They're Coming After You

Worldnetdaily/Creators Syndicate, Inc. | 3-6-02 | Walter Williams

[William Terrell]

See here. Then get back to me.

[Gabz]

The gentleman's personal problem is brought about by the actions of another, had there been no smoke he would not have had the asthma attack, the smoker's rights end at the other fellow's nose.... Literally.... I am for the banning of all smoking in all public places by force of law; it is sickening, dangerous, caustic, irritating. etc.etc.

But what about the right of the restaurant owner to permit smoking in his establishment. Do his rights end when you walk through the door? No one is forced to enter that restaurant.

There are plenty of non-smoking establishments in and around where I live, but that's not good enough for nannies like you. I had a discussion with an anti about this some time ago.

My question was "why don't you go to XYZ restaurant, they are all non-smoking?"
Response - "I don't like the place."
Me- "Why not PDG, they're non-smoking?"
Response - "I don't like the food."
Me - "So because you don't like XYZ or PDQ, then ABC and all the rest MUST go non-smoking by government edict just to accomodate you?"
Response - "YES."

Sorry - that is not only unreasonable, it is down right childish.

[HELLRAISER II]

If they were smoking in a non-smoking area you should have asked them to move, that is a legal remedy. They shouldn't have been smoking in that area, I wouldn't do that to someone who specifically sat in a non-smoking area.

[reflecting]

none of your examples are applicable....I am not advocating the government stop anyone from doing harmful things to themselves....I assert that government does have a role in stopping you from doing harmful things to me...your beer example ---- you can drink all you want but the government has the right to say you can only drink so much before you drive because you are a danger to others...

[Gabz]

I know people like that - including some rabid anti-smokers.

[Great Dane]

You want to ban cats from private homes? You really are radical.

Why would you consider that radical, they are half way there with smoking.

[HELLRAISER II]

Some people do have genuine health problems & they have to be very aware of clean air, but Some people just aren't happy unless their interfering in other peoples lives and I believe that most people are affiliated with the latter.

[reflecting]

the owner has many government restrictions placed upon him--do you advocate that we do away the laws that govern the safe handling of food products...and let the public choose clean or dirty XYZ restaurants? or if a restaurant wants to exclude asians is that OK....in your world what is the role of government?

[maxwell]

If you hate them all for the actions of one you are as bad as the Ku Klux Clan used to be.

Hear hear.

PUFF

[reflecting]

does the government have the right to tell you to put your baby in a car seat?

[Gabz]

Much like the example you used, a wheezing, inhalator wielding asthmatics rights end at the eyes and ears of anyone offended by such, to borrow your logic.

Taking your parallel one step further - I've got no idea if that wheezing inhalator wielding person has asthma or TB>

Are you aware that not only have asthma rates increased but so have TB rates.

The increase in asthma is starting to be related to the ultra-clean environment some people are choosing (anti-bacteria this and that).

Some of the TB is being related lack of air exchange in buildings and airplanes.

The incorporation of outside air into buildings and airplanes can be directly related to smoking bans. When smoking bans were instituted the airlines realized they could save fuel, thus money by cutting the rate of air exchanges per hour. The same in most modernly sealed buildings.

I'm not saying it is a "causation" but there is at least an obvious relationship.

[HELLRAISER II]

They are all applicable, if I'm smoking in a designated smoking area I am not effecting you at all. Just like all the rest of what I listed, none effect you & you don't have the right to tell me what to do.
Now if I sit beside you in a non-smoking area & start blowing smoke in your face, I'm effecting you. If I drink abusively & get impaired & sit behind a wheel, then I can hurt you.
You people want take all rights away from smokers to give ya'll what you want & that my friend is not fair.

[Fred Mertz]

does the government have the right to tell you to put your baby in a car seat?

Take a hike, pansy. But don't walk too fast, you might get sick and miss two more days of work, sissy.

[Hoosier Patriot]

What if you fly out of your car and your corpse kills someone who's riding a bike on the shoulder of the road? Or what if your flying corpse causes property damage? Seat belts are for the safety of those inside (and outside) the vehicle

Good grief! That's probably the most liberal minded post I've seen here yet. What if..... what if...... what if... Are we to legislate for every damn what if? What if the fellow driving the car crashed because he was having a nicotine fit, because "what if-ers" like you had succeeded in banning cigarettes? Under your logic, that makes you complicit in the death or property damage.

But hey, a flying corpse is funny when you think about it.