Should parents smoke around children?

[PLC1]

The US used to be great because we were free...free do do pretty much whatever we wanted so long as what we were doing didn't encroach on the rights of others....then people started imagining that they had certain rights and the courts, at great cost to our freedom went along with them in their belief of rights that didn't exist...such as the right to not have to smell cigarette smoke...

Cigarette smoking is a case of your freedom ending where my nose begins, literally.

But, I agree to a degree. As long as restaurants and bars, for example would advertise "smoking" or "non smoking", I'd be perfectly OK with letting the owners decide. I just wouldn't patronize the smoking establishments.

Probably a lot of other people wouldn't either.

 

[dogtowner]

Cigarette smoking is a case of your freedom ending where my nose begins, literally.

But, I agree to a degree. As long as restaurants and bars, for example would advertise "smoking" or "non smoking", I'd be perfectly OK with letting the owners decide. I just wouldn't patronize the smoking establishments.

Probably a lot of other people wouldn't either.

That has been shown to be the case many times

 

[palerider]

That has been shown to be the case many times

And that is what freedom looks like.....do what you like so long as you don't infringe on any of my constitutional rights and if I don't approve...then I don't join in...subjugation looks like someone telling me I can't do this or that because someone else finds it offensive....

 

[palerider]

Cigarette smoking is a case of your freedom ending where my nose begins, literally.

Care to show me that in the constitution?...didn't think so.

 

[Old_Trapper70]

Care to show me that in the constitution?...didn't think so.

Try reading the 4th., and 5th., amendments dealing with privacy, and property, rights.

Now, care to show me where in the Constitution you have a Constitutional right to smoke? Didn't think so.

 

[dogtowner]

Article the eleventh... The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Article the twelfth... The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

 

[PLC1]

Care to show me that in the constitution?...didn't think so.

It's right there with the right to wage a "war on drugs" and throw people in jail for making poor choices.

 

[palerider]

Try reading the 4th., and 5th., amendments dealing with privacy, and property, rights.

Now, care to show me where in the Constitution you have a Constitutional right to smoke? Didn't think so.

You don't seem to grasp the nature of the constitution...but being a liberal, that doesn't surprise me. There are two claimed types of freedom...positive freedom. Liberals typically favor positive freedom, or the "freedom to" which is not freedom at all but nothing more than an ever diminishing range of choices. Positive freedom has authoritarianism built in.

Negative freedom...or true freedom is the basis of the constitution. It is not based on the freedom "to" do anything but freedom from interference so long as you don't impinge on someone else natural rights. If you care to look at the difference between the effects of positive freedom and negative freedom on the same people divided into two groups...take a look at the development of west germany (negative freedom) vs east germany (positive freedom). At least until socialism began to actively creep into the west.

As to your references to the constitution...in typical liberal fashion..you don't know what the hell you are talking about.

4th Amendment: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Certainly nothing there regarding any right to not smell cigarette smoke...or not smell anything else...only a truly twisted mind could find a "right" to not smell cigarette smoke in that amendment.

5th Amendment: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Again...how twisted must your logic be in order to find a "right" to not smell cigarette smoke in that?

Clearly you have not read the amendments...and even if you have, lack the cognitive and comprehensive skills to understand what you have read.

And again...the constitution being based on negative freedom....I have the right to do whatever I like so long as I am not impinging on any of your clearly stated natural rights.

 

[palerider]

Article the eleventh... The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Article the twelfth... The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Liberals just can't grasp what the constitution actually says or means. Guess it has been a long time since that was actually taught in school. So it goes with socialism...frog in water....blissfully unaware till it is to late.

 

[palerider]

It's right there with the right to wage a "war on drugs" and throw people in jail for making poor choices.

It isn't there and so it goes when socialist thinking begins to creep into government and begin the process of eroding your natural rights.

 

[Old_Trapper70]

It isn't there and so it goes when socialist thinking begins to creep into government and begin the process of eroding your natural rights.

As usual you spout off with a long winded exhortation not addressing the question asked, and showing once again your lack of knowledge about what a "liberal" is as if it were some disease. The question asked to which you requested a Constitutional reference was "Cigarette smoking is a case of your freedom ending where my nose begins, literally". And that has to do with privacy, and property, rights. You have the right to exercise your "freedom" to smoke as long as it does not interfere with my "freedom" not to be affected by the residue you exude from that "freedom". And my "property" begins with my nose. From the tip of my nose to the back of my head, that is "my" property. You have no "freedom" to interfere with, or contaminate, that space regardless of your lack of concern for the party within that space.

Of course, with your limited knowledge of most anything I doubt if you have the ability to grasp the concept of freedom to begin with. Freedom does not allow anyone to do as they please with no regard for others.

 

[palerider]

As usual you spout off with a long winded exhortation not addressing the question asked, and showing once again your lack of knowledge about what a "liberal" is as if it were some disease. The question asked to which you requested a Constitutional reference was "Cigarette smoking is a case of your freedom ending where my nose begins, literally". And that has to do with privacy, and property, rights. You have the right to exercise your "freedom" to smoke as long as it does not interfere with my "freedom" not to be affected by the residue you exude from that "freedom". And my "property" begins with my nose. From the tip of my nose to the back of my head, that is "my" property. You have no "freedom" to interfere with, or contaminate, that space regardless of your lack of concern for the party within that space.

You have no such freedom defined in the constitution.

Of course, with your limited knowledge of most anything I doubt if you have the ability to grasp the concept of freedom to begin with. Freedom does not allow anyone to do as they please with no regard for others.

So says the socialist...

 

[Old_Trapper70]

You have no such freedom defined in the constitution.

Then neither is the "Castle Doctrine" of self defense.

So says the socialist...

You gonna start that lie again?

 

[palerider]

Again...the Constitution...and the nation in general was based on the concept of negative rights...freedom from government interference... The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.......The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

That means that I have a right to defend my house...my home..and if I smoked, smoke all I care to whether you like the smell or not.

 

[Old_Trapper70]

Again...the Constitution...and the nation in general was based on the concept of negative rights...freedom from government interference... The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.......The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

That means that I have a right to defend my house...my home..and if I smoked, smoke all I care to whether you like the smell or not.

I know. The rights of others mean nothing to your kind, and never have. You have the right to smoke on your property, period. Not on mine, or on Public property.

As to positive, and negative, rights, positive rights are grounded in "consensual" arrangements. Since we live in a society, not little conclaves of individuals, if you want to remain in that society, and receive the benefits that society provides, you either accept it, or you leave. There is no place in the Constitution that guarantees you roads to drive on, water to quench your thirst, electrical power, and the list goes on. Those are all positive rights granted by society, and paid for by society, not any one individual.