Washington State bans smoking... with a twist

[tylerdurden]

[ QUOTE ]
So, when's the Anarcho-Cap Clown Parade gonna chime in on this one?

[/ QUOTE ]

Since the state has normative control over "public" property, I don't see anything overly objectionable about them banning smoking in those places (besides the normal "clown" objections to the state's illegitimate control of such property).

Of course, banning smoking on private property is an obvious violation of property rights.

[ripdog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I talked to my wife about it and commented that it would basically make downtown Seattle a No Smoking Zone. As a former smoker I can understand your frustration, but as a non-smoker I have way more empathy for those who choose not to smoke and are exposed to it anyway. I don't dislike smokers, I dislike smoke.

[/ QUOTE ]

As a never-smoker, probably-never-will-smoker, and someone who doesn't care for cigarettes, I think this is completely ridiculous. A sensible restaurant will have a non-smoking section if they don't want to alienate customers, and that's perfectly fine. Anyone bothered by someone passing by them on the streets with a cigarette needs to grow up. It's just one more freedom to take away from us.

[/ QUOTE ]

It ain't the big bad government that's taking this freedom away, it's the people baby! I think it passed by almost a 7 to 3 margin. As far as needing to grow up, I think it's the selfish cry-baby smokers who ought to do that.

[ripdog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I talked to my wife about it and commented that it would basically make downtown Seattle a No Smoking Zone. As a former smoker I can understand your frustration, but as a non-smoker I have way more empathy for those who choose not to smoke and are exposed to it anyway. I don't dislike smokers, I dislike smoke.

[/ QUOTE ]

As a never-smoker, probably-never-will-smoker, and someone who doesn't care for cigarettes, I think this is completely ridiculous. A sensible restaurant will have a non-smoking section if they don't want to alienate customers, and that's perfectly fine. Anyone bothered by someone passing by them on the streets with a cigarette needs to grow up. It's just one more freedom to take away from us.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm semi-torn on the issue. I don't think the gov't should have the right to tell private businesses whether they can allow smoking in their establishment. But then there's in public. Now, the non-smoker is being forced to inhale the smoke, which has been proven to be dangerous. On the other hand, there could be people who want to ban cars because the exhaust annoys them. Where's the line? I don't know.

[/ QUOTE ]

It was an initiative to the people--I-912. The voters of the great State of Washington voted overwhelmingly to tell smokers everywhere "[censored] You!!"

[$DEADSEXE$]

Smoking signals only two things in a person
Stupidity or ignorance.

[tylerdurden]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As a never-smoker, probably-never-will-smoker, and someone who doesn't care for cigarettes, I think this is completely ridiculous. A sensible restaurant will have a non-smoking section if they don't want to alienate customers, and that's perfectly fine. Anyone bothered by someone passing by them on the streets with a cigarette needs to grow up. It's just one more freedom to take away from us.

[/ QUOTE ]

It ain't the big bad government that's taking this freedom away, it's the people baby!

[/ QUOTE ]

Note that the guy you're replying to never mentioned "the government".

What difference does it make? Is it better to have your freedom taken away by "the people, baby" than "the big bad government"? The end result is the same - a violation of property rights.

[Khern]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"good law, second hand smoke is a bitch. Ban it in public I say."

sounds good, as long as we can ban the smells of fast food and frying bacon in public, too- it's offensive to vegans. Oh yeah... car exaust... loud music... they gotta go: you could get asthma and lose your hearing!

...and don't even get me started on skateboards. [/sarcasam, but you knew that...]

[/ QUOTE ]
Gather majority support for any of those initiatives, and I'm sure you'd have a better case. Good for Washington, it makes me glad I live there when I'm not in school. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Gotta love growing democracies

[ QUOTE ]
Allow me two quotations on the subject:




James Madison, Federalist Paper 10:

"Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths."




U.S. Army Training Manual TM2000-05, 1928

Democracy, n. "A government of the masses. Authority derived through mass meeting or any form of "direct" expression. Results in mobocracy. Attitude toward property is communistic - negating property rights. Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, whether it be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences. Results in demagogism, license, agitation, discontent, anarchy."


[/ QUOTE ]

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I talked to my wife about it and commented that it would basically make downtown Seattle a No Smoking Zone. As a former smoker I can understand your frustration, but as a non-smoker I have way more empathy for those who choose not to smoke and are exposed to it anyway. I don't dislike smokers, I dislike smoke.

[/ QUOTE ]

As a never-smoker, probably-never-will-smoker, and someone who doesn't care for cigarettes, I think this is completely ridiculous. A sensible restaurant will have a non-smoking section if they don't want to alienate customers, and that's perfectly fine. Anyone bothered by someone passing by them on the streets with a cigarette needs to grow up. It's just one more freedom to take away from us.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm semi-torn on the issue. I don't think the gov't should have the right to tell private businesses whether they can allow smoking in their establishment. But then there's in public. Now, the non-smoker is being forced to inhale the smoke, which has been proven to be dangerous. On the other hand, there could be people who want to ban cars because the exhaust annoys them. Where's the line? I don't know.

[/ QUOTE ]

It was an initiative to the people--I-912. The voters of the great State of Washington voted overwhelmingly to tell smokers everywhere "[censored] You!!"

[/ QUOTE ]
We (the voters) are the government. Enforcement is still going to be done by the government. While I feel the smokers have the right to smoke in private places that allow it (and their homes), I don't think they have the right to force me to breathe harmful chemicals for simply walking down the street. If the inititave only banned it on the street, I'd be fine with it.

[beset7]

Is there no casino exception? I haven't been playing b&m lately. In general I disaprove of smoking bans but in a selfish way I will enjoy not stinking super-bad.

[DCopper04]

[ QUOTE ]
I-901 had enormous support from the American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, American Lung Association and more than 400 people, all contributing more than $1.3 million total. There was only token opposition.

[/ QUOTE ]

hilarious use of a homonym right there

[ripdog]

[ QUOTE ]
Is there no casino exception? I haven't been playing b&m lately. In general I disaprove of smoking bans but in a selfish way I will enjoy not stinking super-bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

Casino's on Indian Reservations are not affected, all others are.