Subject:
|
Re: Victories for smokefree ballot initiatives
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 10 Nov 2004 04:48:45 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1649 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tim Courtney wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Tim Courtney wrote:
> >
> > > In the mean time, whatever I can do to clear the air, making it safer for me and
> > > others, I'll do.
> >
> > Even if it violates people's rights?
>
> The right to breathe clean air is inherently superior to the right to subject
> others to the byproduct of your pleasure.
Where? You have no right to breathe ANY air (clean OR dirty) when on my
property, unless I grant it. And conversely I have no right to emit smoke on
your property, unless you grant it.
Therefore when you're on my property, you will breathe the air I choose you to
breathe, or you will need to choose not to be there. And therefore, when I'm on
your property, I will emit the exhaust you choose me to emit, or I will need to
choose not to be there.
Those rights and their boundaries are sufficient to solve your putative issue
without need for further coercion, unless we are talking about public property.
Restaurants and bars are not public property.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Victories for smokefree ballot initiatives
|
| (...) They're open to the public. We aren't talking about esatblishments that close their doors to people walking in. Nontheless, I don't sense we can agree on this issue, as we take a fundamentally different approach towards individual rights. (...) (20 years ago, 10-Nov-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
22 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
