Smoking Ban bill as been passed (Scranton, Penn: home, neighborhoods, income)

[thecoalman]

Well I guess I have failed to make people understand my point, in any event just remember your next. These laws like this are slowly creeping into society and slowly eroded the rights of people to make decisions for themselves. Enjoy that medium rare steak and raw shell fish if you like them like that while you can because that is probably next, don't laugh either. It will only take one good outbreak of something that could have been prevented by thorough cooking and we'll see laws governing how we can order our food next. I know I've already seen it mentioned on the news already where legislators had such proposals.

Of course they are right we are too stupid to make our own decisions and need the government to make them for us.

[The Commish]

Originally Posted by thecoalman

Well I guess I have failed to make people understand my point, in any event just remember your next. These laws like this are slowly creeping into society and slowly eroded the rights of people to make decisions for themselves.

Who cares?

You fail to understand that "the rights of people to make decisions for themselves" isn't paramount. Pennsylvanians don't want that when it means that they can't walk into restaraunts and bars (well many of them anyway) without smelling like an ashtray or possibly getting lung cancer. This is definitely a cheap shot, but do you think people should "make decisions for themselves" whether pedophilia should be illegal? Of course not. We have laws in this country because people want them, for the most part.

Originally Posted by thecoalman

Of course they are right we are too stupid to make our own decisions and need the government to make them for us.

No, it's not that.

It's that we *know* smoking in public places will continue unless we have a law saying otherwise. That's not stupidity; that's pretty damn smart. It's responding to a known problem with an easy solution.

[thecoalman]

Originally Posted by The Commish

Who cares?

I think everyone should care, how you going to feel when they start telling you what you can eat. Frankly I find it appalling that you'd trample on the rights of others just so you don't have to deal with them. I'll reiterate, the bottom line is you as non-smoker had a choice and could make a conscious decison to not go to such an establishment but instead want to deny the rights of others to make a choice. Isn't that what comes down too? You and other want to control what other people do. What other conclusion can you draw?

This is definitely a cheap shot, but do you think people should "make decisions for themselves" whether pedophilia should be illegal? Of course not. We have laws in this country because people want them, for the most part.

Yea it is cheap shot and really irrelevant to this discussion because again you the non-smoker who would be effected by this had a choice to not go into such an establishment. Did someone ever hold a gun to your head and force you into a bar or restaurant that allowed smoking.

As I've posted above if its such a great idea anyone... anyone.... reading this could go and open a smoke free establishment. Being that I'm a smoker I wouldn't insist that you should have to allow smoking but then again it's not my prerogative to try and tell people what they can and cannot do.

I know that the restaurant association just recently changed their stance on this issue but I'll bet that if you asked 10 bar/restaurant owners how they feel 9/10 would tell you that it shouldn't be a law. They like me are in business. most people that are in business really loathe government interference in how they operate their business. Of course there is and should be limits but in this case everyone involved had a choice whether they should be subjected to the activity.

It's that we *know* smoking in public places will continue unless we have a law saying otherwise. That's not stupidity; that's pretty damn smart. It's responding to a known problem with an easy solution.

Usually the easy solution isn't always the right solution.

[The Commish]

Originally Posted by thecoalman

I think everyone should care, how you going to feel when they start telling you what you can eat. Frankly I find it appalling that you'd trample on the rights of others just so you don't have to deal with them. I'll reiterate, the bottom line is you as non-smoker had a choice and could make a conscious decison to not go to such an establishment but instead want to deny the rights of others to make a choice. Isn't that what comes down too? You and other want to control what other people do. What other conclusion can you draw?

All laws "control what other people do."

Get over it.

Originally Posted by thecoalman

Yea it is cheap shot and really irrelevant to this discussion because again you the non-smoker who would be effected by this had a choice to not go into such an establishment. Did someone ever hold a gun to your head and force you into a bar or restaurant that allowed smoking.

You're moving the goalposts.

The point is we don't let people "make decisions for themselves" in *tons* of contexts for *very good* reasons. That's why I compared one obviously good law (prohibiting pedophilia) to the anti-smoking law. We clearly don't want people to decide for themselves whether or not it's good to have sex with children. And now the people of the state decided through their representatives in the general assembly that we don't want individual bar and restaurant owners "deciding for themselves" whether to allow smoking.

In terms of your "choice" argument, again, Pennsylvanians have made their choice: no more status quo.

Can I be any clearer?

Originally Posted by thecoalman

As I've posted above if its such a great idea anyone... anyone.... reading this could go and open a smoke free establishment. Being that I'm a smoker I wouldn't insist that you should have to allow smoking but then again it's not my prerogative to try and tell people what they can and cannot do.

The "great idea" isn't just smoke-free public places; the great idea is a regulation mandating that *all* bars and restaurants (with notable exceptions) have to go smoke-free. The fact that any bar or restaurant could legally go smoke-free before the regulation *and didn't* is what brought this regulation about.

Pennsylvanians thought that was not so good.

Originally Posted by thecoalman

I know that the restaurant association just recently changed their stance on this issue but I'll bet that if you asked 10 bar/restaurant owners how they feel 9/10 would tell you that it shouldn't be a law.

Well that's just your conjecture.

Originally Posted by thecoalman

Usually the easy solution isn't always the right solution.

I never said it was.

[thecoalman]

Gotcha Commish, the rights of the minorities make no difference. Since the population of Pennsylvania is mostly Christian perhaps we should ban other religions so Christinas that find them offensive don't have to be subjected to it?

That's payback for the pedo analogy.

[The Commish]

Originally Posted by thecoalman

Gotcha Commish, the rights of the minorities make no difference. Since the population of Pennsylvania is mostly Christian perhaps we should ban other religions so Christinas that find them offensive don't have to be subjected to it?

That's payback for the pedo analogy.

Except religious freedom is protected under the PA and U.S. Constitution.

Smoking aint.

This the part where you say, "touche."

[thecoalman]

Let me ask you this, if the shoe was on the other foot and state mandated that restaurant owners had to allow people to smoke what would be your thoughts on that?

[The Commish]

Originally Posted by thecoalman

Let me ask you this, if the shoe was on the other foot and state mandated that restaurant owners had to allow people to smoke what would be your thoughts on that?

Can you be more specific?

Of course I would disagree with that law.

[Prinny]

Originally Posted by MrKrabs

I can deal with that....at least it will be banned anywhere where children are present, and anywhere where people will be trying to enjoy a meal. I can deal with little corner bars being one last place where smokers can go and indulge in their habit.


Anyways, that might be a good thing. Think of 90% of the neighborhood bars in Scranton....they tend to be in residential areas, can you imagine if all the smokers had to go outside to smoke and they would all be congregated outside these bars right by people's houses? Most of whom would be drunk and loud in the late night hours, probably disturbing the peace (and littering)...I'd rather them inside smoking.

What on earth would posses you to even think that smokers are drunks, litterers and loud people? Just because people smoke does not make them drunks or obnoxious people. That is the most uneducated statement!

[thecoalman]

Originally Posted by The Commish

Can you be more specific?

Of course I would disagree with that law.

It was already very specific, I don't know how I could clarify it anymore. It's really a very simple question, I'll try and rephrase it. Hypothetically speaking if the state of Pennsylvania was made up primarily of smokers and they were able to get a law passed that privately owned restaurant and bars had to allow anyone to smoke at anytime would you support such a law or disagree with it. Basically as I originally stated if the shoe was on the other foot.

Here's the rub, no matter which way you answer that question you're going to be going against the wall... kinda sux doesn't it? If you agree with it then you would be forced into the possibility of having to breathe second hand smoke no matter where you went, you'd no longer have a choice to go to a smoke free establishments because they wouldn't exist. If you disagree with it on the grounds that you or the owner of the establishment should have choice in the matter then you're a hypocrite, as you have already stated :

"the rights of people to make decisions for themselves" isn't paramount.