The only thing I would add to filtherton's well-stated analysis is that smoking bans do not discriminate against a class of people....they regulate an action.
Smokers are welcome in any establishment if they keep their cigarettes in their pocket. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I think that the pro ban crowd is put in the unfortunate position of defending the legal requirement to accept guests with no sense of etiquette or respect. People who give you good reason for dislike and have no rational semblance of a 'right' to be there in the first place. Tough position, I almost feel for you. |
Quote:
Quote:
This isn't to say that you can't address things you don't like. It just seems to me to frame it as some sort of matter of "justice" shows a lack of perspective. Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I disagree that such arguments aren't using reason. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Smokers need to realize that there are no laws on the books protecting their right to smoke. So, with that said, they have absolutely NO leg to stand on as far as demanding a dry, safe, warm place to smoke.
Additionally, there are a lot of things that are legal but regulated in this country. It's legal for me to own and fire a hand gun, but I can't walk down the street to do it. I have to go to an authorized firing range. |
I get so turned off when I meet cute girls and they suddenly whip out a cigarette and start smoking then hacking. Major turn-off.
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Goodbye Titty Board. Quote:
Quote:
(Hint: what do a restaurant and a firing range have in common?) |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And that's in addition to your defense of people who are obnoxious (you won't smoke on your property while I'M here!) and destructive (I don't care if your sales tank!). We're not so different, you and I. Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Child labor laws kinda actually, y'know, do affect people personally, people who don't necessarily have the power necessary for avoiding or escaping such a situation. Not a good comparison. Secondhand smoke was avoidable before the bans by sticking to public property, your own property, and private property owned by like minds. That really, really, really sounds like a reasonable compromise to me. But people in favor of smoking bans - wait for this neat trick, wait for the channeling of Ann Coulter in a way that's actually 100% valid - demonstrate that they aren't reasonable people. At least when it comes to dining out. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
It goes without saying that I'll be disappointed.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
So much for those shades of gray of yours. Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
banning smoking in restaurants is as much about protecting the people working there as it is about protecting the patrons
|
FTA and filth, it's interesting to see these conversations from the outside.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Notice how much is being accomplished. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
I think that is all well and fine. But because there are people who don't care about being "protected" - aka smokers - there should be room for places that allows smoking. And those who want to "protected" can have their dinner, drink, ice cream else where. The only problem I have is that the government is forcing everyone to "protect" the lungs of non-smokers.
how about an island somewhere in the Arctic Circle? |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
I don't really have a large problem with smoking outside, although it is pretty savage when you get a mouthful of smoke downwind when you're enjoying the sun. Most of my friends smoke, so I'm used to it.
What I will add is that for the inside of clubs and bars, the difference the smoking ban here has made is amazing. I used to come home smelling like I'd been set on fire, but now I just smell normal. One "problem" was that the smoke apparently cloaked the smell of body odour on the dance floors, although I haven't encountered this yet! The only main problem I've found with the ban, is that if your friends are all smokers, you often get dragged outside whilst they smoke, so that you aren't sitting on your own in the pub/bar/club/etc. On the whole I love it though! I used to have lots of coughs after going to a gig in a small venue with lots of smokers around, but I'm much better since. :) |
Quote:
Quote:
In case you missed it, I'm against fraud, too. I think that the government should act to prevent and to punish fraud. And forging a contract with someone incapable of understanding the contract and its costs? That's unavoidably fraud by omission. Now that I've spelled out the nuance a little more, maybe you won't ignore it. Quote:
The idea that you are entitled to walk onto someone else's property and start making health decisions for the owner due to your mere presence - which was a privilege in the first place - there's no way to explain that idea as anything other than poor judgment. Try. Quote:
It just keeps getting easier and easier to sympathise with these cancer spewers. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derwood how about an island somewhere in the Arctic Circle? How considerate of you! I don't know where in the world I got this misconception of anti-smoking zealots as unreasonable. Bless you, sir! It just keeps getting easier and easier to sympathise with these cancer spewers. Give me a reasonable, legitimate reason for anyone to smoke ever, and i'll give you a reasonable solution to people's need for a special place to smoke |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And yeah, it does mean that. Taking a gift and insisting that it be modified to your liking is unreasonable. Quote:
If you're only saying that I could be wrong, well, duh. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And I explained in the very next post that child labor does, y'know, actually effect people personally. People who might not have the power and/or authority to escape from such a situation, should it turn harmful. Unlike with adults and restaurant smoking. But it's so much easier to pretend this nuance doesn't exist, that I must hate ALL authoritarianism or NONE of it! Or, when you tire of that pretension, to pretend that I didn't define the supposedly arbitrary line. The strawman or the deafman. Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
FTA.....my advice is to move to Paulville:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Here's another solution. http://www.ingestandimbibe.com/Images/cigarGlass.jpg FTA could ask his current bar of choice to mix him a nicotini Quote:
|
I'm strictly a secondhand smoker, guys. Way too cheap for the real thing.
Quote:
Not all restaurants are suited to your tastes. The mature response to this is to seek out those restaurants that are. Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I don't get it, how am I mistaken? If you are against "nosy authoritarianism" and "nosy authoritarianism" is the same thing as "people using government to enforce their personal preferences on privately-owned areas that need not ever effect them personally" how are you also not a nosy authoritarian? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
I smoked for 12 years. Haven't smoke in something like 15.
You want to smoke fine, please do it outside or at home. As for restaurants- I won't eat at a restaurant that allows smoking. I don't have a problem if private business owners want to allow smoking, it's their business, they own it. Just don't expect me to eat there. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
At least you're now implicitly noting that I never condemned all authoritarianism. Baby steps, I guess. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Also, it's just not very nice to beat your wife. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
And I said nothing about the property rights of these secondhand-loving children anyway, so I'm not sure where you discovered my secret preference for freedom of business over freedom of kids. You're still relying on oversimplifications to discover these oh-so-numerous inconsistencies of mine. Quote:
Also, I hear he's on craigslist under the name 'topdob66'. Just passing that along. Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Notice how nothing is being accomplished here at all... I'm kind of having fun though. |
Quote:
Quote:
Of course, you can keep it cut and dry by banning smoking lounges as well, but then it gets reaaaaaaly hard to deny that you're just being nosy out of some strange spite. Quote:
It's certainly not an altruistic gift, but it is a gift. But this is kinda beside the point, anyway. If owner and customer both decide they're willing to make a deal that involves secondhand smoke - and yes, a customer who walks into a restaurant with smokers IS making that deal - then the government should probably slip out of the mommy role and let both parties take the risks they want to take. And if the customer accepts the smoke but really doesn't want it, the customer is conflicted in a needless and stupid way. Decide which is more important - restaurant food or secondhand avoidance - and choose accordingly. Don't use the gun of government to coerce someone into your idealized choice. Avoid that self-centered childishness. Quote:
Quote:
If you're looking for symmetry, I think private businesses should also not be allowed to serve secondhand smoke to minors. Penalties all around. I also think that underage children shouldn't be allowed to own smoke-filled bars. And there should be a moratorium on the use of the word 'hypocrite' until you're at least 35. (That's a view with personal sacrifice. I've 11 years to go!) If that doesn't cover it, you'll need to clarify what exactly the inconsistency here is. It's looking too much like "A can do B, but X can't do Y? Don't you see the problem with that?" No, no I don't. Quote:
Show me where in the constitution it says that you can make coma-inducing sounds. It's not there. Our Founding Fathers made allowances for the possibility of Kenny G. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:23 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project