IF THEY WEREN'T SERIOUS, THIS WOULD BE HYSTERICAL

The Cigar Show ^ | 2 October 2002 | Chuck Cason

[SheLion]

The movement to get the Dallas City Council to pass a city ordinance to make ALL establishments 100% smoke free is gaining momentum. They advocate preventing a bar or restaurant owner to make his or her own decision about giving a choice to the customer. They advocate putting into LAW that you can't... CAN NOT... smoke anywhere in the City of Dallas. "Well, how about the cigar bar in Del Frisco's after a big steak dinner?"

Nope. In fact if they get this passed, they might come back and try to get a law passed that we can't eat a big steak dinner because they found a study that suggests that the side-effects of other people enjoying a steak is bad for "the children".

In fact, there is no stopping a group of people organizing, coming up with their own "research", and lobbying to take our rights away because they don't like what others do.

 I know that sounds ridiculous and that is why no normal citizen, who enjoys the rights that people before us fought and died for, ever thinks that anything as absurd as a law to take away any of those rights could be even considered as serious. That is where we have been wrong... dead wrong. It seems that advocates share a certain trait with politicians: they both feel the need to get "involved" with the issue of guiding our citizenry. In the meantime, our citizenry is comfortable knowing that our Constitution is protecting us so we can go about our daily lives working and enjoying life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Well, guess what? We were wrong.

There is a group in Dallas that is working hard to "ban" smoking in any establishment in the city limits.

They contend a restaurant owner has no business making a decision about his or her own policies. They think that the local government should decide what type of customers they should try to attract. This group has even stooped to the over-done, we-should-do-it-for-the-children-and-if-you-disagree-with-that-you-hate-children tactic.

 They wonder why when they are with their "children" (because after all, they are pro-family... aren't you?) and someone in a restaurant lights up, the government isn't there to protect the health of their family. They wonder why they are expected to make a decision not to go to that restaurant instead of making everyone around them change so they don't have to.

To find the wisdom in our system, it is often necessary to read what our leaders said a long time ago. It was Abraham Lincoln that had words for this situation:

"Those who deny freedom for others deserve it not for themselves".

Let me be clear. I do not smoke cigarettes. They are nasty and dangerous. There are probably many chemicals and poisons that are let out into the air by smoking. But I reserve the right to smoke one day, if I want to. I won't smoke at your church, school, or in your government building. If you don't allow it in your home, I will totally respect that. I won't smoke in your car, or even near you when I can... I am not rude. However, when I choose a restaurant that wants me as a customer so much as to have a section for me, and you want to go there too (because the food and service are great), we have both made a decision based on personal freedom. Since you have made that choice, why is it my fault that you aren't comfortable? Why do you insist that city government get involved to make sure your dining experience is more pleasant? If you walk by a club and the rap music from inside is so loud that it seems offensive, will you go inside? No, of course not, and you wouldn't run to the city council wanting a law against rap music.

You simply wouldn't go. Get it?

I am not even going to start in on the junk science and so-called "surveys" presented as "irrefutable fact" by this poster group for political correctness. I will give you the link to the web site. Twenty years ago this web site would have made a great satirical magazine. It would have shown, in a ironic way, how fanatics try to push their agenda using any scare tactic they can. Sadly, this is not satire. It is a group that will not be content until others behave the way they think they should. It is time for common sense to replace political correctness.

It is time that people realize a perfect world is not formed by laws.

 

Here is the web site. Enjoy. http://smokefreedallas.org/

[RightOnline]

"Smoking tobacco (or pot) ought to be legal in one's home and a jailable offense outside it."

If I ever meet you, the first thing I'm going to do is to blow a BIG cloud of cigarette smoke right into your ignorant face.

You won't mind. You're already f**king blind.

[SheLion]

Here are just a FEW of the people who can't stand what you post. So why oh why are you singling ME out?! Everyone is telling you OFF, but you single ME out. I just can't understand it.........

I have known 3 non smokers who died of lung cancer after living with a heavy smoker.

If you're using this to support your position, give us all the facts support your assertion that living with these smokers caused the 3 non-smokers to die of lung cancer.

I mean names, dates, medical reports and conclusive and undeniable scientific proof that second-hand smoke was the cause of their death.

Because I could say that pigs fly out of your butt, but I won't, because I can't prove it.

439 posted on 10/5/02 5:49 PM Eastern by Madame Dufarge

To: Ditter

"...smokers are nothing but a small speed bump....When the majority decides...it's gone."

'If you're happy and you know it, clank your chains'!

436 posted on 10/5/02 5:11 PM Eastern by headsonpikes

To: Ditter

OF COURSE emphysema is CAUSED by first hand smoke, glad to know you are aware of that, but it is aggravated by 2nd hand smoke.

Then in the context of ETS emphysema is a pre-existing condition.
And it should be emphytsema CAN be caused by first hand smoke, not IS caused by first hand smoke.

As the person encounters allergens the allergic reactions will *develop*.

Then it's not asthma but the allergy that is the pre-existing condition. You and your brother may BE allergic to tobacco smoke but, if so, you are in the minority.
For almost every other anti-smoker I have heard about it is a matter of annoyance.
"I have to take a shower and wash my clothes every time I go to a bar."
"I hate the smell of smoke"
On and on and on.

As it has been pointed out to you on this thread, things are going my way & it looks like smokers are 'sh*t outta luck'.

Not quite yet but you are correct that it is headed that way.
Are you happy that totalitarian govt is that much closer?

429 posted on 10/5/02 3:04 PM Eastern by Just another Joe

[Just another Joe]

Thats why you should just stay home & smoke & shut up.

You can say it. That doesn't mean I'll do it.
You ain't my mother so don't try to give me orders.

I didn't say we HAVE a totalitarian govt, just that we're that much closer when a ban is put on LEGAL commodity against the wishes of 1/4 of the population.

As for the *line* between the smoking and non-smoking sections, that has been drawn to the point of seperate enclosures and seperate ventilation systems. Guess what. The antis won't even allow a seperate BUILDING.

As for protecting ANYTHING that you want that might go by the board because the majority doesn't want it - A bunch of small speed bumps will wreck your car if you go across them enough times. Maybe by the time your ox is gored we'll have them softened up enough for you to actually be able to DO something.
You can thanks us then retroactively.

[Ditter]

Blah blah blah! If we didn't show up these would be the most boring threads on FR. You should thank us for making it intresting. Go have a smoke & calm down. Good night, I'm going to see Red Dragon.

[SheLion]

ccmay:If I ever meet you, the first thing I'm going to do is to blow a BIG cloud of cigarette smoke right into your ignorant face.

See how he is????? I think he is related to DITTER. I am so sick and tired of these two ignoramus's , that I can just die. I wish they would never enter out threads again.

There is no talking sense to them. All they want to do is bash and trash us. Can you imagine living next door to these two???!!!! Parish the thought.......

Both of them must have come over from the Yahoo Anti-Smoking board! They are ANTI'S of the worst kind!

[Just another Joe]

If we didn't show up these would be the most boring threads on FR.

If you didn't show up I wouldn't lose a minute of sleep over it.
Enjoy your movie.

[SheLion]

oh Joooooe.............

<-----ditter

He is absolutely driving me nuts. I know this is what he wants. But I wish he would head on down the highway!

[Just another Joe]

It's just like butting heads, She.
You have to do it until you have the hardest head around.

Unless they want to bring me proof of what they say I'll continue to castigate them for wanting a totalitarian strictly democratic mob rule.

[metesky]

Allergies?

I hope you die from them soon so I won't have to listen to this incessant "I want the world my way" crap.

We only need the strong and in many ways it's unfortunate that modern medicine has allowed the weak, like you, to survive.

[SheLion]

Yes, but Joe......he is singling ME out. He must have a hard on for me, and it's not a good one. heh!

[SheLion]

metesky

I think he is insane. I mean it. He puts me in mind of someone that isn't all there. Know what I mean?

Gawd, I would hate to be HIS wife! I would be in JAIL for axing him to death. LOL!

Can you imagine waking up to THAT every morning!!!

[Madame Dufarge]

When the majority decides I shouldn't drive an SUV anymore, its gone.

Bwahahahahahaha!

What a weakling, what a Kool-Aid drinker, what a pathetic, childish, hiding-under-the-bed seeker of approval, bus-driver to Hell, gold-plated, snot-nosed, sniveling seed-of- destruction sower you are.

I don't care if I get banned for life, it just had to be said.

[metesky]

Ditter is a women and a disgrace to her sex, according to my advisor.

[SheLion]

I don't care if I get banned for life, it just had to be said.

I don't think there IS a Admin Mod anymore, Madame Dufarge! I sent him a message yesterday asking for help. To date, I have not heard NOTHING!

[SheLion]

Ditter is a women and a disgrace to her sex, according to my advisor.

DITTER IS A SHE?????????? ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!

[Roscoe]

However, his opinion is that militia units must be controlled by state/local government and the rule of law

The actual quote:

"To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self-defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government. The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws."
-- John Adams

Those who hold that the right to keep and bear arms is a call to anarchy show their hatred for our nation's Constitution and our historic systems of law.

[tpaine]

"Those who hold that the right to keep and bear arms is a call to anarchy show their hatred for our nation's Constitution and our historic systems of law."

So? Do you have a point roscoe?

- Who here at FR do you suspect -- "hold that the right to keep and bear arms is a call to anarchy" and "show their hatred for our nation's Constitution and our historic systems of law." ?

Or is it that, as usual roscoe, you are blowing smoke out of very orifice?

[Roscoe]

If the shoe fits....

"There never was a government without force. What is the meaning of government? An institution to make people do their duty. A government leaving it to a man to do his duty or not, as he pleases, would be a new species of government, or rather no government at all." -- James Madison

[tpaine]

The point made here is that the gungrabber shoe fits YOU roscoe.


BTW, what point do you think you made with your out of context Madison quote? -- Other than to again highlight your authoritarian agenda, - hummmm?

[SheLion]