Skip to comments.
The Hazards of a Smoke-Free Environment
CNSNews.com ^
| May 26, 2003
| Robert W. Tracinski
Posted on 05/27/2003 12:14:17 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 161-173 next last
To: Mister Baredog
The author of the article.
To: Lorianne
Public places are streets and sidewalks, parks, libraries, city hall, etc. Places paid for by taxpayers. Taxpayers should set the smoking policies in these places (by the democratic process).I almost agree with you on this statement. The only caveat I would give is indoor public places. In almost every case of outdoor public spaces the problem isn't a problem.
That said, I believe that the owner of the property, in these type of cases I believe the government entity in question would be the owner, should set the smoking policy.
I wonder if the majority of smokers are that fair?
Fair enough?
42
posted on
05/27/2003 2:24:13 PM PDT
by
Just another Joe
(FReeping can be addictive and helpful to your mental health)
To: Just another Joe
In almost every case of outdoor public spaces the problem isn't a problem. According to you it isn't a problem. Would you be agreeable to a taxpayer referendum on the matter of outdoor public places regardless of the outcome?
43
posted on
05/27/2003 2:31:08 PM PDT
by
Lorianne
To: bruinbirdman
True enough. That is why most of the smoking bans are at the city level. However, I think CA is thinking of making it a state law.
44
posted on
05/27/2003 2:32:27 PM PDT
by
Lorianne
To: Lorianne
Then lets eliminate all laws? No, that's not what I'm saying. I argue using these assumptions:
1. Individuals have rights. Inherent in the concept of a right is a corresponding power to defend that right. That is, if someone acts to deny you a right, you are authorized to exercise power against them to stop that denial.
2. Rather than everyone acting to secure our individual rights, government is instituted to secure them. We cede some of our power to the government.
3. A law is a statement by government of what power will be applied, in our names, to those that violate rights.
Individual's rights can and do conflict all the time. Speed limits are one example you cited. I have a right to the "pursuit of happiness." You have a right to "life." I wish to pursue happiness at 150 mph. You prefer not to be in the way when I lose control of my car.
Whose right should be secured? To me, this is the crux of the argument. In some cases, like speed limits, the answer is obvious to most of us. In others, debates can get heated.
In the case of a smoking ban, I may choose to pursue happiness by smoking, you may wish to pursue happiness by avoiding smoke. Whose right is to be secured?
45
posted on
05/27/2003 2:47:41 PM PDT
by
laredo44
To: aardvark1
The author of the article.LOL! I did confess upfront.
46
posted on
05/27/2003 2:47:44 PM PDT
by
Mister Baredog
((They wanted to kill 50,000 of us on 9/11, we will never forget!))
To: Tailgunner Joe
THERE'S NO CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY FOR ANY BAN!
To: Lorianne
I wouldn't live in Texas :) General Sherman claimed if he owned Texas and Hell, he'd rent out Texas and live in Hell. ;)
Be careful, I'm a native Texan. Don't mess with Texas.
48
posted on
05/27/2003 2:57:14 PM PDT
by
laredo44
To: Lorianne
Something to consider: You are aguring with people who approve of sucking toxic smoke into the body and then exhaling it into the immediate environment to contaminate the air around them. Anyone who denies this is unhealthy has had their reasoning severely hampered by their self-indulgent and addictive habbit. Any government which allows this sort of intrusive, addictive and contaminating behavior to go unchecked is negligent.
It is a waste of time to argue with people who have given up their freedom to an addiction and reason from a basis of self-indulgence.
49
posted on
05/27/2003 3:04:33 PM PDT
by
Semper
To: Lorianne
"at the city level" Jefferson said "a small town" and by our standards today towns then were small already.
I live in the smallest incorporated town in NV., 14,950. That would have been a good sized city in Jeffersons time.
yitbos
50
posted on
05/27/2003 3:16:52 PM PDT
by
bruinbirdman
(Veritas vos liberabit)
To: Tailgunner Joe
Buck Floomberg
To: Lorianne
I wonder if the majority of smokers are that fair? IMO, smokers have been way more than "fair" ever since the cigarette jihad started. We confined ourselves to the smoking section of businesses and gathering places, but that wasn't enough. What I love were the tobacco nazis who said that since smoking was banned in the workplace and smokers were hearded out of the building to smoke, they noticed that smokers were sick more often than non smokers. Of course we were! We had to go outside in the cold, the rain, and snow to have a cigarette!
Regardless of how data can be manipulated to get whatever meaning desired, the tools and machinery in government and the legal system that have been and are being used to treat smokers like leppers WILL be used by some other group who desire to make a name for themselves simply because they don't like the habbits of another part of the population. Fast food, snack food, malt liquor, SUV's, clog dancers...take your pick...they'll all be tee'd up. And all the lemmings (useful idiots) will charge over the cliff when they are told that it's "for-the-children."
52
posted on
05/27/2003 3:24:49 PM PDT
by
Orangedog
(Soccer-Moms are the biggest threat to your freedoms and the republic !)
To: Lorianne
I cannot do any damn thing I want, any time I want, anyplace I want. Yes you can. The entire point of the nation's Constitution is that we each can do as we damn well please; as long as it harms neither the person nor property of another.
This presents the dilemma, what is harm? You may readily accept a local ordinance prohibiting public nudity but have great difficulty in accepting a prohibition against nude sunbathing in the privacy of your own back yard.
Harm no one; do as you will.
To: SheLion
Another one to email to the smoking nazi's
54
posted on
05/27/2003 3:47:25 PM PDT
by
ozone1
(Partnership for a Liberal-Free Maine)
To: Lorianne
Well, get ready to give up a lot more freedoms. When all of us smokers figure out who, or what, the ox is of the tobacco Nazis, we're going to gore it ourselves. Our own junk science/research is ongoing into SUVs, fat foods, etc. Better they hide their own crutch inasmuch as a case can be made for almost anything once people jump onto the CONTROL bandwagon. What goes around, comes around.
If anyone wants to discover the true agenda of these people, just go around brandishing an UNLIT cigarette all the time--checkout lines are nice. It's truly amazing how many people are prone to hyper-ventilating and profuse sweating. Their little beady eyes turn to little red, glowing coals as they desperately look about for some Wal-Mart brownshirt to slap you into irons. At least once or twice a week (if the hunting is good) one of these spawn from Hell will finally sucumb to hysterical foaming at the mouth by yelling, "You can't smoke that in here!!!" It's truly amazing how many stokes and heart attacks can occur in otherwise perfectly healthy people who don't have any bad habits.
55
posted on
05/27/2003 4:00:34 PM PDT
by
texaslil
To: Lorianne
You're WRONG at every point....... Liar liar pants on fire nose as long as a telephone wireLiar liar pants on fire nose as long as a telephone wireLiar liar pants on fire nose as long as a telephone wireLiar liar pants on fire nose as long as a telephone wireLiar liar pants on fire nose as long as a telephone wire.
56
posted on
05/27/2003 4:39:12 PM PDT
by
S.O.S121.500
(ENFORCE THE BILL OF RIGHTS.....NO QUARTER ASKED---------NONE GIVEN)
To: texaslil
Hey, you're right there are Nazis of all sorts out there. Just like the ones who rant and rave about women working and why don't they stay home and we're all going to hell in a handbasket because of them ... etc. ..... etc. .... etc.
Lots of examples of Nazi thinking from both ends of the political spectrum. No denying that.
57
posted on
05/27/2003 5:11:07 PM PDT
by
Lorianne
To: MosesKnows
Well I can't walk down a public sidewalk nude without being hauled off to jail. Why is that? What is the public harm being done?
Meanwhile smokers can walk down a public sidewalk smoking.
"Harm" is not the issue. The issue is community standards, what are they and who gets to set them. That is what we're talking about here.
58
posted on
05/27/2003 5:13:39 PM PDT
by
Lorianne
To: Orangedog
I don't believe in private workplace bans on smokering imposed by government either (except in public sector jobs).
But again, as to fairness, smokers are always first to state that the government shouldn't interfere with private businesses ... but would they involve the government if they were NOT hired because they were smokers? How about if they were charged a higher health insurance rate?
Fair is fair. If we want the government out of private business then smoker's would have to risk maybe some workplace discrimination as well. It cuts both ways.
59
posted on
05/27/2003 5:17:22 PM PDT
by
Lorianne
To: Semper
I agree they are argueing from personal bias but I defend anyone's right to indulge in any behavior on private property that does not affect others. Once it affects me, I have a right to have my voice heard at the government level, just as anyone who can vote for any community standards or laws have that right.
I don't mind if people smoke and it's no one else's business if they do, as long as it only affects the individual smoking. Once it affects others, even on an inconvenience level, then others have a say. That's called living in a society of laws.
60
posted on
05/27/2003 5:21:35 PM PDT
by
Lorianne
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 161-173 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson