Federal court tosses out N.Y. smoking-ban lawsuit

It appears you failed to answer my question in your quest for the destruction of freedom and liberty

Overheated rhetoric, anyone? The reason I didn't answer your question is because there is no point in doing so. I can lay out about a century's worth of legal decisions stating that government has the power to regulate business. You will, of course, claim that all those decisions are wrong and that you know better. Which is your right, of course, but it's completely meaningless. Your basic argument comes down to: government cannot regulate what goes on on private property. Nice, I suppose, but completely wrong.

Why don't you move to Germany or France where they like telling businesses how to run?

Naw. I enjoy living here and questing for the destruction of freedom and liberty.

"Which is your right, of course, but it's completely meaningless. Your basic argument comes down to: government cannot regulate what goes on on private property. Nice, I suppose, but completely wrong."

Yep, and we are currently seeing the results of all of this government regulation. US companies are beginning to "shrug" off the government and they are moving off shore. Private restaurants and bars are "shrugging" off the regulation by closing their doors.

Yep, good for AmeriKa all right!

Yep, and we are currently seeing the results of all of this government regulation. US companies are beginning to "shrug" off the government and they are moving off shore. Private restaurants and bars are "shrugging" off the regulation by closing their doors.

Whether or not governmental regulation of business is a good thing is a completely different question than whether government has the power to regulate business. I'm pretty neutral on the issue of smoking bans. Though I enjoy smoke-free bars, I wouldn't lobby government to pass a smoking ban.

Just because a law might be stupid doesn't make it unconstitutional

Your right, the government has the "power" to regulate business. In fact, as we are seeing in a lot of instances today, they have the "power" to do anything that they dang well please. The might of the government is huge and can be used to "regulate" any aspect of our lives.

Does might make right? I personally don't think so. It is sad when I see many freepers celebrate this "power" when it is doing their bidding. I am not saying you are doing that, however many others celebrate it. Hence the passion that this issue stirs among us true protectors of private property. Just because some regulations already exist, doesn't mean we should continually add to those regulations. That would be the same thing as increasing taxes, because we already pay some.

Audrey Silk, of the N.Y.C.L.A.S.H. had this to say:

"What frustrates me to no end though are the ones who comment about the grounds we sued on. If anyone here posts there (Darlene?) could you please point out that since NYC CLASH is NOT a group of OWNERS of ANY **PROPERTY** we could NOT bring suit on private property rights. We'd have no standing if we did that and the case would have been thrown out at the very filing.

That these ignoramouses (sp?) think we could pick and choose from a laundry list of arguments to try our case on and that we picked the "wrong" ones makes me wanna reach out n slap 'em. As THE PEOPLE our ONLY choices were the ones we tried. As THE PEOPLE we tried to prove that PEOPLE, not businesses, have rights (not that I mean that businesses don't have rights, just that it wasn't our place to argue it).

I learned a lot that I had no idea existed regarding how the law works. Whatever you believed you're guaranteed.... you're not. And man, except for finally proving to lawmaker after lawmaker after lawmaker that the science is bogus, NO ONE, not even private businesses, have a chance in the court. Not unless they find the perfect judge but even then any favorable decision will be overturned on appeal.

The power the legislative branch has to enact these laws are completely against us.

The court won't second guess them when it comes to "public health." Until there's a more unique situation that can be argued that doesn't even yet exist it has to be taken back to the legislative level."

Don't mean to depress anyone.
Audrey

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.