SlipLive

headnugg wrote:I don't care why urinating/defecating on the street is illegal or when it was made illegal. For the sake of MY argument, it is all irrelevant.

Yes, for the sake of your ORIGINAL argument ("this new rule is a bad thing") it may be irrelevant. But at this point in our long and winding road together, I thought the sole bone of contention was about the relevance of my comparing the present situation to the enactment of laws about urinating/defecating in public.

Because it IS illegal. Smoking on the street ISN't illegal. They're trying to make a RULE that you can't do it in Belmont.

And my point is that there was a time in our history where urinating/defecating in public was legal, a certain segment of society decided that for the public health it shouldn't be, and took away people's god-given right to crap wherever they wanted. Perhaps we've reached the same point in the history of smoking. A certain segment of society has decided it's bad for the public health and are attempting to act accordingly. That's my point. At least as best as I remember.

I'm saying they're taking away a basic human right,

Would you really call smoking a "basic" human right? In my mind that puts it on par with life, liberty, etc. Yeah, OK, smokers have a right to do what they want to their body. Basic. OK. Is the right to clean air MORE basic? Less basic? The same basic? Hmm.

In 20 years, Hoby, your argument might be relevant, because maybe by then, smoking on the street will be just as illegal as taking a piss on the sidewalk. But right now it's not.

See, this is where I don't understand why you don't see the relevance of my point, because my point is not about 20 years from now. It's about this exactly this time. This time of transition; or possible transition.

Now at this point, I don't even remember exactly what we were arguing about

See above.

......But again, as much as I hate smoking/smokers, it's complete Bullshit that any goverment organization should dictate your life to you.

Any more than they already do, you mean? Do you pay taxes, drink water from a town/city supply, live in a home that has been inspected for safety of wiring and construction, eat food that must meet certain standards in preparation and packaging, attend schools that have curricula that are approved by state and/or federal education departments, get treated or serviced by doctors or any of a myriad of other professionals that are licensed, work at a job where your employer must follow certain rules about how you're treated, etc, etc? It can get downright depressing and scary if you think about it, but so can the consequences of any of those mechanisms not being in place at least to some extent.

Next thing they're going to say I can't smoke pot in the privacy of my own home or car! What's next I ask you?

Wait! Where do you live where you can do that now? I mean without getting at least a ticket if the cop is in a bad mood.

If we don't fight this now, we won't have the OPTION of fighting it in 50 years, when our goverment is dictating everything we can and can't do......The fight starts now!

Hope you're not too late.

OK, OK you're a fucking riot.....and I like you buddy! Yay!

Then my work here is done.

hoby wrote:

headnugg wrote:I don't care why urinating/defecating on the street is illegal or when it was made illegal. For the sake of MY argument, it is all irrelevant.

Yes, for the sake of your ORIGINAL argument ("this new rule is a bad thing") it may be irrelevant. But at this point in our long and winding road together, I thought the sole bone of contention was about the relevance of my comparing the present situation to the enactment of laws about urinating/defecating in public.

Because it IS illegal. Smoking on the street ISN't illegal. They're trying to make a RULE that you can't do it in Belmont.

And my point is that there was a time in our history where urinating/defecating in public was legal, a certain segment of society decided that for the public health it shouldn't be, and took away people's god-given right to crap wherever they wanted. Perhaps we've reached the same point in the history of smoking. A certain segment of society has decided it's bad for the public health and are attempting to act accordingly. That's my point. At least as best as I remember.

I'm saying they're taking away a basic human right,

Would you really call smoking a "basic" human right? In my mind that puts it on par with life, liberty, etc. Yeah, OK, smokers have a right to do what they want to their body. Basic. OK. Is the right to clean air MORE basic? Less basic? The same basic? Hmm.

In 20 years, Hoby, your argument might be relevant, because maybe by then, smoking on the street will be just as illegal as taking a piss on the sidewalk. But right now it's not.

See, this is where I don't understand why you don't see the relevance of my point, because my point is not about 20 years from now. It's about this exactly this time. This time of transition; or possible transition.

Now at this point, I don't even remember exactly what we were arguing about

See above.

......But again, as much as I hate smoking/smokers, it's complete Bullshit that any goverment organization should dictate your life to you.

Any more than they already do, you mean? Do you pay taxes, drink water from a town/city supply, live in a home that has been inspected for safety of wiring and construction, eat food that must meet certain standards in preparation and packaging, attend schools that have curricula that are approved by state and/or federal education departments, get treated or serviced by doctors or any of a myriad of other professionals that are licensed, work at a job where your employer must follow certain rules about how you're treated, etc, etc? It can get downright depressing and scary if you think about it, but so can the consequences of any of those mechanisms not being in place at least to some extent.

I'll begin here. While I don't consider smoking a basic human right(that was ME being funny), I do consider any authoritive power telling you that you no longer have the right to smoke a cigarette in your home, car or simply walking down the street, a SERIOUS breach of your privacy and your rights. What you've mentioned above about taxes, etc., could be considered a breach of your rights I suppose, but not in the same way I don't think. And again, just for the sake of my argument, those are established laws, so no one thinks to say, "Oh hey, isn't having an inpector in my new house to tell me everything's OK a breach of my privacy/rights?" Well, maybe people think that, but no one is marching down to town hall to demand that inspectors be stopped from inspecting private homes. Yet I think it would be perfectly reasonable for a bunch of people to go to the Town Hall of Belmont and complain about this bullshit smoking ban. We could argue for days about all the things you mentioned in the paragraph above, but none of them are relevant TODAY. This smoking issue is relevant TODAY, right now as we speak. The beaurocrats of Belmont, MA have made a major decision affecting peoples lives, and it shouldn't be taken lightly. If this is not FOUGHT, it will only make it easier for the Gov't to enact other rules. If there's no opposition to this one, when will it stop?

hoby wrote:

Next thing they're going to say I can't smoke pot in the privacy of my own home or car! What's next I ask you?

Wait! Where do you live where you can do that now? I mean without getting at least a ticket if the cop is in a bad mood.

I actually live in Amsterdam right now......but only in my head.....

hoby wrote:

If we don't fight this now, we won't have the OPTION of fighting it in 50 years, when our goverment is dictating everything we can and can't do......The fight starts now!

Hope you're not too late.

OK, OK you're a fucking riot.....and I like you buddy! Yay!

Then my work here is done.

Indeed.

headnugg wrote:TBC at work tomorrow...........

TBC?

To Be Continued...

BTW, I accidentally edited that post, but it didn't have anything useful to say, so maybe it was meant to happen. This post is also marginally devoid of content.

DON'T EDIT PEOPLE'S POSTS

headnugg wrote: Well this is weird, because the above post is a post I allegedly authored, but I DIDN"T write this! What the hell is going on?

Not sure what you mean. Are you saying that you didn't write any of the post that ended:

TBC at work tomorrow...........

Or are you saying that you didn't write this:

Ok, instead of attaching a huge post and then writing nothing, how about we only quote when we're going to respond to something? The huge quote nests are a chore to read, especially when they're in triplicate and quadruplicate (quintuplicate???).

I assumed that last part was written by Phrazz and that he was referring to that when, in his next post, he mentioned accidentally editing a post.

hoby

AH ha, so Phrazz edited my post.....it best have been by accident, I don't want to have to mess anyone up round herre



Well, that threw me off, so I guess I'll have to continue this at work tomorrow, and I'm only there for two hours with pretty much nothing to do, so get ready Hoby.....

hoby wrote:

headnugg wrote:TBC at work tomorrow...........

TBC?

Look at the box above the box I"ve just quoted. I edited my post rather than quote out and write a whole new one......

headnugg wrote: I might go over to Belmont with a cig and see what happens......

Did anyone try this yet? Anyone down to try this weekend?

KLUE wrote:

headnugg wrote: I might go over to Belmont with a cig and see what happens......

Did anyone try this yet? Anyone down to try this weekend?

I did not try it yet, but I will. Is this in effect yet? You know, I just realized I never actually bothered to read the article that sparked this whole debate....

My gym is right next door to Belmont though, so at some point I will go down there to cause a little civil unrest.....

theres a bill being discussed by the baltimore council banning smoking in public. i think it only involves bars and restaurants. i would be shocked if this passed.

diesel wrote:theres a bill being discussed by the baltimore council banning smoking in public. i think it only involves bars and restaurants. i would be shocked if this passed.

Personally, I think that's a good thing. We did it in Boston and I love it. Now when I come home from the 'Dise or Harper's I don't reek of cigarette smoke. NYC has it too.

headnugg wrote:......But again, as much as I hate smoking/smokers, it's complete Bullshit that any goverment organization should dictate your life to you.

Any more than they already do, you mean? Do you pay taxes, drink water from a town/city supply, live in a home that has been inspected for safety of wiring and construction, eat food that must meet certain standards in preparation and packaging, attend schools that have curricula that are approved by state and/or federal education departments, get treated or serviced by doctors or any of a myriad of other professionals that are licensed, work at a job where your employer must follow certain rules about how you're treated, etc, etc? It can get downright depressing and scary if you think about it, but so can the consequences of any of those mechanisms not being in place at least to some extent.

I'll begin here. While I don't consider smoking a basic human right(that was ME being funny), I do consider any authoritive power telling you that you no longer have the right to smoke a cigarette in your home, car or simply walking down the street, a SERIOUS breach of your privacy and your rights. What you've mentioned above about taxes, etc., could be considered a breach of your rights I suppose, but not in the same way I don't think. And again, just for the sake of my argument, those are established laws, so no one thinks to say, "Oh hey, isn't having an inpector in my new house to tell me everything's OK a breach of my privacy/rights?" Well, maybe people think that, but no one is marching down to town hall to demand that inspectors be stopped from inspecting private homes. Yet I think it would be perfectly reasonable for a bunch of people to go to the Town Hall of Belmont and complain about this bullshit smoking ban. We could argue for days about all the things you mentioned in the paragraph above, but none of them are relevant TODAY. This smoking issue is relevant TODAY, right now as we speak. The beaurocrats of Belmont, MA have made a major decision affecting peoples lives, and it shouldn't be taken lightly. If this is not FOUGHT, it will only make it easier for the Gov't to enact other rules. If there's no opposition to this one, when will it stop?

OK, I think we've beaten this one to death and then proceeded to turn it into an unrecognizable, pulpy mess. Let’s agree to agree about smoking itself and agree that we can’t figure out what else we’re disagreeing about once we’re done agreeing on the stuff we agree on.

But your last rousing paragraph leads me to one last question. You've given us some inspiring revolutionary calls-to-arms here over the issue of people being allowed to smoke wherever they want.

Have you been making similar statements (online or in the "meat-world") about the destruction of the Bill of Rights? The elimination of Habeas Corpus? Posse Comitatus? I had written a longer, detailed rant about this, but my computer crashed and I don’t have the strength to reconstruct it.

The short version: We could find out in a heartbeat what it was like to live in Stalinist Russia or (oh, the irony) Hussein’s Iraq. There’s some slight hope in the new makeup of Congress, with talk of repeal or amendment, but as of now, your rights as a US citizen are very different than they were 3 months ago.

As you said about a different issue: “If this is not FOUGHT, it will only make it easier for the Gov't to enact other rules. If there's no opposition to this one, when will it stop?”

If you want to fight the power, that would seem to me to be the more important place to take a stand.

Not intending to be in your face or single you out. Just hoping/wishing for some similar energy around this historic (and horrifying) turn of events.

h