Posted on 08/02/2005 10:24:13 AM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
"Except those who cherish private property rights...."
There it is. Thanks.
And what about in a Constitutional Republic, founded on the concepts of limited government and individual sovreignty?
Do we still get to vote on whether we should force people to eat their broccoli at government gunpoint, because it's good for them?
I don't recall where I read it. If you have a study that shows otherwise, ok, but remember that the AMA is not disinterested; they are heavily politicized (to the left, naturally) and anti-smoking studies that come from them should be viewed, in my opinion, with the same skepticism as anti-gun studies coming from them should be.
I forget the year, but the Congressional Research Service, at the behest of Henry Waxman looked into it when he was proposing a huge increase in the federal cigarette tax. It was CRS that determined smokers pay more into the system than they take out, because smokers also pay the smae taxes as non-smokers into the government health funds.
With that said, it is still a specious argument, because claiming that smokers use more taxpayer money is the same as claiming that smokers ONLY use government health care. I pay my own medical insurance, in addition to paying into the government.
Funny you should mention firearm studies - they do have a couple of those!!
Extremely, extremely most excellent point!
But you will notice - not a single post addressing that has been replied to by the poster.........which is typical of those type posters.
The article also stated, "Family restaurants like Applebee's and Perkins, and upscale places like Black and Tan, where smoking had previously been allowed at the bar, saw no ill effect in their July revenues."
I believe the reasons that these "family restaurants" aren't feeling the impact is that people don't spend an entire evening at a family restaurant. Even a heavy smoker can get through a dinner at a family restaurant without lighting up. But a bar? Bars are gathering places where people can spend many hours entertaining each other. To compare a family restaurant to a "bar" is absurd, IMO.
If you doubt bias in the firearms studies, post a link and I'll be happy (and quite confidant that I am able) to expose it. Logical fallacies, etc. I doubt their smoking studies are any more honest, but they might be.
That was to Ndafill.
Are you posting under two identities?
Also, I told you to look at post 32 which answers your questions.
"So more people will stay home and drink and smoke, resulting in more people drinking underage and consuming larger quantities of alcohol (Those who die of alcohol poisoning rarely do so at a bar)."
If those who desire to take away our personal freedoms continue and are successful on their rampage, it will also become illegal to smoke in your own home.
Their firearm study was biased. The smoking study was fairly robust.
It was a real eye opener when they were still discussing just a Minneapolis smoking ban.
Several times the local media played a clip of a Hennepin County official walking along the street stating how unfair it would be if people could just walk across the street into St. Louis Park and smoke in a bar or restaurant there.
It hit me like a thunderbolt, this is how liberal Totalitarianism starts; the liberal politicians pass laws that the people don’t like, and then they won’t allow the people any possibility of choice.
Thus it went from a Minneapolis City smoking ban to a Hennepin County ban, because it would be “unfair” for the people to have a choice. Liberal Totalitarianism at it’s finest!
It's also the home of Houdini, and actor Willem Dafoe.
Those "family restaurants" and "upscale places" are prime movers behind these smoking bans. They have the corporate backing to handle a dip in revenues that the corner tavern or local diner doesn't. They know they can outlast the little guys and then they become the only game in town.
I watched it happen first hand in Delaware....it was the corporate entities of the hospitality industry that pushed for the ban....adn pushed to include the local taverns in the ban.
Thanks.
"Also, I told you to look at post 32 which answers your questions."
That post answers nothing.
I wouldn't know where to start with you.
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.