Smoking Ban part 2, original by Timber Loftis

[WillowIX]

Originally posted by Thorfinn: Willow, sorry but you are mistaken. Using government exposure limits, assuming risk factors are simply additive, we can prove that the thousands of chemicals in a single apple would exceed the LD-50, i.e., lethal dose 50% of the time. The problem is that the exposure limits are at least one order of magnitude on the side of safety, so if you start combining them, the margins of safety, which are 10-fold larger than the effect itself rapidly make the effect itself irrelevant, lost in the uncertainty of the margin of error. You know the other error, of course. Not all chemical exposures are additive. Many/most cancel out others. This is common sense. Otherwise, there would be no need of antivenin, or atropine, or heck, of any medication. The fact is that the effects of some chemicals offset the effects of others. Acids cancel out bases. It is literally impossible to predict the effect of 2000 random chemicals on human physiology, particularly when human physiology is so poorly understood at this point, anyway... I can't tell you what the risk is, but I'll bet my paycheck against yours that multiplying by 2000 is going to be at least two orders of magnitude too high...

No I'm not mistaken Thorfinn. I completely agree with what you have typed above. I'm not too sure about the two magnitudes too high though. I would bet higher. [img]tongue.gif[/img] But at least we would hava a number for those interested in it. Get me?

Originally posted by Yorick: quote: Taking things out of context aren't you Yorick? we were talking about privatley owned establishments which by the way are allowed to be selective about their clientel.

And what would happen if the private establishment banned blacks from entering? Apartheid mk III?? The rights to exclusion are nonsense.

Is it? I demand the right to use the ladies toilet then. I also demand the right to use the handicapped parking spaces and you will have to get rid of every one of the car pool lanes...after all I paid taxes to help pave those lanes too....Right to exclusion is all around you my friend. get used to it.

All private clubs have to disband, According to Yorick, it doesnt matter if I am not a member of the Fraternal order of Meese I have the right to be in their facility![/QUOTE]

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Thorfinn: Wrong. No one forced you at gunpoint to go onto any particular private property. You are forcing people, using government guns, to vacate their own property, while you sit on your duff, enjoying his property.

Wrong.

You can choose to smoke in a bar, you'll just get fined. Just like I can choose to sit in a smoking bar and die or get sick.

Both are choices, or both a "forced consequences".

However for the smokers, the impostition is less consequential and more easily bypassed.

Go outside for two minutes.

I sound like a freakin' broken record.

Go outside for two minutes.

Go outside for two minutes.

It's not hard, just go outside for two minutes.

[ 05-13-2003, 11:40 AM: Message edited by: Yorick ]

[Thorfinn]

Originally posted by Yorick: quote: Taking things out of context aren't you Yorick? we were talking about privatley owned establishments which by the way are allowed to be selective about their clientel.

And what would happen if the private establishment banned blacks from entering? Apartheid mk III?? The rights to exclusion are nonsense. [/QUOTE]Well first off, they would lose the business of any blacks who might want to spend a few dollars, and those dollars would go elsewhere, to someone a tad more tolerant. Woohoo, the free market rewards those with more virtue.

What happens beyond that, you tell me. Would you give your money to a racist establishment if you had the choice to go to the bar where the black guy did? If so, the racist lost your money, too. Multiply that by the number of people who would do likewise.

The fact is that grassroots racism, at least in America, was not as widespread as people make it out to be. Private businesses have no interest in turning away other peoples' money. And history shows the businesses were not the one committing the racism until they were ordered to do so by government. And more than one white bus driver was sent to the hospital by the state's jackbooted thugs for refusing to enforce Jim Crow laws...

Your fear of racism rearing is ugly head is utterly irrational drivel.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by MagiK: quote: Originally posted by Yorick: quote: Taking things out of context aren't you Yorick? we were talking about privatley owned establishments which by the way are allowed to be selective about their clientel.

And what would happen if the private establishment banned blacks from entering? Apartheid mk III?? The rights to exclusion are nonsense.

Is it? I demand the right to use the ladies toilet then. I also demand the right to use the handicapped parking spaces and you will have to get rid of every one of the car pool lanes...after all I paid taxes to help pave those lanes too....Right to exclusion is all around you my friend. get used to it.

All private clubs have to disband, According to Yorick, it doesnt matter if I am not a member of the Fraternal order of Meese I have the right to be in their facility![/QUOTE][/QUOTE]Handicapped spaces mean a handicapped person can visit the same places an able bodied person can. It creates more equality.

Places generally provide two toilets Magik, so you're being ridiculous.

We are talking about whether a place can exclude willy nilly. What would happen if blacks were excluded from a bar Magik? Answer the question?

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Thorfinn: Your fear of racism rearing is ugly head is utterly irrational drivel.

Oh no. I'm talking about America and South Africa in the past. I'm not afraid of it returning.

Originally posted by Yorick: If one side has been persecuted it's been the NONSMOKERS!! Forced inot breathing the crap that comes out of a smokers lungs!! Bull hockey! Im a non-smoker and I have never once had anyone "Force" me to breathe smoke. And Ill bet neither have you...I will bet that every single time..you had an option to leave. Unless some of those smooching smokers had you tied up.... in that case you should have taken preemptive action to keep yer butt out of there. How, pray tell, is being asked to take your habit outside persecution might I ask? You can always choose not to smoke and stay inside, or delay the smoke and do it once the show's finished? Or take two minutes and go and do it. Not the question at hand guy...its "does the owner have the right to permit smoking in his establishment...or gan the government tell you which legal activities you can allow on your premises. How is this persecution? Could ONE SMOKER please tell me what is so hard about going outside for two minutes?? ANYONE? or is everyone so blinded by the LOSS OF RIGHT TO HARM OTHERS issue here? Sorry can't speak as a smoker..not one..never have been. Again we were talkig about private establishments having the right to decide if they will or will not allow smoking..what is so hard for those against smoking to just stay the F%^* out of smoking establishments?...wait I already know..."but I want to go there cause its where all the really cool kids hang out" give it up, you don't have the right to dictate to business owners..and neither should the state.

[Thorfinn]

Originally posted by Yorick: quote: Originally posted by Thorfinn: Wrong. No one forced you at gunpoint to go onto any particular private property. You are forcing people, using government guns, to vacate their own property, while you sit on your duff, enjoying his property.

Wrong.

You can choose to smoke in a bar, you'll just get fined. Just like I can choose to sit in a smoking bar and die or get sick.[/QUOTE]You misunderstand. Before the ban, the owner of the establishment could freely declare it non-smoking. You wrested that right from him. You are in favor of bossing him around, on his own property, for your own selfish interests.

My turn to sound like a broken record.

Find a different place to hang out.

Find a different place to hang out.

Find a different place to hang out.

Find a different place to hang out.

Is it that tough?

Originally posted by Yorick: We are talking about whether a place can exclude willy nilly. What would happen if blacks were excluded from a bar Magik? Answer the question?

I would say, that if you realy believe that there are not places where blacks are not allowed, or whites or jews...you live in a fantasy land. There are whole sections of DC where I as a white person would not be permitted to venture through unscathed...as are there several well known Biker bars in Baltimore that Blacks do not go to....it may be illegal but it is true none the less.

The truth is, private establishments should be allowed to allow smoking or not as they see fit. Smoking isn't a racial issue, it is not a equal rights issue...it is about the right of an establisment owner to allow the use of a legal product in his establishment.
thats it...no blacks, no whites, no jews..its about smoking. And my examples are no more ridiculous than the anti-smokers demanding access to smoking establishments.


Also....You still have yet to come up with a credible reason why if this is applied to smoking it should not be applied to your music.

[ 05-13-2003, 11:54 AM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

***MagiK looks around for TL*** my this has turned into something out of the war forum Circular reasoning forum. My last word on it will be....

"Yeah...what Thorfinn just said". not his last post..the one before that [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 05-13-2003, 11:58 AM: Message edited by: MagiK ]