Who Smokes Cigarettes?

[Error 404]

Quote from Rearden Metal:



No, it's impossible to please all people, however you could FREE all people. Religious people with children are no longer allowed to refuse to rent their own property,adjascent to their homes, to flaming homosexuals. Private property rights no longer exist. If I want to build a golf course and wish to forbid Muslims from entering MY property, this should be my constitutional right.
If Mohammad Abdul wishes to exclude me from his sheep fornicators club, that should be his right.

Enslaving everybody to each other is not liberty.

Good post. Good points.

But the thing is, we have gotten off topic. Which again is no sin, since it happens with virtually every thread on ET.

So, giving in to this reality, let me ask you this. If, (for an extreme example), civil rights were to be determined to mean that anyone could make their own rules, then if a popular sentiment became that all people of a particular race, color, religion, sexual orientation, whatever were "undesirable", and because people would have the "right" to refuse to rent to, sell to, provide services to, entertain, cater to, etc. those people, then what kind of country would we have?

Take it a step further. Maybe you couldn't tell if these people belonged to whatever group was found distasteful by the majority. Then maybe the majority could demand the "right" to readily know who these people are. So they could require these undesirables to wear a patch on their sleeves so there would be no mistaking them.

Wait.... this sounds a little familiar somehow.

By the way, your golf club analogy is pretty interesting. As I said, Augusta National doesn't allow women, and that is perfectly legal. It's a private club. They can make thier own rules. The Palm Beach Country Club is open to anyone to join. Any religion, race, gender, whatever. But there is a requirement that they make a $50,000 contribution to the Palm Beach Jewish Federation. (Don't know if it's a one time or annual contribution....I am not a member). I do know of one Irish Catholic who is a member. I believe he is the only non Jewish member.

In context of this thread, he happens to have been the lead lawyer who sued the big tobacco companies. (no real relevance...just an interesting coincidence...very famous lawyer...Bob Montgomery).

Anyway, in non English speaking nations, are there anti-smoking campaigns at all?

Anyone?

Peace,
RS

 

[ARogueTrader]

Govt gets serious about smoking ban
by TIMES NEWS NETWORK
Source: The Times of India, 2001-11-22NEW DELHI:

In a desperate attempt to enforce the smoking ban, the government has constituted special teams to conduct raids at public places from next week.

Health minister A K Walia said the anti-smoking law would be
implemented with a heavy hand from next week. The government already has a provision for imposing a fine of Rs 500 for smoking in enclosed public places and on public transport. Repeated offence could lead to a fine of up to Rs 1,000 or three months’
imprisonment.

The ban, however, has not been effective because of tardy
enforcement. In May 1997, Delhi became the first state in the
country to ban smoking in public places. In four years only 380
people have been penalised.

‘‘Raiding teams have not been doing their job properly. If ever
somebody is caught, he can get away by paying Rs 100. The efficacy of the law is seriously under doubt,’’ said an official.

Walia said following the recent Supreme Court order imposing a
nationwide ban on smoking in public places, the government had taken measures to improve enforcement. ‘‘We have increased the number of teams from one to nine. Now raids will be conducted every day instead of once a week,’’ he said.

According to Walia, teams will visit all enclosed public places like
hospitals, schools, bus and railway stations, restaurants, hotels,
cinema halls and public transport to penalise people who are found smoking.

The government has constituted special teams in all nine revenue
districts. These teams will be headed by chief medical officers who
will be empowered to penalise defaulters. Walia said similar teams were being created at the district police level. Each raiding team will comprise three health officials and two policemen. The raiding teams will also be authorised to issue challans to people violating the law.

Early this year, the government tried to add teeth to the
anti-smoking law by prohibiting the sale of cigarettes to children
below 18 years of age and within 100 metres of an educational
institution.

Walia said in the past two months, the health department had taken action against 187 people for storing or selling tobacco products near educational institutions. Raiding teams sealed five shops for violating the anti-smoking law.

About 40 shopkeepers were caught selling tobacco products to
children below the age of 18 years. Besides, 211 persons were
arrested for smoking in public places and about 58 cases were
pending in courts, Walia said.

Quote from Error 404:



Good post. Good points.

But the thing is, we have gotten off topic. Which again is no sin, since it happens with virtually every thread on ET.

So, giving in to this reality, let me ask you this. If, (for an extreme example), civil rights were to be determined to mean that anyone could make their own rules, then if a popular sentiment became that all people of a particular race, color, religion, sexual orientation, whatever were "undesirable", and because people would have the "right" to refuse to rent to, sell to, provide services to, entertain, cater to, etc. those people, then what kind of country would we have?

Take it a step further. Maybe you couldn't tell if these people belonged to whatever group was found distasteful by the majority. Then maybe the majority could demand the "right" to readily know who these people are. So they could require these undesirables to wear a patch on their sleeves so there would be no mistaking them.

Wait.... this sounds a little familiar somehow.

By the way, your golf club analogy is pretty interesting. As I said, Augusta National doesn't allow women, and that is perfectly legal. It's a private club. They can make thier own rules. The Palm Beach Country Club is open to anyone to join. Any religion, race, gender, whatever. But there is a requirement that they make a $50,000 contribution to the Palm Beach Jewish Federation. (Don't know if it's a one time or annual contribution....I am not a member). I do know of one Irish Catholic who is a member. I believe he is the only non Jewish member.

In context of this thread, he happens to have been the lead lawyer who sued the big tobacco companies. (no real relevance...just an interesting coincidence...very famous lawyer...Bob Montgomery).

Anyway, in non English speaking nations, are there anti-smoking campaigns at all?

Anyone?

Peace,
RS

 

[Rearden Metal]

RS, Nazi Germany was hardly an Objectivist/Libertarian society. It was the exact opposite, actually. Pre-Hitler, the Jews of Germany fared much BETTER than the Jews of Russia & Poland. Racist evil on such a scale can only come from government, not from the general population. The US government should never be allowed to racially discriminate, obviously. The same goes for reverse-discrimination aka affirmative action.

Getting back on topic, I remember in the late eighies/early ninties there were these public service commercials in Israel. Using special effects, they showed an open pack of cigs, and slowly the cigs morphed into disgusting slimy worms crawling out of the box. Then the announcer said: "Cigarette? They disgust me."

Still, the Israeli government always respected the rights of businesses to determine their own smoking policy. Not sure if it's still like that, though.

 

[Error 404]

Quote from Rearden Metal:

I remember in the late eighies/early ninties there were these public service commercials in Israel. Using special effects, they showed an open pack of cigs, and slowly the cigs morphed into disgusting slimy worms crawling out of the box. Then the announcer said: "Cigarette? They disgust me."

Still, the Israeli government always respected the rights of businesses to determine their own smoking policy. Not sure if it's still like that, though.

That is pretty interesting.

I had heard that in the 1960's, Robert Kennedy had produced some anti-smoking films (I guess for a TV campaign) that showed postmortem films or still photos of the lungs of cancer victims. The campaign was never aired because they were deemed too horrifying. And this was long before anti-cigarette commercials were ever broadcast. As a matter of fact, RFK was assassinated in 1968, and cigarette commercials were not taken off of US television until 1970 or 1971 if I remember correctly.

And yeah, I agree that we are far from being anything like Germany was in the 1930's. But still, civil rights and "equality" have to be in some kind of balance. We agree that there will never be conditions; political, social, moral, religious, etc., that will satisfy everyone at the same time. So it's a delicate balance. All we can do is hope to live by a set of "rules" that will not impose the will of others on us. But since that is basically impossible to achieve 100%, the best we can do is try and legislate "fairness" (equality), which is pretty tough. We have failed miserably at attempts to legislate morality.

It isn't easy governing hundreds of millions of people in a country of such diverse cultures as the US. All we can do is try. Every move, every change is going to piss off some and please some. Nothing will be universally accepted. That's how it is.

Personally, the ban on cigarettes in public places works for me (now). Twenty five years ago, it would have made me feel like a victim. Laws change, people change, society changes, everything changes. No easy answers or solutions.

Peace,
RS