I meant a smoking ban couldn't be harmful to health. That's what the original post was about, right? That banning smoking had led to positive health. It's not always a big government argument guys.

You just said it couldn't hurt and I stated reasons why it can. BUT, I think a lack of freedom can be detrimental to your health...at least mentally.

 

And this particualr issue will always be a "big government argument".

You just said it couldn't hurt and I stated reasons why it can. BUT, I think a lack of freedom can be detrimental to your health...at least mentally.

 

And this particualr issue will always be a "big government argument".

 

So should there be no legal drinking age? Should there be no age as to when a person can begin smoking? I only ask because that's just an off-the-head example of government making a decision for people.

So should there be no legal drinking age? Should there be no age as to when a person can begin smoking? I only ask because that's just an off-the-head example of government making a decision for people.

I'm fine with not having one. It's not really a governmental decison but more of a parental one.

I'm fine with not having one. It's not really a governmental decison but more of a parental one.

 

 

The legal drinking age is not a governmental decision? :confused:

The legal drinking age is not a governmental decision? :confused:

Shouldn't be.

I'm with formerky. If you don't like second-hand smoke, don't go into a smoking establishment. I am OK with certain, time, place, and manner regulations, but the government ban is far too intrusive.

 

Should we ban Big Macs because they have no redeeming value?

 

The government control outweighs the beneficial effects, IMVHO.

 

I will have to agree as far as business patrons go, but for me, that is not the primary issue. If a chemical plant was making the toxic soup that is second hand smoke there is no way that OSHA would allow workers to have a routine exposure to those chemicals. Bar and restaurant workers deserve the same level of protection.

It was placed on the ballot in Ohio. The people have spoken. I don't see that as government control.

 

As with many issues, majority rule is not always the underwriter of common sense.

As with many issues, majority rule is not always the underwriter of common sense.

 

 

It makes perfect sense to me.

So should there be no legal drinking age? Should there be no age as to when a person can begin smoking? I only ask because that's just an off-the-head example of government making a decision for people.

 

I don't see the harm in either case. People who are underage drink and smoke anyway. All the restrictions simply make poor parents feel better about the fact that the government is helping to do their job for them.

I don't see the harm in either case. People who are underage drink and smoke anyway. All the restrictions simply make poor parents feel better about the fact that the government is helping to do their job for them.

 

 

So you see no problem with liquor stores legally being able to see alcohol to 16 year olds?

So you see no problem with liquor stores legally being able to see alcohol to 16 year olds?

 

Nope. If an establishment wishes to enforce a policy of their own it is entirely their prerogative. However I don't see why it is the job of the government to enforce things such as that. It is, in a sense, a legal form of age discrimination.

 

As it is the establishment of a drinking age and so on is problematic in my opinion given the fact that it makes alcohol into a "forbidden fruit" of sorts that kids are more likely to binge on because their opportunties to consume it would usually be few and far between.

Nope. If an establishment wishes to enforce a policy of their own it is entirely their prerogative. However I don't see why it is the job of the government to enforce things such as that. It is, in a sense, a legal form of age discrimination.

 

As it is the establishment of a drinking age and so on is problematic in my opinion given the fact that it makes alcohol into a "forbidden fruit" of sorts that kids are more likely to binge on because their opportunties to consume it would usually be few and far between.

 

 

All I can say is WOW!!!!

All I can say is WOW!!!!

 

Because....?

 

 

 

My opinions are quite different from many on here save for maybe two others that I can think of off the top of my head. That said, I tend toward less government than more.

Because....?

 

 

Because of what you said. Why even have any laws or regulations based on your argument? Why not just let 24 year olds have consensual sex with 10 year olds?

Count me in on the side of Peprock and FKY. :thumb: