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.
Apparently you don't think your bad habit is an infringement on my rights.
1. I don't smoke.
Often the problem with this issue is people make assumptions. For instance, you assumed that because I was against the smoking bans, it must be because I am a smoker. It never occurred to you that I have more respect for individual liberty than I do my personal tastes.
2. Explain to us here how it is an infringement on your rights? Now keep in mind what is private space, public space and what rights you have concerning them both.
Private space, your rights are pretty much limited to the permission of the owner and your acceptance of their conditions to that permission.
Public space, your rights are constrained to your ability to choose. That is, if you encounter something you dislike, you have the right to remove yourself from it or avoid it in the first place. Now certainly there are other factors of "harassment", but this has to be properly identified. The expectation of never encountering your personal distaste is an unrealistic and unreasonable expectation within public settings. We all accept that we will encounter things we do not care for, the issue is our freedom to remove ourselves from those encounters.
An example would be you sitting on a park bench and someone walks over, sits next to you and lights up. While it may be rude and inconsiderate, it isn't infringing on you as you can simply move to another spot. Now if that person follows you to your next spot (and you can show they are doing such purposely), then... you have a case for infringement (your choice to remove yourself is being infringed).
Past that, as long as you have a choice, then there are no infringements. Remember, our encounter with "personal" distastes are not infringements. That is called entitlement as it makes the position that your personal preferences should be given special attention and in the "public", special consideration is an infringement on those who are not "special" as they do not get the choice to obtain special treatment themselves.
If you are going to make the case of it being a dangerous hazard, then we are going to have to discuss the current inconclusive research and that of issues with Permissible Exposure Limits and that of Threshold Limit Values concerning toxins in not only that of SHS, but most elements you come in contact with daily.
How funny that you would complain about healthcare costs then say "just take your favorite benzodiazepine" to manage stress. I'm sure you don't see the irony. Maybe you're just experiencing withdrawal...an excuse for wishing ANYONE would die. Unbelievable!
Me thinks someone is humor and sarcasm-impaired.
I am self-insured, so I know the health care costs. Some illness that is self-induced, should be the responsibility of the individual(s) that created it, and thus they should bear the full burden of its treatment. Really simple. Personally, I don't want to subsidize you, your kids, your relatives in any way. And I don't want you, your kids or your relatives to subsidize me in any way. Fair 'nuff?
Precisely! And it is deviously ingenious while simplistic at the same time.
There seems to be a significant element within all human populations that are predisposed to an authoritarian mindset. And throughout the history of human civilization, it's been proven over and over again that it is only a matter of time before such types position themselves among the greater society for which they belong, into positions of ... you guessed it ... "authority". After all, what could one expect an authoritarian to seek other than authority?
The most definitive expose' of the leftist authoritarian mindset can be summarized in the fable of the frog and the scorpion. For those unfamiliar .... the scorpion asks the frog to carry him across the river. The frog, fearful of the deadly sting of the scorpion, says no. The scorpion reasons with the frog, by explaining how crazy it would be for him to kill the frog on the way, because that would doom both of them. So the frog eventually agrees. But, halfway across the river, the scorpion indeed stings the frog ... and as they both begin to drown, the frog asks why did you do that? The scorpion responds .. I couldn't stop myself ... it's just my nature. And so they both die.
This perfectly defines the essence of the left, and their self destructive nature. Those that seek authority over others are not ruled by logic or common interests, but ruled by their insatiable desire for exercising power and domination. It is their nature, even if they convince themselves or others to the contrary. Their basic nature will ultimately prevail and overrule even their own best interests.
The leftist will present all sorts of rationalizations and good reasons for the need for such authoritarianism .... most often invoking the "greater good" or the "best interests of the whole". Such arguments are empty .. and have never delivered on one promise. The results are always the same ... self destruction.
You know, it's too bad. I was with you until you started bringing up the 'left' and how authoritarian they are, yadda, yadda, yadda.
Just don't forget, a republican formed DHS. I considered THAT a power grab.
Both 'sides' want to wield authority. The R's also want everyone to live according to their morals.
Anyway, this thread is about smoking, and an individual's rights.
Often the problem with this issue is people make assumptions. For instance, you assumed that because I was against the smoking bans, it must be because I am a smoker. It never occurred to you that I have more respect for individual liberty than I do my personal tastes.
2. Explain to us here how it is an infringement on your rights? Now keep in mind what is private space, public space and what rights you have concerning them both.
Private space, your rights are pretty much limited to the permission of the owner and your acceptance of their conditions to that permission.
Public space, your rights are constrained to your ability to choose. That is, if you encounter something you dislike, you have the right to remove yourself from it or avoid it in the first place. Now certainly there are other factors of "harassment", but this has to be properly identified. The expectation of never encountering your personal distaste is an unrealistic and unreasonable expectation within public settings. We all accept that we will encounter things we do not care for, the issue is our freedom to remove ourselves from those encounters.
An example would be you sitting on a park bench and someone walks over, sits next to you and lights up. While it may be rude and inconsiderate, it isn't infringing on you as you can simply move to another spot. Now if that person follows you to your next spot (and you can show they are doing such purposely), then... you have a case for infringement (your choice to remove yourself is being infringed).
Past that, as long as you have a choice, then there are no infringements. Remember, our encounter with "personal" distastes are not infringements. That is called entitlement as it makes the position that your personal preferences should be given special attention and in the "public", special consideration is an infringement on those who are not "special" as they do not get the choice to obtain special treatment themselves.
If you are going to make the case of it being a dangerous hazard, then we are going to have to discuss the current inconclusive research and that of issues with Permissible Exposure Limits and that of Threshold Limit Values concerning toxins in not only that of SHS, but most elements you come in contact with daily.
Fabulous post ... and an excellent breakdown of what it means to be a liberty minded American.
You know, it's too bad. I was with you until you started bringing up the 'left' and how authoritarian they are, yadda, yadda, yadda.
Just don't forget, a republican formed DHS. I considered THAT a power grab.
Both 'sides' want to wield authority. The R's also want everyone to live according to their morals.
Anyway, this thread is about smoking, and an individual's rights.
Yes, and political ideology and liberty is at the heart of the debate about smoking and individual rights.
As for losing you with "left" authoritarianism, you were lost before I started, and that's because you're confused about the the current reality regarding American politics, and apparently not up to speed in the history of political ideologies, since authoritarianism is the foundation of LEFT WING philosophy, and has been that way since before you or I were born. Now this may also come as a shock to you .. but the letter that is attached after a politician's name does not define what that politician represents ... their actions do. So, from that point of measure (ACTIONS) Bush was every bit as much a leftist as any democrat ever has been. In fact, neither party today represents classic, liberty conscious Americanism ... both promote authoritarian policies which are simply delivered in slightly different packaging ... cherry or grape .. that's your choice ... but you're still drinking Kool-Aide.
This should now be evident to most Americans who actually have a pulse .. as it couldn't be more obvious than it has become today. It's the gigantic pink elephant standing in the middle of the room which seems to go unnoticed. Unfortunately, we seem to have a great many zombies out there who don't actually possess a pulse, and seem to navigate life through impulse and reaction to pre-programmed stimuli delivered by Television, rather than thinking on their own, an utilizing critical thought and discernment.
Yes, and political ideology and liberty is at the heart of the debate about smoking and individual rights.
As for losing you with "left" authoritarianism, you were lost before I started, and that's because you're confused about the the current reality regarding American politics, and apparently not up to speed in the history of political ideologies, since authoritarianism is the foundation of LEFT WING philosophy, and has been that way since before you or I were born. Now this may also come as a shock to you .. but the letter that is attached after a politician's name does not define what that politician represents ... their actions do. So, from that point of measure (ACTIONS) Bush was every bit as much a leftist as any democrat ever has been. In fact, neither party today represents classic, liberty conscious Americanism ... both promote authoritarian policies which are simply delivered in slightly different packaging ... cherry or grape .. that's your choice ... but you're still drinking Kool-Aide.
This should now be evident to most Americans who actually have a pulse .. as it couldn't be more obvious than it has become today. It's the gigantic pink elephant standing in the middle of the room which seems to go unnoticed. Unfortunately, we seem to have a great many zombies out there who don't actually possess a pulse, and seem to navigate life through impulse and reaction to pre-programmed stimuli delivered by Television, rather than thinking on their own, an utilizing critical thought and discernment.
Good post. However, those that do tend to think on their own, and utilize critical thought and discernment to sift through the BS get labeled with the ole "tin foil hat" thing.
I spent a few days in Las Vegas where smoking was allowed indoors and after two days, I could barely see as my eyes were burning like crazy. Avoiding the smoke was nearly impossible as you were forced to walk through the casinos to get in and out of the hotel Oh, it was so nice to be back in California and have smoke-free air to breathe. So no ... I don't miss the era prior to smoking bans at all
That is almost funny since California has some of the worst air in the country to breathe despite all their regulations.
An example would be you sitting on a park bench and someone walks over, sits next to you and lights up. While it may be rude and inconsiderate, it isn't infringing on you as you can simply move to another spot. Now if that person follows you to your next spot (and you can show they are doing such purposely), then... you have a case for infringement (your choice to remove yourself is being infringed).
What about the smoker's ability to choose not to sit right next to someone that's not smoking? Maybe he has the right to sit there, but he could extend something called common courtesy. But no one has that anymore, thus the laws. If I ate a huge stomach busting meal and have to rip ass, yes I COULD do it anywhere, I suppose, but I don't. Because that would be ****ing rude and inconsiderate of others. I think most people understand this. It only goes away with smoking because smokers are addicted and lose proper perspective on the issue because of that. At least a nasty fart eventually dissipates... not so with tobacco smoke.
"You know, it's too bad. I was with you until you started bringing up the 'left' and how authoritarian they are, yadda, yadda, yadda."
I agree. I actually rep'd texas guys' first post in this thread, then he went off the deep end.
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.
However, those that do tend to think on their own, and utilize critical thought and discernment to sift through the BS get labeled with the ole "tin foil hat" thing.
Oh, it was so nice to be back in California and have smoke-free air to breathe. So no ... I don't miss the era prior to smoking bans at all 