Any government that can promote private property rights can take them away".

Don't know where that quote came from but the answer is only if you let them.
People talk the talk but few do little if nothing.

 

Well, the example does go both ways. Mainly, it applies to developing/3rd world countries.

And you are right about "walk the walk" and talk. I try to attend a village board meeting from time to time in my town. It amazing how much effort it takes someone to write a letter to a congressman these days?
:?

 

This is the issue exactly. I don't feel it is right for the government to ban a legal activity in someone else's property.

The fight should really be to make smoking illegal, not ban it from private property. Know why we aren't fighting that fight? Because the tax revenue from the tobacco industry is ENORMOUS.

This is all a political sham.

 

I still see it as my right to live and breath in a smoke free environment as the right that is being taken away. We were all born as nonsmokers, you are commiting the act that infringes upon my rights, not the other way around. We are not fighting to stop your rights, but to regain ours.

 

I always smoke by the trailer, by the street. Usually a good 30-50 ft from my shippers houses. Its policy and common couretesy.

I don't smoke at truck stops, even ones that allow it. Maybe after dinner one, but I can't stand some of these game rooms with guys sucking cigs down almost as fast as their Mt DEw

 

Still comes down to the owners Property Rights and if he wants smoking allowed or not. It's not for the Government to TELL them what They'll allow.

 

IN some places a club can "sponsor" someone to drink. Like a hunting club or something? MI/WI? Area? I know very little about it, but some private clubs have ways around alcohol. Comparing aplles and oranges, similar in color

 

I admit to being conflicted on this issue. I am certainly not for more government control. I have just come from a highly regulated industry. The government can control its property, no problem with that. I think there is something to banning smoking in areas were children are around. Insurance companies should be able to discriminate against smoker as should employers. Private property should be up to the owner, we can all decide if we want to patronize a particular business or not.

 

Private property is exactly that. A place that you own, where you can limit who can, and cannot come in.

A restaurant is not by definition "Private Property". There is no lock on the door, you do not stop at the front and wait for them to ask you in, and anyone, as long as they obey simple rules of decency can come and go at their choosing.

An invitation to come in is implied by an OPEN sign and a person at the front desk that says "How many in your Party". This in effect makes it Public Access.

A highway and a restaurant could be argued have the same access. And as long as you obey certain rules and regulations, you get to use them at your leisure.

It could also be argued, that if you use these public places, then you have a right to certain safety precautions. Not drinking and driving, very few people would argue with that one, and in restaurants not being exposed to a know carcinogen. And only very few people would argue with that also. If you open your place of business to the public, and then do not take precautions to keep the public safe, then you should be responsible for not taking those precautions. The same would apply to a highway. If the Dept of highways runs unsafe highways, or Airline Companies run unsafe airplanes, then they should be held responsible for it.

Your rights to private property, do not trump my rights to personal safety.

 

:roll:

I'm afraid that is where you are wrong