Idea about "click it or ticket" (mandatory seat belt laws)

[Sava]

that's fine... I'll just "piddle" out my window...

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Ming


You misunderstood my response... I have no problem with people putting in that type of equipment... I even applaud those that do. My point was, in most cases, they don't make much of a difference

I understood it fine, did you not see the hint of burlesque in my post?

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Sava
that's fine... I'll just "piddle" out my window...

Sava-- trust me here-- you do not want to get into a contest of excretions with a two year old

[Odin]

Originally posted by Ming
I have no problem with a ban on smoking indoors in publicly owned places. On the other hand, an owner of a business/establishment should be allowed to make his own decision on whether smoking is allowed. If there were such a big demand for it in bars, bars that outlawed smoking should be prospering, and most bars should be smoke free already... funny, they aren't. Now people want to make that decision for the owners... and force it down their throat, even if it hurts their business. It should be up to the owner... and employees can decide whether they want that enviornment. It's like people that build homes next to an airport, then complain about the noise. THE AIRPORT WAS THERE... WHAT DID YOU EXPECT. People that have a problem with second hand smoke shouldn't plan their career path on working in a bar.

Public health is more important than private profit.

[Sprayber]

Originally posted by Ming
If people don't want to wear them... fine. However, they should be forced to admit it to the insurance companies so that only they pay higher rates and not eveybody who does wear them

So, you want people to volunteer the information that would raise their rates?

" Excuse me officer, I know you didn't clock me exceeding the speed limit because I had my radar detector on. I just wanted you to be aware of my speeding"

[rah]

Than all tobaco products should be illegal, and liquer, and fast food.

[Ming]

Originally posted by Odin
Public health is more important than private profit.

What rah said
Oh... and add all fossel fuel burning vehicles to the ban list as well

Public health is so important to the government that they continue to increase the taxes on smokes and drinks to pay for non health related expenditures, instead of banning them

[Flubber]

Originally posted by rah
Than all tobaco products should be illegal, and liquer, and fast food.

Well it would be better if we used less of all of them . But its part of our cherished freedoms to be able to do things that are bad for ourselves

[rah]

BINGO

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by Flubber


Sava-- trust me here-- you do not want to get into a contest of excretions with a two year old

QFT

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Flubber
But its part of our cherished freedoms to be able to do things that are bad for ourselves

My eating fast food doesn't hurt you. My smoking does. Hence, it's perfectly legit to regulate one while not the other.

[rah]

try the same argument with liquer

and if you choose not to stand next to me, the tobaco doesn't hurt you either.

and i won't even talk about guns.

[chequita guevara]

What if I was standing there first? The argument works with liquor, and guns are protected by the Constitution.

[Ming]

Then what about pollution from cars...

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Ming


What rah said
Oh... and add all fossel fuel burning vehicles to the ban list as well

The fossil fuel thing might limit itself to some extent if the price increases start limiting consumption. So far it seems the craziest thing as demand appears to continue unabated despite massive price increases. I can't see how that can continue in the long term