[aldo_14]

Originally posted by Rictor


There are differing degrees of human rights. For example, my right to live in "a positive environment" and not have people swear in my presence is of a lesser priority than say, my right to due process in a court of law.

It would be simple-minded to apply the same standard throughout. If you were to do so, a person who smokes within 100m of Kazan would be the same as lets say, Pol Pot.

If reasonable measures have been taken to respect human rights, and particularly when they are being broken to such a small degree, then it would be alright, by my logic at least, to ignore any such persons who are not satisfied with the current enforcement of said human rights.

what i mean is, the essence of a/ human right/s is not something that should be decided on public opinion levels.  i.e. if even if a majority supports the removal of some key right, it may not be best to do so.  (It's a poorly phrased explaniation, but I don;t care cos I'm off to bed).

[Knight Templar]

Smoke = Bad.

SHS = Not in my face, don't care otherwise.

[SadisticSid]

Originally posted by Kazan
"Tell me where are you getting these mythical rights from" how about UN and international human rights organizations, oh yeah the US Constitution as well

Presumably you mean the right to 'adequate health for everyone' - not an issue in this case because you can quite easily avoid any health risks by walking outside. It's similar to avoiding the health risks by not walking on to a motorway or off a cliff. No-one is preventing you from doing this. Hence there is no violation of rights.

[Kazan]

SadisticSid: you cite the dictionary as support for you, when it shoots the support out from under you and supports me - CO2 is a SIMPLE asphixiant - i causes death by CROWDING out otherthings- which takes extremely high concentrations

the chemicals in tabacco smoke cause CHEMICAL damage (or in the case of radioactive polonium chemical and radiological damage) which makes them hazardous at any concentration, not just high concentrations


know something about biochemistry before arguing against someone with extensive biochemical knowledge

-------------------------

The right health, The right to make health decisions for ones self, the right not have others do harm to you.

"Walking outside" does not mitigate the effects of ETS (i'm going to start using the medical communities term) - it is damaging at any concentration, outside does NOT reduce the hazard, nor the concentration in many cases - it only gives the ILLUSION of reduction of hazard.   While increase _Range_ from the smoker reduces hazard that holds true whether you're outside or not.  

Nothing changes the following facts
1) ETS is hazardous at any concentration
2) If someone is exposed against their will it is a violation of their human rights
3) "Your rights end where my nose begins" - you only can exercise your rights so far as they do not violate other peoples.  

----------------------------------------------

JarC: Your logic does not follow

You made a logical fallacy, so your argument was not compelling

I have made no logical fallacies

[Janos]

Yes - because it's fun.

[Nico]

So I break human rights smoking in the street? See if I give a flying damn about that. In the street, I smoke, in a bar, I smoke. If someone tell me to stop smoking there, I'll tell him to **** off. If there's a kid or a pregnant woman around, they won't even need asking me to stop smoking, coz I won't, tho. If I go at some others place, I don't smoke, unless they smoke too. It's my right to smoke in the street, see, it's in the laws, you have places where smoking is banned, and in streets, it's not. See me smoking in the street: it's your right to walk 100 meters away from me.
That's my way of things, and I don't care about what others think. See, I'm a mean evil thing, and an enemy of humanity.
Cool, that makes me so proud.

[Zeronet]

yes, i suppose reducing quality of life for those around you, inducing cancer and lung diease and impotency, is something to be proud of. Nice and compassioniate.

[Nico]

nice? compassionate? what does that mean?

[01010]

Originally posted by Nico
nice? compassionate? what does that mean?

Rabid non smokers nico, ignore them, most of humanity has a rational grip on their feelings.

[Nico]

Oh, I always do, you see, I'm quite lucky, never had any pb with that, at least, even my parents, who are completly agaisnt, don't bother me with that as soon as I don't stink tobacco when I come back home. And my parents not bothering me for something I do, that's a real prowess, believe me.
That's why I'm taking the opportunity in that thread

[01010]

Originally posted by Zeronet
yes, i suppose reducing quality of life for those around you, inducing cancer and lung diease and impotency, is something to be proud of. Nice and compassioniate.

Also, don't you want to join the army to y'know become a hired killer?

Am I the only one to see the irony in this?

[Gloriano]

No- I don't smoke

[Setekh]

Don't smoke and don't like it second hand. I'm an asthmatic.

[Ryx]

Voted "No - and I despise SHS"

[Kazan]

01010: rabid SMOKERS are the ones who call people who want their rights respective "rabid nonsmokers"

all the evidenca nd logic is on my side - none of it on yours - i've argued this argument atleast 50 times

given enough patience i'd run you into the ground

I am tired of keeping irrational people calm while trying to tell them why their preposterious views about their purported right to smoke and purported right to get away with poisoning other people is wrong


if there were "so few" that held my view the poll would show it

i'm just the messenger

[01010]

Originally posted by Kazan
01010: rabid SMOKERS are the ones who call people who want their rights respective "rabid nonsmokers"

I don't smoke cigarettes, I've made this point but obviously in your zealotry you choose to ignore it.

Originally posted by Kazan

all the evidenca nd logic is on my side - none of it on yours - i've argued this argument atleast 50 times

The grammar and spelling evidently aren't though. Evidence and logic are all well and good, but your delivery is awful Kazan, people won't listen to someone that has no tact and tries to bludgeon people with their opinion, be it valid or not.

Originally posted by Kazan

given enough patience i'd run you into the ground

More likely that I'd get bored goading you but not yet at least.

Originally posted by Kazan

I am tired of keeping irrational people calm while trying to tell them why their preposterious views about their purported right to smoke and purported right to get away with poisoning other people is wrong


if there were "so few" that held my view the poll would show it

i'm just the messenger

I've been calm the entire duration of this thread, if anything Kazan this thread shows that you are the one that gets so wound up about it, your a pompous asshole and people love to wind you up because you take the bait so damn well.

Also, a cross section of a forum with what 300-400 active members does not represent the entire worlds opinion on smoking no matter how loud you shout your point.

[Kazan]

01010: you smoke weed - which is actually worse from a chemical standpoint even not taking THC into account

you smoke, doesn't matter what you smoke

i was just waking up when I typed that message -you'll have to forgive the tpyoes


"goading" yuo're not Goading me, you're making me think you're one of the most pathetic lifeforms on the pace of this planet


"your a pompous asshole" - yes I'm a pompous asshole because I demand you respect my views

PS: that sample above is actually very represenative of current trends in smoking, whether you like it or not

[01010]

Originally posted by Kazan
01010: you smoke weed - which is actually worse from a chemical standpoint even not taking THC into account

you smoke, doesn't matter what you smoke

But not in a place that affects anyone but myself so your point is redundant.

Originally posted by Kazan

"goading" yuo're not Goading me, you're making me think you're one of the most pathetic lifeforms on the pace of this planet

Same difference to me, if it's getting you wound up enough to reply to it in the manner you have then it's good enough for me.

Originally posted by Kazan

"your a pompous asshole" - yes I'm a pompous asshole because I demand you respect my views

PS: that sample above is actually very represenative of current trends in smoking, whether you like it or not

Which is funny because you won't respect the views of someone like Liberator (not that I do either) which seems like a big ****ing double standard to me.

As for the whole issue, I really don't care either way regardless, you die you die, be it lung cancer, heart attack or hit by a bus. Makes no difference to me.

[Kazan]

01010: "not in a place that affects anyone but myself" - so you smoke in a room that's completely and totally cut off from all outside air circulation and the air is pass through the filters that level 4 biohazard facitilies use?

ya. ****ing. right.



How does me not respecting liberator's illogical and irrational views have anything to do with this? oh.. i see I made a brainfart again

I meant to say I demand you respet my RIGHTS

i need to proof read my posts when I am not wholly awake yet

[TopAce]

I don't smoke at all.
Option 3.