|
|
|
|
|
| Smoke-free crusaders may now be at your door
Posted: 12/12/2007 7:31:51 AM | You do not understand... There are only so many ways I can spell this out to you... By bringing up other issues you are only clouding this one... I don't see a necessity for cars myself either except that others do... I don't drive either so your personal attacks are really getting old... If you have any intelligent debate for this topic, bring it, but if you want to muddle the issue with other issues, you will never get to the bottom of anything.
So you wish to ban smoking in homes that have children in it. And there is only one way the government can do that, and it is through the government watching your actions in your home. Don't dance around it- be clear about your intentions.
You aren't even reading my posts... The government does not need to monitor your actions at home for crying out loud! All they have to do is pass the law and give the people an option to report the abuse... They don't have T.V. screens to make sure you don't hit your kids, but it's against the law.
I'm still waiting for a real argument that isn't rooted in paranoid fantasy.
*EDIT* Or political conspiracy(for Hozo)... Not that I don't buy into some, just that they waste time sometimes. | |
|
| Smoke-free crusaders may now be at your door
Posted: 12/12/2007 10:53:22 AM | Jiperly asked...
And if a parent chooses to smoke in the presence of their child in their own property.....would that be illegal?
Stonestongue replied:
Only if it was in a confined space.
This is where the crux of my arguement evolves...it has nothing to do with conspiricies, or the like, but has everything to do with the crusade and the crusaders' blind ambition coupled with apathetic ignorance. The devil is in these very details; always was, and always has been. This is a very pure example of what I am arguing:
Using this specific example posted here, go back to page 1 of this thread. This thread is about banning smoking in apartments mainly. Why?? Because anti-smokers can smell smoke from others in the complex.
They extrapolate this into 2nd hand smoke throughout the entire building, of which it is only a scent, and NOT 2nd hand smoke, therefore the proposed ban.
The 2nd hand smoke you see a child breathing in a closed room with a smoker is the SAME what a crusader sees when they smell that faint smell in a block of flats.
Since it is now and forever etched into their minds that they themselves are breathing 2nd hand smoke, they seek to ban any and all sources of tobacco smoke.
So again, back to what Jiperly asked:
And if a parent chooses to smoke in the presence of their child in their own property.....would that be illegal?
Because of this slash and burn mentality, YES, it would be illegal, because, contrary to what you assure us, which you said:
Only if it was in a confined space.
The confined space would not even matter at all. ANY smoking within ANY walls would be illegal. THIS is my arguement. Again, you are aiding and abbetting those who wish the total elimination of tobacco from society, even though you say you oppose that idea.
There is no middle ground here for you or me, as there is no middle ground for smokers. A full tilt crusade is in progress against tobacco and smokers, whether they smoke in front of you, a child, or in the middle of a field alone.
You either are allied with them in preserving their rights, or you are not. It is that simple. It has become a black and white issue now, much like American politics. Are ye Democrate, or are ye Republikan? Those are the real choices, and whichever side you ally yourself with is the side that gains from your support.
As a non smoker also, I ally myself with the likes of jiperly, et. al., because we see where this is heading. I only have 2 choices. | |
|
| Smoke-free crusaders may now be at your door
Posted: 12/13/2007 8:07:52 AM | This is where the crux of my arguement evolves...it has nothing to do with conspiricies, or the like, but has everything to do with the crusade and the crusaders' blind ambition coupled with apathetic ignorance. The devil is in these very details; always was, and always has been. This is a very pure example of what I am arguing:
I still think you're reaching here... This has nothing to do with a crusade anymore than not allowing any other kind of child abuse is a crusade... That may not be the intention of the government for making this law, but if it keeps folks from poisoning kids in their homes, then I'm for it.
They extrapolate this into 2nd hand smoke throughout the entire building, of which it is only a scent, and NOT 2nd hand smoke, therefore the proposed ban.
Give up while you're behind... If you can smell the second hand smoke, you are breathing in second hand smoke... To me this is more of an issue for those without the power to leave the room.
The 2nd hand smoke you see a child breathing in a closed room with a smoker is the SAME what a crusader sees when they smell that faint smell in a block of flats.
So what? It's also the same smoke a child has to inhale.
Since it is now and forever etched into their minds that they themselves are breathing 2nd hand smoke, they seek to ban any and all sources of tobacco smoke.
Some yes... But the majority of people just want kids protected... More smoke and mirrors.
The confined space would not even matter at all. ANY smoking within ANY walls would be illegal. THIS is my arguement. Again, you are aiding and abbetting those who wish the total elimination of tobacco from society, even though you say you oppose that idea
No... There is not just black and white here for Christ sake... I think it would be great to eliminate it completely, but that isn't up to the government alone... It's up to us... They can't stop you from smoking in your home... What they can do is follow up on complaints that you are abusive with it... It doesn't matter if this law goes thru, they will never be able to enforce it without personal complaints... Big Brother won't be in your home.
There is no middle ground here for you or me, as there is no middle ground for smokers. A full tilt crusade is in progress against tobacco and smokers, whether they smoke in front of you, a child, or in the middle of a field alone.
There is always middle ground... You just aren't seeing it.
You either are allied with them in preserving their rights, or you are not. It is that simple. It has become a black and white issue now, much like American politics. Are ye Democrate, or are ye Republikan? Those are the real choices, and whichever side you ally yourself with is the side that gains from your support.
I can't help it if some extremists share some of my views... I won't let them go just because you are threatened by' em... I don't pick sides, you see... I unite them.
As a non smoker also, I ally myself with the likes of jiperly, et. al., because we see where this is heading. I only have 2 choices.
What are those? Let people do what ever they please just because they are in their own home, regardless of the harm or let Big Brother come swooping in? These are not our only options.
You only see in black and white?
Some of us have evolved past that. | |
|
| Smoke-free crusaders may now be at your door
Posted: 12/13/2007 8:45:11 AM | if any non-smoking doo gooder knocked at my front door and told me i couldnt smoke in my own home i wouldnt be too happy
how dare anyone tell me or anyone else what they can or cant do in their own home.
people are just taking things to the extreme just to become annoying tw##s | |
|
| Smoke-free crusaders may now be at your door
Posted: 12/13/2007 10:11:37 AM |
Give up while you're behind... If you can smell the second hand smoke, you are breathing in second hand smoke... To me this is more of an issue for those without the power to leave the room.
Please refer back to page 7, post #164 again, for the definition of 2nd hand smoke.
I also am tired of repeating my self, but I am repeating fact, not emoting. This is what fuels the crusade, and it is wrong.
And again and again, crusaders smell smoke. It is NOT 2nd hand smoke. They see smoke. It is NOT 2nd hand smoke. They know someone is smoking. It is NOT 2nd hand smoke. This is why it is now a black and white issue. You cant see it because you have become part of the crusade.
Here is where it stands today:
~You and I agree that children shouldnt be exposed to REAL 2nd hand smoke in a confined space(not smoke and mirrors 2nd hand smoke).
~You and I wish to come up with some compromising solution in which this is avoided.
~The crusaders want none of that and want to ban smoking within ALL walls that exist. That is what this thread is about. Remember? Just re-read the 1st post AGAIN.
Now what? The crusaders' are not giving any more than 2 choices - over reaching total bans, or resistance to these bans. Again, there is no middle ground.
So when you say:
They can't stop you from smoking in your home...
..you dont understand the intent of the news story that this thread sprang from, and are unwittingly abbetting this scenario, with this mindset:
I think it would be great to eliminate it completely, but that isn't up to the government alone... It's up to us...
So yes, their intent is to stop smokers from smoking in their own homes. You really do not disagree with this scenario. You have chosen a side, whether you believe it or not.
The only way you are going to see your dream come to fruition is the implementation of the crusade's dream. They will have none of our compromise. It has happened time and time again. There was never compromise before. I see the track record. I know how the crusade works. | |
|
| Smoke-free crusaders may now be at your door
Posted: 12/13/2007 11:39:22 AM |
You do not understand... There are only so many ways I can spell this out to you... By bringing up other issues you are only clouding this one...
The subject as presented is that people will not be able to smoke in rented multi-unit housing. That means people who own these apartments will not be able to rent to smokers. How do the apartment owners know if someone smokes? Will the government require that owners do blood tests before they rent? Will there be some sort of fines or punishment to apartment owners who do rent to smokers? Will the government provide some sort of subsidy to apartment owners for loss of revenue from not being able to rent to smokers.
Not all renters have children. There is no valid reason that a person who smokes should be denied the opportunity to smoke in their own apartment because someone two floors down has children. What will be the punishment for smoking in a rental unit? Will the person renting or leasing be punished if a visitor or workperson smokes in their apartment? If the law is passed, how long will a renter have to find another place to live? Will the law grandfather tenants who already smoke? If so, what possible good can the law do if the people who are renting realize they won't have a chance in Hades of finding another place, and occupy the apartment they have for the next 20 yrs.? Does this smoke-free environment extend to all forms of smoke, or only tobacco?
If a property owner chooses not to allow smoking, that is their right. But, if a government enforces a smoking ban, that government is infringing, not just on the rights of the smokers in their homes, but also the rights of property owners. | |
|
| Smoke-free crusaders may now be at your door
Posted: 12/13/2007 11:34:08 PM | SassyAquarius,
secondhand smoke kills zero, i have never heard of anyone die from secondsmoke or from smoking marijuana (I don't smoke weed anymore) but it does have bad effects on people who abuse marijuana, just like anything not in moderation. But we should then ban cars because they all emmit fossil fuels and children can smell them coming out of the exhast. We should ban 18-wheelers because they cause a lot of wrecks on interstate highways. We should a hyporite like John Corzyne of New Jersey who's is suppost to enforce the laws of his state and drove drunk with NO SEAT BELT.
I do not condone spousal or child abuse but people smoked in cars with their own children for years in fact my mom is perefectly healthy my grandfather when he was alive smoked cigars in the car with my mom and neices taking long trips only one of them ever smoked, yes she had emyphsema and had oxygen, but she took the oxygen out and was able to breath on her own.
You are talking about statistics here you have a better chance being killed by the boogeyman then from second hand smoke. Wait a minute no such thing as a boogeyman, you say.
Cedar Fever coming up soon so many people are allergic to that should have cut down the Cedar trees?
You can not shove morality down peoples throats it is up to the individual to make their own decisions either good or bad, If you have children simply explain to them I am the parent you are the child.
The government can't run the Department of Child Protective Services correctly I seen unruly single parents leaving children unattended at a popeyes or the Blockbusters because they are too busy thinking of themselves and having kids of their own at 13. Let alone give smokers a ticket for smoking in the car around their own kids you know who will be the first they pull over? An African-American or Hispanic. But if a child has been abused any person of the community should call the proper authorites because child abuse is no excuse although I believe in spanking when appropiate (like stealing or extreme profanity after other methods like LOP and time outs) they should be no excuse for hitting.
Another note, Is it OK to give your child Ritalin, or Prozac because the school says your child is disruptive? Some people go that route and some don't.
I also have to add this is also Big-Pharma's doing to sell what? Prescription Drugs BINGO! | |
|
| Smoke-free crusaders may now be at your door
Posted: 12/13/2007 11:53:25 PM | Smoke-free crusaders may now be at your door
Posted: 12/7/2007 2:00:26 PM by MX220
Stoney, here are some of your metaphorical quotes you've made in response to some of us who've been debating with you.
_______
**Values? What value is there in poisoning children?
**You care so much about your liberties that you're willing to sacrifice anothers health for them
**Do the children consent to being abused?
**So leaving arsenic in the fridge is fine and dandy I guess... How about a loaded gun? (where that one came from I don't know)
**Parents do not have the right to abuse their children
**Or are children not considered people to you?
**So that makes it ok then I guess?
_______
None of us said there was value in poisoning a child.
None of us said we consent to child abuse.
None of us said leaving arenic in the frige is ok.
None of us said having a loaded gun in the same home as children is ok.
None of us said parents have the right to abuse their children.
None of us said children are not considered people.
None of us said it was ok to smoke in a home where there are children (that's now the 3rd time I've stated that)
Now when I said you think it's ok for children to be raised by an alcoholic parent it was metaphor. A figure of speech. Not meant to be taken seriously. Either you can't take what you dish out or you really do think that we want to poison children, abuse them, leave arenic and a loaded gun in the house, or that we don't think children are people.
RIGHT ON!
I did not say that hmm lets send stonestounge the Limbaugh Letter LOL
I do find Rush a little out of touch but I have watched and listened to him as well.
I also watch Charlie Rose, CNN, Tavis Smiley every now and then, and Fox news.
We already have to much beaucracy and it needs to change.
No child left behind act is an example of failure. Remember when Rod Paige was appointed department of education chair.
Plus I am a former Sharpstown resident so I know what I am talking about. I think it was 20/20 who launch a doctored up test score scandal going on at Sharpstown High School an example of failure legislation, I could go on about Iraq but my blood pressure is high enough already.
Sure it may pass but how is going to be enforced?
As them accusing smokers of poisoning kids, What about non-organic foods should they be banned?
What about KFC?, or Taco Bell?
All you doing is breathing the air, some people have allergies but their is medicine and accupunture for that.
For the people who make their own decisions by themselves I applaud them.
For the educators that are teaching our children they deserve a raise, better technology in the classroom, and recent textbooks not those that are alomst 7 years old.
American needs to be a democracy with simple reforms and not wasted on stupid issues.
I will tell you the Mafia loves prohibition that is how Al Capone got his start. | |
|
| Smoke-free crusaders may now be at your door
Posted: 12/14/2007 12:06:09 AM | Smoke-free crusaders may now be at your door
Posted: 12/8/2007 7:09:04 PM SteelCity1981
^^^ 100% Dead on. If softdrinks can take rust off a metal bumper, then what the hell do you think it is doing to your body, but i'm yet to hear any softdrink companies getting pressured by any anti-group to find alternitives to what they are putting in their softdrinks.
They have in the public schools because kids are getting obese.
However they base this on bias in Texas we have a lot of Hispanic Mexican-Americans and I would say a lot are obese so it would be polictally wrong to eliminate the taco, chulpa, and enchaladas from the menu so they go after the soft drinks. Plus a lack of PE but my question is I guess a child could bring sodas from home on to the property? The said thing is less school funding is provided because of lack of revenue from the soda companies.
After the trans-fat war they will probally attact that next. | |
|
| Smoke-free crusaders may now be at your door
Posted: 12/14/2007 12:21:38 AM | Ummm....I put no in the drugs box because I never know how people view marijuana. I don't see it as a drug any more than beer. Again...In moderation.
stonestouge
Hypocrite Marijuana is usally smoked I view your profile Dave would you smoke marijuana in front of your children?
I heard you pot mak you stupid an advertisement after seeing my heavily addicted brother act I was smart to quit.
I would admit if were in very extereme pain and no pills would work I would smoke marijuana
I believe are drug laws need to be re-examend to a resonable extent.
But I have a question, Dave
So you have your own business how would you like the Canadian government to force you to give away your items to their goverment like lighting and for the poor because of pick an excuse?
You would not like that would you? | |
|
| Smoke-free crusaders may now be at your door
Posted: 12/14/2007 6:29:25 AM | if any non-smoking doo gooder knocked at my front door and told me i couldnt smoke in my own home i wouldnt be too happy
how dare anyone tell me or anyone else what they can or cant do in their own home.
people are just taking things to the extreme just to become annoying tw##s
Really... I couldn't care less what you do in your own home as long as you aren't hurting anyone.
And again and again, crusaders smell smoke. It is NOT 2nd hand smoke. They see smoke. It is NOT 2nd hand smoke. They know someone is smoking. It is NOT 2nd hand smoke. This is why it is now a black and white issue. You cant see it because you have become part of the crusade.
Hey, I don't like crusaders any more than you do... All I am thinking of is the kids suffering... I am not on any crusade nor do I side with them when it comes to obliterating any of your rightful rights... It is not black and white... There have been alot of laws passed and there are still no spies in your livingroom... Do you really think it would come to that here?
The subject as presented is that people will not be able to smoke in rented multi-unit housing. That means people who own these apartments will not be able to rent to smokers. How do the apartment owners know if someone smokes?
Ummm, the smell maybe? You can hide it I'm sure but you'd have to be near a window... It is well within the rights of apartment building owners to say you can't smoke... If only for insurance purposes.
They will never say you can't do it in your home, but if you are known to be doing it in a confined area with a child present, it should be considered abuse (imo)just as if you were smoking a joint... Again, just ask the kids what they think.
If a property owner chooses not to allow smoking, that is their right. But, if a government enforces a smoking ban, that government is infringing, not just on the rights of the smokers in their homes, but also the rights of property owners.
It should be up to the property owner I agree... But again, if you are subjecting your kids to it, I think it's unethical.
So yes, their intent is to stop smokers from smoking in their own homes. You really do not disagree with this scenario. You have chosen a side, whether you believe it or not.
I choose the side where no one smokes in front of their young kids... You have to be a crusader to hope people respect their children? You see, this is all I care about with the smoking issue... It takes presidence over "picking sides"
The only way you are going to see your dream come to fruition is the implementation of the crusade's dream. They will have none of our compromise. It has happened time and time again. There was never compromise before. I see the track record. I know how the crusade works.
No... I think you are wrong... This dream will(imo) come to fruition once enough people realise what compassion is all about... Then almost all would find it hurtful to smoke in the same room as a child.
Not all renters have children. There is no valid reason that a person who smokes should be denied the opportunity to smoke in their own apartment because someone two floors down has children. What will be the punishment for smoking in a rental unit? Will the person renting or leasing be punished if a visitor or workperson smokes in their apartment?
They would likely be told to vacate... Warned maybe a few times if the excuse is friends, but if you know you're renting a smoke free apartment, you know the risks.
Hypocrite Marijuana is usally smoked I view your profile Dave would you smoke marijuana in front of your children?
Well if you viewed my profile, you would see I have no children, but no of course not... Anyone that smokes anything in a confined space with a little kid is an a$$hole in my books... I don't even think you guys know what the word hypocrite means... I don't act differently than I believe...(usually anyhow, but not in this thread for sure).
I heard you pot mak you stupid an advertisement after seeing my heavily addicted brother act I was smart to quit.
Just in the nick of time I see!
So you have your own business how would you like the Canadian government to force you to give away your items to their goverment like lighting and for the poor because of pick an excuse?
If I had my own business, I would be giving to the underpriveledged regularly. | |
|
| Smoke-free crusaders may now be at your door
Posted: 12/14/2007 6:55:31 AM | >>>If I had my own business, I would be giving to the underpriveledged regularly.
You were not asked that- you were asked if you would like to be forced. | |
|
| Smoke-free crusaders may now be at your door
Posted: 12/14/2007 2:18:28 PM | As much as I am a non smoking crusader , this one i disagree with ,
both my parents smoked and its why I don't , so i think parents setting a bad example for kids is a good idea , we see it all around us , don't we? Smoking , Drinking , Having a guy of the week as a dad , doing crack ? If we go this route , let's take the children of all single parents , and put them in orphanages .... | |
|
| Smoke-free crusaders may now be at your door
Posted: 12/14/2007 3:56:37 PM | | BRB I think I hear the TPPTS at my door now, yes they were here last week also, I wasn't feeling well as you all know. Ahh you ask what does TPPTS stand for, thats Toilet Paper Police Tactical Squad. Don't worry if your city doesnt have one yet, they are coing to all global cities soon. | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
