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/

[freeeee]

We outlawed those just like we should outlaw the wretched tobacco weed, as dangerous a drug as any that have gone before.

Go ahead and keep manufacturing criminals out of people that do others no harm. The more groups you criminalize, the deeper you foster disrespect for the law. See what that gets you.

where other people have to breathe it.

You don't have to walk into any establishment that allows smoking. When you choose to go there, you choose to breathe whatever air within. Don't like their air, or music, or whatever else, keep walking. It's really not all that complicated.

The vehemence of the militant smokers on this thread is just more proof of the depths of their addiction.

I don't smoke, never have, never will. So, what's your explanation for my defense of smokers?

[Zon]

If you think a person's act of smoking a cigarette has harmed you, take the person to court and do your best to prove it to an impartial jury. After all, that's what a rational person would do if a person robbed them, right?

This forum is used by some people that want the power to initiate force, fraud and coercion against people (be the "higher authority") or seek to enlist government agents ("higher authority") to initiate force, fraud and threat of force against people on their behalf.

[Zon]

As for anyone else reading it, I'm sure anyone with an oz. of freedom in their blood already understands how off base the post is.

If you think a person's act of smoking a cigarette has harmed you, take the person to court and do your best to prove it to an impartial jury. After all, that's what a rational person would do if a person robbed them, right?

This forum is used by some people that want the power to initiate force, fraud and coercion against people (be the "higher authority") or seek to enlist government agents ("higher authority") to initiate force, fraud and threat of force against people on their behalf.

[ccmay]

If you think a person's act of smoking a cigarette has harmed you, take the person to court and do your best to prove it to an impartial jury. After all, that's what a rational person would do if a person robbed them, right?

This rational person would call the police and have them arrest the robber at gunpoint.

You are confusing civil with criminal law.

-ccm

[Protagoras]

Pot and tobacco are both filthy and dangerous, and anyone who uses tobacco is just as bad as someone who smokes pot. They ought not to be allowed to corrupt other people's children into the drug-addicted lifestyle, nor to blow their disgusting drug smoke into the air where other people have to breathe it.

All opinion, and all irrelevant. If you don't want yourself or your kids to breathe smoke, keep yourself and your children the hell out of establishments (private property) where it is allowed.

[SheLion]

This is a circular argument. You can't say that something should be tolerated just because it's now legal.

Tobacco has been legal for HUNDREDS of years! 

Other kinds of drugs were once legal too, and for that matter so was slavery and wife-beating. We outlawed those just like we should outlaw the wretched tobacco weed, as dangerous a drug as any that have gone before.

I have never heard ONE case of abuse, or anyone ending up dead in a piece of twisted metal from driving and smoking, and tobacco is no more dangerous then the FAT FOODS YOU EAT FROM THE FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS.

They ought not to be allowed to corrupt other people's children into the drug-addicted lifestyle.

We lost a LOT of teen-agers in Maine this past summer from drinking and driving.  If all they did was smoke, they would still be here with us. 

Why do you assume I use anything? There are other ways to relax than using drugs, dear. Though I wouldn't expect a drug-addled junkie to know that...

Your pathetic, you know it?  You see what others in here think about you.  Yet still you wear blinders.  There is no talking sense to you, and I for one, am on my knees thanking God that you and I will NEVER meet!!!!!!

I am ashamed that you are a Conservative.  Take a good look in the mirror, bub.  Your so pious that you can sit behind your monitor and spew your hate towards good decent people who choose to smoke a legal commodity.  Hitler???  I thought HITLER WAS DEAD.

Do me a favor.  Stay out of our smoking threads.  There is NOTHING you can say to us that will stop us from fighting for the rights of the Americans.  Nothing!  Your all hot air.  I don't appreciate your narrow minded anti-American posts.

And with that, I will bid you adieu.  I will not lower myself ever, by responding to your illiterate words. Have a nice day.

[Protagoras]

I'm in the middle of a tobacco tax battle and I need all the logical thinking I can gather.

Post #58 (and a few others) have done a yeoman's job of dissecting it. If you have a specific point you want discussed which wasn't covered there, I'll spend some time on it.

All of this stuff has been covered ad-nausem in the past with no effect on the poster.

The issue isn't about smoking in any case, it is about property rights, and rights in general. The proper role of government in a free society is to defend the rights of it's citizens, not abet those who would violate them.

[Protagoras]

I am ashamed that you are a Conservative.

You needn't give that another thought. The poster is a poser.

[Redbob]

"Having a no-smoking zone in a restaurant is like having a no-pissing zone in a swimming pool."

Exactly;
or more to the point, in case your comment is too subtle for the average smoker:
Having a smoking-allowed area in a restaurant is like having a p*ssing-allowed area in a swimming pool!

[RedBloodedAmerican]

Having a no-smoking zone in a restaurant is like having a no-pissing zone in a swimming pool

LOL! That is a very good point!

[SheLion]

This forum is used by some people that want the power to initiate force, fraud and coercion against people (be the "higher authority") or seek to enlist government agents ("higher authority") to initiate force, fraud and threat of fore against people on their behalf.

WHAAAAAAAT?????

[cibco]

Some people just want their opinions and beliefs made into laws for everyone else. Maybe a law requiring deodorants and mandatory "smell tests" should be next...

Blue eyed, blond girls cause my blood pressure to get dangerously high. And we all know high blood pressure kills. For the good of all... we need to pass laws restricting where these girls can go...

just kidding ;0)

[SheLion]

Having a smoking-allowed area in a restaurant is like having a p*ssing-allowed area in a swimming pool!

That statement is so old, it's time for an oil change:

Smoking in a restaurant is like peeing in a pool.

If you want to put up a sign saying "Peeing is permitted" over your own pool, why should anyone else care?

The air in restaurants is changed 35,000 times a year; the water in pools once, if that. Only an idiot could fail to see the difference.

[SheLion]

Having a no-smoking zone in a restaurant is like having a no-pissing zone in a swimming pool

Smoking in a restaurant is like peeing in a pool.

If you want to put up a sign saying "Peeing is permitted" over your own pool, why should anyone else care?

The air in restaurants is changed 35,000 times a year; the water in pools once, if that. Only an idiot could fail to see the difference.

[freeeee]

Having a smoking-allowed area in a restaurant is like having a p*ssing-allowed area in a swimming pool!

Don't like it? Stay out of your neighbors pool. He built it, he invited you, that makes you his guest, not his master. Maybe you should put a pool in your own backyard. Nah, easier just to have some thug stick a gun in your neighbors face so he sees it your way.

[wcbtinman]

So, anybody still think that out of control govt can be stopped at the ballot box?

I've long thought that the smoking issue might be the last straw. Maybe it's time to remind these facists why the second amendment is in the Constitution. You think?

[SheLion]

To all you ANTI'S coming in here:

There is NOTHING you can say to get rid of us. We are here to STAY!

None of you can produce evidence to back anything you say. All you spew is hate for smokers. We don't CARE what you think of us! We have scientific proof to back UP what we say!

If you all really think it's just fine for Big Government to go into a private business and tell them how to run it, you need more help then what I thought.

GO BACK TO THE YAHOO ANTI SMOKING BOARDS. FREE REPUBLIC! GET IT? FREE!!!!!

[Zon]

No confusion. Prove it to an impartial jury that you've been harmed by the person smoking a cigarette. The point being, you wouldn't be able to convince even half the jury that you'd been harmed.

This forum is used by some people (ccmay included) that want the power to initiate force, fraud and coercion against people (be the "higher authority") or seek to enlist government agents ("higher authority") to initiate force, fraud and threat of force against people on their behalf.

[Zon]

What are you having trouble with?

[VRWC_minion]

The handwriting is on the wall but smokers are in denial. The restaurants as a whole represented by their associations have determined that its cost beneficial to have state wide smoking bans.

This is an economic movement and not a rights movement. I agree that various groups have common ground but if it were not for the big restaurant chains to be for state wide bans.