Author Topic: smoking ban starts in less than a month!  (Read 27739 times)

thirsty moore

  • Member
  • Posts: 6131
Re: smoking ban starts in less than a month!
« Reply #30 on: December 05, 2006, 04:28:00 pm »
Our current administration is exactly the opposite of what you're saying.
 
   
Quote
Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
 the government is not here to regulate behavior.  if you think someone is doing something rude, blame the parents.  as for doing something stupid- just because its stupid doesn't make it illegal or require the government to step in and control people's lives.

Venerable Bede

  • Member
  • Posts: 3863
Re: smoking ban starts in less than a month!
« Reply #31 on: December 05, 2006, 04:30:00 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by Steny Hoyer, Pubic Destroyer:
  How do you explain laws regulating rape, murder, robbery, etc. or do you think that business or common people should regulate those things, not government?
 
 
     
Quote
Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
  the government is not here to regulate behavior.  if you think someone is doing something rude, blame the parents.  as for doing something stupid- just because its stupid doesn't make it illegal or require the government to step in and control people's lives.
[/b]
i think numbers 6, 7, 8 and 10 cover those.
 
 1. I am the Lord thy God and thou shalt not have other gods besides me.
 2. Thou shalt not make for thyself any graven image.
 3. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.
 4. Remember the Lord's Day to keep it holy.
 5. Honor thy Father and Mother.
 6. Thou shalt not kill.
 7. Thou shalt not commit adultery.
 8. Thou shalt not steal.
 9. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
 10. Thou shalt not covet.
OU812

Venerable Bede

  • Member
  • Posts: 3863
Re: smoking ban starts in less than a month!
« Reply #32 on: December 05, 2006, 04:32:00 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by econo:
  Our current administration is exactly the opposite of what you're saying.
 
   
Quote
Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
 the government is not here to regulate behavior.  if you think someone is doing something rude, blame the parents.  as for doing something stupid- just because its stupid doesn't make it illegal or require the government to step in and control people's lives.
[/b]
well, as with everything, it depends on the context.  our current administration is in support of the above if it deals, generally, with education and overall economics.  as for social issues, well, then. . yeah, you're right, and i am well aware of it.  its like friedman's monetary policy- cutting taxes is the easy part. . .
OU812

sonickteam2

  • Guest
Re: smoking ban starts in less than a month!
« Reply #33 on: December 05, 2006, 04:37:00 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by Steny Hoyer, Pubic Destroyer:
  How do you explain laws regulating rape, murder, robbery, etc. or do you think that business or common people should regulate those things, not government?
 
 
     
Quote
Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
  the government is not here to regulate behavior.  if you think someone is doing something rude, blame the parents.  as for doing something stupid- just because its stupid doesn't make it illegal or require the government to step in and control people's lives.
[/b]
rape??? are you serious.  
 
   well, put it this way, rape is forceable sex. meaning someone who wants no part in the sex, is forced to take part in it.
 
   consentual sex, however, is legal.
 
   smoking can be thought of the same way.  when you go to a place that allows smoking, you are consenting to secondhand smoke.
 
   if the government forced people to smoke in your house, or car then you would have an issue, but they are NOT.  you are choosing to go to places that allow smoking, thus, consenting to being around it.
 
    you cannot ever and will not ever  convince me that its the popular decision to have no smoking everywhere when its been the choice of business owners since the dawn of time and most of them choose to allow smoking, and people still go to bars last time i checked.
 
    you know what i dont like? i dont like children at baseball games.  they are dirty, have lots of germs and you cant swear nearby them, but i choose to go to baseball games and therefore knowingly subject myself to germ ridden kids

sonickteam2

  • Guest
Re: smoking ban starts in less than a month!
« Reply #34 on: December 05, 2006, 04:40:00 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by Steny Hoyer, Pubic Destroyer:
  How do you explain laws regulating rape, murder, robbery, etc. or do you think that business or common people should regulate those things, not government?
 
 
     
Quote
Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
  the government is not here to regulate behavior.  if you think someone is doing something rude, blame the parents.  as for doing something stupid- just because its stupid doesn't make it illegal or require the government to step in and control people's lives.
[/b]
and as far as robbery goes....wouldnt robbery be taking something of someone elses without their permission.  
 
  again, this involves permission.  
 
  giving things away in the paper is the same thing as robbery only both parties have consented to the act.

nkotb

  • Member
  • Posts: 6202
Re: smoking ban starts in less than a month!
« Reply #35 on: December 05, 2006, 04:49:00 pm »
Wouldn't the more apt comparison be that smokers are putting something in the air that non-smokers haven't consented to breathing?
 
 
Quote
Originally posted by le sonick:
 rape??? are you serious.  
 
   well, put it this way, rape is forceable sex. meaning someone who wants no part in the sex, is forced to take part in it.
 
   consentual sex, however, is legal.
 
   smoking can be thought of the same way.  when you go to a place that allows smoking, you are consenting to secondhand smoke.
 
   if the government forced people to smoke in your house, or car then you would have an issue, but they are NOT.  you are choosing to go to places that allow smoking, thus, consenting to being around it.
 
    you cannot ever and will not ever  convince me that its the popular decision to have no smoking everywhere when its been the choice of business owners since the dawn of time and most of them choose to allow smoking, and people still go to bars last time i checked.
 
    you know what i dont like? i dont like children at baseball games.  they are dirty, have lots of germs and you cant swear nearby them, but i choose to go to baseball games and therefore knowingly subject myself to germ ridden kids

Re: smoking ban starts in less than a month!
« Reply #36 on: December 05, 2006, 04:49:00 pm »
I'm glad you agree. Every time I go someplace that allows smoking, I feel like my lungs are being raped.
 
 That is why I'm glad my government is enacting anti-smoking laws to protect my lungs, just like they have anti-rape laws to protect my ass.
 
 
Quote
Originally posted by le sonick:
  ]
rape??? are you serious.  
 
   well, put it this way, rape is forceable sex. meaning someone who wants no part in the sex, is forced to take part in it.
 
   consentual sex, however, is legal.
 
   smoking can be thought of the same way.  [/b][/QUOTE]

Celeste

  • Guest
Re: smoking ban starts in less than a month!
« Reply #37 on: December 05, 2006, 04:53:00 pm »
This is old news, but apparently not everyone is aware of it.
 
 Case for prohibiting smoking in publc places=closed.

terry

  • Member
  • Posts: 255
Re: smoking ban starts in less than a month!
« Reply #38 on: December 05, 2006, 04:54:00 pm »

Venerable Bede

  • Member
  • Posts: 3863
Re: smoking ban starts in less than a month!
« Reply #39 on: December 05, 2006, 05:00:00 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by Steny Hoyer, Pubic Destroyer:
  I'm glad you agree. Every time I go someplace that allows smoking, I feel like my lungs are being raped.
 
 That is why I'm glad my government is enacting anti-smoking laws to protect my lungs, just like they have anti-rape laws to protect my ass.
 
so, why do you frequent places that allow smoking?  you made the choice to go and have given your consent by going to that place.  you can choose not to go.
OU812

Re: smoking ban starts in less than a month!
« Reply #40 on: December 05, 2006, 05:01:00 pm »
That would be a good thing, but it's an altogether different matter than protecting nonsmokers against secondhand smoke.
 
 
 
Quote
Originally posted by terry:
  This is next...

Celeste

  • Guest
Re: smoking ban starts in less than a month!
« Reply #41 on: December 05, 2006, 05:06:00 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by terry:
  This is next...
And I support this too!

sonickteam2

  • Guest
Re: smoking ban starts in less than a month!
« Reply #42 on: December 05, 2006, 05:09:00 pm »
Quote
Originally posted by nkotb:
  Wouldn't the more apt comparison be that smokers are putting something in the air that non-smokers haven't consented to breathing?
 
like mr. venerable just stated.  you went to a place that allows smoking.  so you consented.
 
   just like when you go to 930 you consent to hear loud music.  (which damages your ears!)

sonickteam2

  • Guest
Re: smoking ban starts in less than a month!
« Reply #43 on: December 05, 2006, 05:10:00 pm »
Fortunately, I live in Baltimore
 
 Citywide smoking ban stalled
 Proponent sends bill back to committee; council might reconsider matter next month
 By John Fritze
 Sun reporter
 Originally published December 5, 2006
 In a major setback for Baltimore's proposed smoking ban, its chief proponent unexpectedly yanked the legislation into a committee to shield it from a vote last night - a move supporters said was intended to save the controversial bill from defeat or being weakened.
 
 City Councilman Robert W. Curran, who said the bill faced several hostile amendments at a City Council meeting yesterday, made the last-minute decision to pull the measure back into a committee at least until next month, when he said the legislation might have a better chance.
 
 
 
 
 "This bill is not dead by any means," Curran said shortly after the council voted unanimously to return the bill to the five-member Judiciary and Legislative Investigations Committee, which he chairs. "It's just a pause."
 
 However, the dynamic at City Hall next year is uncertain, and the potential for such a proposal to advance, as many members of the council seek higher office, is unclear.
 
 Anti-smoking advocates who have been lobbying council members, meanwhile, are expected to redirect their attention to Annapolis to push for a statewide smoking ban.
 
 Similar debates have played out in cities across the country and usually pit owners of small restaurants and bars against health advocates. Opponents argue the ban will affect business, while supporters say patrons and servers should be protected from secondhand smoke.
 
 Fourteen of the nation's 20 largest cities, including New York, Chicago and Los Angeles, have imposed smoking restrictions on restaurateurs or are covered under a statewide ban. The remaining six, including Baltimore, Memphis, Tenn., and Charlotte, N.C., have not approved a ban.
 
 Late yesterday, Curran appeared to have the votes required to clear the ban through the procedural vote - especially if, as expected, many who oppose the legislation abstained rather than openly voted against it. But Curran said he was concerned about the possibility of last-minute amendments to weaken the bill, as well as the timing of a final vote.
 
 Like the General Assembly, the City Council holds "second reader" votes on legislation approved in committee. To advance, bills need a majority of those voting "yes" or "no," meaning that members who abstain, or "pass," are not considered.
 
 Theoretically, if 14 of the council's 15 members abstained and one voted yes, the bill would have advanced.
 
 If Curran had managed to get the smoking ban over the second-reader hurdle, he faced a tougher battle on the final vote. Curran - a former smoker who has pushed the measure for more than a year - needs eight votes for final approval, regardless of abstentions, and that threshold has been difficult to achieve.
 
 Curran said the ban could be considered again on second-reader as soon as Jan. 22.
 
 But by then, City Council President Sheila Dixon, who has voiced her support for a ban, will no longer vote on the council, because she will serve out the remainder of Gov.-elect Martin O'Malley's mayoral term. Also, the council will likely include a new member to replace Vice President Stephanie C. Rawlings Blake, who is expected to replace Dixon as president.
 
 "The fact of the matter is that we're just going to keep working to shore up the support so that we can pass a strong bill," said Johanna Neumann, a policy advocate with Maryland PIRG, a group that has lobbied heavily in favor of the ban.
 
 Melvin R. Thompson, vice president of the Restaurant Association of Maryland, could not be reached for comment late yesterday. The group has fought against the legislation, arguing that it could be especially devastating for small corner bars and restaurants.
 
 Maryland counties with bans include Howard, Montgomery, Prince George's and Talbot.
 
 Baltimore's proposal would prohibit smoking in all public places, including bars and restaurants, bowling alleys and taxicabs. Cigar bars, outdoor seating areas of restaurants, private clubs and certain tobacco shops would be exempt if owners apply for a waiver.
 
 Late last month, the council added an amendment that could have a significant impact on the legislation - a waiver that would allow businesses to be exempt if they could demonstrate that the ban would cause "undue financial hardship." The legislation allows the city health commissioner, currently Dr. Joshua Sharfstein, to set the rules for how, and why, waivers would be granted.
 
 After yesterday's vote, advocates said they were disappointed but that they would not give up.
 
 "I don't consider the bill dead," said Kari Appler, director of the Smoke Free Maryland Coalition. "Baltimore may be slow to adopt, but Baltimore is going to be smoke-free."

  • Guest
Re: smoking ban starts in less than a month!
« Reply #44 on: December 05, 2006, 05:11:00 pm »
Mary J.Bilge