You know whats nice ?

[z12358]

Originally Posted by jeffsquire

_____________________________
You mean the freedom you take from those who choose to smoke in public places against those nonsmokers who choose to voluntarily attend those same public places? Sounds like a strawman argument to me.

My advice is to avoid patronage of smoke-freindly restaruants and establishments. There are plenty of them out there. ANd while you're there, quaff some CocaCola, imbibe bourbon, gorge cake, wallow in fried food and loosen your belt as it rubs against the table, but enjoy yourself.

You seem to have missed the class about why laws, rules, and regulations are neccessary in a society of two or more free individuals. Or forget the roots of law -- Ever heard of the 'golden rule'?

So your proposed solution to every free individual in a free society is: If something (bullet, baseball bat, bomb, noise, spit, smoke, etc.) is about to negatively affect you in a public space, shut your mouth and just stay away, lest you (god forbid!) limit the freedom of the ones who are causing it!?

Z.

[jeffsquire]

Originally Posted by z12358

So your proposed solution to every free individual in a free society is: If something (bullet, baseball bat, bomb, noise, spit, smoke, etc.) is about to negatively affect you in a public space, shut your mouth and just stay away, lest you (god forbid!) limit the freedom of the ones who are causing it!Z.

_______________________________________________

Talk about the ultimate straw man argument . . . . . comparing chosing to smoke in a public place and equating it to exploding bombs and shooting guns in public places. Right . . . .

[z12358]

Originally Posted by jeffsquire

_______________________________________________

Talk about the ultimate straw man argument . . . . . comparing chosing to smoke in a public place and equating it to exploding bombs and shooting guns in public places. Right . . . .

You keep refering to the 'strawman argument' and, in my opinion, don't really understand it. The list in the brackets was not there for comparison, but for analogy. Regardless, you could have just disregarded the bracketed text and addressed my statement on its own merits, but chose not to do so. And that's fine, too. It's a free country.

Z.

[jeffsquire]

Originally Posted by z12358

You keep refering to the 'strawman argument' and, in my opinion, don't really understand it. The list in the brackets was not there for comparison, but for analogy. Regardless, you could have just disregarded the bracketed text and addressed my statement on its own merits, but chose not to do so. And that's fine, too. It's a free country. :Z.

_________________________

I'm completely familiar with the strawman argument as it is used against me and I use it (along with a variety of other thigns) in court every week. I stand by my response to your entire paragraph including my comment of the strawman. That was my answer.

But you're right. I didnt address this:

You seem to have missed the class about why laws, rules, and regulations are neccessary in a society of two or more free individuals. Or forget the roots of law -- Ever heard of the 'golden rule'?

Regulations are always necessary and you've never heard me advocate for anarchy. The golden rule is is traditionally defined as treat others as you would want to be treated. With that being said, regarding antismoking laws, I would not like to be treated the way smokers are today. Thus I defend them and treat them as I would want to be treated.

[NickCats]

bmuss,

There are posted speed limits on the TOD, but no one seemed to follow them. I did the tail in 2005 on the Harley, and I was speed limited by those in front of me, but the crotch rockets were zipping around us at their leisure.

Sammy,

I drove from here to Chattanooga in one day on the bike, so it should be an easy one day drive in the Box.

Can't wait !!!

Nick