Article: New smoking rules not well received

ponder said:
You are working from the premise that when the state decides to make laws (& infringe on fundamental property rights) it is just.
Click to expand...

Well because you're the addict this law inconveniences obviously to you, the law must be unjust.

To non smokers the law is completely just.
 
Qwikslver said:
Well because you're the addict this law inconveniences obviously to you, the law must be unjust. To non smokers the law is completely just.
Click to expand...

I'm a non-smoker and I think this law is unjust. The head of the Law Review is also a non-smoker and he is the most ardent opponent of this law.

Are you claiming to speak for all non-smokers now!?
 
Qwikslver said:
Well because you're the addict this law inconveniences obviously to you, the law must be unjust.

To non smokers the law is completely just.
Click to expand...

I recall him saying that he is non-smoker, as have others in this thread who are interested in defending our civil liberties. Perhaps you should state that your last line speaks for yourself, and not for everybody.
 
Qwikslver said:
Well because you're the addict this law inconveniences obviously to you, the law must be unjust.

To non smokers the law is completely just.
Click to expand...

i am also a non-smoker and i think the law is unjust
 
Mike Hoxbig said:
I recall him saying that he is non-smoker, as have others in this thread who are interested in defending our civil liberties. Perhaps you should state that your last line speaks for yourself, and not for everybody.
Click to expand...

Anyone that wants to sit and poison themselves can go do so in private, far away from me, and far away from public places.

Regardless of all your civil liberty arguments. Smoking is bad for you. Government needs to do all it can to keep it's citizens healthy and productive.

These laws are meant to be inconveniencing to smokers so that fewer smoke. If you don't want to be inconvenienced just quit smoking. No one is forcing you to poison yourself.

Except maybe your addiction.
 
Qwikslver said:
Anyone that wants to sit and poison themselves can go do so in private, far away from me, and far away from public places.

Regardless of all your civil liberty arguments. Smoking is bad for you. Government needs to do all it can to keep it's citizens healthy and productive.

These laws are meant to be inconveniencing to smokers so that fewer smoke. If you don't want to be inconvenienced just quit smoking. No one is forcing you to poison yourself.

Except maybe your addiction.
Click to expand...

Drinking is bad for you, gambling is bad for you. The problem we have is why doesn't government just give us a list of acceptable hobbies and tell us what we can and cannot do? Why not give us a list of things we can eat and cannot eat? Or things we should or should not buy? Religion can be bad for you and more detrimental than smoking will ever be.

This isn't about what is bad for the individual, it's just a taboo that can easily be bullied. They ban homosexuality from public places and the muslims and christians cheer. they ban smoking from public places and the non-smokers cheer.

if that is the case i hope they ban all forms of drinking in the near future, as i've yet to see positive effects from it too
 
Qwikslver said:
Anyone that wants to sit and poison themselves can go do so in private, far away from me, and far away from public places.

Regardless of all your civil liberty arguments. Smoking is bad for you. Government needs to do all it can to keep it's citizens healthy and productive.

These laws are meant to be inconveniencing to smokers so that fewer smoke. If you don't want to be inconvenienced just quit smoking. No one is forcing you to poison yourself.

Except maybe your addiction.
Click to expand...
Stop with the cop-outs please. You've made it clear that you speak on behalf of all non-smokers, and when you were called on it, then you do a backtrack.
 
smalltownsky said:
Drinking is bad for you, gambling is bad for you. The problem we have is why doesn't government just give us a list of acceptable hobbies and tell us what we can and cannot do? Why not give us a list of things we can eat and cannot eat? Or things we should or should not buy? Religion can be bad for you and more detrimental than smoking will ever be.

This isn't about what is bad for the individual, it's just a taboo that can easily be bullied. They ban homosexuality from public places and the muslims and christians cheer. they ban smoking from public places and the non-smokers cheer.

if that is the case i hope they ban all forms of drinking in the near future, as i've yet to see positive effects from it too
Click to expand...

Baby steps.

Mike Hoxbig said:
Stop with the cop-outs please. You've made it clear that you speak on behalf of all non-smokers, and when you were called on it, then you do a backtrack.
Click to expand...

I really don't give a ****. Smokers can go all die in a fire for all I care.
 
Qwikslver said:
Anyone that wants to sit and poison themselves can go do so in private, far away from me, and far away from public places.

Regardless of all your civil liberty arguments. Smoking is bad for you. Government needs to do all it can to keep it's citizens healthy and productive.

These laws are meant to be inconveniencing to smokers so that fewer smoke. If you don't want to be inconvenienced just quit smoking. No one is forcing you to poison yourself.

Except maybe your addiction.
Click to expand...

Fully agreed. My point is still that smoking is pointless from all aspects, except for it being a hobby to some. Poison yourself by all means - but these laws are there to protect people like me, who do not want to be adversely affected.

I feel sorry for those little kids I see on weekends who sit in the back of their parents' cars whilst the windows are closed who must inhale all that 2nd hand smoke and have no choice about it :sick:
 
Qwikslver said:
Baby steps.



I really don't give a ****. Smokers can go all die in a fire for all I care.
Click to expand...

That is all we're saying. Smokers defend people's right to smoke or not smoke. Some non-smokers want smokers not to only stop smoking, but to go die, die faster, etc etc. I see only one rational side here...
 
Ho3n3r said:
Fully agreed. My point is still that smoking is pointless from all aspects, except for it being a hobby to some. Poison yourself by all means - but these laws are there to protect people like me, who do not want to be adversely affected.

I feel sorry for those little kids I see on weekends who sit in the back of their parents' cars whilst the windows are closed who must inhale all that 2nd hand smoke and have no choice about it :sick:
Click to expand...

then **** on them. you don't tell people not to have kids because some can't buckle them up. you don't tell everyone not to drink because some drive drunk, so why tell all smokers to go and die when some of them are decent?
 
smalltownsky said:
That is all we're saying. Smokers defend people's right to smoke or not smoke. Some non-smokers want smokers not to only stop smoking, but to go die, die faster, etc etc. I see only one rational side here...
Click to expand...

Non-smokers on here have never said you HAVE to stop smoking, only if you really must be a smoker, do it without affecting those who do not want to inhale your poison.
 
Ho3n3r said:
Non-smokers on here have never said you HAVE to stop smoking, only if you really must be a smoker, do it without affecting those who do not want to inhale your poison.
Click to expand...

i disagree, i can quote many people who have not only said it's unhealthy and that they should stop, but even suggested that some of them die quicker or dying is the only feeling they will have for them. of course this is not true for every person with an argument against smoking, but it is true for the majority arguing here
 
smalltownsky said:
Drinking is bad for you, gambling is bad for you. The problem we have is why doesn't government just give us a list of acceptable hobbies and tell us what we can and cannot do? Why not give us a list of things we can eat and cannot eat? Or things we should or should not buy? Religion can be bad for you and more detrimental than smoking will ever be.

This isn't about what is bad for the individual, it's just a taboo that can easily be bullied. They ban homosexuality from public places and the muslims and christians cheer. they ban smoking from public places and the non-smokers cheer.

if that is the case i hope they ban all forms of drinking in the near future, as i've yet to see positive effects from it too
Click to expand...

Because while I'm sitting in the bar at Carnival City just to watch the rugby, as I do not drink either, the guy next to me's drinking does not affect me at all, I don't inhale his alcohol. If he were smoking, however, that would be affecting me.
 
smalltownsky said:
i disagree, i can quote many people who have not only said it's unhealthy and that they should stop, but even suggested that some of them die quicker or dying is the only feeling they will have for them. of course this is not true for every person with an argument against smoking, but it is true for the majority arguing here
Click to expand...

I will never wish death upon someone else. :erm: Seems people here are getting too hot under the collar, but it is a passionate subject.
 
Ho3n3r said:
Because while I'm sitting in the bar at Carnival City just to watch the rugby, as I do not drink either, the guy next to me's drinking does not affect me at all, I don't inhale his alcohol. If he were smoking, however, that would be affecting me.
Click to expand...
Up until he pukes on you and/or starts a bar fight and/or crashes into you on the drive home.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X