Non-smoking shows

[Bags]

Originally posted by vansmack:
   

Originally posted by thingsfallapart:
  I don't actually smoke, but I still support people's right to smoke in a rock club.

Do you often make up rights that don't exist in any codified form anywhere? [/b]

Cigarettes are legal.  Sorry.  
 
 And yes, they are making it illegal to smoke in many types of places, but where it's allowed, it's legal.  Doesn't that make it a right?
 
 I'm fine with the ban.  Luckily I'll probably stop smoking entirely once it goes in to effect (as I only smoke intermittently, based on a combination of booze and folks smoking around me).

[beetsnotbeats]

Originally posted by Bags:
  Cigarettes are legal.  Sorry.  
 
 And yes, they are making it illegal to smoke in many types of places, but where it's allowed, it's legal.  Doesn't that make it a right?

Driving a car is legal. Does that mean I can drive anywhere in any direction at any speed and without regard to those around me? Don't I have the right to do so?

[Venerable Bede]

Originally posted by beetsnotbeats:
  Driving a car is legal. Does that mean I can drive anywhere in any direction at any speed and without regard to those around me? Don't I have the right to do so?

well, driving a car is only legal if you have passed the required tests as set up by the state to receive your license to drive, which also is a tacit understanding that you will follow the rules as set up by the state- a compact of sorts.  whereas for smoking, the only requirement is that you be 18 years old.
 
 now, that doesn't mean you can't do whatever you want with your car, but i doubt you'd be long for this world, not to mention you'd probably have quite a hefty insurance bill.

[twangirl]

Originally posted by beetsnotbeats:
   

[/b]

Driving a car is legal. Does that mean I can drive anywhere in any direction at any speed and without regard to those around me? Don't I have the right to do so? [/QB]

A lot of drivers in this area seem to think so.

[sonickteam2]

Originally posted by beetsnotbeats:
   

Originally posted by Bags:
  Cigarettes are legal.  Sorry.  
 
 And yes, they are making it illegal to smoke in many types of places, but where it's allowed, it's legal.  Doesn't that make it a right?

Driving a car is legal. Does that mean I can drive anywhere in any direction at any speed and without regard to those around me? Don't I have the right to do so? [/b]

nifty analogy , but you failed to make a point.
 
 you cant drive your car like that because its NOT legal.
 
   and besides werent we all taught that driving was a privilege, not a right!

[sonickteam2]

Originally posted by RatBastard:
   

Originally posted by Maf54:
   

Originally posted by thingsfallapart:
 I don't actually smoke, but I still support people's right to smoke in a rock club.

<img src="http://www.punknews.org/images/bands/replacements.jpg" alt=" - " /> [/b]

There is no 'right' to smoke. [/b]

there is a right to decide whether to allow or ban smoking in your business, isnt there?
 
   no, but there should be!

[sonickteam2]

Originally posted by vansmack:
   

Originally posted by Maf54:
  the good people at RJ Reynolds have conveniently codified our rights!
 
    https://mysmokersrights.rjrt.com/  

Unless they've changed the Constitution without me noticing, there is nothing on that web site that will convince me that there is a right to smoke in any public place (and I adimantly refuse to sign up for that web site, but feel free to share with me any of the pearls of wisdom brought to you by the good people at RJ Reynolds). [/b]

dont they ask your permission before changing the constitution smackie?  

[Bags]

Originally posted by beetsnotbeats:
   

Originally posted by Bags:
  Cigarettes are legal.  Sorry.  
 
 And yes, they are making it illegal to smoke in many types of places, but where it's allowed, it's legal.  Doesn't that make it a right?

Driving a car is legal. Does that mean I can drive anywhere in any direction at any speed and without regard to those around me? Don't I have the right to do so? [/b]

Precisely.  Which is why I do NOT oppose the ban.  I never said I had a right to smoke anywhere I want at anytime.  But where it is allowed (like the 9:30 Club and Black Cat), it is allowed, and I will do so if I like.
 
 As is common, you mixed apples and oranges based on my statement.

[vansmack]

A right is usually something granted by the Constitution.  There are certain other Human Rights we are afforded by our admission to the United Nations.
 
 Statutes grant privileges, and those prvilieges cannot infringe on any rights granted by a Constitution.
 
 The Constitution says nothing about your ability to smoke, and neither Due Process nor Equal Protection are afforded to smokers as smokers are not considered a protected class.  If anything protects smokers, it's, ironically, the right to privacy, and that is not being infringed on here - you have the right to smoke in your home if you so choose.
 
 The same statute that once granted smokers the priviledge to smoke in public places has been revoked in some areas.  If smokers want to be granted that priviledge again, go through the processes and change the laws, but stop arguing that smokers have a right to smoke in public, because they do not.

[vansmack]

Originally posted by le sonick:
  dont they ask your permission before changing the constitution smackie?      

They certainly do, every two years, first Tuesday in November.

[thingsfallapart]

Originally posted by Maf54:
  jaguar, any rational person definitely understands your complaints, being allergic to smoke would really suck
 
 i think thingsfallaparts' comments were just tied to the fact that we're talking about a RAWK club, not a bridge party ... booze, cigarettes, and a general fuck-all attitude are pretty intricately tied up in RAWKing

Thank you.

Originally posted by Bags:
  I only smoke intermittently, based on a combination of booze and folks smoking around me).

Are you hot?

[thingsfallapart]

Originally posted by vansmack:
  A right is usually something granted by the Constitution.  There are certain other Human Rights we are afforded by our admission to the United Nations.
 
 Statutes grant privileges, and those prvilieges cannot infringe on any rights granted by a Constitution.
 
 The Constitution says nothing about your ability to smoke, and neither Due Process nor Equal Protection are afforded to smokers as smokers are not considered a protected class.  If anything protects smokers, it's, ironically, the right to privacy, and that is not being infringed on here - you have the right to smoke in your home if you so choose.
 
 The same statute that once granted smokers the priviledge to smoke in public places has been revoked in some areas.  If smokers want to be granted that priviledge again, go through the processes and change the laws, but stop arguing that smokers have a right to smoke in public, because they do not.

Haha I'd like to know where you received your law degree from.

[vansmack]

Originally posted by thingsfallapart:
  Haha I'd like to know where you received your law degree from.

Wikipedia, why?  It doesn't require a law degree to understand the basic knowledge of what constitutes a right in the United States.

[thingsfallapart]

Originally posted by vansmack:
   

Originally posted by thingsfallapart:
  Haha I'd like to know where you received your law degree from.

Wikipedia, why?  It doesn't require a law degree to understand the basic knowledge of what constitutes a right in the United States. [/b]

True.  But I think it's worth noting that, on a strictly technical level, rights in this country are enumerated in the Bill of Rights and subsequent amendments to the Constitution, not from the actual Constitution itself, which is essentially a blueprint for the layout of our government.  The point is, right now it is legal to smoke in the 9:30--therefore I have the right to smoke there.  Anyone, at this point in time, who would tell me to put out my cigarette (well not mine, but those of patrons who do smoke) would be infringing on my rights.