Smoking ban in Philadelphia approved

[Munson]

I also posted a picture of myself in a tux, and in my work uniform.

So not only am I a tough guy, but I'm an upper class rich guy!
Or it could be those are the few good pictures I have of myself on the computer. But no, no way...

And this thread isn't about phone tapping and the NSA, Enemy of the State, whatever you want to talk about....which I think is bad, by the way...It's about smoking indoors and creating unhealthy enviroments in a place where people go to eat/drink, not breathe in smoke. And it is a good idea to keep smoking outside, where it belongs.

[rjs246]

And this thread isn't about phone tapping and the NSA, Enemy of the State, whatever you want to talk about...

Yes it is, dumbass. That's the whole point. Why else would I care about a smoking law? I don't smoke. I like the fact that my clothes don't smell like ass when I leave a bar as much as the next guy. I want to avoid health problems and live long enough to see you and your idiotic opinions grow up and realize what these laws mean. But both of those issues are far less important than what laws like this represent.

Banning smoking in public places or forcing business owners to keep people from smoking in their establishments is a civil liberty stripped from tax-paying adults capable of making their own decisions. Wiretapping US citizens is obviously a much bigger line to cross, but stopping the government from passing the 'little' laws that revoke our liberties sends a message that we won't be told how to live and won't let the government control us. Instead you and others like you gleefully accept these laws in the interest of being able to wear the same shirt twice without washing it. These little laws eventually lead to a government brazen enough to actually begin spying on its own citizens without cause and pass a law that makes such an activity legal.

Little things first. Big things second. They are absolutely related.

[Munson]

The point of this law is that a person smoking in a restaurant/bar doesn't just effect the person smoking. It effects ALL THE PEOPLE AROUND the person smoking. THAT is why this law was passed, not to take away civil liberties.

If you want to talk about laws effecting the way people choose to live thier lives, then talk about the "Click it or Ticket" law. Whether or not you choose to wear your seatbelt in the car is your pesonal choice, and it does not effect anyone else but yourself. It is absurd that there is a law that charges you money for choosing to be less-safe should you be in a car accident. THAT is something that is your personal choice, and it effects only you. That is your choice.

Smokers do not have the right to impose thier life style onto everyone else in the room. Which is why this law was made. And we're back to the beggining of the post.

FTR, I'm pretty sure that not wearing your seatbelt will not contribue to giving the person next to you in the car cancer. Smoking, however, will.

Are you seeing the difference yet? Would you like me to type slower?

[rjs246]

The point of this law is that a person smoking in a restaurant/bar doesn't just effect the person smoking. It effects ALL THE PEOPLE AROUND the person smoking. THAT is why this law was passed, not to take away civil liberties.

Jackass. I know WHY the law was passed. That doesn't keep it from also taking away civil liberties. They are not mutually exclusive. You're just saying the same thing over and over and over again like always. Stop.

If. You. Don't. Want. To. Be. Around. Smokers. Don't. Go. To. Bars. That. Allow. Smoking.

You have a choice here. You don't have to press your idiotic beliefs onto others.

And by the way, I agree with your seatbelt rant.

[ice grillin you]

That doesn't keep it from also taking away civil liberties

its actually giving civil liberties...i now have the liberty to go to ANY bar or restaurant and enjoy my food and drink in a smoke free enviroment...before the law i could only do that at non smoking establishments

[rjs246]

That argument holds no water, but you know that and you're not trying to contribute anything to the debate so here is a picture of a baby getting punched by a Russian police officer.

[Seabiscuit36]

That argument holds no water, but you know that and you're not trying to contribute anything to the debate so here is a picture of a baby getting punched by a Russian police officer.

  How did you find that pic RJS

[rjs246]

phattymatt found it years ago when it actually happened. I randomly did a search on it recently and it took me a surprisingly long time to find it, but I finally typed in the right search words and there it was. I love that picture.

[Diomedes]

Proof positive that cops are the same everywhere.  Baby punchers.

[Seabiscuit36]

New Avatar time 

[Father Demon]

Remember when the government banned lead from paint and gasoline, even though it infringed on the rights of the paint companies and oil companies to make a profit?

Yeah, that worked out horribly.

[Father Demon]

i am looking forward to the crybaby non smokers complaining about all the entrances to bars and restaurants are crowded by smokers next to the front door.

thats gonna be sweet.

In Denver, the law says you can't smoke within 30 feet of a building entrance, and there are designated smoking areas 30 feet from the doors to each "public" building (bars, restaurants, etc), complete with ashtrays.  No complaining from the people going in and out of those places, and the air inside is clean and fresh.

[Seabiscuit36]

Paint with lead in it taste sweeter 

[ice grillin you]

seatbelt laws basically led to the end of civilization as we knew it

[Seabiscuit36]

If less people wore them, we wouldnt have overpopulation.  Excellent point IGY