ClumsyMonkey.net

wow you people are idiots

you try to shoot me down for using stats, yet you use the same stats to fuel your anti-public smoking.. wow.

Hey buddy, no offence but no one really cares much for what you say anymore. If you can't tell we're all pretty well ignoring you. This thread is pretty well done, and it's turned into a Dumb and Dumber thread. You were about a week or so too late.

Again thanks for making the CM a wonderful place to be.

Now back to what this thread is all about

yea its pretty easy to ignore someone whos right

actually the whole state of california has an anti-smoking thing in place. bars are making more money now then they've ever made. does it make it right? hmmmm.....who cares money talks, bullshit walks.

and in most places where the anti-smoking laws were put into effect were done so because they were voted on by the public....here in austin a smoking ban goes into effect on september 1, and i couldnt be happier

bort8 wrote:and in most places where the anti-smoking laws were put into effect were done so because they were voted on by the public....here in austin a smoking ban goes into effect on september 1, and i couldnt be happier

So, if everyone got together and voted that your house was now the community landfill, it'd be okay with you?

blue eyed soul wrote:truly. in short, banning shit sucks. booo on new york and edmonton.

If they ban SHIT like you're saying, then what use will toilets serve!?!?!?

WHAT'S HAPPENING TO THIS WORLD!?!

Narbus wrote:

bort8 wrote:and in most places where the anti-smoking laws were put into effect were done so because they were voted on by the public....here in austin a smoking ban goes into effect on september 1, and i couldnt be happier

So, if everyone got together and voted that your house was now the community landfill, it'd be okay with you?

well, we do live in a democracy...the legislation was put to a vote in the most recent elections and supported by a majority of the voters....that's the way the system works....if you dont like it, then why dont u leave?

well, the majority of americans feel that gay marriage is unacceptable. will it be ok when they pass a constitutional ammendment outlawing gay marriage? the war with iraq was passed under a democratic resoultion, too. is that ok?

bort8 wrote:well, we do live in a democracy...the legislation was put to a vote in the most recent elections and supported by a majority of the voters....that's the way the system works....if you dont like it, then why dont u leave?

Didn't answer the question. If it was voted, by the majority, that your house would be used as a landfill, and you just have to deal with it, no compensation for the land, you still own it and such, but everyone could dump their trash there, would that be okay?

that's not the way it works narbus, as a land owner they have to compensate you. if they feel that it's for the better of the many to use someone's land for public use they buy you out. they don't just take it.

Still not answering the question. Your entire basis for the "rightness" of this law is "the majority said yes." So, is that justification acceptable for another situation, one where you are the one being told what you can, and cannot do with your property? It may not even be legal in another sense, but if the majority say go, is it fine?

yes of course. there's zoning laws and building codes that tell you what you can do or do not do on your property. they're set up by city council people that are elected by the majority.

So. You now live in a landfill. And that's fine? No, you're not compensated, but hey. It was voted on, and they voted to not compensate you. And that's just fine with you. Right?

im not talking about just a bunch of random people standing there voting on something........if there was actually a proposition in a general election for it, then fine, what ya gonna do.....but i think the example isnt even comparable

we don;'t all vote every every single law. If that's the case then I think I've been grossly misinformed. We only vote for propositions as mentioned above, and we vote for the people who will make decisions for the population. They vote on those decisions. Now that we've caught you up on how democracy works...

There are laws in place that compensate the land owner if the govt feels the land could be of their use. If the govt decides your house would be better as a landfill, I'm sure they would offer you a very good sum of money for it. This happens a lot, especially when cities are looking to make progress with infrastructure. They don't just boot everyone to the street if they want the land.

Missing the point. Both of you. Bandelero's entire defense for the act of outlawing smoking in bars was, "Well, the public voted on it." The majority is not always right, folks.

A more relevant example, since you seem to want one:
A proposition called the "good host" law is put up for a vote. Basically, it says there is no smoking inside ANY building, including private homes/apartments as the smoke makes the air unpleasant for any guests you may have over who don't smoke. The majority says "yea." Is this okay?

ps: J-Neli, you still haven't answered my point from earlier in the thread.

enters thread....

peers all over page 8....


Neil says..........WTF


gone...

Well first off they wouldn't ever do that. They make huge tax dollars off of the purchasing of cigarettes, so why would they band something that's giving them so much money?