NEXT: NO CIGS IN YOUR CAR

New York Post ^ | 9/22/03 | KENNETH LOVETT

[Michael81Dus]

Even if I disregard the comparisons between Hitler and democratic politicians of today, I agree that banning smoking in private cars is not a decision that gives people more freedom. I could understand if states decide, that smoking is illegal for drivers, but the other passengers should be allowed to do what they want.

[ctonious]

I never could understand that people scream about the sensible measures needed to catch terrorists and protect us and don't revolt over such total invasions of privacy for absolutely no reason, except because the government wants to do it.

I understand why...as an ex-smoker. Smokers are the most masochistic lot when it comes to their rights. They almost encourage being stepped on. They pay outrageous taxes on tobacco, get shunned and lectured by everybody, and stand outside in sub-zero weather in designated smoking areas - often purposely unsheltered and without any creature comforts.

But they acquiesce to all this because they think "Well...I need to quit anyway...and all this stuff...will make me wanna quit."

[Neanderthal]

Thanks for the link to Tilly's 911 story.

[dorothy]

Even if I disregard the comparisons between Hitler and democratic politicians of today

In this particular case they apply -- Hitler was vehemently anti-smoking, and a vegetarian to boot.

[Reactionary]

"The master plan is to totaly ban smoking."

Yes, the Master Race had the same Master Plan. The glorious Fuhrer hated smoking and drinking. One must be healthy for the good of the Fatherland, you know.

So say the authoritarian American fascists, the liberals.

[Bonaparte]

"Hitler was vehemently anti-smoking, and a vegetarian to boot."

As well as a drug addict who surrounded himself with homosexuals.

[Bonaparte]

fyi

[metesky]

The further purposeful division of society. CWII coming soon.

[bart99]

Perhaps the Legislature in Albany could work up some bills to have the all state agencies actually enforce the fedreal ILLEGAL imigration laws in this country - enfrorcing identification and IMMEDIATE depotation, rather than scheduling a hearing 6 months later. [Damn civil servants - seems they just have a job and work for their pensions (an apology to those who care)].. I'm sure they recognize that terrorism is a real isue today and a little bit more important than smoking legilation.

[Wolfie]

"It's government coming in pretty strong on people's lives and choices."

That's government for ya.

[Wolfie]

The master plan is to totally ban smoking

"When we look down the road, I would say 10, 15, 20 years from now, in a gradual fashion, smoking will probably be outlawed in the United States."
Tom Constantine
Administrator of the DEA
in an interview with ABC TV network, 1998

[Wolfie]

They'll never ban smoking. They're more addicted to the tax revenue than any smoker is to nicotine.

At a certain point, the increase in governmental power, coupled with the potential new funding for enforcement, will outstrip the tax revenue. Prohibition is a $40 billion dollar annual windfall to the government, and adding tobacco to the list will bring in a whole lot more.

[TankerKC]

They said each anti-smoking bill has its own merit, including protecting children, helping New York businesses, and reducing litter.

Well, why not one BIG bill requiring that we all be wrapped in non-flammable safety orbs and fed government approved nourishment through our veins.

One point for smokers: throwing a cigarette butt down IS littering. I see butts flicked out the window and dropped at store entrances everyday by folks I’m sure don’t think they are littering.

[nothingnew]

PUFF!

FMCDH

[Alberta's Child]

I never could understand that people scream about the sensible measures needed to catch terrorists and protect us and don't revolt over such total invasions of privacy for absolutely no reason, except because the government wants to do it.

Good point. In fact, I said back in 2002 that as far as I was concerned, this so-called "war on terror" was officially over when the New York City council passed its smoking ban. For the life of me, I could not understand why "second-hand smoke" in bars and restaurants was such a pressing concern in a city that had lost 2,500+ people in terror attacks only a few months earlier.

[Behind Liberal Lines]

bump for later

[SheLion]

This is a bunch of BS! Like Audrey said: it IS about back dooring a segment of people who use a legal product.

I'd like to see a complete ban on tobacco. Then we will see which end is UP! That's for sure!

[SheLion]

They'll never ban smoking. They're more addicted to the tax revenue than any smoker is to nicotine.

You've got THAT right!

[lodwick]

Excellent post - thanks.

[Dazedcat]

This is a New York story. It's not only democrats who are sponsoring and endorsing this mindset. Republican majority leader Joe Bruno endorsed the last smoking ban for restaurants and bars........and from what I've been told made damn sure other Republicans voted for it as well.

Maybe where you live it's different, but in New York you can't tell the players without a scorecard. Rats or Reps, makes very little difference. Prohibiting smoking in your own home will be next on the agenda......and there IS an agenda, believe me.