Massachusetts town weighs nation's 1st tobacco ban

[Rattlehead 69]

How about people that engage in risky behaviors. Motorcycle riders, sky divers, base jumpers. How about people that don't exercise. How about people that are thin but have high cholesterol . Let's tax the stew out of them also.

Just wait... it's coming.

[Pooky 3,348]

You're not sorry for feeling the way you feel, but yet you use the word in a feigned attempt to appear that way. As for your desire force people to do the things you disapprove where you can't see them, or hear them, feel them, or touch them, or even hear about them doing it, I suggest you do like the rest of the people on earth do. They change the channel, they move, they go to another location and live and let live. The anti-smoking ideology is the tip of the iceberg to impose a behavioral standard upon everyone.

No, I'm not sorry for the way I feel. I never said I was.

I'm sorry that you feel a smoker's privilege to pollute their lungs supersedes my right not to inhale their cigarette smoke. Perhaps my health doesn't mean much to them, but it means a whole lot to me.

Why should I move, just because a smoker wishes to poison themselves where I happen to be? Why don't they show some consideration for other people and be the one to move? From your words, that's exactly what you expect me to do. Why should it be me?

[LibCampFireClub 635]

No, I'm not sorry for the way I feel. I never said I was.

I'm sorry that you feel a smoker's privilege to pollute their lungs supersedes my right not to inhale their cigarette smoke. Perhaps my health doesn't mean much to them, but it means a whole lot to me.

Why should I move, just because a smoker wishes to poison themselves where I happen to be? Why don't they show some consideration for other people and be the one to move? From your words, that's exactly what you expect me to do. Why should it be me?

Oh come on, it's pathetic you find it necessary to change my words. To remind you, here is your statement, and my reply:

Sorry, but people who smoke need to to do so somewhere far away from me. It's your choice, but leave me out of your consequences. No second hand smoke, no contributing to your healthcare.

You're not sorry for feeling the way you feel, but yet you use the word in a feigned attempt to appear that way. As for your desire force people to do the things you disapprove where you can't see them, or hear them, feel them, or touch them, or even hear about them doing it, I suggest you do like the rest of the people on earth do. They change the channel, they move, they go to another location and live and let live. The anti-smoking ideology is the tip of the iceberg to impose a behavioral standard upon everyone.

There is no need to manipulate it. My reply is fully clear. If you don't want cigarette smoke, move on down the road to where there is none. If you don't like your neighbors, move. If you don't like the food, eat something different.

[Pooky 3,348]

How about people that engage in risky behaviors. Motorcycle riders, sky divers, base jumpers. How about people that don't exercise. How about people that are thin but have high cholesterol . Let's tax the stew out of them also.

Motorcycle riders carry insurance, sky divers and base jumpers have to try really hard to hurt other people, laziness and high cholesterol aren't infectious. Smoking on the other hand, has a noticeable effect on those nearby. The smell is obnoxious and the smoke can make it difficult to breathe. Long term, second hand smoke can be hazardous to health.

Smoking affects people other than the smoker, with little avenue for recourse. That's the big difference.

[Pooky 3,348]

Oh come on, it's pathetic you find it necessary to change my words. To remind you, here is your statement, and my reply:

There is no need to manipulate it. My reply is fully clear. If you don't want cigarette smoke, move on down the road to where there is none. If you don't like your neighbors, move. If you don't like the food, eat something different.

I never touched your words, but it's clear that you failed to understand mine.

My behaviour doesn't affect the health of a smoker, but theirs, when they light up, affects mine. Why should I be the one to move?

[LibCampFireClub 635]

I never touched your words, but it's clear that you failed to understand mine.

My behaviour doesn't affect the health of a smoker, but theirs, when they light up, affects mine. Why should I be the one to move?

We disagree. You're a hypocrite. You have an expectation that it's the world's job to make you comfortable. Music too loud? Turn it down for you! Don't like the rain? The help should fetch an umbrella for ya. Don't like guns? Abolish them. Don't like rednecks? Make them move somewhere else.

Dude, that ain't gonna happen on this earth. Too many people out there would just love to annoy you even more when you feel uncomfortable.

[eieio 1,594]

Who cares as long as someone else pays? That is the quite possibly what the motley crew refers to as the conservative value of personal responsibility. It is your personal responsibility to pick up the tab for my personal irresponsibility. Murkha!

I believe the health care costs are highly exaggerated. People get sick and die all the time. They all have medical and health care costs when they do. If smoking was banned would less people die?

The longer people live the more they cost taxpayers. Smokers that die early are saving taxpayers money in the long run.

[Pooky 3,348]

We disagree. You're a hypocrite. You have an expectation that it's the world's job to make you comfortable. Music too loud? Turn it down for you! Don't like the rain? The help should fetch an umbrella for ya. Don't like guns? Abolish them. Don't like rednecks? Make them move somewhere else.

Dude, that ain't gonna happen on this earth. Too many people out there would just love to annoy you even more when you feel uncomfortable.

A hypocrite? Hardly.

None of the examples you cited, with the exception of the guns, are hazards to my health caused by another person. I don't need the world to make me comfortable. On the other hand, I don't need smokers to make me uncomfortable.

As for the exception, you're not likely to shoot me during the course of a conversation (unless I really, really annoy you). Yet by smoking, there's a direct impact on my health every time a smoker lights up in my vicinity.

[LibCampFireClub 635]

A hypocrite? Hardly.

None of the examples you cited, with the exception of the guns, are hazards to my health caused by another person. I don't need the world to make me comfortable. On the other hand, I don't need smokers to make me uncomfortable.

As for the exception, you're not likely to shoot me during the course of a conversation (unless I really, really annoy you). Yet by smoking, there's a direct impact on my health every time a smoker lights up in my vicinity.

Here's the deal. You support an ideology that I reject. I reject an American government to choose what's best for me or my family. I fully support the rights of the individual as written in the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. Government is too big. We don't need more nannies to protect people from the boogeyman. As for smoking, I do not. If I am eating or drinking and don't like it, I either go somewhere else, or move away. The same applies to every single possible scenario you can think of.

This is a government nanny at work:

Recognize this guy? Another nanny:

Edited November 11, 2014 by ExExpat

[spookyturtle 9,465]

Here's the deal. You support an ideology that I reject. I reject an American government to choose what's best for me or my family. I fully support the rights of the individual as written in the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. Government is too big. We don't need more nannies to protect people from the boogeyman. As for smoking, I do not. If I am eating or drinking and don't like it, I either go somewhere else, or move away. The same applies to every single possible scenario you can think of.

This is a government nanny at work:

Recognize this guy? Another nanny:

You shouldn't let people walk all over you.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

No, I'm not sorry for the way I feel. I never said I was.

I'm sorry that you feel a smoker's privilege to pollute their lungs supersedes my right not to inhale their cigarette smoke. Perhaps my health doesn't mean much to them, but it means a whole lot to me.

Why should I move, just because a smoker wishes to poison themselves where I happen to be? Why don't they show some consideration for other people and be the one to move? From your words, that's exactly what you expect me to do. Why should it be me?

I do not think a smokers rights over rides your at all.

I think this is America and if someone wants to open a business and cater to people that enjoy doing something that is perfectly legal, it is none of the Govts business. we are not talking about the smokers rights, we are talking about the business owners rights