He doesn't need that right. You need permission to be on the property from the property owner, who you are desperately avoiding discussing (in fact you've been systematically avoiding any discussion of property owners in this entire thread). Part of the agreement between the property owner and you that allows you to come onto the property is acceptance of the conditions of the property. Just like you accept that there will be loud, potentially hearing-damaging levels of music at concerts.

You were clearly aware of the conditions (you admitted you knew what was going on as soon as you opened the door). You made a choice. Nobody drug you into that building. Nobody held a gun to your back.

Not me. I want to use your argument that if I don't do activity X and other people do activity X and that decreases my general health I should be able to outlaw X to outlaw driving for non-commercial reasons in Manhattan.

I assume I have your support.

No. We're having what's called a normative discussion here. You can't just short-circuit a discussion of (eg) whether weed should be decriminalized by saying "BUT WEED IS ILLEGAL, ERGO I WIN."

Well, you CAN do that, but that's not a convincing argument.

And this is where you completely, of course, are simply bat**** crazy.

Except that isn't what I've done at all.

I don't think anyone has the right to poison you against your will.

I think you should have the right to poison yourself.

If you walk into a private entertainment venue that is full of smoke, that's ON YOU.

Lol Dwetzel - that's quite the convincing reply...

Brilliant retort.

There is no place for logic here only for arguing .

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me why I can't outlaw non-commercial cars in Manhattan. It's public space so I don't even need to worry about pesky private property owners.

Also, the reduced road maintenance can be used to reduce taxes or improve public transit. Everyone wins!

Which is what you're displaying. I'm sure somewhere ITT you've actually said that if you enter another man's home he should bow down and not smoke while the great Goodie graces him with his presence.

You're either the biggest health nit in the world or the biggest anti-social god complex douchebag in the world.

I'm going with the latter. Without question you have shown that you believe your thoughts feelings and opinions must be respected even when they grossly infringe upon others. And rather than address that infringement you just handwave it away as "stupid smokers" every time it's brought up by these inconvenient mo-fo's who just don't get what you do, which is that... it's not just anyones opinion.. It's Goodie's opinion. And that's ****in special.

For some reason you just can never wrap your head around the fact that no one here buys that you're superior to them, which seems to be quite a source of shock and frustration to you.

Well then, prove your heretofore unfounded assertion that one inherently gives up all rights for anyone to poison me (or presumably, to do anything else to me) when I go into a public or quasi-public place. You earlier said that you don't think it's solely my responsibility to avoid the smokers in these situations, yet that's EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING HERE.

Hint: That's not even close to what he's saying. What's wrong with you?

While, on the other hand, the other side of this argument have shown that they believe their thoughts, feelings and opinions and behaviors must be respected even when they grossly infringe on the health of others.

Hint 2: This is qualified by: and "the other side" owns the property that the "others" are entering willingly and with full knowledge of what will happen to them upon entering.

lol, what? Of course it is. A place of business is, (and this is where pvn will make up his own definitions) a quasi-public place. He has asserted (indeed, this is the entire ****ing argument) that the smokers right to poison me in such a setting trumps my right to not be poisoned in such a setting.

What's wrong with YOU?

Hint #2: No, they don't.

Specifically, I don't think they give up their right to not be poisoned by a third party or other invited guest simply by entering a property, same as I don't think that if I get punched by a guy at that bar that I gave up my right to not be punched because I was there.

You're still pretending to be being forced into smoke filled bars against your will by horrible smokers I see...

Closer - you've dropped "public". Good first step. Now look at Hint 2 and see what you're still missing.

Wow, this is the first post of yours that really gives a true legitimate opinion that gets to heart of the issue. Good work!!! I didn't think you had it in you.

My retort is this. When it comes to the safety of the public, a governing body needs to make sure that safety is insured to the best of their ability. If someone wanted to open up a bar that simply served cigs and nothing else, I would be okay with people smoking there since non-smokers would have no reason to go there. However, because this bar serves alcohol and whatever else that might be attractive to non-smokers, it's the smokers (and by extension the bar owner) that need to adhere to the non-smokers so that their health is not affected.

I can't trust the property owner to make the right decision so I have to rely on a governing body.

Nope

And, yet again, I'm not stopping you from smoking. I'm stopping you from damaging me.

Why can't smokers simply figure out a way to exercise their behavior that they want to do without damaging other people in the process?

Well, then, ****ing say it. Show your own work. In detail. Quit dancing about it. Tell me exactly where I'm wrong.

nope again

just like goodie, you've completely ignored a third person.


I want to go swimming. But the gym I joined keeps their pool really cold because some of the people there are training for a polar bear club thing. Why should their preferences get to trump mine?

I bolded it

everyone else reading this thread (except goodie) understands the argument and doesn't feel the need to childishly misrepresent it like you're doing.

I am absolutely certain that no one on here thinks I'm superior to them. Trust me.

You have this completely wrong. I just would like others to treat me like I treat them, with respect and courtesy. That's all.