• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

Coronado said:
There's only about five Birchers left, and I doubt the Rev is one of them. :roll:
Click to expand...

Glenn Beck is a Bircher. He's the one that started using the term "statist" on his show along with "socialist, Marxist and communist, and now all the little FoxNews monkey's are using that term too. So if Rev wasnt a Bircher, he is one now if he's going to use Bircher talk to help spread Bircher paranoia.
 
Moot said:
Glenn Beck is a Bircher. He's the one that started using the term "statist" on his show along with "socialist, Marxist and communist, and now all the little FoxNews monkey's are using that term too. So if Rev wasnt a Bircher, he is one now if he's going to use Bircher talk to help spread Bircher paranoia.
Click to expand...

Statist is anyone who wants the government gun to be involved in areas that the Constitution says they arent supposed to be invovled in.
 
Orion said:
I have to say, as a non-smoker and doctor I am personally biased in favour of this law. I hate having to share public spaces with smokers, even after I am making it clear to them that their smoking is bothering me. It is always I who has to get up and move, just because I don't want to be poisoned. I can even tolerate pot smoke way more than I can the poisonous stench of tobacco. If people are so hooked on nicotine, maybe they should administer it more directly, like with a patch, so that people nearby aren't getting dosed with carcinogens.
Click to expand...

I'm a non-smoker and a doctor too (heheh, we didn't specify medical doctor), I am definitely against this law. It acts against the people and freedom of choice. Tobacco is legal, that's all there is to it. These sorts of laws are unjust, and overstep the boundaries of government. We are free to make the choice to smoke or not to smoke. In public places like parks it can briefly smell bad as you walk by a smoker; but that's the worst of it. We can't start legislating on slight annoyances, we'll end up with so many laws that all of us will be doing something illegal at any given time. You can talk about being "poisoned", but the brief exposure isn't going to do much harm. You're taking well more damage just by being outside than you are by passing by a smoker. I think we should try to be less drama queens about certain things, pretending that some smoker is causing our death because we were exposed to diffuse smoke for 1 second. That's when we start loosing rational and logical thought. If you really don't like it, than you have to push to make it illegal. But as it remains legal, I see little to no rightful authority to prevent people from smoking outside.
 
Moot said:
Glenn Beck is a Bircher. He's the one that started using the term "statist" on his show along with "socialist, Marxist and communist, and now all the little FoxNews monkey's are using that term too. So if Rev wasnt a Bircher, he is one now if he's going to use Bircher talk to help spread Bircher paranoia.
Click to expand...

I've used "statist" as an accurate description of people and political platforms for much longer than Glenn Beck. Just because he uses it now doesn't mean that I or others who use the term correctly are somehow associated with him and his special brand of lunacy.
 
Moot said:
Glenn Beck is a Bircher. He's the one that started using the term "statist" on his show along with "socialist, Marxist and communist, and now all the little FoxNews monkey's are using that term too. So if Rev wasnt a Bircher, he is one now if he's going to use Bircher talk to help spread Bircher paranoia.
Click to expand...
:lamo

Darling, the only one spreading paranoia is you. Get a grip, lest I be forced to dispatch one of the Koch brothers to straighten you out.
 
chevydriver1123 said:
No they should be forced to fight Bears.
Click to expand...

Why let the bears have all the fun? Maybe we can round a bunch of them up, release them into a city, and the rest of us can hunt them down with sniper rifles and such. Make a game out of it. How many authoritative statists can you shoot? Each one you kill brings stability and longevity to your rights and liberties.
 
MaggieD said:
Honestly? Smoking should be illegal. I smoke. I'll probably die from it. I know that, but I'm hooked. Smoking is so hazardous to one's health that I know the only reason it's a legal substance is because of powerful farm lobbies AND the ever-growing tax revenue it generates. It's a horrible habit.

The more places they ban it, the closer to illegal it gets. I don't care if they ban it outside because it absolutely positively should be illegal. And people who don't smoke shouldn't have to smell it -- shouldn't have to get it in/on their clothing and in their hair.

As to banning it in private restaurants/bars, that's an infringement on rights that I find obnoxious. "This is a smoking establishment. Don't smoke? Don't come in." As to those who say, "What about the employees?" I say, "Don't smoke? Don't work here." It's all a political game. No one is going to defend one's right to smoke anywhere. Except smokers. I can't say as I blame them.
Click to expand...

i believe it shouldn't be allowed where the audience is captive....other than that, i don't care. i can say that as a former smoker, i wouldn't enter a restaurant where smoking was allowed, but it should be up to the owner.
 
Orion said:
Public spaces though... I don't think you should have that right. It's shared space and I should be able to enjoy the park with my partner and children (if I had any) without feeling the need to move, or suffer through the stench of ignorant smokers.
Click to expand...

If that's the case, I want a ban on fat people in revealing clothing, loud music, unleashed dogs, food, unsupervised children, etc.

The list is very long of **** that I want banned in the park.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
If that's the case, I want a ban on fat people in revealing clothing, loud music, unleashed dogs, food, unsupervised children, etc.

The list is very long of **** that I want banned in the park.
Click to expand...

Can we ban hippies please! I'm tired of them banging on their drums in the park and they smell BAD. Seriously, these jerks need to bathe. I hate sitting in the park reading and have a group of these noisy, smelly, inconsiderate bastards come walking by. I shouldn't be momentarily inconvenienced like that; let's make a law!

Also, can we ban Scientologists from public too?
 
Ikari said:
Can we ban hippies please! I'm tired of them banging on their drums in the park and they smell BAD. Seriously, these jerks need to bathe. I hate sitting in the park reading and have a group of these noisy, smelly, inconsiderate bastards come walking by. I shouldn't be momentarily inconvenienced like that; let's make a law!

Also, can we ban Scientologists from public too?
Click to expand...

Absolutely, we shouldn't have cults(including hippies) considered religions.

Lets also ban people, from everywhere.
Geesh I hate people.
 
Ikari said:
I'm a non-smoker and a doctor too (heheh, we didn't specify medical doctor), I am definitely against this law. It acts against the people and freedom of choice. Tobacco is legal, that's all there is to it. These sorts of laws are unjust, and overstep the boundaries of government. We are free to make the choice to smoke or not to smoke. In public places like parks it can briefly smell bad as you walk by a smoker; but that's the worst of it. We can't start legislating on slight annoyances, we'll end up with so many laws that all of us will be doing something illegal at any given time. You can talk about being "poisoned", but the brief exposure isn't going to do much harm. You're taking well more damage just by being outside than you are by passing by a smoker. I think we should try to be less drama queens about certain things, pretending that some smoker is causing our death because we were exposed to diffuse smoke for 1 second. That's when we start loosing rational and logical thought. If you really don't like it, than you have to push to make it illegal. But as it remains legal, I see little to no rightful authority to prevent people from smoking outside.
Click to expand...

Alcohol is legal too but people aren't allowed to drink in the streets. There are assigned locations where it's acceptable for people to partake in alcohol consumption and public parks aren't one of them. (Mind you, I've lived in countries where people can drink in the streets and I found it to my liking. Just demonstrating that there is a precedent.) I don't agree in this case with placing restrictions on private businesses or people's homes, but in terms of public spaces I don't have a problem. No one is saying smokers can't smoke, but they can't do it around non-smokers in spares that are shared. With private establishments, I can choose not go into ones that allow smoking; whereas, parks are shared and they are the outdoors.

It isn't just about getting cancer. People have allergies to cigarette smoke (myself included) and a minute's worth of exposure is enough to trigger sniffles, so please don't lecture me about loss of logical and rational thought. Air pollution is a problem in cities but it is fairly dilute compared to the smoke that comes out of some jerk's mouth who decides to light up mere feet away from my friend and I as we are leaning on a railing watching the water. Why should I have to move because some jerk has no consideration for others?

The government wouldn't be getting petititoned to create these laws if smokers were more considerate, and if there weren't blatant health hazards attached to second hand smoke.
 
Orion said:
It isn't just about getting cancer. People have allergies to cigarette smoke (myself included) and a minute's worth of exposure is enough to trigger sniffles, so please don't lecture me about loss of logical and rational thought. Air pollution is a problem in cities but it is fairly dilute compared to the smoke that comes out of some jerk's mouth who decides to light up mere feet away from my friend and I as we are leaning on a railing watching the water. Why should I have to move because some jerk has no consideration for others?
Click to expand...

I'm very considerate of others.
I don't smoke around other people and I don't toss my butts on the ground but in a trash can, after I'm sure the coal is extinguished.

Orion said:
The government wouldn't be getting petititoned to create these laws if smokers were more considerate, and if there weren't blatant health hazards attached to second hand smoke.
Click to expand...

The sun is more dangerous than second hand smoke.
We should ban people from going outside during daylight hours.
 
Orion said:
It isn't just about getting cancer. People have allergies to cigarette smoke (myself included) and a minute's worth of exposure is enough to trigger sniffles, so please don't lecture me about loss of logical and rational thought. Air pollution is a problem in cities but it is fairly dilute compared to the smoke that comes out of some jerk's mouth who decides to light up mere feet away from my friend and I as we are leaning on a railing watching the water. Why should I have to move because some jerk has no consideration for others?
Click to expand...
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.

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.
 
Orion said:
Alcohol is legal too but people aren't allowed to drink in the streets.
Click to expand...

And that's a bull**** law, along with many other alcohol related laws. The existence of bull**** laws doesn't excuse the creation of more bull**** laws.

Orion said:
There are assigned locations where it's acceptable for people to partake in alcohol consumption and public parks aren't one of them. (Mind you, I've lived in countries where people can drink in the streets and I found it to my liking. Just demonstrating that there is a precedent.) I don't agree in this case with placing restrictions on private businesses or people's homes, but in terms of public spaces I don't have a problem. No one is saying smokers can't smoke, but they can't do it around non-smokers in spares that are shared. With private establishments, I can choose not go into ones that allow smoking; whereas, parks are shared and they are the outdoors.
Click to expand...

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.

Orion said:
It isn't just about getting cancer. People have allergies to cigarette smoke (myself included) and a minute's worth of exposure is enough to trigger sniffles, so please don't lecture me about loss of logical and rational thought.
Click to expand...

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.

Orion said:
Air pollution is a problem in cities but it is fairly dilute compared to the smoke that comes out of some jerk's mouth who decides to light up mere feet away from my friend and I as we are leaning on a railing watching the water. Why should I have to move because some jerk has no consideration for others?
Click to expand...

Because it's a free country. Did you honestly need that one explained to you?

Orion said:
The government wouldn't be getting petititoned to create these laws if smokers were more considerate, and if there weren't blatant health hazards attached to second hand smoke.
Click to expand...

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.
 
rivrrat said:
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.
Click to expand...
I have that same problem. These gals that bathe in perfume make me suffocate and my eyeballs pop out.

So I just find somewhere else to be. Problem solved.
 
Coronado said:
:lamo

Darling, the only one spreading paranoia is you. Get a grip, lest I be forced to dispatch one of the Koch brothers to straighten you out.
Click to expand...
Honey, I live in Utah. Beck's mentor is Cleon Skousen and Skousen was a Bircher. Everything Beck says on his show comes straight of Skousen's book "The 5,000 Year Leap" and mirrors the Bircher philosophy to a tee. Do you get it now? Or do you need a dumb FoxNews blonde to spell it out for you?
 
I don't see why this is such an issue. As it stands, im not allowed to smoke a paperless joint or drink a beer in Time Square. What makes smoking a cigarette so special?
 
Moot said:
Honey, I live in Utah. Beck's mentor is Cleon Skousen and Skousen was a Bircher. Everything Beck says on his show comes straight of Skousen's book "The 5,000 Year Leap" and mirrors the Bircher philosophy to a tee. Do you get it now? Or do you need a dumb FoxNews blonde to spell it out for you?
Click to expand...

And that still has nothing to do with his correct usage of "statist".
 
Moot said:
Honey, I live in Utah. Beck's mentor is Cleon Skousen and Skousen was a Bircher. Everything Beck says on his show comes straight of Skousen's book "The 5,000 Year Leap" and mirrors the Bircher philosophy to a tee. Do you get it now? Or do you need a dumb FoxNews blonde to spell it out for you?
Click to expand...
Take your ridiculous John Birch bull**** to the Conspiracy section with the rest of the delusional rants where it belongs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom