From: Gary Theilsen on
On Fri, 1 Jan 2010 17:33:36 -0800, Savageduck
<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

>On 2010-01-01 17:17:30 -0800, Gary Theilsen <nocontact(a)spamfree.com> said:
>
>> On Fri, 1 Jan 2010 18:38:41 -0500, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> If you want to smoke, that's your business. But, don't screw up my lungs
>>> with your second hand smoke.
>>
>> You need to watch Penn & Teller's cable show called "Bullshit!", the
>> episode where they cover this issue. Are you aware that not even ONE person
>> has ever died from second-hand smoke? All of this started by one biased and
>> badly done research paper that was later dismissed in court as lacking any
>> factual evidence at all. Penn & Teller are not even smokers, drug-users,
>> nor drinkers, but they will try to uncover and defend the truth whenever
>> possible as much as possible. They are taking up where Houdini left off in
>> exposing frauds and charlatans that use trickery to manipulate and exploit
>> a gullible audience. They know all about how that works (on an
>> entertainment stage for entertainment purposes only) so they are now using
>> that knowledge to expose those that use trickery and manipulation tactics
>> for ill-gotten gains. Like the smoke banning issue. Do you know how much
>> money is being had by the drug-companies in advertising their "stop
>> smoking" drugs, some of the "side effects" from their drugs so terrible
>> that they kill, or permanently damage people worse than cigarettes ever
>> could.
>>
>> Go educate yourself instead of parroting all other control-freaks' paranoid
>> nonsense and stupidity.
>
>So, second hand smoke isn't going to kill me. I'll buy that.
>
>Now tell me how second hand smoke isn't going to make me choke & cough,
>my eyes water, my clothes stink, and any other unpleasantness
>non-smokers would have to endure so those addicted to a corporate drug
>can indulge themselves.

By doing the polite, respectable, and responsible thing for everyone. DON'T
GO WHERE SMOKERS ARE ENJOYING THEIR CIGARETTES, PIPES, AND CIGARS.

If you don't like a restaurant or bar where people are smoking, then don't
go there! It's just that amazingly simple. Smokers will treat you with
respect by not smoking in places clearly deemed for non-smokers only. But
for idiots like you to place blanket laws on everyone based on unfounded
and unproven fears and using deceit and lies to do so, it only makes you
look like the insecure, easily manipulated, control-freak Nazi that you
are.

When I walk into a place where women are wearing cologne so thick that it
would make a pig in a sty gag and puke, I walk out of there. Let them enjoy
their gut-wrenching stank, I have plenty of other places I can patronize.
But you don't see me petitioning politicians to pass laws that all perfumes
should be outlawed in public places do you? No, I respect their
as-stupid-as-they-are decisions to do with their lives as they see fit. The
rare times I venture into a city and get an instant 2-day headache from all
the carcinogenic diesel fumes, I don't go around passing laws to have all
fossil-fuels made immediately illegal. No, I go back to where the air isn't
full of more pollutants and carcinogens than my own home, even with the
cigarette smoke in it.

You're a bloody hypocrite, it's all you are and will ever be.

From: Peter on
"Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
news:opSdnUcZUrVoL6PWnZ2dnUVZ_gCdnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>
> "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote in message
> news:4b3ea7e5$1$19451$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com...
>> "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:2ImdnfSkBfrdO6PWnZ2dnUVZ_rqdnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>>>
>>> "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
>>> news:2010010117333643658-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom...
>>>> On 2010-01-01 17:17:30 -0800, Gary Theilsen <nocontact(a)spamfree.com>
>>>> said:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jan 2010 18:38:41 -0500, "Peter"
>>>>> <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you want to smoke, that's your business. But, don't screw up my
>>>>>> lungs
>>>>>> with your second hand smoke.
>>>>>
>>>>> You need to watch Penn & Teller's cable show called "Bullshit!", the
>>>>> episode where they cover this issue. Are you aware that not even ONE
>>>>> person
>>>>> has ever died from second-hand smoke? All of this started by one
>>>>> biased and
>>>>> badly done research paper that was later dismissed in court as lacking
>>>>> any
>>>>> factual evidence at all. Penn & Teller are not even smokers,
>>>>> drug-users,
>>>>> nor drinkers, but they will try to uncover and defend the truth
>>>>> whenever
>>>>> possible as much as possible. They are taking up where Houdini left
>>>>> off in
>>>>> exposing frauds and charlatans that use trickery to manipulate and
>>>>> exploit
>>>>> a gullible audience. They know all about how that works (on an
>>>>> entertainment stage for entertainment purposes only) so they are now
>>>>> using
>>>>> that knowledge to expose those that use trickery and manipulation
>>>>> tactics
>>>>> for ill-gotten gains. Like the smoke banning issue. Do you know how
>>>>> much
>>>>> money is being had by the drug-companies in advertising their "stop
>>>>> smoking" drugs, some of the "side effects" from their drugs so
>>>>> terrible
>>>>> that they kill, or permanently damage people worse than cigarettes
>>>>> ever
>>>>> could.
>>>>>
>>>>> Go educate yourself instead of parroting all other control-freaks'
>>>>> paranoid
>>>>> nonsense and stupidity.
>>>>
>>>> So, second hand smoke isn't going to kill me. I'll buy that.
>>>>
>>>> Now tell me how second hand smoke isn't going to make me choke & cough,
>>>> my eyes water, my clothes stink, and any other unpleasantness
>>>> non-smokers would have to endure so those addicted to a corporate drug
>>>> can indulge themselves.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Savageduck
>>>>
>>>
>>> weg9 says: If you really believe its a drug, then why are you happy
>>> letting your government deal in it? Either make a law against it, or
>>> believe what I believe.....That everyone should be allowed access to any
>>> drug they want anytime they want it. (Including prescription drugs)
>>
>>
>> Do you drink alcohol?
>>
>> --
>> Peter
> weg9 says: Yes, but I am not addicted to it. I drink about one beer
> every two or three months, and perhaps one martini or bloody Mary a
> year......for one thing, I take glyburide for my diabetes, and it is
> incompatible with alcohol. I am, however addicted to cigarettes......I
> haven't smoked a cigarette since July 31st, 1983, but I know that I am
> still addicted to them.....All it would take is one cig, and I would be
> back on a pack and a half a day in about two weeks......Why do you ask? I
> would not support a law against either tobacco or alcohol, any more than I
> support laws against pot or any other drug. I think it is deplorable that
> when I was young all my favorite movie stars and athletes both drank and
> smoked, and it was heavily advertised. I have had many friends die of both
> drinking and smoking as a result. I am all in favor of my government
> researching the ill effects of drugs and advertising against them. But I
> am still a libertarian when it comes to laws......I don't believe it is
> the government's business to make laws against stuff for, "our own good."


What about laws against murder, extortion, robbery, etc.
If I deliberately and knowingly manufacture a substance that causes harm,
should that be illegal?


--
Peter

From: Gary Theilsen on
On Sat, 2 Jan 2010 10:40:25 +0900, "David J. Littleboy" <davidjl(a)gol.com>
wrote:

>
>"Gary Theilsen" <nocontact(a)spamfree.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 1 Jan 2010 18:38:41 -0500, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>If you want to smoke, that's your business. But, don't screw up my lungs
>>>with your second hand smoke.
>>
>> You need to watch Penn & Teller's cable show called "Bullshit!", the
>> episode where they cover this issue. Are you aware that not even ONE
>> person
>> has ever died from second-hand smoke?
>
>That's simply quite wrong. The amount of excess morbidity and mortality due
>to second hand smoke is small, but definately not zero. The worst victims
>are spouses and children of smokers. (I think that the problem of paying for
>the medical care of smokers is serious enough that second hand smoke issue
>isn't worth worrying about, though.)
>
>It's a well documented problem. You could read about it and learn if you
>wanted instead of taking an entertainment show at face value.
>
>http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/secondhandsmoke.html

Yes, let's all reference the very same documents that were thrown out in a
court of law for being deceptively biased and found to be nothing but
blatant misinformation. Shall we?

From: Gary Theilsen on
On Fri, 1 Jan 2010 22:16:39 -0500, "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net>
wrote:

>"Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:opSdnUcZUrVoL6PWnZ2dnUVZ_gCdnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>>
>> "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote in message
>> news:4b3ea7e5$1$19451$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com...
>>> "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
>>> news:2ImdnfSkBfrdO6PWnZ2dnUVZ_rqdnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>>>>
>>>> "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:2010010117333643658-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom...
>>>>> On 2010-01-01 17:17:30 -0800, Gary Theilsen <nocontact(a)spamfree.com>
>>>>> said:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, 1 Jan 2010 18:38:41 -0500, "Peter"
>>>>>> <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you want to smoke, that's your business. But, don't screw up my
>>>>>>> lungs
>>>>>>> with your second hand smoke.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You need to watch Penn & Teller's cable show called "Bullshit!", the
>>>>>> episode where they cover this issue. Are you aware that not even ONE
>>>>>> person
>>>>>> has ever died from second-hand smoke? All of this started by one
>>>>>> biased and
>>>>>> badly done research paper that was later dismissed in court as lacking
>>>>>> any
>>>>>> factual evidence at all. Penn & Teller are not even smokers,
>>>>>> drug-users,
>>>>>> nor drinkers, but they will try to uncover and defend the truth
>>>>>> whenever
>>>>>> possible as much as possible. They are taking up where Houdini left
>>>>>> off in
>>>>>> exposing frauds and charlatans that use trickery to manipulate and
>>>>>> exploit
>>>>>> a gullible audience. They know all about how that works (on an
>>>>>> entertainment stage for entertainment purposes only) so they are now
>>>>>> using
>>>>>> that knowledge to expose those that use trickery and manipulation
>>>>>> tactics
>>>>>> for ill-gotten gains. Like the smoke banning issue. Do you know how
>>>>>> much
>>>>>> money is being had by the drug-companies in advertising their "stop
>>>>>> smoking" drugs, some of the "side effects" from their drugs so
>>>>>> terrible
>>>>>> that they kill, or permanently damage people worse than cigarettes
>>>>>> ever
>>>>>> could.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Go educate yourself instead of parroting all other control-freaks'
>>>>>> paranoid
>>>>>> nonsense and stupidity.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, second hand smoke isn't going to kill me. I'll buy that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now tell me how second hand smoke isn't going to make me choke & cough,
>>>>> my eyes water, my clothes stink, and any other unpleasantness
>>>>> non-smokers would have to endure so those addicted to a corporate drug
>>>>> can indulge themselves.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Savageduck
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> weg9 says: If you really believe its a drug, then why are you happy
>>>> letting your government deal in it? Either make a law against it, or
>>>> believe what I believe.....That everyone should be allowed access to any
>>>> drug they want anytime they want it. (Including prescription drugs)
>>>
>>>
>>> Do you drink alcohol?
>>>
>>> --
>>> Peter
>> weg9 says: Yes, but I am not addicted to it. I drink about one beer
>> every two or three months, and perhaps one martini or bloody Mary a
>> year......for one thing, I take glyburide for my diabetes, and it is
>> incompatible with alcohol. I am, however addicted to cigarettes......I
>> haven't smoked a cigarette since July 31st, 1983, but I know that I am
>> still addicted to them.....All it would take is one cig, and I would be
>> back on a pack and a half a day in about two weeks......Why do you ask? I
>> would not support a law against either tobacco or alcohol, any more than I
>> support laws against pot or any other drug. I think it is deplorable that
>> when I was young all my favorite movie stars and athletes both drank and
>> smoked, and it was heavily advertised. I have had many friends die of both
>> drinking and smoking as a result. I am all in favor of my government
>> researching the ill effects of drugs and advertising against them. But I
>> am still a libertarian when it comes to laws......I don't believe it is
>> the government's business to make laws against stuff for, "our own good."
>
>
>What about laws against murder, extortion, robbery, etc.
>If I deliberately and knowingly manufacture a substance that causes harm,
>should that be illegal?

That means your own government is illegal. I believe the "right to bear
arms" should also include nuclear weaponry. If someone else can have one
that automatically gives me the right to have one. If only they weren't so
expensive. No one person is more worthy of defending themselves than any
other person on earth. Why are others any more responsible with a nuclear
bomb than I will be? They aren't. They never will be. To believe someone
else is always more responsible with weapons of mass destruction only makes
you into a fool.

From: Peter on
"Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
news:TuWdncwqyakZKKPWnZ2dnUVZ_hSdnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>
> "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote in message
> news:4b3eaafd$1$19486$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com...
>> "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:g4CdnZyYp-hrOaPWnZ2dnUVZ_sOdnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>>>
>>> "Peter" <peternew(a)nospamoptonline.net> wrote in message
>>> news:4b3ea0c5$0$12828$8f2e0ebb(a)news.shared-secrets.com...
>>>> "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:xZydneWphIfKC6PWnZ2dnUVZ_uOdnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You know, there is another reason than money why I am opposed to the
>>>>> Obama health plan....there is a philosophical difference between
>>>>> people paying for their own health care and letting the government
>>>>> (taxpayers) pay for it. If you are paying your own way, then your
>>>>> lifestyle will (and should) affect your premiums, and the insurance
>>>>> companies will charge you more for endangering your life and
>>>>> health.But when the government just insures everyone automatically,
>>>>> then there is no individual responsibility, and people will drive,
>>>>> eat, drink, and live generally like there's no tomorrow. Good health
>>>>> care is expensive, and that's the way it ought to be. By costing you
>>>>> money, it insures that you will fully realize the cost of not taking
>>>>> good care of yourself. It's the same old argument....Socialism takes
>>>>> away individual responsibility, and this also takes away your freedom
>>>>> to do what you want to do, and pay your own way. I have to pay $1450 a
>>>>> month for three people, and this is one of the reasons why I no longer
>>>>> ride a motorcycle, and no longer smoke tobacco. I didn't need any laws
>>>>> to convince me of this.....It was my own choice.
>>>>
>>>> Your statement has nothing to do with the reality of insurance. At the
>>>> present time there is no firm "Obama health plan." However, the gut of
>>>> the Senate plan is that insurance companies will be prohibited from
>>>> denying coverage based upon pre=existing conditions. Don't confuse life
>>>> with health. e.g. There may be an exclusion from coverage for scuba or
>>>> stunt driving accidents on a life policy. On a health policy, they
>>>> don't do it,unless you get into the catastrophic coverage area.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Peter
>>>
>>> weg9 says: And so what would prevent me from living like there's no
>>> tomorrow for N years, and then, when I am getting old and sick, just
>>> applying for the government's health plan where some poor insurance
>>> company is forced to insure me, and then going into the hospital for
>>> some serious late stage health care?
>>
>>
>> The same thing that keeps me from doing that. It's called a sense of
>> personal responsibility.
>> You could always rob a bank, get caught and let the government take care
>> of you for the rest of your life.
>>
>> Let's take a different tack. Isn't something wrong when you could lose
>> all your money because you get sick, even though you have done everything
>> right? Your long term nursing care isn't covered by your vaunted
>> insurance. (Unless you have long term care insurance. In which case see
>> how quickly you will reach the limit.)
>>
>> Peter
>
> Yes.....To all that. That's why I say that rationing is necessary, and any
> health plan will have to include it......It's not a perfect world, and we
> will all die some day, and there is nothing either the government or
> private insurance companies can do about it. All we can do is the best we
> can do, and I claim that the capitalistic system holds the best chance of
> getting that for us......It had done pretty well by me so far.....I was
> not born rich. I worked and saved and purchased good health insurance my
> whole life, and I am happy with where I am right now. When my socialistic
> government wants me to pay for the indiscretions of others, it makes me
> sick.


Of course, health care must be rationed. It is in every jurisdiction I am
aware of. It is hypocrisy that I rage against.

--
Peter