78e64e5c 
 XPost: alt.activism, ny.politics, nyc.general 
 XPost: nyc.politics 
 From: liberty@once.net 
  
  wrote in message 
 news:7266296d-3686-417b-8a7a-3c9729020ec5@g17g2000prg.googlegroups.com... 
 On Nov 10, 4:11 pm, "Freedom Fighter"  wrote: 
  
 > I don't smoke (except for the rare cigar). 
 > --- 
 > Then you DO smoke, though not often. 
  
 Or, maybe, I'm an ex-smoker as I don't know when, or if, I will smoke 
 again. 
  
 > That is only true if you smoke in your own home and no non-smokers are 
 > present when you do. 
  
 There are a few places lef in the city where you can actually smoke. 
 Has anyone forced you in them? 
 --- 
 I don't care for inhaling the smoke from someone's cancerette even when 
 outdoors, but there's nothing I can do about that - I am FORCED to put up 
 with it. I can however advocate that indoor public spaces be kept free of 
 this obnoxious pollution. 
 --- 
  
 > Raising the taxes on cigarettes only causes many smokers to get their 
 > smokes elsewhere. I'm sure Yonkers jumped for joy when NYC went smoke- 
 > free; it got the additional tax money from those in the Bronx (and 
 > perhaps other New Yorkers). People order cigarettes online and they 
 > get them from Jersey. 
 > --- 
 > And people buy heroin in needle parks and back alleys. I'm not saying to 
 > ban 
 > tobacco, but I do advocate preventing its use from harming or annoying 
 > non-users. 
  
 Heroin is illegal; tobacco is not.  Then allow smoking in certain bars and 
 keep away from them. 
 --- 
 Heroin, when legally available and used with caution, is actually less 
 harmful than tobacco. The addictive properties of both drugs are about the 
 same. But no heroin user forces others to take that drug, whereas tobacco 
 smokers indirectly force non-users to inhale their smoke. The law should be 
 changed to treat heroin addiction as a medical problem, not a legal one. The 
 law also should rightfully protect non-smokers from air-polluting tobacco 
 users. 
 --- 
  
 > If people knew that Bloomberg wanted a smoke-free New York, when he 
 > first ran for mayor, I doubt he would've won. 
 > --- 
 > Smokers are in the minority, as most people have greater concern for their 
 > health now than in the past, and the dangers of smoking are clear. This is 
 > one issue on which I agree with Bloomberg. 
  
 Bloomberg's anti-smoking plan cost businesses much more than it 
 should've.  Instead of placing the current plans, he whittled away at 
 when and where smoking was permitted.  Businesses ponied up big money 
 to go along with the law, only to have to keep up with additional 
 changes and more additional changes. 
 --- 
 Gee, I really feel sorry for the tobacco corpserations that for decades 
 profited massively by feeding addicts their means of slow suicide! 
 If someone in a bar wants to smoke, all they have to do is step outside to 
 do it. How does that harm the bar's business? 
 --- 
  
 --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05 
  * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)