We cannot upgrade your 60A fuse to 100A unless the tails are 25mm

Well, we can make all kinds of broad sweeping generalizations, but the thing is, each person is unique, with their own metabolism, their own "normal" weight, and so on. Making rules that everyone has to obey under threat of violence is not the path to a Free Society.

Thanks, Rich

This essentially proves my point - that antismokerism is a religion, plain and simple.

Thanks! Rich

Yeah, too bad all those antics that "add 10 years to your life" add them to the wrong end. )-;

Thanks, Rich

No it isn't - it's simpler than that. I don't want your stink in my face. End of story.

Dirk

Amen! The Dreaded Libertarian wants freedom for himself, not us.

You want 10 more years of helpless infancy?

Not a problem, but when you pass laws that ban me from smoking even in places you wouldn't go into anyway, you're overstepping the line. How hysterical are you antis anyway?

Thanks, Rich

No, you can have all the freedom that you want, but threatening violence if I smoke somewhere that you wouldn't even go into anyway, that's anathema to Freedom.

As I've said, repeatedly, I have no problem with people who don't like smoke, or who don't like smoking - the problem is making laws against smoking where the antis wouldn't even be anyway.

The sane thing to do would be to put a sign on establishment doors: "CAUTION! This facility accomodates smokers. If you don't like smoke, STAY THE HELL OUT!!"

But there's no reasoning with self-righteous religious fanatics.

Thanks, Rich

What if there are other people in it? Employees? (Do you believe in workplace safety regulations?) Children?

On the contrary, you've been saying the exact opposite of that, repeatedly.

Like what? Bars, restaurants, trains, busses, cinemas, planes, waiting rooms, my place of employment? Nobody is banning you from smoking in your home or outside in the street.

Dirk

But they ARE. The Left Coast has gone bananas.

(I'm a non-smoker, but I don't like government to excess.)

...Jim Thompson

Particulars? Inquiring minds want to know.

Banning smoking outdoors.

There have also been some cases of people using California law to keep their neighbor from smoking in his own house... claiming they could still smell it.

...Jim Thompson

-- | James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona Voice:(480)460-2350 | | | E-mail Address at Website Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat | |

So far it's Calabasas CA only. No one is allowed to spew carcinogens into others' air in PUBLIC places. The least common denominator has been deemed to be "health". [1] (I'm pretty sure they also frown on people spraying bullets.)

I'm really surprized we're on opposite sides of the table re: public-vs-private behavior. I thought this was an area where we were in agreement. . . [1] It's interesting which addictions have gotten govn't endorsement over the years.

In public streets or private property? Fire-hazard areas?

Well, actually, if I *could* smell it I'd object to it. Property lines don't block air pollution.

I don't think we differ. Public space is NOT my own backyard.

Public space IS the bus stop, the library, civic offices, bars and restaurants that don't have separated air spaces.

If it's taxable it's legal ;-)

I'm sure they'd just love to tax prostitution, but they're afraid of the "religious" right.

...Jim Thompson

So put up a fan ;-)

...Jim Thompson

street.

Link, please?

I don't have a link, I just saw the suit mentioned in a newspaper article a few months ago.

...Jim Thompson