M
MontyBrunswick
May 23, 2012 8:23pm
That can be said about anything that is taxed. Food, alcohol, etc.ts1227;1179972 wrote:Plus cigarettes are the easiest tax grab there is... the retards will pay whatever price is put on them. No government is going to shut that off.
ts1227
Posts: 12,319
May 23, 2012 8:30pm
Yes, but they haven't tacked the taxes onto any of them in a fashion that is anywhere close to what they do to smokes.dlazz;1180005 wrote:That can be said about anything that is taxed. Food, alcohol, etc.
W
WebFire
Posts: 14,779
May 23, 2012 8:48pm
So drinking and driving should be legal?FatHobbit;1179859 wrote:As long as cigarettes are legal I think the ban is a huge abuse of govt power. But I also really enjoy going out and not having to smell smoke everywhere.
M
MontyBrunswick
May 23, 2012 9:18pm
Unfair comparison...again.WebFire;1180022 wrote:So drinking and driving should be legal?
Laley23
Posts: 29,506
May 23, 2012 9:25pm
Governments job is to make sure public saftey comes first, and in this case, they have done that. Just because it is on private property doesnt mean smoking isnt hurting the public. Same type of thing they have done with standards of kitchens, food being clean and cooked properly, etc.
W
WebFire
Posts: 14,779
May 23, 2012 9:42pm
Again? It's my first post in the thread.dlazz;1180060 wrote:Unfair comparison...again.
What's unfair?
hasbeen
Posts: 6,504
May 23, 2012 9:42pm
hoops23;1179866 wrote:
If you want to smoke, fine. But respect those around you and stay at home.
If you don't want to smell smoke, fine. But respect those around you and stay at home.
It sounds just as ridiculous both ways.
Not putting words in his mouth, but because the owner of the establishment should maintain the right to allow smoking. If he does and loses business, that's his own decision.vball10set;1179970 wrote:Out of curiosity, why?
hasbeen
Posts: 6,504
May 23, 2012 9:45pm
Drinking and driving can cause immediate harm to you and you don't have a choice. Smoking doesn't. Even second hand smoke you can see and avoid if necessary.WebFire;1180116 wrote:Again? It's my first post in the thread.
What's unfair?
W
WebFire
Posts: 14,779
May 23, 2012 9:45pm
Not really. Smoking impinges on the well-being of others. But that's not true the other way around.pnhasbeen;1180118 wrote:If you don't want to smell smoke, fine. But respect those around you and stay at home.
It sounds just as ridiculous both ways.
W
WebFire
Posts: 14,779
May 23, 2012 9:46pm
So one slowly harms you, so it's ok?pnhasbeen;1180121 wrote:Drinking and driving can cause immediate harm to you and you don't have a choice. Smoking doesn't. Even second hand smoke you can see and avoid if necessary.
hasbeen
Posts: 6,504
May 23, 2012 9:46pm
Driving drunk and hitting a car and killing someone is impinging on the well-being of others.WebFire;1180125 wrote:Not really. Smoking impinges on the well-being of others. But that's not true the other way around.
W
WebFire
Posts: 14,779
May 23, 2012 9:47pm
Which is why it's illegal. See how that works?pnhasbeen;1180130 wrote:Driving drunk and hitting a car and killing someone is impinging on the well-being of others.
hasbeen
Posts: 6,504
May 23, 2012 9:47pm
Again, if someone is smoking outside a restaurant, you have the choice to not go to that restaurant and avoid the smoking.WebFire;1180127 wrote:So one slowly harms you, so it's ok?
Getting hit by a drunk driver isn't someone you can choose to avoid, it just happens.
W
WebFire
Posts: 14,779
May 23, 2012 9:48pm
The reason I used that example was because Fat said it should be legal because cigarettes are. It wasn't to compare the 2 actions. It was just a poor defense on his part.pnhasbeen;1180121 wrote:Drinking and driving can cause immediate harm to you and you don't have a choice. Smoking doesn't. Even second hand smoke you can see and avoid if necessary.
W
WebFire
Posts: 14,779
May 23, 2012 9:48pm
I guess we can choose to walk and not drive. :rolleyes:pnhasbeen;1180132 wrote:Again, if someone is smoking outside a restaurant, you have the choice to not go to that restaurant and avoid the smoking.
Getting hit by a drunk driver isn't someone you can choose to avoid, it just happens.
hasbeen
Posts: 6,504
May 23, 2012 9:49pm
I interpreted his remark as saying if cigarettes are legal, it should be the owner of the establishment's decision to allow or not allow. Similar to allowing or not allowing alcohol.WebFire;1180135 wrote:The reason I used that example was because Fat said it should be legal because cigarettes are. It wasn't to compare the 2 actions. It was just a poor defense on his part.
W
WebFire
Posts: 14,779
May 23, 2012 9:50pm
Prostitution should be legal. You can see a hooker and walk the other way.
DeyDurkie5
Posts: 11,324
May 23, 2012 9:51pm
Agreed. Why isn't it legal? Religion?WebFire;1180145 wrote:Prostitution should be legal. You can see a hooker and walk the other way.
W
WebFire
Posts: 14,779
May 23, 2012 9:51pm
But sitting in the bar next to someone with a drink has no affect on me whatsover.pnhasbeen;1180140 wrote:I interpreted his remark as saying if cigarettes are legal, it should be the owner of the establishment's decision to allow or not allow. Similar to allowing or not allowing alcohol.
hasbeen
Posts: 6,504
May 23, 2012 9:51pm
:thumbup:WebFire;1180137 wrote:I guess we can choose to walk and not drive. :rolleyes:
You're not defending the point. I own hasbeen's cafe. I allow smoking right outside my entrance. The patrons who are smoking aren't being impolite, I am. I allow it. If you choose not to dine at my cafe, I lose business. If you do, you have to deal with my decision to allow smoking.
W
WebFire
Posts: 14,779
May 23, 2012 9:51pm
I've always wondered myself.DeyDurkie5;1180149 wrote:Agreed. Why isn't it legal? Religion?
hasbeen
Posts: 6,504
May 23, 2012 9:52pm
if it did, would you bitch about it? Saying you have more of a right to be there than he does?WebFire;1180150 wrote:But sitting in the bar next to someone with a drink has no affect on me whatsover.
W
WebFire
Posts: 14,779
May 23, 2012 9:53pm
Personally, I think there should only be a ban for places that serve food. But many/most bars do anyway, it seems.pnhasbeen;1180151 wrote::thumbup:
You're not defending the point. I own hasbeen's cafe. I allow smoking right outside my entrance. The patrons who are smoking aren't being impolite, I am. I allow it. If you choose not to dine at my cafe, I lose business. If you do, you have to deal with my decision to allow smoking.
W
WebFire
Posts: 14,779
May 23, 2012 9:53pm
If it directly affected my health and my right to enjoy the establishment? Yes.pnhasbeen;1180156 wrote:if it did, would you bitch about it? Saying you have more of a right to be there than he does?
hasbeen
Posts: 6,504
May 23, 2012 9:54pm
that's reasonable. But as long as the smoke isn't near the cooking and there are sections, like most restaurants used to do, I don't think it should matter.WebFire;1180158 wrote:Personally, I think there should only be a ban for places that serve food. But many/most bars do anyway, it seems.