Page 9 of 44 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 440

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

  1. #81
    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 Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Both of us can move to separate areas, it is of no consequence.
    I think the correct response is: ding ding ding.

    I hate the smell of diesel vehicles, really hate it.
    No one is banning them from the road.
    High sulfer diesel is actually banned from road use. The point i am trying to make is (and i believe it was made), violence can result from people having no respect for others. Any reasonable rational person, if asked not to smoke in their presence, would go somewhere else.
    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

  2. #82
    Goddess of Bacon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Last Seen
    05-28-12 @ 09:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,988

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    If i asked you nicely to not smoke around me, and you told me to get the **** out, or lit it up in spite, how is my following action (taking your smoke out of your mouth) any less respectful?
    1) If you asked me nicely not to smoke around you, I wouldn't. Hell, I had a friend come visit me for a few days once who was allergic to cig smoke. I agreed to air out my home for days prior to her visit and not smoke in my own home during her stay to accomodate her. It was either that, or she stayed in a hotel. I wanted to spend more time with her, so I accomodated her sensitivities. Because she asked nicely. Had she said, "You're a stinky bitch and I aint setting foot in your disgusting smoke filled home unless you air it out and don't smoke in it the entire time I'm there!", I would have told her to stick her visit where the sun don't shine.

    2) If we were in an area where you were unable to move out of my vicinity, then you might have an issue even IF I declined your request not to light up. But outdoors? In a public park? Walk the **** away. That's it. That's all that needs to be done. Anything else is only facilitating the disrespect you keep going on about.

  3. #83
    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
    It's easy for YOU to go somewhere else as well.
    Why, i am just standing there. You have decided to pollute my area, therefore you should have a bit more respect for my rights.

    I ignore them, no rule against being disrespectful. People are free to be as rude as they want. I won't call the police and I won't engage in physical violence against them unless they initiate physical violence. Just being rude doesn't cut it.
    If i was to politely ask you to not smoke in my presence, and your reply was **** you buddy, i guarantee my next reaction would not be respectful. If you cannot handle this, well i guess that's just tough rocks.
    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. #84
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    I think the correct response is: ding ding ding.

    High sulfer diesel is actually banned from road use. The point i am trying to make is (and i believe it was made), violence can result from people having no respect for others. Any reasonable rational person, if asked not to smoke in their presence, would go somewhere else.
    I'm talking about regular diesel vehicles.
    They are all over the main road I use to go to work, shopping, everywhere.
    They smell horrible and actually make me a bit light headed.

    Banning whole places from one activity, isn't the same as going to separate places on the same area.

    What about peanut products, some people get severe allergic reactions just from air particles?
    Should those also be banned in public places?
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  5. #85
    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 rivrrat View Post
    1) If you asked me nicely not to smoke around you, I wouldn't. Hell, I had a friend come visit me for a few days once who was allergic to cig smoke. I agreed to air out my home for days prior to her visit and not smoke in my own home during her stay to accomodate her. It was either that, or she stayed in a hotel. I wanted to spend more time with her, so I accomodated her sensitivities. Because she asked nicely. Had she said, "You're a stinky bitch and I aint setting foot in your disgusting smoke filled home unless you air it out and don't smoke in it the entire time I'm there!", I would have told her to stick her visit where the sun don't shine.
    Agreed.

    2) If we were in an area where you were unable to move out of my vicinity, then you might have an issue even IF I declined your request not to light up. But outdoors? In a public park? Walk the **** away. That's it. That's all that needs to be done. Anything else is only facilitating the disrespect you keep going on about.
    Why do you believe that smoking in front of others is so special? If you want to **** your lungs up, be my guest. There is simply no reason for you to have to pollute the area i was standing at. With that in mind, if i went to a park with my child (i dont have one) and people were smoking weed/cigarettes/crack at that park, yes i would most likely leave and not ask them to stop.
    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

  6. #86
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    Why do you believe that smoking in front of others is so special? If you want to **** your lungs up, be my guest. There is simply no reason for you to have to pollute the area i was standing at. With that in mind, if i went to a park with my child (i dont have one) and people were smoking weed/cigarettes/crack at that park, yes i would most likely leave and not ask them to stop.
    I go to the park and walking trail near my home with my kids regularly.

    These people are non smokers and I have to put up with their **** regularly.
    Unleashed dogs, dog ****, litter, their nasty obeseness.

    I'll pitch a bitch on here but largely I have to deal with their ****ed up crap and actually help clean up the litter.
    Why?
    Because I'm not a jackass like them.

    That's life and screwing around with smokers because of some negligible harm, is wasteful.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  7. #87
    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 Harry Guerrilla View Post
    What about peanut products, some people get severe allergic reactions just from air particles?
    Should those also be banned in public places?
    This is where it gets complicated. Smoking is a choice made by an individual that is proven to have a serious negative impact on the health of others. Eating a peanut in someones presence can cause them a severe allergic reaction?
    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

  8. #88
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Goldenboy219 View Post
    This is where it gets complicated. Smoking is a choice made by an individual that is proven to have a serious negative impact on the health of others. Eating a peanut in someones presence can cause them a severe allergic reaction?
    Sorry but second hand smoke isn't serious, except if it is repeated over long the term.

    A whiff of smoke isn't going to hurt you, pumping gas at the gas station is more likely to have more long term effects.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  9. #89
    Sage
    Moot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:03 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    27,460

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    What does Beck have to do with this?
    I assume you were being facetious about banning fat people in the park. But I think Beck was being a bit facitious about fat people, too when he said "let them die."

    If Beck wants to smoke cigarettes or be a fatty or wear perfume, of course that is his individual right. Except if smokers or fatties don't have health insurance, then they become a burdon on society and all our insurance rates go up to help pay for their medical costs. And their medical costs far exceed those who don't smoke and aren't obese. Why should we should have to pay for smokers and fatties health care through our private insurance?

    Then there is the hypocrisy of those who say they want government to stay out of their personal lives but those same people seem to have no problem wanting government to tell others who they can marry, whether to have abortions, or smoke pot. Do you understand, now?

  10. #90
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    I assume you were being facetious about banning fat people in the park. But I think Beck was being a bit facitious about fat people, too when he said "let them die."

    If Beck wants to smoke cigarettes or be a fatty or wear perfume, of course that is his individual right. Except if smokers or fatties don't have health insurance, then they become a burdon on society and all our insurance rates go up to help pay for their medical costs. And their medical costs far exceed those who don't smoke and aren't obese. Why should we should have to pay for smokers and fatties health care through our private insurance?

    Then there is the hypocrisy of those who say they want government to stay out of their personal lives but those same people seem to have no problem wanting government to tell others who they can marry, whether to have abortions, or smoke pot. Do you understand, now?
    Sorry but smokers don't cost anyone anything more.
    Smokers tend to save people money through increases in taxes and being less burdened by the retirement social welfare system.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

Page 9 of 44 FirstFirst ... 789101119 ... 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
  •