If you love liberty, vote NO on this smoking ban poll for business owners

[Anti Federalist]

This is why we fail.

Look how easily this has divided us, who should be in solidarity yet will argue this non stop.

Meanwhile, the ruling elite are running around saying that "international permission" is all that is needed to launch the US war machine.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...CONGRESSIONAL-PERMISSION-FOR-MILITARY-ACTIONS

Fuck me people, light up a cigarette, smoke a bowl, have a shot, or jog around the block and let's focus on whose asses really need to be kicked here, please?

Because I'm pretty sure even a non smoker would prefer a smoke filled barroom over the air at Gitmo, which is where we are going to fucking end up if we don't put the brakes on this shit.

 

[angelatc]

I'm not speaking of owners prohibiting smoking, or pets or whatever in property that they rent.

I'm talking about the state banning it, in any multi unit configuration.

Do you own your townhouse or condo?

The problem, I have with the townhouse / condo clause is changing the terms of the contract after the purchase. But that's the chance you take when you buy a condo or townhouse, which is one of the best reasons not to buy a condo or a townhouse.

 

[pcosmar]

Fuck me running...

LOL

Have not heard that phrase in a while.

 

[specsaregood]

There is a hamburger chain called 'Five Guys' that served free peanuts to shell and eat in line while waiting for your order. They were sued and had to put up signs warning of peanut allergies. That was awhile ago. I imagine they are peanut free today.

They all have peanuts still, but their warning sign even warns about taking the peanuts out of the restaurant and into the public because neighbors might have peanut allergies.

There was a study not too long ago, where they actually tested kids who's parents claimed they had peanut allergies, only about 25% of the kids actually had the allergy, the rest were parents self-diagnosing...

 

[Anti Federalist]

The problem, I have with the townhouse / condo clause is changing the terms of the contract after the purchase. But that's the chance you take when you buy a condo or townhouse, which is one of the best reasons not to buy a condo or a townhouse.

I agree and I never would, but once you go down that road, you really never own anything anyway.

Got a mortgage?

Then the bank can dictate to you.

Home paid off?

Then the state can dictate to you, because, in reality, none of us own anything, we just rent from the state through property taxation and they could claim smoking lowers the value of the home, which would lower their tax revenue. (Kelo v. New London)

While I understand the concept, there has to be some consideration: whether you contract a flophouse room for rent or buy a multi million dollar home, once that door closes, it is your "castle" and you should have the right to do anything legal within, and only a duly sworn warrant should allow the state or the owner to search for anything illegal.

If that is too onerous, then don't rent rooms.

 

[Revolution9]

I voted. I'm surprised at how many "yes" votes there are, though. Don't people get that all this would do is hurt the businesses, hurt the customers, and increase law enforcement costs? Everyone loses.

Realistically, I stopped going to bars when they told me I can't smoke a cig with my beer. I drank at home. Then that got boring so I stopped drinking. I still smoke and enjoy it when I am working on hard core coding and intense art. Alcohol does not allow those activities and makes me just surf instead of work.

Rev9

 

[Anti Federalist]

Are you asking me out on a date??

Of course I am...probably get turned down though....

 

[donnay]

Of course I am...probably get turned down though....

 

[DamianTV]

I think the lady in that cartoon is having an Affair with her Neighbor... hood.

 

[Anti Federalist]

I think the lady in that cartoon is having an Affair with her Neighbor... hood.

LOL

 

[The Gold Standard]

Here in Ohio a non-smoking ban was enacted a few years back and practically everyone I know loves it and says it should have been done years ago. While it is true that a minority have lost their "right to smoke", the majority has regained the "right" to breathe cleaner air and the poor property owner caught in the middle no longer has to be the bad guy telling one group or the other to stuff it. A lot of property owners like that. Additionally, a lot of people who otherwise wouldn't have visited a business because of the smoke now do.

Who gives a fuck what the majority likes? Does the majority own someone's bar or restaurant?

 

[otherone]

WHO has the pOwEr to enforce what we CAN and CAN NOT do?

 

[Shorty Dawkins]

Liberty is about making choices, not being told what we can and cannot do. Provided we harm no one else's equal right to make their choices. The property owner should be able to make the choice, not the Government. Denying freedom to one person denies it to all. It is a simple concept that many refuse to understand. Tyranny comes in many guises. Let's get real, shall we? Let's face this world honestly. Let's look in our neighbor's eye and treat him/her with respect. We don't need Elitists telling us what to do. Haven't you noticed whatever they decide for "us" always benefits them? The "Great Awakening" starts with one person and spreads outward. Awaken yourself, then assist others to awaken. There is no great secret to how it can work.

Shorty Dawkins

 

[donnay]

Liberty is about making choices, not being told what we can and cannot do. Provided we harm no one else's equal right to make their choices. The property owner should be able to make the choice, not the Government. Denying freedom to one person denies it to all. It is a simple concept that many refuse to understand. Tyranny comes in many guises. Let's get real, shall we? Let's face this world honestly. Let's look in our neighbor's eye and treat him/her with respect. We don't need Elitists telling us what to do. Haven't you noticed whatever they decide for "us" always benefits them? The "Great Awakening" starts with one person and spreads outward. Awaken yourself, then assist others to awaken. There is no great secret to how it can work.

Shorty Dawkins

Well said! +rep

 

[kezt777]

I would like to be able to visit hospitals and bars where people aren't coughing and sneezing some kind of nasty, life-threatening bacterial/viral infections. Can we make some laws against going out in public when you have these conditions? (not really serious here, but something to think about)

Oh boy I am just coming into this thread and am miles behind lol. I posted in the Health topics about cigarette warning labels in Canada and other such fun about smoking bans. I do not think that people should smoke in areas where others are reasonably expected to be without it being a choice - hospital, govt buildings like to pay municipal bills or whatnot, police stations, clinics, grocery stores, clothing stores, etc etc. But I do not think that a private business owner should be forced to comply with smoking bans or other such regulations. I posted in my other thread about how things have gone in my city (in Alberta) and it is actually quite shocking to look at how much money businesses had to spent in order to comply with smoking laws (ex, setting up a separate area, then setting up a completely sealed off separate area, like with glass walls or something, then putting in a completely separate air system so the smoke from the smoking area does not recirculate with the rest of the establishment -- and then after all that money was spent, smoking in all buildings that the general public enters was banned. Talk about a huge pile of money wasted while following these plans). yikes. In my city, a private bar or restaurant owner is not even supposed to smoke in his office, even after hours. Some places had to change the coverings on all their furniture as well, because it was deemed that the carcinogens could stay stuck in the fabric for a long time.

This also reminds me of when I was in Ireland in 2005. I was there for 4 days and reading various news papers each day... One huge headline caught my eye, saying that 2000 pubs had closed already, in the one year since the smoking bans were put in place (2004). But over the years, I have seen endless accounts stating that the smoking bans in Ireland (and England) had very little affect, if any. I couldn't figure that out - I saw the headline with my own eyes, with a huge list of pubs and their towns/cities. Yet the media kept saying that it had little to no effect. Um... okay?

Then I just read an article in the guardian UK about how the Labour govt is concerned about the number of pub closures and how, since pubs had to give 30% of their profits in taxes, the govt is losing a huge amount of tax revenue per closure and wants to get things going to help pubs.....

And I read another account from 2011 where a TV chef over in the UK (Antony Worrall Thompson) wants their govt to relax it's smoking bans because of the major impact on pubs. Another point in that post was that the 10 million smokers over there pay 10 billion in taxes and should therefore be allowed to smoke in some public areas (or public houses, etc) after putting so much money into the coffers. It's like 'take our money and use it, but dictate where we can sit or stand to do it'.

I saw mention in another post in this thread as well about how suddenly in recent years there is an influx of allergies and asthma blamed on smoking, when in the more distant past you just did not hear that. I remember when I was a teenager and people were smoking on the city bus. Sometimes it did bother me, if someone right in front of me was doing it, or in winter when the windows were closed, but it happened. And there were smoke butts right on the floor where people stamped them out. And I remember in elevators, grocery stores, government offices, etc etc. Literally everywhere. You'd think there would have been a bus or elevator full of choking gagging people all the time, what with all of the nasty mean smokers blowing it in everyone's faces constantly. I think the only places people were not allowed to smoke was in schools (aside from the teacher's lounge, where it was allowed), and on hospital wards. People could smoke in the lobby and such, which I think it just plain silly, but they did it. Now suddenly people are saying 'I have asthma, could you put that out please'. I never heard that before in my life. I did not like it when it was in my face, but I did not hear others coughing their brains out at every event.

Regardless though, I firmly believe it should come down to private property rights. It is starting now here where people cannot smoke in their cars with children. They use children as the excuse but in at least one Canadian city, you can't smoke in your car if there is a carseat - even if a child is not in it! So go figure that one out. I watched a police officer craning his neck around and looking ANGRILY at my boyfriend and I as we were driving past him a couple of months ago, because my bf had his ciggy out the car window and at first we could not figure out what this cop's problem was. He was glaring and twisting around - then I followed his line of sight. He was trying to see into the car seat in the back to see if a child was in it (no). He was driving without care and attention while looking at us bad bad mean nasty smokers. Unreal. That is getting completely ridiculous in my opinion.

Editing to add: my mother is a non smoker, unless you count the 6 months back when she was 19 when she dabbled in smoking. Anyway she is 66 and has been having lung problems for several months. She blamed me, and her smoker friend. She said 'I am sure that I am having these problems because my friend smoked in her car and house while we hung around together for 15 years'. She kept quoting smoking reports at me. Nice to make me feel to blame for her breathing issues 20 years after I moved out of her house. But anyway, I kept asking her to keep going to the doc until they get to the bottom of this. Last month they finally took a sample of the crud she coughs up, and a weird bacteria showed up that normally is not in the lung. She was on meds for 3 weeks and felt better very quickly, with no symptoms at all now. But - she still blames me and her friend. Gee thanks mumma. And thanks to the media and 'science' giving her all the fodder to blame us. I cannot say that it's NOT my fault, but she cannot say that it IS either.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Two of the very best "pro smoking" pieces ever written, I think.

By Joe Jackson. (yes, Joe Jackson the singer)


Smoke, Lies and the Nanny State
http://www.joejackson.com/pdf/5smokingpdf_jj_smoke_lies.pdf


The Smoking Issue
http://www.joejackson.com/smokingissue.htm

My articles in the New York Times and UK Daily Telegraph, protesting smoking bans and antismoking hysteria, have attracted a huge amount of attention. Since this has unfortunately become such a contentious issue, and since I'm now constantly asked to discuss it, I'm going to take this opportunity to set out my position as clearly as I can, without the ‘filter' of editors, the time constraints of radio, etc. This essay was primarily written for my website, but it can be freely downloaded, copied and circulated. When printed, it should run to around 12 pages.

I'm ‘pro-choice' on smoking, not just because I want to smoke (I don't even smoke very much) but also because I'm concerned about certain worrying political and cultural trends. The antismoking movement is on such a roll at the moment, and smoking has been so thoroughly demonised, that some of what I have to say is bound to raise a few eyebrows. All I can say is that my views are carefully considered and extensively researched.

(1) DANGERS OF SMOKING

Two or three years ago I considered giving up my own moderate enjoyment of tobacco because of the constant barrage of horrific statistics. But antismoking propaganda in the USA (I was living mostly in New York) seemed so overblown, so hysterical, that I became skeptical. So instead of giving up smoking, I started doing research. At first my mind was pretty open; I half expected to find that smoking was even worse than I thought, and I decided that, since I wasn't a hardcore nicotine junkie, I could live without it. Instead, I've been astonished, again and again, by how flimsy much of the antismoking evidence really is. By now I'm absolutely convinced that the dangers of smoking (and ‘secondhand smoke' in particular) are being greatly exaggerated, for a number of reasons, many of which have less to do with health than with politics, money and fashion.

People used to be guided by intuition, experience, observation, moderation, pleasure, folklore, the testimony of friends and acquaintances, and their family history. Increasingly, though, we're expected to be guided by Government Statistics. The problem is that so much of what we're told is politicised, out of context, out of proportion, or just plain false. The bald statement ‘Smoking Kills!' makes us skeptical right away, since we can see for ourselves that in most cases, it doesn't.

 

[donnay]

Two of the very best "pro smoking" pieces ever written, I think.

By Joe Jackson. (yes, Joe Jackson the singer)


Smoke, Lies and the Nanny State
http://www.joejackson.com/pdf/5smokingpdf_jj_smoke_lies.pdf


The Smoking Issue
http://www.joejackson.com/smokingissue.htm

My articles in the New York Times and UK Daily Telegraph, protesting smoking bans and antismoking hysteria, have attracted a huge amount of attention. Since this has unfortunately become such a contentious issue, and since I'm now constantly asked to discuss it, I'm going to take this opportunity to set out my position as clearly as I can, without the ‘filter' of editors, the time constraints of radio, etc. This essay was primarily written for my website, but it can be freely downloaded, copied and circulated. When printed, it should run to around 12 pages.

I'm ‘pro-choice' on smoking, not just because I want to smoke (I don't even smoke very much) but also because I'm concerned about certain worrying political and cultural trends. The antismoking movement is on such a roll at the moment, and smoking has been so thoroughly demonised, that some of what I have to say is bound to raise a few eyebrows. All I can say is that my views are carefully considered and extensively researched.

(1) DANGERS OF SMOKING

Two or three years ago I considered giving up my own moderate enjoyment of tobacco because of the constant barrage of horrific statistics. But antismoking propaganda in the USA (I was living mostly in New York) seemed so overblown, so hysterical, that I became skeptical. So instead of giving up smoking, I started doing research. At first my mind was pretty open; I half expected to find that smoking was even worse than I thought, and I decided that, since I wasn't a hardcore nicotine junkie, I could live without it. Instead, I've been astonished, again and again, by how flimsy much of the antismoking evidence really is. By now I'm absolutely convinced that the dangers of smoking (and ‘secondhand smoke' in particular) are being greatly exaggerated, for a number of reasons, many of which have less to do with health than with politics, money and fashion.

People used to be guided by intuition, experience, observation, moderation, pleasure, folklore, the testimony of friends and acquaintances, and their family history. Increasingly, though, we're expected to be guided by Government Statistics. The problem is that so much of what we're told is politicised, out of context, out of proportion, or just plain false. The bald statement ‘Smoking Kills!' makes us skeptical right away, since we can see for ourselves that in most cases, it doesn't.

Great articles! The question everyone needs to ask is, if governments track record is so dismal, why trust them when they say smoking is extremely bad for you? Yet they said, "the air was safe to breathe after 9/11"--when we know it wasn't!

 

[Cutlerzzz]

I'm guessing you're in your 20's - 30's. The children of the "ME!" generation are a nasty lot.

Yeah, and your generation is a bastion of Liberty, right?

 

[liberty2897]

Yeah, and your generation is a bastion of Liberty, right?

Lets not fall into this whole age-gap thing. I'm right in the middle. I could be pissed at the old people for being duped by the GOP (neocons) or I could be pissed at the young people for not showing up to vote lately. Truth is that we liberty minded people need to stick together regardless of our age. Doesn't matter if you are 18 or 90. If you are willing to fight for the cause of freedom, you are a freedom fighter. Watching those George Carlin videos lately in a couple of threads made me realize that you can be well into your 70's and be 10 times sharper minded than the majority of people on the planet. We should focus on making this country free again. Then we can worry about the small shit like who can smoke where.

 

[Cutlerzzz]

Lets not fall into this whole age-gap thing.

I'm not.