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.
How do you define "around?" At what distance do others have to be before it amounts to privacy?
In any case, by such a standard smoking in a persons own home could be banned unless he lives alone because it's no longer private. Would you be OK with that?
I'll tell you like I told everyone else (and maybe you also). For the purposes of this thread, consider me an anarchist. I don't think anything should be banned!
I won't answer your question about defining "around" because distinguishing between private life and public matters is not important to me. I wasn't suggesting that anything that isn't part of one's private life is automatically the jurisdiction of the law. That's why I've repeatedly agreed that the law shouldn't determine for a business who can smoke in its buildings. I was only pointing out that this subject is not a matter of government interfering in one's private life, as the vast majority of our conversation is about what should be allowed OR what should be done when others are around.
How do you define "around?" At what distance do others have to be before it amounts to privacy?
In any case, by such a standard smoking in a persons own home could be banned unless he lives alone because it's no longer private. Would you be OK with that?
No I wouldn't, period, and I wish the control sick people in this contry would put all that pent up anger, hostility and fear into the real issues that abound. I cannot believe this...just cannot believe the intellectual loss that exists...
The CDC issued the results this week of a survey they conducted which shows that only 1 in 5 of high school or middle school students are exposed to SHS in automobiles. That's just 20%.
Is that a big enough problem to demand government intervention? If not, why not? If so, where's the cut off point?
The CDC issued the results this week of a survey they conducted which shows that only 1 in 5 of high school or middle school students are exposed to SHS in automobiles. That's just 20%.
Is that a big enough problem to demand government intervention? If not, why not? If so, where's the cut off point?
why doesnt the goverment spend more time reducing the deficit and budget than butting into peoples private lives?
What I don't get is why people would do this to their children (or to any child, really).
It's part selfishness and part addiction. I grew up with a mom who routinely smoked with the car windows rolled up. No amount of coughing on my part could persuade her to stop and complaining about the smoke would earn me a whacking. She wasn't the only mother I knew like this. Some parents have that 'damn the kids, I want what I want' attitude.
The CDC issued the results this week of a survey they conducted which shows that only 1 in 5 of high school or middle school students are exposed to SHS in automobiles. That's just 20%.
Is that a big enough problem to demand government intervention? If not, why not? If so, where's the cut off point?
So long as so much as 0.01% of children { or anyone really } is exposed to smoke or have legal access to tobacco products, the antis will never quit. Yhere will be no cut-off. Then, after they are done with that, they will move on to something else.
__________________________________________________ _______________
I hope all you people that have such hatred for smokers and support intrusive gov't laws that restrict private prop. rights, end up having to file weekly detailed records of what your child ate complete with calorie counts, protien tracking etc. etc. Then, you will wonder how the gov't can force private citizens to do this, what went wrong? How did the gov't get so much control over our private lives?
Myself and others will be there waiting in the wings to tell you....." we tried to warn you....we told you so"!
Anyone who thinks diesel smoke is healthier than second hand cigarette smoke is an idiot.
Well thats what they are programmed to think throughout their everyday lives. They dont bother to look at studies and compare chemical compounds, the graphic images are what sell and get interest.
Myself and others will be there waiting in the wings to tell you....." we tried to warn you....we told you so"!
Since some of us have already done that in other threads and been rebuffed because it's all for a "good" reason, I've reluctantly come to the conclusion that most American's really don't care about their liberties. They prefer to be "safe."
I guess we as a people have become so used to freedom that we no longer value it enough to fight to keep it or to be inconvenienced for the sake of someone else's freedoms. Taking it so much for granted, we're rapidly losing it and few seem to be bothered by that.
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.
