[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
If you don’t love it – cigarette smoke in bars that is – you can leave it, motherfuckers.
Bar owners have no say in how their property is used just so a few busy-body, do-gooders can feel better while they poison their bodies with alcohol.
Ironic?
People who whine about cigarette smoke should stay home and quit fucking up everyone else’s freedom to fuck up their own bodies. No one forces someone to go to a bar and drink.
What a bunch of whiny, no minded losers you liberals are.[/quote]
So smoking should be allowed in all public places? And airplanes?
[quote]stokedporcupine8 wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
stokedporcupine8 wrote:
Umm… You think Marines are over in Iraq fighting so you don’t have to pay your taxes? What?
No, he’s saying that we are being betrayed here at home by a bunch of power hungry jackals, who rely on the naivete of the honest and the just.
Would you fight and die to protect Barney Frank? Chris Dodd? Nancy Pelosi? They’re all criminals that, in a decent country, would be behind bars.
I understand what the point was suppose to be. My point was the cartoon really fails to make this point, since it lists silly examples of “rights” that are being taken away. [/quote]
Owning and using property how the owner sees fit isn’t a right? You didn’t get that point from the cartoon?
You exactly don’t get the point if you think how people want to use their rights is “silly”.
Personal liberty can be very silly sometimes, but who are you to judge that?!
I understand what the point was suppose to be. My point was the cartoon really fails to make this point, since it lists silly examples of “rights” that are being taken away. [/quote]
Silly rights?
Sister busted for not wearing a seat belt: none of the government’s business.
Brother busted for smoking a joint: none of the government’s business.
Mother busted for carrying a gun: infringement of her right to keep and bear arms.
Family business destroyed by imminent domain: violation of equal protection, and the rights of life, liberty and pursuit of property.
Family home seized for back taxes: violation of right to be protected against illegal search and seizure, not to mention taxation without representation. Unless, of course, one really, really feels that he is represented in government commensurate to the amount he is taxed.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
If you don’t love it – cigarette smoke in bars that is – you can leave it, motherfuckers.
Bar owners have no say in how their property is used just so a few busy-body, do-gooders can feel better while they poison their bodies with alcohol.
Ironic?
People who whine about cigarette smoke should stay home and quit fucking up everyone else’s freedom to fuck up their own bodies. No one forces someone to go to a bar and drink.
What a bunch of whiny, no minded losers you liberals are.
So smoking should be allowed in all public places? And airplanes?[/quote]
There are no such things as “public places”, moron. If I own a piece of property it is private – no ifs, ands, or buts.
“If you don’t like it leave” or find an other service provider that makes you happier.
You do not have rights to someone else’s property.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
If you don’t love it – cigarette smoke in bars that is – you can leave it, motherfuckers.
Bar owners have no say in how their property is used just so a few busy-body, do-gooders can feel better while they poison their bodies with alcohol.
Ironic?
People who whine about cigarette smoke should stay home and quit fucking up everyone else’s freedom to fuck up their own bodies. No one forces someone to go to a bar and drink.
What a bunch of whiny, no minded losers you liberals are.
So smoking should be allowed in all public places? And airplanes?[/quote]
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
If you don’t love it – cigarette smoke in bars that is – you can leave it, motherfuckers.
Bar owners have no say in how their property is used just so a few busy-body, do-gooders can feel better while they poison their bodies with alcohol.
Ironic?
People who whine about cigarette smoke should stay home and quit fucking up everyone else’s freedom to fuck up their own bodies. No one forces someone to go to a bar and drink.
What a bunch of whiny, no minded losers you liberals are.
So smoking should be allowed in all public places? And airplanes?
There are no such things as “public places”, moron. If I own a piece of property it is private – no ifs, ands, or buts.
“If you don’t like it leave” or find an other service provider that makes you happier.
You do not have rights to someone else’s property.[/quote]
So people should be allowed to smoke on airplanes, in buses, in malls, etc.? That’s what you’re saying, right?
[quote]orion wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
If you don’t love it – cigarette smoke in bars that is – you can leave it, motherfuckers.
Bar owners have no say in how their property is used just so a few busy-body, do-gooders can feel better while they poison their bodies with alcohol.
Ironic?
People who whine about cigarette smoke should stay home and quit fucking up everyone else’s freedom to fuck up their own bodies. No one forces someone to go to a bar and drink.
What a bunch of whiny, no minded losers you liberals are.
So smoking should be allowed in all public places? And airplanes?
Not in public places.
Everywhere else, ask the owner.[/quote]
What do you consider a public place, and what do you consider “everywhere else?”
Sister busted for not wearing a seat belt: none of the government’s business.
Brother busted for smoking a joint: none of the government’s business.
Mother busted for carrying a gun: infringement of her right to keep and bear arms.
Family business destroyed by imminent domain: violation of equal protection, and the rights of life, liberty and pursuit of property.
Family home seized for back taxes: violation of right to be protected against illegal search and seizure, not to mention taxation without representation. Unless, of course, one really, really feels that he is represented in government commensurate to the amount he is taxed.[/quote]
Agreed, if you don’t get this comic, then you are a blind fool.
I understand what the point was suppose to be. My point was the cartoon really fails to make this point, since it lists silly examples of “rights” that are being taken away.
Silly rights?
Sister busted for not wearing a seat belt: none of the government’s business.
Brother busted for smoking a joint: none of the government’s business.
Mother busted for carrying a gun: infringement of her right to keep and bear arms.
Family business destroyed by imminent domain: violation of equal protection, and the rights of life, liberty and pursuit of property.
Family home seized for back taxes: violation of right to be protected against illegal search and seizure, not to mention taxation without representation. Unless, of course, one really, really feels that he is represented in government commensurate to the amount he is taxed.[/quote]
I agree with you on the seat belt thing and imminent domain to a point, but although I don’t like how either in practice actually work I don’t see these as clear cut instances of the state abusing it’s power. As for smoking a joint–I certainly wouldn’t say in any strong sense that you have a “right” to smoke a joint. As for carrying a gun, did she have the proper permits? Surely you don’t advocate completely unregulated and unrestricted “rights” to gun ownership.
As for taxes–the main thing I called “silly”–yes, that certainly is silly. You don’t have the right to not pay your taxes, and if you don’t pay your taxes, then yes, your property should be taken from you. You can blabber all you want about how the government doesn’t deserve your tax money, blah blah blah, but at the end of the day you don’t have a “right” to not pay taxes.
Look, I’m all for individual liberty and rights and whatnot, but acting as if any minuscule instance at all of governmental law and regulation constitutes an abuse of individual liberty makes you look like a thick headed and ignorant conspiracy nut. There are other rights–the rights of your neighbors–that governmental law and regulation must secure as well. To interpret liberty and “rights” as meaning that you can do whatever the fuck you want whenever you want is to misunderstand the matter all together. At the end of the day I hope you have something more to complain about then the government taking away your right to smoke where ever you damn well please or your “right” to not wear a seat belt.
Thus I completely stand by my previous statement… While I agree that there is plenty Americans can bitch about and that major governmental reform is needed, this cartoon fails at actually pointing out any real issues.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
So people should be allowed to smoke on airplanes, in buses, in malls, etc.? That’s what you’re saying, right?
Yes, of course. If the owner permits it.
I may not think that would be a wise business move on the owners part but its not my business whether he drives all of his customers away or not.
I certainly would not do business with such a person, as a nonsmoker.[/quote]
Except that it is likely that you wouldn’t have a choice, because when things are legal, very, very few ban them.
So you, as a non-smoker, would be effectively forced to deal with cigarette smoke, even in places where allowing it makes absolutely no sense, such as in a plane. And it would have an adverse affect on the health of others, especially people forced to deal with it like waiters and bartenders who might not smoke themselves.
Sister busted for not wearing a seat belt: none of the government’s business.
Brother busted for smoking a joint: none of the government’s business.
Mother busted for carrying a gun: infringement of her right to keep and bear arms.
Family business destroyed by imminent domain: violation of equal protection, and the rights of life, liberty and pursuit of property.
Family home seized for back taxes: violation of right to be protected against illegal search and seizure, not to mention taxation without representation. Unless, of course, one really, really feels that he is represented in government commensurate to the amount he is taxed.
Agreed, if you don’t get this comic, then you are a blind fool.[/quote]
No, if you think the silly and trite examples given in this comic make any sort of point then you do not get the real issues.
Go cry about having to wear a seat belt or the government selling someone’s house for back taxes, I’ll worry about real issues like developing sustainable economic policies and energy independence.
[quote]stokedporcupine8 wrote:
Surely you don’t advocate completely unregulated and unrestricted “rights” to gun ownership. [/quote]
Surely you don’t know me very well, or else you wouldn’t need to ask this question.
I believe the only firearms regulation the federal government should be involved in is ensuring that the arms manufactured and sold in the United States are structurally sound and reliable, and that the ammunition is accurate and free from defects.
Other than that, I agree with the commonsense gun laws enacted by Vermont and Alaska, and look forward to the day when other states follow suit.
[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
… people forced to deal with it like waiters and bartenders who might not smoke themselves.
[/quote]
How are they forced to deal with it? They are not forced to be a bartender or waitress. Every job has its dangers, If they don’t like it, they can change jobs.
[quote]malonetd wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
… people forced to deal with it like waiters and bartenders who might not smoke themselves.
How are they forced to deal with it? They are not forced to be a bartender or waitress. Every job has its dangers, If they don’t like it, they can change jobs.[/quote]
You could say that for anything. Because coal mining is dangerous does not mean that they shouldn’t make it as safe as possible. Because welding shops are dangerous does not mean that there should be no safety precautions.
Because bartenders work at a bar/resturaunt, they shouldn’t have to deal with smoke. Neither should the patrons, the majority of which are not smokers.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Except that it is likely that you wouldn’t have a choice…
Not going to the bar in the first place is always a choice, you lush!
That’s not an option.
But besides that, it would be “Don’t go to the mall, fly on a plane, take a bus, go to a restuarant, sit in your office, etc.”
It’s ridiculous.
Then take a risk and start your own business if you don’t like the something is.
That is how freedom works.
It’s not ridiculous. It is the only fair way to do things.[/quote]
And while the 99.98 people who aren’t interested in starting an airline still have to fly, they’ve got to inhale smoke and worry about a fire on board as well.