Passive Smoking Doesn't Cause Cancer - Official

13 November 2002

[metesky]

Lenny, you're talking to the wrong guy. I've been breaking laws all my life and I don't intend to stop for a post-nasal drip like you.

[Leonard210]

And let's leave it up to the restaurant owner if he wants smoking sections or not. How about that?

That's fine, unless enough of us, sitting accross from your "smokers section" decide to restrict the restaurant owners RIGHT to provide such a facade unless it truely keeps your RIGHT from infringing on our RIGHT...BY LAW.

[Leisler]

The government doesn't exist, but save an idea. What we commonly call the government are people who work together for and with power. Power over others. It is an old story. They know no limits, and the pillars of limitations of their actions has long since died in the harts of people save us few. No matter. The armed revolution was started in taverns, let it start again.

Leisler12pack

[Just another Joe]

I don't see any reason to believe that this study is the truth and all others are fatally flawed.

Most of the studies that the anti-smoking cartel use have been PROVEN to be fatally flawed, by the Congressional Research Institute, OSHA, or some other governmental agency.

[Leonard210]

Lenny, you're talking to the wrong guy. I've been breaking laws all my life and I don't intend to stop for a post-nasal drip like you.

Well, metesky, you're still young. One of these days some of those laws will catch up to you.

[borisbob69]

Your conclusion that I have no response is the typical comment of someone who believes that since a law is a law it must be just (and aren't you just so clever?). The only problem with the antis is that they aren't content to force smokers outside or into designated areas...their ultimate objective is to make it illegal for us to smoke a legal product anywhere.

And don't think I missed the extra s in the word leading off your previous post before this one.

[VRWC_minion]

Unsupportable conclusion.

As a father I have two choices. I could avoid smoking near my children and be 100% sure that any subsequent lung problems were not from my smoke or I could just deny that any connection as an unsupportable conclusion If it were me, I rather err on the side of caution. However, if its up to the smoker they would ratehr err on the side of convience. That is why they are selfish.

[montag813]

Someone show this to our mayor, Adolf Bloomberg, before he eviscerates every small bar and restaurant in the city with his total ban on smoking.

[Publius6961]

I don't see any reason to believe that this study is the truth and all others are fatally flawed. You should expect some studies to fail to find correlations that exist. They are designed to make such errors unlikely, but not impossible.

You haven't been paying attention have you.
Yes, all those other "studies" are fatally flawed, and the courts found them to be so: contrived, invented, unscientific and assembled to fit a preconceived conclusion.
See the link to the court findings elsewhere in this thread.

Neurotic controllers always assume that the end justifies the means, and that the universe (of course) revolves around them.

[SheLion]

I don't see any reason to believe that this study is the truth and all others are fatally flawed. You should expect some studies to fail to find correlations that exist. They are designed to make such errors unlikely, but not impossible.

This is definitely NOT just one study.

The BIG LIE That Smoking is an Economic Burden To Society
 
Federal Court Rules Against EPA on Second Hand Smoke
 
Oak Ridge Labs & SHS
 
I think any anti who tries to dismiss the findings of the U.S.Department of Energy labs at Oak Ridge, should be confronted with the question: "Are you saying that DOE researchers committed scientific fraud and that their findings on ETS exposure are untrue?

Also: Second Hand Smoke Frauds

[Old Professer]

That's fine, unless enough of us, sitting accross from your "smokers section" decide to restrict the restaurant owners RIGHT to provide such a facade unless it truely keeps your RIGHT from infringing on our RIGHT...BY LAW.

Are you listening to yourself? What you say here and in an earlier post is simply that the mob rules; the rights in question are those of the retaurant owner, not the individual smoker.

If I go someplace where I find myself unwanted, I leave, you want to come in and kick me out - big difference.

Power has a way of shifting; when the tobacco pile is swept away there will still be a big broom scouring the floor for another pile, don't find yourself in it.

[Madame Dufarge]

That's fine, unless enough of us, sitting accross from your "smokers section" decide to restrict the restaurant owners RIGHT

So, if a large enough mob gathers together and decides to restrict someone else's property rights to accommodate their sniveling, gutless little lives, that's A-OK with you.

Yup, mob rule's just fine with Lennie.

Your posts reek of mental illness, too bad. Let me be the first to vote that you be committed, for the public good, for the attempted murder of freedom. By your reasoning, if we get enough votes by the end of the night, I guess you'll have to go along quietly with those nice men in the shiny ambulance.

Hands?

[borisbob69]

How dare you presume to tar everyone with your brush of intolerance. You know absolutely nothing about smokers you've never encountered in person where you could observe whether they fit the pre-conceived notions you espouse! Typical lib/antismokingnazi!

[Old Professer]

Darwin wrote reams on the fate of the unselfish.

[SheLion]

That's fine, unless enough of us, sitting accross from your "smokers section" decide to restrict the restaurant owners RIGHT to provide such a facade unless it truely keeps your RIGHT from infringing on our RIGHT...BY LAW.

Oh, that's beautiful! What side of the world are YOU living on!

Smoking Bans Devastating to Business

[Eva]

No, I have asthma and burning wood in your fireplace is supposedly worse than smoking.

[Leonard210]

And don't think I missed the extra s in the word leading off your previous post before this one.

My sincere apology. I did not intend that "s". I don't think that any arguments are unproductive. Your comment is true to a point, but my argument is with smokers who insist that they have a LEGAL RIGHT to smoke anywhere. Well, it's a fact that in many places they no longer have that LEGAL RIGHT.

[VRWC_minion]

If they smoke around their children, what else do I need to know to decide they are playing russian roulette with their health ? What are the mitigating circumstance ?

[Leisler]

1. Ask the owner. It is not "a restaurant." It is private property, a mans castle, as much as a farmers field or a fisherman’s boat or a cabbies cab. I don't think your going to do anything to any farmer, fisherman or cabby, in or on their property without their permission. Just as neither you would allow, without force, someone doing something in your house or property. I know that everyone here, save a few anti's, would support you to decide what occurs in your home, to your family and on your property .

2. Bleach, ne diluted chlorine, is very toxic in any form and fatal in less diluted concentrations. As a gas it was used in the trenches in WW I, and killed usually through the lungs, thousands. Even in its concentrations as you buy it in the store, it can permanently blind in minutes if not flushed. No one has ever been blinded in minutes, tissue burned or killed by ETS. They have by chlorine.

[SheLion]

Someone show this to our mayor, Adolf Bloomberg, before he eviscerates every small bar and restaurant in the city with his total ban on smoking.

BLOOMBERG? DID YOU SAY BLOOMBERG??!!

More On Bloomberg