Bartiromo's show because the rehab pla ..."

18-1: "[i]To stop the threat we either need to end the re ..."

[/b][/i][/u][/s]I used to have a different nic: "[i]... to be this platform of power projection for ..."

Eeyore: "Bad news for Campa-Najjar: Democrats fight like do ..."

Don Black: "I was thinking about the current unpleasantness in ..."

Thomas Paine: "Is it not a military problem but one of insurance& ..."

NR Pax: "[i]It's a wonder the justice system participants d ..."

18-1: "[i]I've said for years now that I don't want (and ..."

Yep: "[i]I've said for years now that I don't want (and ..."

Eeyore: "“I think the most important thing is that we ..."

Another alternative: "To stop the threat we either need to end the regim ..."

Bloggers in Arms
Some Humorous Asides
Archives