KC residents - How are you voting on the smoking ban in April? - Page 15

**Bowser** · 01-27-2008, 02:56 PM

Let's get a definitive look on how the Planet feels about this. Poll on the way.

Simplex3 · 01-28-2008, 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adept Havelock

That's part of the problem of allowing Government to dictate to private property. It's a slippery slope, and morons like Dane are all to eager to push us right on down it.

All I'm pointing out is that you've been Ok with a hundred things like this in your lifetime, you've just picked this one to be offended over.

Simplex3 · 01-28-2008, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Flopnuts

How about gay people. They are the minority, should we be allowed to not hire them based on their sexual orientation?

If they were running around in public rubbing their d**ks on people I'd have a problem with it.

**Mr. Flopnuts** · 01-28-2008, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by penchief

What are gays doing to harm your long term health?

Well if I spread my butt cheeks open and let them have their way with it, and they have aids, I could die. I don't though. You have the same choice with smoking establishments. Don't go there.

Frazod · 01-28-2008, 02:49 PM

Too busy to dick around with this thread at the moment. Will reconvene later this evening.

I enjoy arguing against mechanical implants with the Borg.

Can't wait.

**bogey** · 01-28-2008, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Thanks, Doc!

This argument has to do with discomfort and inconvenience, not health. I understand that. I wouldn't/didn't smoke inside because it's annoying to non-smokers. I'm okay with that. I'm not okay that I have to find an outside dedicated spot on a map in Disneyland to smoke a cigarette. IMO, that's just silly.

**Mr. Flopnuts** · 01-28-2008, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bogey

This argument has to do with discomfort and inconvenience, not health. I understand that. I wouldn't/didn't smoke inside because it's annoying to non-smokers. I'm okay with that. I'm not okay that I have to find an outside dedicated spot on a map in Disneyland to smoke a cigarette. IMO, that's just silly.

If you don't like Walt's rules, don't go to Disneyland. It works on both sides of the fence.

**DaneMcCloud** · 01-28-2008, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bogey

This argument has to do with discomfort and inconvenience, not health. I understand that. I wouldn't/didn't smoke inside because it's annoying to non-smokers. I'm okay with that. I'm not okay that I have to find an outside dedicated spot on a map in Disneyland to smoke a cigarette. IMO, that's just silly.

Well, like, that's just your opinion, Man.

Ask your doctor the next time you have a physical if he believes that second-hand smoke is harmful.

Do it.

Adept Havelock · 01-28-2008, 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

No, they're not "Privately Owned Areas".

So tell me, Dane, are they "Publicly owned areas/properties?" No. They are not. They are owned by PRIVATE companies or individuals. That's what makes them Private areas, open to the public.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

It's real estate that is ZONED for businesses. Zoning laws are different for businesses than they are for residences and in most cases, I highly doubt that business owner actually OWNS the building where his bar or restaurant operates.

As for Zoning laws, WTF does that have to do with anything? I've never seen a zoning law that made private property the property of the government. You're really flailing around like the T-1000 in a foundry, aren't you.

If the business owner owns the property, then they should be allowed to decide for themselves. If a landlord owns the property, they should get to decide. Simple.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Last time I checked, grocery stores, drug stores, clothing stores, ice cream shops and shopping malls don't allow smoking on their premises.

Why should bars and restaurants be excluded from the same laws that exist for other business owners in the same business zone?

See my response to this same question in my previous posts. I'm not rehashing it because you can't read the first time.

Public property is owned by the government. Private property is not.

Sorry that's too difficult a concept for a Californian to get.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simplex3

All I'm pointing out is that you've been Ok with a hundred things like this in your lifetime, you've just picked this one to be offended over.

Actually, I've always had issues with the government dictating how owners can or can't use their property.

**Bearcat** · 01-28-2008, 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Flopnuts

How about gay people. They are the minority, should we be allowed to not hire them based on their sexual orientation?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Flopnuts

...You have the choice...

I'm choosing to believe that you're trying to make a mockery of this thread, because anyone arguing a smoking ban with drunk drivers and homosexuality can't be serious.

Detecting sarcasm around here gets harder and harder... either we are all getting better at sarcasm or we're just getting dumber.

bkkcoh · 01-28-2008, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Flopnuts

How about gay people. They are the minority, should we be allowed to not hire them based on their sexual orientation?

But if one believes that the healthcare costs are considerably higher for them, just like a lot of people think smoking healthcare costs are as high, why not?

Isn't that one of the arguements about second-hand smoke?

**Mr. Flopnuts** · 01-28-2008, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bearcat

I'm choosing to believe that you're trying to make a mockery of this thread, because anyone arguing a smoking ban with drunk drivers and homosexuality can't be serious.

Detecting sarcasm around here gets harder and harder... either we are all getting better at sarcasm or we're just getting dumber.

I use very EXTREME examples. Things that sound ridiculous to the average person as smoking bans do to me. Are they serious questions? Not at all, rather they are designed to try and provoke some thought over something I find equally ridiculous.

penchief · 01-28-2008, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simplex3

Don't install a handicapped accessible toilet and/or entrance and see how far that argument gets you.

If you are going to provide services to the public for reasons of profitability you have to absorb the cost of not discriminating against certain segments of the public just because it is inconvenient for you. And certainly, you should not be able to do harm to others in pursuit of profit, IMO.

I don't think businesses are disicrimating against smokers if they are not prohibiting people from exercising their right to smoke. Asking smokers to respect the rights and long term health of non-smokers by going outside is not a violation of anyone's rights, as far as I can tell.

Chiefnj2 · 01-28-2008, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by penchief

What are gays doing to harm your long term health?

Where is it okay for the government to intrude into your life for the benefit of your long term health?

Outlaw french fries? Outlaw red meat? Make it illegal to serve someone more than one dessert per meal because obesity is a health crisis in the US?

Adept Havelock · 01-28-2008, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by penchief

Asking smokers to respect the rights and long term health of non-smokers by going outside is not a violation of anyone's rights, as far as I can tell.

There's a difference between "asking" and "ordering".

IMO, you're stomping on the property rights of the establishments owners when you dictate to them they must order smokers to go outside, even if the owners would prefer it otherwise.

Eleazar · 01-28-2008, 03:03 PM

I wonder how long before government tells fast food restaurants that they can't serve fatty foods, because it's a public health hazard.

View Poll Results: Smioking Ban in KC - Ye or No?
I will vote YES on the smoking ban	47	59.49%
I will vote NO on the smoking ban	32	40.51%
Voters: 79. You may not vote on this poll

01-27-2008, 02:56 PM
Bowser sorta mod-ish Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: KC North Casino cash: $-158384	KC residents - How are you voting on the smoking ban in April? Let's get a definitive look on how the Planet feels about this. Poll on the way.
Posts: 106,767

01-28-2008, 02:49 PM	#214
Frazod Did you hear what I said? Join Date: Aug 2000 Casino cash: $-736615	Too busy to dick around with this thread at the moment. Will reconvene later this evening. I enjoy arguing against mechanical implants with the Borg. Can't wait.
Posts: 121,759

01-28-2008, 03:03 PM	#225
Eleazar Beyond the Rapids Join Date: May 2003 Location: Langley, VA Casino cash: $-370000	I wonder how long before government tells fast food restaurants that they can't serve fatty foods, because it's a public health hazard.
Posts: 80,659