Posted on 11/13/2002 9:23:09 AM PST by SheLion
There is an old Roman quote to the effect that, "The more laws, the more crime."
This has a few different insights. Naturally as more laws are passed, what used to be free becomes illegal. But also at a deeper level, as the citizenry become more corrupt and base and criminal, there is the need for more laws.
Today, the enemy of all LEOs and decent people is the political class. Every cop, sheriff, agent who is made to do nanny state chin wiping is one less that isnt available for rape, robbery and murder. For instance the arrest rate in DC is under 50%, thus the conviction rate is under 40%. Now a lot of those convicted are fellow criminals or low rent family member, pretty clear cut. But for street murders during robbery of mutual strangers, or home invasion the conviction rate is around 25%. Naturally self defense in your home or on your person is illegal (more laws) in the District.
So, although the antis have some truth to the nature of smoking and second hand smoke, they do so without the regard that that the enforcement, already poor, against murder, robbery and rape is weakened. And thus, not too indirectly, they are junior partners of the predators amongst us.
Oh, come one! If you are irritated by the guy two cars away blowing smoke out his window, it's not because of the smoke, it's because of your attitude about smokers. There is absolutely no scientific reason why a guy smoking a cigarette two cars down would irritate your lungs/eyes/whatever more than an SUV while it is running.
On the other hand neither of my parents put up with injustice and both believed in fighting for what they believed. Guess some of that rubbed off, too.
Bad laws deserve the anarchy they create and it's the duty of every American to disregard such laws wherever possible until they can be repealed.
You don't seem to be able to handle more that one issue at a time.
And the attitudes of those like you are the reason I am turning more militant. You have no clue.
No, Max, I haven't seen that often. A compliment in and of itself. ;)
Can you explain to me why virtually every anti-smoker nico-Nazi I've encountered here and elsewhere is obsessed with bodily functions and scatalogical references?
DUDE!! You have every right in the world to put your own money where your big mouth is and open a FART-FRIENDLY restaurant!! Fart all you want, but keep it there where only other farters will be affected. Then those who CHOOSE to work in a fart factory can do so; those who CHOOSE to patronize such an odious establishment can do so; and those of us who just want to socialize with other smokers have that choice, too.
CLEARLY it depends critically on the CONCENTRATION and DURATION of such exposure - bar staff in hotels, for example, face a high concentration and prolonged duration, wheras diners face a low concentration and short duration.
Monitored studies from DOE's Oak Ridge National Laboratories show hospitality staff are exposed to about SIX CIGARETTES A YEAR, not enough to be of concern. Hardly the 24/7 exposure for 40 years necessary to reach those statistically insignificant findings from EPA and WHO. Those who would be bothered by six cigarettes a year could always go elsewhere to work. No one has the absolute right to work in any particular place, a small fact that antis tend to overlook. But at least you got the "dose makes the poison," and most antis can't grasp that.
Smokers are just people who, as teenagers, were SO desperate to belong to ANY group that they took great pains to overcome the natural revulsion to inhaling burning vegetable leaves. that sort of low self-opinion is sad,
Bullshit. Sounds to me like a whole heap of sour grapes, like maybe you were the class nerd that no one liked.
but it is NOT an excuse to ruin my capacity to enjoy a decent meal. Otherwise we just have a free-for-all, and anyone who makes my shirt stin kas a result of their smoking, risks me standing on a chair and urinating all over THEIR clothes.
Oh, stop acting like a jerk. The ONLY way my smoking has a chance to ruin your meal is if you CHOOSE to eat in a smoker-friendly restaurant. Aren't you grown up enough to make that decision for yourself? REAL men are.
You'd have to "stand on a chair," huh?....
You are not alone there, but you must also realise from the many smoking posts you have participated in that even amongst never-smokers and ex-smokers, there are others who don't mind the smell of smoke.
And this is where it comes down to your values - do you support the right of 25% of your fellow citizens to do something that you personally find objectionable, or do you consider the discrimination/segregation/overt taxation/humiliation/castigation/zero-accommodation of that very large minority to be acceptable?
I suggest to you that most conservatives would say, "No. I will put up with a certain level of discomfort to support the rights of that significant minority."
The alternative - which is presently playing out - of forcing all smokers outside, regardless of how cold it is, or how old they are and, in extreme cases, of "smoke-rage" resulting in murder of smokers, should be too appalling for even those who despise the smell to consider.
Like I've said, we aren't going away, so what would you propose we do?
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.