Smoking ban in Philadelphia approved

[ice grillin you]

actual its liberals who fight for this kind of stuff...the stuff that protects people from harm

one of the fundemental differences btwn liberals and conservatives is that liberals care about people other than themselves

and thats word to bleeding hearts

[PoopyfaceMcGee]

I agree that it's liberals who push for this more, but that's because many more Republicans from "red states" are bought and sold by tobacco lobbies, not because it fits with the rest of their platform.

Telling people where they can and cannot participate in a legal activity like smoking a cigarette is a socially conservative stance, no matter which side of the aisle has taken up the cause.

[ice grillin you]

Telling people where they can and cannot participate in a legal activity like smoking a cigarette is a socially conservative stance, no matter which side of the aisle has taken up the cause.

couldnt disagree more.....there are tons of laws that tell people where legal practices can or cant take place...its what govt is for and usually it works...just because govt makes a law like this doesnt make it a police state...

can and do they go to far?...absolutely...but this is hardly one of those instances...like illegal wiretapping for example....that would be a social conservative stance to support that

[PoopyfaceMcGee]

couldnt disagree more.....there are tons of laws that tell people where legal practices can or cant take place...its what govt is for and usually it works...just because govt makes a law like this doesnt make it a police state...

Naturally, you don't want to associate yourself with being socially conservative, but at the heart of totalitarianism and socialism is a government that dictates the lives of people financially and morally, and that's what you're for.

[ice grillin you]

couldnt disagree more.....there are tons of laws that tell people where legal practices can or cant take place...its what govt is for and usually it works...just because govt makes a law like this doesnt make it a police state...

but at the heart of totalitarianism and socialism is a government that dictates the lives of people financially and morally

yeah but what does that have to do with anything?

you can have a govt that makes laws to limit certain individual freedoms for the benefit of the larger population and not be a totalitarian state...drinking and driving for example are both legal practices however drinking while driving is not

you can disagree with the smoking ban and at the same time not think that we live in a communist state

[PoopyfaceMcGee]

We don't live in a communist state... yet.


BTW, the drinking/driving example is probably the best argument you've ever put forth on this specific issue.  That said, I still think individual watering holes should be able to dictate their own policy, and the Maryland law allows that if they prove they're losing money from the law.

It's a small loophole, but it is a smart one.

[rjs246]

couldnt disagree more.....there are tons of laws that tell people where legal practices can or cant take place...its what govt is for and usually it works...just because govt makes a law like this doesnt make it a police state...

Naturally, you don't want to associate yourself with being socially conservative, but at the heart of totalitarianism and socialism is a government that dictates the lives of people financially and morally, and that's what you're for.

I don't think that FF is suggesting that we currently live in a totalitarian state. He's simply pointing out that this is how we start down the road to get there. And he's right.

[ice grillin you]

well i disagree that just because theres a smoking ban put in place means we are headed for the gulag

but i absolutely leave open the possibility that the govt can overstep its bounds and when that happens im on board to fight it...i just just think its a huge leap from an individual state enacting a smoking ban to a police state


the abortion issue is infintely more important than a restaurant/bar smoking ban and im as pro choice as you can get yet if r v w was abolished as outraged as id be i still wouldnt think we were headed for communism....

we maybe a little

[rjs246]

I get your point, and it's perfectly reasonable. I'm just far more paranoid about it and don't like the trends I'm seeing...

These things don't usually happen suddenly. They usually happen in small doses over time until one day big brother runs things and the people are left scratching their heads... the funny thing is that over the past decade or so, there actually have been BIG steps towards totalitarianism. The suspension/weakening of habeas corpus and congressionally approved wire-taping and internal spying being the biggest examples. The smoking ban is a much smaller example of the same thing, but make no mistake, it is the same thing.

[Sgt PSN]

drinking and driving for example are both legal practices however drinking while driving is not

you can disagree with the smoking ban and at the same time not think that we live in a communist state

Drinking and driving is also an immidiate threat on property and lives.  If you choose to drink and drive, you are not only risking your life but the lives and property of everyone in your path.  Not to mention that when you drink and drive you are doing so on public roads that are maintained by tax dollars.  Therefore, gov't has an obligation to keep those roads safe. 

If you choose to smoke in a bar, you are only endangering yourself and those who choose to occupy that space with you.  

One thing I think that's total bs about the law in MD is this (other than the whole thing to begin with):

The ban will mean that patrons won't be allowed to light up in any indoor areas of bars or private clubs such as the American Legion as long as employees are present.

Private clubs typically require some sort of application and paid membership to enter.  To include them in the ban is rediculous.  

[ice grillin you]

Drinking and driving is also an immidiate threat on property and lives.  If you choose to drink and drive, you are not only risking your life but the lives and property of everyone in your path.  Not to mention that when you drink and drive you are doing so on public roads that are maintained by tax dollars.  Therefore, gov't has an obligation to keep those roads safe.   

so only immediate threats to people count?

and things like second hand smoke and lead based paint dont?

[PoopyfaceMcGee]

the abortion issue is infintely more important than a restaurant/bar smoking ban and im as pro choice as you can get yet if r v w was abolished as outraged as id be i still wouldnt think we were headed for communism....

we maybe a little

The idea of abortion bothers me morally.  I'm not going to lie on that.  But wasting the courts' and governments' time by attempting to push through a repeal of a 30-year-old law is a recipe for failure.  Roe v Wade must continue to hold.  We have more important things to worry about than debating the morality of terminating unwanted pregnancies.

[Sgt PSN]

Drinking and driving is also an immidiate threat on property and lives.  If you choose to drink and drive, you are not only risking your life but the lives and property of everyone in your path.  Not to mention that when you drink and drive you are doing so on public roads that are maintained by tax dollars.  Therefore, gov't has an obligation to keep those roads safe.   

so only immediate threats to people count?

and things like second hand smoke and lead based paint dont?

I like how you quote the stuff you want to argue against but leave out the stuff that counters your argument.

If you choose to smoke in a bar, you are only endangering yourself and those who choose to occupy that space with you. 

As a non smoker, you have a choice whether or not to go into an establishment that allows smoking.  So if the 2nd hand smoke bothers you or gives you the black lung, don't blame me for lighting one up.  Blame yourself for standing next to me. 

There's plenty of fresh air outside so take your pink lungs out there if you want to take a deep breath and leave my corner bar with toxic air alone. 

[ice grillin you]

your only argument is that "im a smoker and dont wanna be inconvienanced"...and to be honest thats your best argument....the rest is just spin...

my belief is that your inconvienanced argument gets trumped by other peoples health argument

but the great thing is we both win because red states will never ban smoking in bars

[Sgt PSN]

but the great thing is we both win because red states will never ban smoking in bars

The whole state isn't non-smoking, but every Kansas town in the KC area is non-smoking.  I can only imagine it's just a matter of time until the whole state follows suit.


And my argument isn't that I don't want to be inconvenienced and have to go outside to smoke.  My argument is that the gov't has no right to tell a person how to run a private business. 

Also, if a bar owner really wanted to make some nice profits, he'd turn his bar to non smoking automatically.  Once the word spreads that he doesn't allow smoking, all of the non smoking customers will start going there.  He would have the entire market cornered for non smoking beer drinkers.