I really hate doing clue-bat entries, but from some of the comment/emails I have received regarding my previous post about tobacco sales in pharmacies some/most of you ‘don’t get it’. Either I worded it wrong, or people just saw “Tobacco + Pharmacy + Stupid” and jumped to conclusions.
I’m not saying that pharmacies should sell smokes and other tobacco entries. I think that if a pharmacy does that its not only unethical but retarded (however nobody has a problem with gas stations selling beer/liquor, go figure).
The issue that I thought I made clear in the last post was who gets to make the decision as to what LEGAL product you can and cannot sell in your store which is LEGAL in every other store. Its not really about if a pharmacy should sell, but who gets to make that decision. Now remember that Tobacco is a 100% LEGAL substance. Yes it has no health benefits and is dangerous, but that’s not what I’m arguing about.
Now, personally, I should be able to sell whatever legal substance (that can be sold anywhere) I choose. If I wish to sell tobacco and be a total hypocritical pharmacist douche, that’s my right. Its also your right to not trade with me because of my choice in what I sell. With me so far?
However SF now has drawn the line in the sand. Since nobody really fought it, they have set precedence that the city can dictate what individual classes of businesses can and cannot sell. Products that the GOVERNMENT not YOU have decided “for the best interest of the public” cannot be sold in a business that YOU OWN AND RUN. This is the start of SOCIALISM in pharmacy with decisions made by people who are NOT PHARMACISTS.
This is super bad news here. You may think that allowing them to ban tobacco is nothing big, but replace tobacco with any of the following and you have Pharma-riots.
- Birth control (if you’re so bent on pressing your religious beliefs on those who do not share the same views as yourself and would want to BAN something, then yes, you are a “shit-eating psycho religious type”)
- Soda/Candy (see below)
- Sudafed (as if putting that behind the counter did anything what-so-ever)
- Anything that a combination of whining/money/politics can ban “for the children”.
Pharmacies in SF got bent over by the city, and given the dildo of justice on their rights. The city is putting their nose in what you can and cannot sell, but ultimately has no responsibility if your business goes under.
If SF banned tobacco within the city limits for EVERYONE, this whole rant is a non-issue. Everyone gets screwed, everyone is on an even playing field, SF sucks, move. Nanny-SF says that you are too stupid to live your own life, no cancer-sticks for you. But SF is selectively targeting pharmacies and preventing them from selling a legal product. Like HIPAA, COMMON SENSE DOES NOT NEED TO BE PUT INTO A FUCKING LAW!!!!! Now the socialism slope is greased up, how long until you must clear with the city what inventory you stock?
Here is the list that no pharmacies should carry (according to SF)
- Lung Cancer
- Mouth Cancer
- Second Hand Smoke
- Fetal damage
- Childhood obesity
- Dental caries
- Exacerbation of Diabetes
- Caffeine Addiction
- Lipid Disorder
- Heart Attack
- Liver Failure
- Bad Dancing
- UNWANTED CHILDREN
- Fetal damage
See all of the above? NONE ARE 100% GUARANTEED TO HAPPEN. Stop with the weak “tobacco is bad mmm-kay” arguments. These are all on the “should not sell” list using the same rationale that SF did with banning tobacco.
Don’t say that I didn’t warn you when this case gets brought up and something that YOU care about stocking gets banned using this tobacco bullshit as a case study. By the time that happens however the battle has already been long lost.
I hope that clears up some confusion. Go ahead, call me paranoid, laugh at me, but deep down you know that I bring up a damn good point.