It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Anti Smoking Laws and the Reality of the Totalitarian Police State

page: 3
20
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 13 2018 @ 07:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

" Don't like the rules? Don't live there, find somewhere else to live. It's as simple as that. It's not "nazi- like" to enforce no smoking rules. You have two choices, find somewhere else to live or quit smoking."


You are a Jew Living in Germany in the Late 1930's ? Don't Like the Rules ? Don't Live there , find somewhere else to Live . It's as Simple as that . Don't Like the Enforcement of No Jew Rules ? You have Two Choices , find a Way Out of the Country , or Die in a Concentration Camp and have your Body Burned to Ashes in an Oven . No , it IS Fascism , and You are Just OK With that ...........


I would think that being Jewish is a little bit different than having an addiction...

Also, please link to me where we are now throwing smokers into the gas chambers.



Edited to add... do they burn longer? And does the smoke smell like an ashtray? Random thoughts...

edit on 13-11-2018 by Lumenari because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 13 2018 @ 07:57 PM
link   
a reply to: AlienView

Why not stop subsidizing housing from the tax payers' teat?



posted on Nov, 13 2018 @ 08:05 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

It is an Unlawful Denial of an Americans Constitutional Rights to Life , Liberty , and the Persuit of Happiness . So , it's OK to Smoke Pot , but Not Tobacco in some Twisted Pretzel Logic of Certain Fascist Law Makers ? ONLY SHEEP Think that Way .Baa...



posted on Nov, 13 2018 @ 08:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

You are Missing the POINT . It is a Denial of Freedom . Smokers Have the Same Rights in America as Non Smokers do . It's Discrimination Pure and Simple .



posted on Nov, 13 2018 @ 08:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

Not on someone else's property.



posted on Nov, 13 2018 @ 08:11 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

That is Debatable .



posted on Nov, 13 2018 @ 08:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

Not really.

Do I have freedom of expression on your property?

Do I have freedom of press photographing you on your property and then publishing it?

Do I have freedom to my firearms on your property?

All of this under the assumption that I do not have permission and you do not want it.



posted on Nov, 13 2018 @ 08:19 PM
link   
Okay.

I get it.

Smoking is evil, people who smoke are evil and we are all vampires. And not the glittery kind who get the gals.



posted on Nov, 13 2018 @ 08:22 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

Suppose your Non Owned Dwelling is Controlled by a Landlord . The Landlord suddenly Decides he has the Right that No one is Allowed to Ingest Salt , Sugar , or Booze on the Premises because he Deems them Unhealthy for you . When do the Conditions and Demands Stop ? Tenants have Rights to . Any BAN is a Slippery Slope in Creating an Atmosphere of Discrimination Towards others who happen to Disagree ..
edit on 13-11-2018 by Zanti Misfit because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2018 @ 08:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

Salt, sugar or booze does not damage the property when ingested.

As I stated before, your rights end where another begins. Smoking inside of a domicile is damaging and an owner has the right to protect their property.



posted on Nov, 13 2018 @ 08:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

Not really.

Do I have freedom of expression on your property?

Do I have freedom of press photographing you on your property and then publishing it?

Do I have freedom to my firearms on your property?

All of this under the assumption that I do not have permission and you do not want it.





That Depends on the Individual Person . He has a Right to Allow that or Not as a Personal Choice . Only a Law can Say for Certain You Can or Cannot Do Something .



posted on Nov, 13 2018 @ 08:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

I'm not debating the choice, of course the owner has the choice. That's why I stated:



All of this under the assumption that I do not have permission and you do not want it.



posted on Nov, 13 2018 @ 08:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

You're trying to deny a landlord's right to protect their property. Pot meet kettle. Why are you trying to force landlords to allow smoking on their property? You're so authoritarian!



posted on Nov, 13 2018 @ 08:42 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

OK , How does Cigarette Smoke Damage a Property ? No FICTIONS Please ..........



posted on Nov, 13 2018 @ 08:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

You could easily look up the damage smoking causes to the inside of homes. No one is saying you can't smoke, just take it outside.
edit on 11/13/2018 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2018 @ 08:44 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Your Neurons Need to be Rerouted .



posted on Nov, 13 2018 @ 08:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

Toy could easily look up the damage smoking causes to the inside of homes. No one is saying you can't smoke, just take it outside.



I did not Ask you that Question . Well JinMi ?



posted on Nov, 13 2018 @ 08:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

Tar stains on walls, trim, appliances, carpet and drapery for starters.



posted on Nov, 13 2018 @ 08:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

I'm just using your own logic against you. If you were renting out a room in your house to me I would follow the rules you set out. If you say no smoking I'm not going to sign that lease unless I agree to your terms.

If you tell me no drugs on your property and you catch me in the act of smoking pot would I have a right to smoke pot in your house even though I already agreed not to?
edit on 11/13/2018 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2018 @ 08:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Freeborn

Shouldn't that be up to the owner of the establishment? And if it were so troublesome for so many people, a smart entrepreneur could come along and open a non-smoking pub, since there is so much demand. The smoking pub (if everyone hates it) would go out of business on it's own, without government intervention, while the non-smoking establishment would prosper.

They couldn't do it that way, however, because the truth is, the smoking bar would prosper and be the cool place hang. That's why they had to force people not to smoke.




top topics



 
20
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join