FDA Deeming Regulations Protect Children ... I'm Confudsed ... What Age Is An Adult?
ghostsofpompeii
Master
At first glance you might look at the topic of this discussion and assume I'm a fool for asking such a question - but look deeper into my argument and you may see my point. First off, this whole FDA Deeming Regulation situation has set off a firestorm among we pipe smokers and for good reasons. We're all pretty tired of having our rights and liberties taken away under the guise of protecting the rights and liberties of others. And in most cases their assumptions are based on flawed logic, while at the same time making contradicting decisions based on other flawed logic. Such as legalizing marijuana to alleviate the drug problem while doing everything in their power to curb or restrict the use of tobacco for health issues and to protect the youth from the dangers associated with smoking. Where is the logic in that?
But it's this whole 'for the protection of children' argument that has me in something of a quandary. Here we have the FDA deciding on the fate of the tobacco industry in an effort to protect our children when there doesn't even seem to be concessions of what actually constitutes an ADULT.
In 47 states a person is considered an ADULT at age 18 ... meaning he or she is responsible for any binding contracts that they sign including buying a car, house, or signing a lease on an apartment, military duty - with the potential to die in defense of their Country, the right to vote, get married and have children of their own - and legally buy cigarettes. Some states like California are changing the age requirements for smoking from 18 to 21. Adult admission at theme parks like Disneyland and Disney World is 18. But if you're looking for that first drink you must be 21 (even though the odds are pretty high that if you had a wedding alcohol was served and you drank a toast or two), and same holds true when purchasing a handgun. Which is odd considering trained and well armed 18 year olds are protecting the country as members of the military. And Car Rental Agencies won't rent to anyone under 25 years old. See no one knows what the Hell they're doing ... how can we make laws to protect children from tobacco when we can't even decide what age a child transitions to adulthood. And now here comes the best kicker of all to prove my point that the Government doesn't know when a 'child' becomes an 'adult'.
Before I make that revelation let me stir the pot a bit more. I'm sure every parent raising an adolescence child has been faced with protests of unrestricted independence ... "Stop treating me like a child - I'm 16.". And the real kicker is when they're three or four years older and still living at home ... "Stop treating me like a child ... I'm an adult." Yet these same 18+ year old colleges kids when confronted by real world dilemmas or political opinions that differ from their own become so traumatized they require consoling and therapy sessions which include safe zone where these young adults can engage in making craft projects and coloring in books like Kindergarteners. Maybe that explains the final act in this bizarre numbers game I've been trying to wrap my head around.
Apparently the Government doesn't think you're an adult at 18 or 21. At least that seems to be the consensus of the current Politicians (both Democrat And Republican - in an apparent act to capture the youth vote), who both agree that one aspect of our embattled health care plan "The Affordable Care Act" is they should include keeping 'children' on the parent's policy till the age of 26. Did you get that ... "children up to the age of 26". Not an 18 or 21 year old adult. But a 26 year old child. I need a Tylenol.
It's damn scary to think the fate of our hobby rests in the hand of these same Politicians who can't even agree on when a person is of legal age to make decisions for themselves. Then again what difference does it make since they intend on making those decisions for us anyway. Maybe fI'll take four Tylenol, a bottle of Jack, and a bowl of Molto Dolce.
Comments
In a nutshell, it is a dirty tactic, used to play on the emotions of the masses. The same argument is used in the gun control debate.
Nothing pulls on the heartstrings of the masses, like sympathy for defenseless children or defenseless animals. All the libbys need to do, is convince the masses, that the children and/or the animals are under fire, even if they are not.
If Americans are expected to give up the freedoms, that brave men and women have fought and died to protect, there needs to be justification in the mind of the average lemming. The excuse "We have to do it for the children," is the ultimate dirty tactic that goes straight for the jugular.
You speak of "the government" as if it were a single entity. It's not - we're talking about 51 separate governments here.
Most states define 18 as the age of adulthood for purposes of voting, signing contracts, etc. The Federal government defines 18 at the age you are an adult for military service.
Research has shown, however,that the brain is not fully developed until about age 25 - thus car rental policy, which, of course, has nothing to do with the government.
In Michigan, where I live, when the drinking age was lowered to 18, there was a spurt in high school students having access to alcohol, so they raised the age back to 21.
Legalizing marijuana is one step towards a more sensible drug policy. The War on Drugs was started by Nixon et al as a way to attack the counterculture of the late 1960s and early 1970s, as well as ethnic minorities. It had nothing to do with anything else.Current drug policy treats what is basically a public health issue as a criminal matter. It makes no sense whatsoever.
The current hostility towards tobacco is fueled, to a large extent, by the total refusal of Big Tobacco to admit any health risks whatsoever.
Everyone is always somebody's child, even as an adult. I have three children, who are now grown adults.Since we don't have a sensible health care policy - like single payer - it makes sense to give young adults the option to stay on their parents' health care as they get established in the world, if they don't have other options.
A lot of the regulations of tobacco are as much about protecting Big Tobacco as anything else.
Lastly, using tobacco is not a right - it's a privilege, just like using alcohol.
Pretty much says is all about today's precious snowflakes.
although you've made an effort at making a legitimate argument, I have to tell you, respectfully, that I absolutely disagree with you.
A literal, albeit unpopular, position on the U.S. Constitution deduces that anything not specifically forbidden or denied, is by definition "A Right", not a privilege as you would suggest.
The government(s), however, are specifically limited in their "rights or power", through the language contained within the Constitution... Enumerated powers means exactly that! Numbered, Finite, Specific and LIMITED !
Furthermore, Rights are not "Given or Bestowed" upon us by our government(s). Our rights are indeed "Recognized" by the Constitution. They are not "Granted" to us as the "Privileges" we grant our children when they behave as we would wish.
I will admit that much of the wrath we tobacco users experience has indeed been the consequence of the actions of the Big Tobacco bad guys you reference, but this does not mean that we should lay down and acquiesce to the despotism of the Mob-de-jour. We are not responsible/accountable for the sins of our fathers, or in this situation, tobacco producers.
For us to bow our heads in shame over the actions of such people / entities is nothing less than capitulation or a fais de compli. I for one will not go silently into the night and will most certainly not kowtow to the current groupthink that would have us bow our heads and silently accept their beration as a matter of course.
Being a relative noob here, I have yet to get an accurate read on the different personalities and therefore their tone / intent when they post.
That being said, your post caused me to laugh out loud. I guess my post does look as if I may have taken artistic liberties with the "lets go get some aliens boys" speech.
When you think about it though, it's not too far from the truth. (stay with me here, I'm gonna try to circle this back around and connect the dots).
Being born in the early 60's I remember July 20, 1969 around 8 or 9pm sitting on the floor of my living room with all of my buddies, each wearing his interpretation of a space suit or helmet, drinking our Tang and eating our Astronaut Food Sticks and watching Neal Armstrong take his first steps on the moon. After that I was hooked. Couldn't get enough of space and flying and subsequently science fiction books, movies and comic books.
I had the good fortune of having some great mentors along the years, parents, teachers, family members and friends, that helped me calibrate my moral compass, learning how to accurately discern right from wrong in an objective and logical manner, and most likely helped shape my world view.
Getting back to that scifi thing I mentioned. I remember one of the most disturbing movies, at least at the time I watched it, was Invasion of the Body Snatchers, the black & white 1956 version that was playing late one summer night in 1973. The thought that evil aliens could snatch up one of my friends and then take their place was unsettling for me. Actually gave me nightmares. When the remake came out in 1978 my girlfriend Paula and I went to the drive-in on a double date with friends and watched it. Gave me nightmares again.
Staying with the scifi theme a bit longer here, imagine if you will, a person somehow is taken from the earth in, oh, I don't know, 1988. By, oh, I don't know... Aliens! Anyway, if they were to return, oh, I dunno, Now! I wonder what sort of paranoid, alternate reality, invasion of the body snatchers thoughts would be running through their minds.
Think about it, just rip a headline or front page from any newspaper (if you can actually find a newspaper) and look at the things being reported since their departure...
College students protesting against free speech
College students demanding "safe spaces" that are free from anything that might cause any cognitive dissonance
College students demanding free college
College dropouts demanding $15 an hour wages for unskilled positions
Main Stream Media organizations reporting personal opinions as fact, yet reporting facts as alternative truth
Wrong Think
Dangerous Talk
Micro-aggression
BLM
Al's Inconvenient Truth (both the original release and the reality check on all of his predictions)
White privilege
HB2
Judaeo Christian persecution,both here and abroad
Racial tension
Email Leaks
Hands up Don't shoot
Fast n Furious
Reporters have become hacks
Hackers become actual reporters
IRS targeting people based on political affiliation
EPA declares CO2 a toxic pollutant
Hockey stick graph
Hockey stick graph debunked
FDA deems a pipe made of wood, glass, stone, etc... is tobacco
TSA gropes grandmas
DHS hacks election
NSA surveillance on Americans
Carbon Footprints
Social Justice
Hipsters
Emo's
9-11
Boston Marathon Bombing
Murrah Building Bombing
War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength.
The best books are those that tell you what you know already.
If you want to keep a secret, you must also hide it from yourself.
Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.
It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face -- for ever.
2 + 2 = 5
I think you get the point. Such a traveler in time would most certainly experience an "Up is Down, Left is Right," you know the whole...
Invasion of the Body Snatchers moment.
Or maybe, just maybe it's actually...
We have met the enemy and they are us.
@Bonanzadriver You're absolutely right about "Up is Down - and Left is Right". Lifestyle choices that were once considered on the fringe and odd are now the norm ... and anyone thinking or expressing an opinion otherwise is the oddball to be ostracized. In 1952 Christine Jorgenson's (George William Jorgenson) sex reassignment transition made him/her a national curiosity and was considered by most to be scandalous and against the laws of nature. The headline of the 12/1/52 New York Times read: "Ex-GI Becomes Blonde Bombshell". Today the same procedure is commonplace and that New York Times headline would be deemed offensive by the mainstream news. Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner has become a media darling appearing on magazine covers and countless TV appearances. Leading some liberal thinking parents to consider gender alteration as a viable option for their confused adolescents struggling with a gender identity crisis And anyone who questions the parents judgment or thinks otherwise is berated with labels of intolerance.
Politicians are morally corrupt - a perfect example is the last 4 out of 7 Illinois Governors ended up in prison. And respected members of the clergy have fared no better.
Several comedians refuse to do the college circuit because political correctness has gotten so completely out of control it's impossible to get through an act without offending someone then finding yourself subjected to a media apology tour in hopes of rehabilitating your reputation. George Carlin, Bill Hicks, Dick Gregory, and Lenny Bruce would have never stood a chance on today's comedy circuit.
And it's become clear that Ted Turner's June 1, 1980 experiment for a 24 hour news station has outlived it's usefulness. To fill in that 24 hour gap stations like CNN, MSNBC and FOX have filled the seat once held by highly respected Newcasters with opinionated Commentators. Cable News Networks can't report the unfiltered news without expressing an opinion or twisting the information to twist it to fit their agenda. And like you I too remember watching those great old Sci-Fi classics of the 50s' ("Invasion Of The Body Snatchers" is a personal favorite as well) - and if you recall many of those late night movies began at 10:15 p.m. ... right after the news. Now think about that - local stations were able to provide the daily news, sports, and weather in 15 minutes. I think we'd all be in a much better mental state if 24 hour cable was gone - and newscasters reported "just the facts" - and did it in 30 minutes or less.
Yes my friend, your hijacked Earthling would find the world a much different place today than it was in 1988 ... and even more so if he or she was beamed up during the 50s' or 60s'. Change can be good ... but not always. The only time I can think of when change is always for the best is when changing a baby's dirty diaper.
In my youth, we could at least rely on the New York Times for straightforward reporting. This is sadly no longer the case. Justifiably, their credibility is now pretty much in the crapper with everyone else.
I'm afraid the best we can do is to monitor what is reported by both the liberal and the conservative news outlets, and then recognize that the truth probably lies somewhere in between. A tedious process for sure, but probably the only way to get some vague idea of what is really going on.
Funny thing is we all seem to have a general distrust in the Government ... or powers that be (I think the two terms may not actually be mutually inclusive) - and we complain about the loss of our rights when something we truly enjoy, like our tobacco, is taken from us. But in the last decade I've watched in amazement as we not only unwittingly relinquished one of our most cherished rights (the right to privacy) - but actually opened our wallets and forked out our hard earned cash to finance this invasion of privacy by buying the very equipment required to monitor our every word and deed; and then install it in our homes for the eyes and ears of "who knows who". And they did it to us with catch phrases and shiny objects while distracting us from what really was happening.
Land line home phones were replaced by convenient cell phones that could do everything a Star Trek Communicator could do and more. Including track your every move - as well as record every call (it's not wiretapping) without a Court Order. And now we can't live without it. For some people it's an addiction. And of course one never knows when some jerk with a camera phone is pointed in your direction or up some young girls skirt as she ascends the escalator ... the video to be shared later on the internet. And speaking of the internet, most home computers are equipped with a web cam for Skype. Web cams that can be switched on without you being aware of it. Same goes for baby monitors and wireless security cams people assume are only used to protect themselves from evil doers. When in fact evil doers are sometimes using those same cameras for their purposes. And other than a police officer I can't imagine why anyone would need a dash cam. Big Brother is watching you ... and you supplied him the camera equipment.
If a police officer or some Government official were to walk up to your door and demand to swab the inside of your mouth for a DNA sample for no apparent reason you'd go ballistic. But if someone on a TV commercial tells you how special you are and how important it is to discover your heritage. And all you have to do is contact Ancestry.com or their competitor 23andMe and for $79.00 and they'll send you a DNA kit so you can swab out a sample of your DNA and send it to them for an evaluation. And as the ad says "Discover what makes you uniquely you." Now remember a cop comes to your door asking for your DNA you 'pitch- a- bitch' ... a silver tongued spokesperson strokes your ego and tells you how special you are and you spit on a Q-TIP and send them $79.00.
And now what prompted me to write this rant in the first place. Two products that are getting considerable commercial time intended to be the next big thing in 'have time' saving devices for the American home. And possibly even the worse example of paying for a device that hears your every word. Nothing you say in the privacy of your home will escape detection if you are within range. The products are ... The Amazon Echo (your price for this little eavesdropping device $79.00) or the competitor Google Home ($130.00). You've seen the commercials ... someone walks into a home asks the time and a cute little cylindrical tower spits out the time. Ask it a question ... it has all the answers. Ask it to turn out the lights ... off they go. Here are some selling points hi-lighted in the ad ... *hands free convenience with voice control ... *hears you from across the room with far-field voice recognition, even while music is playing ... *controls lights, fans, switches, thermometers, garage doors, sprinklers, locks and more ... always getting smarter and adding new features.
Now what can possibly go wrong with that. People you need to watch "Demon Seed" to see what happens when a computerized house decides who is in control. Hard to believe how easily we were suckered into selling off our right to privacy. And did I with a smile on our face as we opened the box it came in.
@xDutchx That last line always getting smarter and adding new features was a real eye opener. In all honesty it doesn't even matter if or when it becomes self-aware - anther factor to consider is the people on the other end listening in and providing the answers and services. It doesn't take a thinking computer to begin either locking you in and turning up the thermometer to sweat you out ... they can just as easily open all your doors and simply walk in should they hear you say something they deem makes you a security risk. Time to start pulling out the old sci-fi flicks and view them with as more than escapist entertainment. Reminds me of that Tom Cruise movie "Minority Report" where they arrest people they predict will commit a crime. I was never one for wacky conspiracy theories - that was my youngest son. We'd have debates about it all the time and I'd tell him he's too paranoid and over-thinking everything. Now I'm moving towards his way of thinking as new revelations come to light that verified his concerns.
At what point does protecting the rights and liberties of one group cross the line into Intruding on the rights and liberties of the so call offender. I guess what I mean is I find it peculiar that Most of the people that want to accuse others of wrong doing( we'll take smoking for example) The non smokers need their rights protected and we need to stop smoking. What about the smokers rights, if we are regulated to stop what we care about. What makes their rights more valuable than ours. Now I understand the health risks associated with second hand smoke so maybe the example doesn't quite fit with my point but you can apply it to almost any issue when someone gets offended today. And as far as I've seen it usually the minority side of whatever issue you pick is the one making the most noise about it, and the majority side gets their rights infringed upon. Sorry if this doesn't pertain but its what came to mind in reading these post. And if I offended anyone, I guess my right of free speech is wrong and should be taken away. :P
@2motie Thanks for the article. If anyone who is concerned about an invasion of privacy buys into this product they need their head examined.
<!--IDG.GPT.IMUCounter = IDG.GPT.IMUCounter + 1;IDG.GPT.addDisplayedAd(IDG.GPT.getIMUSlotName(), "true");document.write('<div id="' +IDG.GPT.getIMUSlotName() + '" class="ad-container">');IDG.GPT.defineGoogleTagSlot(IDG.GPT.getIMUSlotName(), [[300,250],[300,50]]);document.write('</div>');$('#' + IDG.GPT.getIMUSlotName()).responsiveAd({screenSize:'971 1115', scriptTags: []});if (Object.keys(IDG.GPT.companions).length > 0) { IDG.GPT.display(IDG.GPT.getIMUSlotName());}//--><!--IDG.GPT.IMUCounter = IDG.GPT.IMUCounter + 1;IDG.GPT.addDisplayedAd(IDG.GPT.getIMUSlotName(), "true");document.write('<div id="' +IDG.GPT.getIMUSlotName() + '" class="ad-container">');IDG.GPT.defineGoogleTagSlot(IDG.GPT.getIMUSlotName(), [[300,250],[300,50]]);document.write('</div>');$('#' + IDG.GPT.getIMUSlotName()).responsiveAd({screenSize:'971 1115', scriptTags: []});if (Object.keys(IDG.GPT.companions).length > 0) { IDG.GPT.display(IDG.GPT.getIMUSlotName());}//-->You already trust your Echo to organize your calendar and select music for you, but now Amazon wants Alexa to help pick your outfit, too.
Echo Look is the latest device in Amazon’s ever-expanding line of AI-powered product line, and it’s designed to give you an eye for fashion. Literally. The new Echo is more chic and stylish than its cylindrical predecessor, but it contains all of the listening and audio capabilities of the original Echo with one big addition: It now has a camera. Make that a voice-controlled camera.
That’s right, Alexa will now take pictures of you on command, using a “hands-free camera that includes built-in LED lighting, depth-sensing camera, and computer vision-based background blur.” But the pics you snap aren’t just for your Instagram followers, they’re so you can see how you look before you step out.
There’s also a feature called Style Check that utilizes "advanced machine learning algorithms and advice from fashion specialists” to help you choose between different outfits. And you’ll also be able to create a personal “lookbook” as well as share your photos with friends in case you don’t trust Alexa’s fashion sense.
Like the original Echo, the $200 Look is currently available only through a personal invitation from Amazon.
Take a long, hard look: While we love being able to control our smart home with voice commands and ask Alexa questions while we’re sitting on our couch, at first glance the Echo Look goes a little too far. There are already privacy concerns with the original Echo’s always-listening system; putting a camera in our bedroom might be a bridge too far. Plus, Motherboard is already reporting that Amazon plans to store the pictures and videos you take “indefinitely,” and we’d sure like to know what they’re allowed to do with them. So, while the technology here certainly looks interesting, we need to learn a little more about it first.
Before I go any further, I would like to disclose that none of what I'm about to say is intended to be political. It's a statement of fact, although parties from either side of aisle may think it is intended one way or the other, it is not in support of any one political party or ideology.
Speaking of Original Intent, I find it funny that many media sources, universities and talking heads have created a conversation, as it relates to the U.S. Constitution. Originalists are labeled as "Those that want to interpret the U.S. Constitution as it was written and intended by the Founding Fathers". They even go so far as to say that such a perspective is actually one "Theory" of how to look at the Constitution.
They go on further and use more "made up" talking points and try to espouse their ideology of a "Living Breathing Document" agenda as some foregone conclusion, indeed fact, as it were.
Anyone who has truly read and sought to understand the U.S. Constitution will have undoubtedly studied the men and times in which it was written. The amount of time, thought and effort that went into crafting this document was paramount. Yet, with all of this it was quite succinct and very specific. Any student would further acknowledge that the language and intent was designed to be resolute and steadfast, not malleable to the whims or emotions of the day or a minority of usurpers or discontents.
If you read what these brave men wrote your would no doubt know that they believed in their hearts that Our Inalienable Rights were indeed given to us by our Creator. The Constitution picks up where the Declaration of Independence left off with the Demand of Unfettered Pursuit of Life, Liberty & Happiness.
Fast forward some 200+ years and we find ourselves in a time where many of our younger generation, though hopefully, and quite likely, only possibly familiar with the actual language of these wonderful documents as well as their Intent. One only need to watch the evening news or read one of thousands of so called "online news" sources to hear such things as "The U.S. Government is the ones that Give you your Rights". I kid you not, a quick youtube query will reveal a group of Senators and Congresspersons stating that very thing. Within the last 10 years it was announced in D.C. that High Shcool students were no longer going to be required to take U.S. History a prerequisite for graduating.
Yeah, I know, I've used up a lot of electrons to post a lot of words, and where is he going with this, right?
This is where I'm going with this... We all are familiar with the fable of the tortoise and the hare... Slow and steady wins the race! The over reach of our Statist Government Officials and the ever so slow chipping away of our God Given, Constitutionally Recognized Rights has been going on since the first gun control law passed by Georgia in 1837 and later thrown out by the Supreme Court.
Think about that. We have been fighting to keep our rights for almost two hundred years, barely 50 years after we fought and won the Revolutionary War! So, this isn't a new thing by any stretch of the imagination. But, as I said, just a few lines ago, "Slow and Steady" wins the race.
Today we have found ourselves right where we put ourselves. "What did he say? Sounds like a Roseanne Roseannadanna skit right?" What I mean is that through our inaction, ignorance, apathy or sense of futility, we have allowed the erosion of our Personal Freedoms, Liberty's & Rights.
"Well that's easy for you to say Dino, sittin in your comfortable office while you're sippin your Earl Grey". And you'd be right in assuming so if I were the typical pimple faced Gamer Site adolescent espousing fascist anarchists rhetoric and trolling the other members. But, alas, I am not "that guy".
No, I'm just regular ol Dino. Just like most of you out there I have a wife and kids and a mortgage and bills and responsibilities. One of those responsibilities, as I see it, it to not sit around and do nothing. No, instead I choose to... "Abjure the comatose state and get radioactive" (Elbert Hubbard, A message to Garcia). I wear my friends and family out with this, but damnit, Write your congressmen and senators. Call em on the phone and give em hell. Go to the city council meetings and school board meetings. For the love of Pete guys,we get up to speed and get involved! We can not wait around for someone else to do it for us. Don't know if you realize it or not, but you and I are the someone else.
The FDA's decision to put their neck out there and DEEM is not only tyrannical and despotic in nature but is an unconstitutional act bordering on Totalitarianism. Our constitution, by design, precludes any government body or agency from being able to self regulate, self govern or self enforce. This can not stand guys. Not unlike the EPA Deeming that CO2 is a toxic pollutant, such self appointed aggrandized authority and power is not constitutionally authorized or granted to any branch or department of government.
I'll end this here with these last few words. Just as breathing air, and living free from the shackles of a tyrannical overlord are God given rights, so is the ability to drink what we want, eat what we want and yes, even Smoke What We Want. None of these are Privileges! To think so is not only uninformed, but dangerous.
Here endeth the preachment
Dino
Hear, Hear
@Bonanzadriver Dino (Nice calling you by you name and not moniker), my son has been at the forefront of much of what you speak - as have I to a lesser extent. Yet if you read my earlier words many of our more cherished rights (the right to privacy) have been surrendered by our own the blind ignorance of consumerism, purchasing items which makes us more susceptible to this invasion of privacy under the guise of making our lives more comfortable. Combine this with the blind panic we all shared after the attack on 9-11, and the all to willing surrender of other freedoms - "for our own good" - and it's easy to see where this is leading us. And when a person like yourself gets on their soapbox trying to open the eyes of those around them to expose the bigger picture - you're either ignored as a malcontent, or categorized at best as conspiracy theorist, or worst - anarchist. Or worse yet - that long-haired crazy person carrying the placard sign around their neck reading "The End Is Near".
I've been trying to convince friends and family members to open their eyes and look to the skies and examine the cloud patterns above their heads. Talk till I'm blue in the face about the distinction between contrails and chemtrails ... explaining that our skies should not be streaked with checkerboard patterns. Then try to explain what brain damaging chemicals like Barium and Aluminum Oxide are being sprayed behind those planes - and they stare at me as though were a raving lunatic in a whacky tinfoil hat trying to keep the Martians from reading my thoughts. People don't take notice or action until something substancial effects them personally ... of course by then it's too late.