Poll: Most Texans want statewide smoking ban (Point: law, assault)

[HtownLove]

Originally Posted by getmeoutofhere

For criminal liability in Texas, the traditional tort definitions of "assault" and "battery" are rolled into just assault.

And the contact can be harmful and consent still a defense, as long as it wasn't "serious" harm.

when I say harmful I mean serious harm, not just a slap on the cheek. I mean cancer type of harm

[Houston3]

Originally Posted by HtownLove

good luck, my grandad has been trying for 40 years

Have him look at Chantix....

[getmeoutofhere]

Originally Posted by HtownLove

when I say harmful I mean serious harm, not just a slap on the cheek. I mean cancer type of harm

Oh, like secondhand smoke harm.

Gotcha.

[TexasHorseLady]

getmeoutofhere, let's ban alcohol, then, shall we? (Oh, wait, that's been tried.) And cars. And ice cream. And meat. And tofu. And everything that might possibly cause harm to someone, sometime, or that they might possibly find pleasure in.

Think then you'll live forever?

My MIL chainsmoked for 50 years that we know of. Literally before she got out of bed in the morning until the last thing before bed at night. She had surgery for something unrelated in her later years, and the doctors assured her that they knew for a fact that when they got in there, her lungs would be black and they might have to just go ahead and take some of them out, as well. Because everybody KNOWS that cigarette smoke, even second-hand smoke, causes lung cancer. After the surgery, they had to acknowledge to her that when they got in, she had lovely, pretty, pink, healthy lungs. Blew their little minds, because, well, everybody KNOWS that it is inevitable that exposure to cigarette smoke causes all those things.

Except it didn't. Again, there's something going on here that we don't understand, and the sooner we acknowledge that the more likely we are someday to understand it. But not as long as we insist that we KNOW what the problem is and that it just HAS to be cigarette smoking.

That is, however, a big digression from the topic of this thread, which is civil liberties and just how far some folks are willing to go to (a) impose their will on others while thinking that it won't ever happen to them and (b) pretend that they're never going to die if they just make everyone else do what is clearly (to them) The Right Thing To Do.

Big reminder: this is Texas. We're not wusses, and we are competent, as adults, to make our own decisions about such things. Including not whining and throwing hissy fits because somewhere, somebody is enjoying something we don't approve of, and even if we don't go into the place where they're doing it, WE HAVE A RIGHT TO AND THEY SHOULD JUST STOP IT BECAUSE WE MIGHT SOMEDAY WANT TO GO THERE!

Heck, I wouldn't accept that behavior from my own children beyond the age of about three, why on earth should we accept it from purported adults?

Sheesh. And some folks complain about religion in Texas, without even seeing that they're worshiping at the altar of the fear du jour.

[HtownLove]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

getmeoutofhere, let's ban alcohol, then, shall we? (Oh, wait, that's been tried.) And cars. And ice cream. And meat. And tofu. And everything that might possibly cause harm to someone, sometime, or that they might possibly find pleasure in.

Think then you'll live forever?

non of those things are inherently dangerous by themselves.

It is in combination with other elements that are dangerous.

but you can just sit there smoking and not do anything else and be endangering other people's lives.

if you drink alcohol while just seating there you are not endangering other people. same with icecream, meat tofu etc.

why must your examples be so off the scales?

[TexasReb]

Originally Posted by getmeoutofhere

That's not entirely true, and is a misreading of the TPC.

No, what is a misreading is that on the part of you and HT in suggesting an assault is commited to begin with...as involves it being commited when one enters a place where they know aforehand, smoking is allowed.

To deliberately blow smoke into someones face is an assault. It would be that way, public OR private. On the other hand, there is no assault commited when the person enters an arena where smoking is permitted and they know this aforehand. Thus, they have no grounds upon which to charge another person with assault if other people were simply smoking. In effect, the "consent" defense would stand...even presuming anyone were so silly as to charge "assault" at all!

[getmeoutofhere]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

getmeoutofhere, let's ban alcohol, then, shall we? (Oh, wait, that's been tried.) And cars. And ice cream. And meat. And tofu. And everything that might possibly cause harm to someone, sometime, or that they might possibly find pleasure in.

Think then you'll live forever?

What a ridiculous argument. None of those things harm other people by their mere existence.

Secondhand smoke hurts everyone around, not just the person choosing to indulge in smoking.

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

My MIL chainsmoked for 50 years that we know of. Literally before she got out of bed in the morning until the last thing before bed at night. She had surgery for something unrelated in her later years, and the doctors assured her that they knew for a fact that when they got in there, her lungs would be black and they might have to just go ahead and take some of them out, as well. Because everybody KNOWS that cigarette smoke, even second-hand smoke, causes lung cancer. After the surgery, they had to acknowledge to her that when they got in, she had lovely, pretty, pink, healthy lungs. Blew their little minds, because, well, everybody KNOWS that it is inevitable that exposure to cigarette smoke causes all those things.

Except it didn't. Again, there's something going on here that we don't understand, and the sooner we acknowledge that the more likely we are someday to understand it. But not as long as we insist that we KNOW what the problem is and that it just HAS to be cigarette smoking.

Ah, so based off your statistical sample of one person you can conclusively say that all the medical research of the past 30 years is wrong.

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

That is, however, a big digression from the topic of this thread, which is civil liberties and just how far some folks are willing to go to (a) impose their will on others while thinking that it won't ever happen to them and (b) pretend that they're never going to die if they just make everyone else do what is clearly (to them) The Right Thing To Do.

Public health trumps civil liberties. Always has.

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

Big reminder: this is Texas. We're not wusses, and we are competent, as adults, to make our own decisions about such things. Including not whining and throwing hissy fits because somewhere, somebody is enjoying something we don't approve of, and even if we don't go into the place where they're doing it, WE HAVE A RIGHT TO AND THEY SHOULD JUST STOP IT BECAUSE WE MIGHT SOMEDAY WANT TO GO THERE!

Typical Texan arrogance. Trying to shoehorn the state into something completely unrelated. News flash...it doesn't matter if this is Texas, Ohio, or Florida...secondhand smoke kills people everywhere.

This isn't about banning something that people disapprove of. Texas and it's religion-run government already do that pretty well.

Smoking hurts not only the person who does it, but everyone around. You get to make choices that affect your body, but you don't get to harm everyone else.

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

Sheesh. And some folks complain about religion in Texas, without even seeing that they're worshiping at the altar of the fear du jour.

So are we back to 30 years of medical science is nothing but a scare tactic? Good argument.

[TexasReb]

Originally Posted by HtownLove

non of those things are inherently dangerous by themselves.

It is in combination with other elements that are dangerous.

but you can just sit there smoking and not do anything else and be endangering other people's lives.

if you drink alcohol while just seating there you are not endangering other people. same with icecream, meat tofu etc.

why must your examples be so off the scales?

Then don't go into these dangerous places, HtLove.

[getmeoutofhere]

Originally Posted by TexasReb

No, what is a misreading is that on the part of you and HT in suggesting an assault is commited to begin with...as involves it being commited when one enters a place where they know aforehand, smoking is allowed.

To deliberately blow smoke into someones face is an assault. It would be that way, public OR private. On the other hand, there is no assault commited when the person enters an arena where smoking is permitted and they know this aforehand. Thus, they have no grounds upon which to charge another person with assault if other people were simply smoking. In effect, the "consent" defense would stand...even presuming anyone were so silly as to charge "assault" at all!

Actually, other states have already upheld assault charges for secondhand smoke.

I don't believe it's been challenged yet in Texas, but it's coming.

[TexasReb]

Originally Posted by getmeoutofhere

What a ridiculous argument. None of those things harm other people by their mere existence.

Secondhand smoke hurts everyone around, not just the person choosing to indulge in smoking.

Ah, so based off your statistical sample of one person you can conclusively say that all the medical research of the past 30 years is wrong.

Public health trumps civil liberties. Always has.

Typical Texan arrogance. Trying to shoehorn the state into something completely unrelated. News flash...it doesn't matter if this is Texas, Ohio, or Florida...secondhand smoke kills people everywhere.

This isn't about banning something that people disapprove of. Texas and it's religion-run government already do that pretty well.

Smoking hurts not only the person who does it, but everyone around. You get to make choices that affect your body, but you don't get to harm everyone else.

So are we back to 30 years of medical science is nothing but a scare tactic? Good argument.

Then don't go into these places, GMOH.

Typical Texas Arrogance? Now why did I exepect THAT one to come up too? *checks timer again* THL...do you have your watch on as well...?