Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You are serious? I guess you cut all of the references to "individual liberty" in there?
What about my "individual liberty" to walk down the street or enjoy a meal without breathing in cigarette smoke? Applies just as much to me as it does to you.
It's very simple really. Your habit is very harmful to other people, therefor it ceases to be about you and your liberty. That's why all over the country you smokers are having the hammer brought down on you.
You are serious? I guess you cut all of the references to "individual liberty" in there? How about private property? Guess that one is just... well... not needed anymore?
You don't have a right to walk into a restaurant, but let me guess.. you think you do?
The problem here is you don't understand what the constitution is protecting and when you do attempt to use it, you use it to violate the very thing you claim it is protecting.
It is my right to go out in public withour fear of assault with a toxic substance.
When smokers figure out how to light up and inhale all of the smoke produced by the cigarette without exhaling or letting any smoke escape into other people's personal space, as far as I am concerned they can smoke wherever they damn well please.
A gift to smugglers! Also a good source of income to commuters to/from NJ and CT! Roll your own, anyone? Actually there is some evidence that smokers save taxpayers so much money in Social Security and Medicare expenses that if that were reflected in prices, cigarettes would actually be subsidized.
As everyone knows, I HATE smoking, and I absolutely HATE to be around it. However, as others have mentioned, they will be going for my beer next so I do not support the smoking tax.
What about my "individual liberty" to walk down the street or enjoy a meal without breathing in cigarette smoke? Applies just as much to me as it does to you.
It's very simple really. Your habit is very harmful to other people, therefor it ceases to be about you and your liberty. That's why all over the country you smokers are having the hammer brought down on you.
You are free to walk down the street. Things that you dislike of others such as smoke, you are free to to choose not to be near them. You are free to select a restaurant to eat at, whether you are allowed to eat there is entirely up to the restaurant owner. You are not free to dictate how others should act or how they should use their freedom of choice. You are not free to dictate to a business owner how they will run their business or if they should serve you.
You apparently do not understand what individual liberty is. Your perception of it is more in line of what children think their freedoms are. Sorry, but you are confused here.
Also, I don't smoke. Unlike you though, I respect the rights of others to choose for themselves and am not obnoxious enough to believe that my opinion sets the precedence on freedoms.
And your claim of it being harmful? Inconclusive, though I doubt you would understand what I am talking about. After all, you had no clue concerning my discussion on PEL and TLV of various toxins. Go ahead though, you tell me though, its about safety. Pure BS. It is about what you want. As I said, a child argues in the same manner. They have no problems demanding of others anything they want, but have little understanding of the responsibility of being free to choose.
It is my right to go out in public withour fear of assault with a toxic substance.
When smokers figure out how to light up and inhale all of the smoke produced by the cigarette without exhaling or letting any smoke escape into other people's personal space, as far as I am concerned they can smoke wherever they damn well please.
Go back and review the discussion concerning that point. I have already covered this. Your "objection" is invalid because it is one of a double standard to which you pick and choose that which you believe is an acceptable toxin to be in contact with.
You are free to walk down the street. Things that you dislike of others such as smoke, you are free to to choose not to be near them.
Why does your right to smoke override my right to not inhale your smoke?
It doesn't. Hence the legislative smackdown you guys have taken.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
