Posted on 11/05/2002 6:03:16 PM PST by jgrubbs
Look to New York City for an example. They put a huge tax on cigarettes there, and smoking dropped by two-thirds. (Well, most people probably just went elsewhere, such as across the state line to N.J., or to the Internet.)
The libs won't have a problem until they run out of targets ... which will never happen. They'll always find a way to make something or some group politically incorrect.
The next targets are: fast food, red meat, alcohol and sweets.
Anytime people think that they can go to the polls to get BIG government to do what ever they want we are in trouble.
They can vote for BIG government to increase welfare and give them free handouts.
They can vote for BIG government to ban smoking at their favorite resturant, because they don't want to just go somewhere else to eat.
They can vote for BIG government to pay for smaller classrooms.
They can vote for BIG government to keep pregnate pigs out of cages.
They can vote for BIG government to pay for health care.
I guess they could vote for BIG government to regulate fast food and junk food also.
Im sure there are many CA conservatives around the country that would help the liberals vote for all of the above BIG government issues.
Again, when you register to vote you are signing an oath that says "I will protect and defend the Constitution", not I will vote for BIG government to do everything I want it to do to make my life easier.
Get bent.
You should consider going to DU. They would love to hear about your smoking ban. And they could explain to you how that was the first one. Next is Big Macs and Whoppers and beef of all forms and meat and. . . . . . .
Oh Puulleeeeze! I really am ammused by people who pick and choose the conservative issues that suit them like the US constitution is some kind of menu.
A business owner has the right to determining smoking policies in HIS business. Government agencies (at the behest of the public) have the right to determine smoking policies in public buildings and on public property. YOU and the Government entities do not have the right to tell a private business owner whether or not they can or cannot allow smoking on their property.
You don't like smoking in a resturant, don't go there to eat! You don't like smoking where you work, find another job!
The free market will take care of itself. If enough people refuse to patronize resturants that allow smoking; those resturants will eventually go out of business. If enough people refuse to work in an environment that allows others to smoke; then a company will have to change its policy or go out of business. Its that simple!
As you know, CA has a virtual no smoking policy. I usually go there three to four times a year for a week or two at a stretch as part of my job. Every time I go there I simply hate it. I feel like I'm in a communist country for several reasons, but what I hate the most is the fact that I can not enjoy a fine cigar with a scotch or a beer in a friendly local bar.
I have few sins left other than an occaisional cigar and shooter. I often prefer to do it in a social stting like a bar/ bar grill etc. You don't like it, either don't sit next to me or in the alternative, go to a watering hole or resturant that is smoke free an leave me alone.
BTW; smokers are generally known to be a lot bigger tippers than non smokers; which I think says it all
You say you are conservative as they come. Well I'm very familiar with the writings and thoughts of the founding fathers of this country, and you highbottom are no conservative!
Sui
Business owners have lots of regulations in place to protect the public. I agree that some of the regulations are government micromanagement, but some are necessary. Examples are health inspections in restaurants, making employees wash their hands after a restroom visit, or a drinking age of 21. Normally, I'm opposed to excessive government intervention in private affairs, but in Florida, many people who helped to re-elected Jeb also supported this amendment. Where I work, when they band smoking in the workplace several years ago, our manufacturing yields increased dramatically (ashes weren't contaminating and ruining product yilds). On the other hand, the Pig Amendment is just plain stupid.
I don't think it's the governments right to tell a business they can or can't allow smoking, and deffinately not worthy of a Constitutional Amendment.
Try this on for size. It's irrational to put forth that a person can assign or give to a person, group of persons or government a right he doesn't himself possess.
No person has the right to barge onto another person's property uninvited. Nor does a person have the right to "camp" or take up a seat on another person's property once the property owner has asked the person -- whom the property owner invited in the first place -- to leave. Who is to say when a person is uninvited? The property owner. Who is to say when an invited guest has overstayed their welcome? The property owner.
That law, if you will, is universal. It's objective law. Objective laws exist beyond the reach of man-made law or political-agenda law or media agenda or media bias. That is, objective law regarding access to property and who holds the right is valid on all property at the property owner's discretion.
The American news media proclaims from on high that the individual belonging to this group of people and that group of people and all manner or segments of individuals that can be corralled into a group have, as an individual member of said group, the right to barge in uninvited, and when invited, the right to overstay his or her welcome.
That communitarian agenda is proclaimed form on high to protect the "little guy". The little guy being an individual of any special interest group. Special interest groups that self-proclaim to have rights that as separate individuals no person in the group has the right to impose on another individual.
It's the rule of tribalism -- tyranny of a majority over the individual. It's a form of terrorism inflicted on the individual that if the individual doesn't bow to the tribe's irrationality, dishonesty and mysticism he or she will become the tribe's next victim. There in lies the underlying motive and cause of almost all politicians, bureaucrats, mainstream news media "personalities" and many academics: to undermine honesty.
Dishonesty, mysticism and irrationality are the problem/cancer that terrorizes the little guy.
Let's say that those regulations you mentioned are necessary (personally, I disagree.) I don't see how the smoking ban is necessary. A person can very easily tell if a restaurant or workplace allows smoking. Finding smokers doesn't take expert inspectors, and it's not something that can be easily hidden from the public. Therefore, people can very easily avoid establishments that allow smoking. Why must the government be involved?
Normally, I'm opposed to excessive government intervention in private affairs, but in Florida, many people who helped to re-elected Jeb also supported this amendment.
They were wrong.
Where I work, when they band smoking in the workplace several years ago, our manufacturing yields increased dramatically (ashes weren't contaminating and ruining product yilds).
If a smoking ban leads to higher productivity, businesses will enact them on their own. If they choose not to, it's their own fault.
On the other hand, the Pig Amendment is just plain stupid.
On this we agree.
They just think how nice it will be to have less smoke in their eyes, noses, clothes.
They just think how nice it will be to have less smoke in their eyes, noses, clothes.
Maybe a group of us Floridians should get on the next ballot a vote to REMOVE THE ABILITY TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION BY POPULAR VOTE.
Query: is a "popular vote" really all that's required to amend the Florida law? Or does this now have to be "legislated"?! Or "repealed"...otherwise this is going to seriously adversely affect my usually much-anticipated annual 2-week Florida vacation...not to mention the principle of the thing...
Smoking up here in the cold north...
You must be talking about property rights.
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.