Puff Puff. Libertarians, I assume, will be up in arms.

From politics to poetry, if it isn't covered in one of the other forums and you want to share it with us, put it here.

Re: Puff Puff. Libertarians, I assume, will be up in arms.

Postby -Jarrett » Thu Nov 16, 2006 3:56 am

I can't tell if you're attempting to correct me Nidal.

Fatty foods... uh yeah, but there's still a Wendy's, McDonalds, and Burger king all within 1 block of the strat, for example. All banning it from some places does is herd the cattle... Not to mention that trans fats are just the newest focal point. There's still a butt ton of other concentrated nasty in all kinds of entres.

Re: Vegas. I know, I read your post. That's why I called it a close proximity dance, rather than a lap dance; a knee dance, an air grind. But there are still whores on every corner there, and legal prostitution not so far away. And yes, the booze
-Jarrett
 
Posts: 3773
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 1:35 pm

Re: Puff Puff. Libertarians, I assume, will be up in arms.

Postby savaughn » Thu Nov 16, 2006 4:07 am

Well, the argument here is pretty clear. Cigarettes kill more people than any one other activity in the country. The argument is that doing this is good for the smokers themselves. Sort of like a ban on jaywalking.

Personally I don't know if this really that restrictive. You can smoke at home, go... do. Cigarettes are infinitely worse for you than marijuana (to date not a single death from marijuana) and you can't do that legally even in your home. There were 9 elected types who had to vote unanimously for this and only 15 people bothered to show up at the city meeting on it. If it's a big deal to the people in Belmont, CA it won't stick. I'm betting it does though.

Smoking, like lap dances and drinking, is a vice luxury not a right. If you like lap dances, you have to live somewhere that they are allowed. If you want to drink, don't live in a "dry" county. If you want to smoke, don't live in a city that bans it. Nature of the beast.
savaughn
 
Posts: 271
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 12:30 pm

Re: Puff Puff. Libertarians, I assume, will be up in arms.

Postby -Jarrett » Thu Nov 16, 2006 4:32 am

The counterpoint is that people are projecting their own desire for longevity onto others. Terms like "vice luxury" go by another name, "living my goddamn life". Banning these "vice luxuries" is wrong because it's lame and smacks of control. Citing 40 other ways the government controls our lives is a lame line of reasoning, because it either a) assumes those 40 other points of control are fair and right or b) says "look how bad you've always had it, so just suck it up like always" which is as pathetic as a parapalegic Jesus.

America had two balls at one point. They've taken one for sure. Let's pretend they haven't removed most of the other and we have one whole ball left. We shouldn't complain about them taking the other one because we're only a uniball as it is? If someone rapes my mother that means they can rape my sister too because, hey, I've already had my mother raped! Stupid
-Jarrett
 
Posts: 3773
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 1:35 pm

Re: Puff Puff. Libertarians, I assume, will be up in arms.

Postby VectorAWX3 » Thu Nov 16, 2006 4:36 am

Hey, lap dances ARE a right! 4th Ammendment to the Constitution. Read it!!!

Quote:
Congress shall make no law barring the grinding of the strippers buttocks into the front of the client's pantaloons.
Jaghatai, on the Pale Rider event: I hop on this board to post a simple NEWCC question, end up looking at some interacial lesbian action and watch a religious meltdown. You guys know how to party!
User avatar
VectorAWX3
 
Posts: 10006
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 11:13 am

Re: Puff Puff. Libertarians, I assume, will be up in arms.

Postby savaughn » Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:00 am

I'm officially using Mr. Nasr as my write in candidate for president.
savaughn
 
Posts: 271
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 12:30 pm

Re: Puff Puff. Libertarians, I assume, will be up in arms.

Postby Amazonwarlord » Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:34 am

Quote:
Armed with growing evidence that second-hand smoke causes negative health effects, the council chose to pursue the strictest law possible and deal with any legal challenges later.


This is a civil liberties issue but for the non-smoker. The point actually is you have a right to do many things in a free country as long as it doesn't infringe on anyone elses rights. The problem here is the increasingly mounting evidence that secondhand smoke is not just in confined spaces. Kids in home where parents smoke outside are generally sicker than kids in homes where there is no smoking.
Second hand smoke I run into on the street affects my health.

If I eat fatty foods and am obese, that does not make Jarrett tat greater risk for heart disease. There in lies that fault in the lets ban other vices things. Smoking is the only vice that directly affects those around you while you indulge in it. The act of drinking does not. Being drunk and driving and killing your family does but I could drink and either not get drunk or just not drive. So don't go there .. it's just not the same.

And as far as it being unenforceble .. that's rubbish. Just like littering. If it is seen and the cop wants to give a ticket .. he or she will. Period. No hypocracy involved. The police are going to be very busy if they do enfoce it though
"I have not failed, I've just found ten thousand ways that won't work." – Thomas Edison
User avatar
Amazonwarlord
 
Posts: 2677
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 6:40 pm

Re: Puff Puff. Libertarians, I assume, will be up in arms.

Postby VectorAWX3 » Thu Nov 16, 2006 12:32 pm

Quote:
The police are going to be very busy if they do enfoce it though.
Not true. Once you start seeing news stories left and right about people getting ticketed, most smokers will either comply, or hide it really really well. And hey, as long as the cops aren't ticketing my illegally parked car, I'm happy. ;)
Jaghatai, on the Pale Rider event: I hop on this board to post a simple NEWCC question, end up looking at some interacial lesbian action and watch a religious meltdown. You guys know how to party!
User avatar
VectorAWX3
 
Posts: 10006
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 11:13 am

Re: Puff Puff. Libertarians, I assume, will be up in arms.

Postby -Jarrett » Thu Nov 16, 2006 11:40 pm

"Smoking is the only vice that directly affects those around you while you indulge in it."

I'm failing to see how smoking in your car or by yourself on a street directly affects anyone. And an attached house? You're telling me the smoke bores through solid walls? (Maybe if their are holes in the walls, in which case there's a building code violation and they need to enforce that, not the smoking bullshit.
-Jarrett
 
Posts: 3773
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 1:35 pm

Re: Puff Puff. Libertarians, I assume, will be up in arms.

Postby -The Fabulous Orcboy » Thu Nov 16, 2006 11:57 pm

Jarrett -- regarding attached homes: many older units, and a few newer ones, have shared ventilation systems.

You smoke, it goes into the ducts and into your neighbor's home
-The Fabulous Orcboy
 
Posts: 395
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 11:18 am

Re: Puff Puff. Libertarians, I assume, will be up in arms.

Postby -Jarrett » Fri Nov 17, 2006 12:21 am

For homes with ventilation systems that aren't windows. Perhaps my experience in modern home construction standards is limited, but attached multihome ventilation strikes me as rare. This seems more applicable to apartment buildings, in which case the law makes sense, but by my reading if your house is attached to mine that's the end of my bad habit
-Jarrett
 
Posts: 3773
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 1:35 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Off Topic

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron