Page 12 of 44 FirstFirst ... 2101112131422 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 440

Thread: Smokers Beware! Proposed New York City Smoking Ban Targets Outdoor Facilities

  1. #111
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Seen
    07-23-12 @ 03:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    6,763
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Smokers Beware! Proposed New York City Smoking Ban Targets Outdoor Facilities

    Quote Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
    No, the attitude that got smoking banned in PRIVATE businesses is the big government, nanny-staters, self-righteous, no-personal-responsibility, everything-is-someone-elses-fault, and the govt-must-protect-us attitude.

    In other words, the ****wads.
    Those ****ing ****wads piss me off. How can we ban them from public spaces?

  2. #112
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Last Seen
    09-24-12 @ 02:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    11,963

    Re: Smokers Beware! Proposed New York City Smoking Ban Targets Outdoor Facilities

    Quote Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
    It can still be offensive.


    Nope. You just get the **** away from me. Don't like the smell of smoke? Don't ****ing sit next to someone smoking.



    Don't sit near me when I'm smoking, and you won't smell my smoke. Pretty ****ing simple.
    I agree, if you're smoking in a designated area, and I sit down next to you, then I shouldn't say anything unless you're blowing it right in my face.

    I'll usually move if someone's smoking is bothering me.

    But that's what I like about having less designated areas. Less chance of me having to move.

  3. #113
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: Smokers Beware! Proposed New York City Smoking Ban Targets Outdoor Facilities

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    No, the attitude that got smoking banned from private establishments was the holier-than-thou pussy attitude of people who couldn't accept personal choice. There is no just reason to infringe upon property rights the way that anti-smoking POS law went ahead and did. If people can't accept the responsibilities of freedom, I say get out of the gene pool.
    So because you are a nicotine addict (not saying you, but within the realm of the discussion), i have to accommodate this addiction by walking away? And you wonder why this position is not supported by governments in all developed countries.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  4. #114
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Seen
    07-23-12 @ 03:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    6,763
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Smokers Beware! Proposed New York City Smoking Ban Targets Outdoor Facilities

    Smokers need to start a PAC and raise some money.

  5. #115
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Smokers Beware! Proposed New York City Smoking Ban Targets Outdoor Facilities

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    So because you are a nicotine addict (not saying you, but within the realm of the discussion), i have to accommodate this addiction by walking away? And you wonder why this position is not supported by governments in all developed countries.
    Yes, because this is the real world implications of aggregated populace in a free society. This is a consequence of freedom on the scale it is supposed to exist on in this country. We must be able to handle the consequences and responsibilities of freedom if we wish to remain free. Of course, the adult and responsible thing to do if a smoker lights up next to you and you really do not like it is to walk away. The bitchy, me me me first thing to do is to raise a stink and initiate force against the other person.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  6. #116
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Smokers Beware! Proposed New York City Smoking Ban Targets Outdoor Facilities

    Quote Originally Posted by reefedjib View Post
    Smokers need to start a PAC and raise some money.
    They would, but the government already took all their money in the form of taxes on tobacco products. Taxes, BTW, which were installed under the guise of offsetting the additional health care costs smokers put on the system.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  7. #117
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Seen
    07-23-12 @ 03:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    6,763
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Smokers Beware! Proposed New York City Smoking Ban Targets Outdoor Facilities

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    They would, but the government already took all their money in the form of taxes on tobacco products. Taxes, BTW, which were installed under the guise of offsetting the additional health care costs smokers put on the system.
    On top of those taxes, I would be willing to pledge $500 a year to stop this encroachment on my freedoms.

  8. #118
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: Smokers Beware! Proposed New York City Smoking Ban Targets Outdoor Facilities

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Oh boo f'n hoo. Cry some more about being outside with random people and seeing or experiencing things you don't normally like. For ****'s sake, there are consequences and repercussions for living in a free society. People may be doing **** you don't like. It's time to man up and learn to accept the consequences of freedom instead of bitching to high heaven about every conceivable thing.
    We don't have complete freedom, and there are rules. Sorry to burst your libertarian pipe dream. Again, don't lecture me like an asshole. You're being hostile and it's not necessary. If you want to have a civilized debate with rational talking points, I'm cool with that... if you want to make personal attacks toward me and act like a child, then be prepared to be treated like one.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    I will lecture you about loss of logical and rational thought as this sentence of yours here has neither. I'm allergic to dogs and cats; does that mean people can't take their dogs out in public? I mean come on, it's the same damned thing as your ignorant and idiotic statement. Or should I just understand that people have dogs and because we're a free society, those people will take their dogs outside and I'll just have to learn to deal with it? Enough with being pansies about everything, it's really starting to hurt us and the future of the Republic.
    Dogs and cats in parks cause you to have an allergic reaction? Scientific proof please? I have never known anyone to have an allergy attack to animals while they are walking in the oudoors, unless of course a dog actually runs up to them and conveniently rubs themselves all over the person.

    Also, are dogs and cats lethal carcinogens? Apples and oranges.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Because it's a free country. Did you honestly need that one explained to you?
    We're not completely free and never have been. Maybe you have trouble distinguishing reality from how you want things to be.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    The government wouldn't be getting petitioned either if the French pansies would stop crying about every damned thing under the sun and man up about it. You're not getting cancer by walking past a smoker in the park; so don't even start up with bull**** excuses like that. Turn on the rational and logical thought processes first. Jesus.
    Keep up the mouth foaming and you won't get a reply from me again in this thread. I like you and you always have interesting contributions to discussions but if you're going to flame then there's no point in talking to you.

  9. #119
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    West Loop
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    16,254

    Re: Smokers Beware! Proposed New York City Smoking Ban Targets Outdoor Facilities

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    Well then, you're getting arrested for assault and that's the consequences of your actions.
    Says the person who said he would pistol whip someone who took the ciggy out of his mouth.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  10. #120
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: Smokers Beware! Proposed New York City Smoking Ban Targets Outdoor Facilities

    Quote Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
    I have allergies to most perfumes and colognes. You don't see me whining my way to the govt to mandate people don't wear them. Why? Because I can take care of myself and don't need the ****ing government to step in and declare a ban simply to appease my delicate sensibilities. If someone's odor bothers me, I move away from them. I don't need the government to move them for me.
    When perfume can cause cancer then I'll care. Until then, apples and oranges. We're not talking about offensive body odours but a product containing hundreds of known and verified carcinogens. I shouldn't have to move because some jerk nearby wants to poison himself. If you want to consume poison then just go drink some, or snort it. Do it in any other way where I don't have to breathe your toxic and disgusting exhaled breath.

    Quote Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
    God this country is going into the ****ing crapper. Nobody can do a goddamn thing for themselves, nobody can take an ounce of personal responsibility, and everything is someone else's fault.
    Yeah boo hoo I can't take responsibility because I don't want to walk down the street walking behind someone who is puffing on a cancer stick. How about YOU take personal responsibility for YOUR addiction and smoke at home where people who actually value healthy lifestyle won't have to smell your noxious fumes?

Page 12 of 44 FirstFirst ... 2101112131422 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •