Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ObieX
One could just as easily make the case that bars serving alcohol should be banned because afterwards people have to get home from wherever they are. In most cases that means getting into a car and driving to that home. This is a huge problem public safety wise, therefore we should ban anyone from drinking alcohol except while in their own home, and anyone caught driving with any alcohol in their system whatsoever should have their license revoked.
|
Also on the agenda of curbing individual freedoms in Austin are checkpoints stationed thoughout the city at intersections doing.... can you guess?
Every driver wanting to pass through the intersection would be subject to a Breathalyzer test. It is another idea I don't agree with.
Your analogy is excellent as far as the public safety concerns arguement. I would wager that more people die as a result of the alcohol bars serve than second-hand smoke patrons of bars inhale.
With that logic in mind, it shows the transparency of the motive behind this referendum. The
crybabies don't like to deal with smoke. They are trying to ban it so they don't have to put up with it. It is not a public health concern at all. You will not get cancer from second-hand smoke at a bar. They could have an arguement that the workers of the bar, with more prolonged exposure to smoke, could develop health problems. My counter would be- they can work somewhere else.
OFF TOPIC:
All this nonsense annoys me. While driving home from work today I heard a story about a
boy who jumped off a parking garage and fell 80 ft. His parents are suing the city of Orlando for "making little effort to correct a potential deadly risk."
It is absolutely outrageous. If you kid jumps off a fucking building that makes him suicidal or stupid. Either way, it isn't the city of Orlando's fault. Are tall buildings a public safety concern now? Even if we try and idiotproof everything, the morons will find a way to hurt themselves.