Texting While Walking

[Stash]

Why would I have to show you anyting? What does your point have to do with the original point being made that your rights are disappearing. You just need to pay attention to what is going on around you and understand that rights are going away IMO. If you don't see it, that's fine. Just don't complain about it later because it's pretty easy to see. I don't think it needs to be pointed out.

'Right to be stupid'?

I won't miss 'em.

I'm tired of stupid things happening in the name of 'freedom'.

It's the line the 'have's' give to the 'have-nots' to shut them up.

It doesn't work for me.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Should we ban fat people from buying anything except vegetables? I guess we should. They are causing a tremendous strain on the health care system.

If I am a smoker I pay more for insurance. The free market works when allowed to do so. Fat people should be paying the most. Attention all fatties... Please stop eating or I will pass a law forcing you to.

I don't like smelling smoke on my clothes either but I gotta say that we now see the progression of these kinds of limitations moving forward. We see things being banned in NY that are ludicrous IMO. It's a matter of time before we see this filter down into the rest of the country. It's a dangerous road we are going down IMO. We are allowing freedoms to be taken simply because we don't like things like the smell of smoke but honestly, you don't have to go to bars and there have always been eateries that had smoking and none smoking seating. Now we are talking about not being able to smoke in parks? Really? We are allowing it to happen and it will go beyond smoking in bars. It will go to places that are people are going to say, "Hey wait." Unfortunately, it will be too late because we didn't understand that what we were giving away for convenience will be applied to other things in life. That's how it is unfortunately.

 

[Stash]

Should we ban fat people from buying anything except vegetables? I guess we should. They are causing a tremendous strain on the health care system.

Let them do whatever they want, when they're on a separate healthcare system than me. Again, more freedom for them. But when that collapses, don;t come running to me.

If I am a smoker I pay more for insurance. The free market works when allowed to do so. Fat people should be paying the most. Attention all fatties... Please stop eating or I will pass a law forcing you to.

Again, just keep them completely separate insurance company for smokers, separate company for non-smokers. You want your own freedoms? Fine. But you need the 'freedom' to face the consequences alone too. Along with the people who somehow feel the need to have AK-47's. Heck you can make a reality show out of it to see who dies first.

Are you against a smoker only business. Smoke shops and fine tobacco shops have been forced to close in KC because of stupid lazy do gooders. Beware the do gooders.

You would have to give me the specifics on that issue for me to have an informed opinion as I simply don't know.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

'Right to be stupid'?

I won't miss 'em.

I'm tired of stupid things happening in the name of 'freedom'.

It's the line the 'have's' give to the 'have-nots' to shut them up.

It doesn't work for me.

There have been some very intelligent people who smoked. I'd wager that many, many have been significantly smarter then you or I. While your not missing anything go by, be sure you don't miss that point.

You can be tired of that all you want but keep in mind, there are many out there that look at us and say, "Those guys are stupid." Take care that a day may come when they look at it and say, "They don't work for me."

It's a double edged knife.

 

[JBond]

I don't like smelling smoke on my clothes either but I gotta say that we now see the progression of these kinds of limitations moving forward. We see things being banned in NY that are ludicrous IMO. It's a matter of time before we see this filter down into the rest of the country. It's a dangerous road we are going down IMO. We are allowing freedoms to be taken simply because we don't like things like the smell of smoke but honestly, you don't have to go to bars and there have always been eateries that had smoking and none smoking seating. Now we are talking about not being able to smoke in parks? Really? We are allowing it to happen and it will go beyond smoking in bars. It will go to places that are people are going to say, "Hey wait." Unfortunately, it will be too late because we didn't understand that what we were giving away for convenience will be applied to other things in life. That's how it is unfortunately.

Based on my past experiences with CBZ, this is probably not the place to get into this, but if anyone is interested go to iceberg's new site. If anyone is interested PM me, so we can stick to the guidelines here. I do not want an issue to arise with the powers that be, especially during training camp.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Based on my past experiences with CBZ, this is probably not the place to get into this, but if anyone is interested go to iceberg's new site. If anyone is interested PM me, so we can stick to the guidelines here. I do not want an issue to arise with the powers that be, especially during training camp.

Well said JB. I am glad that you are mindful of this, as we all should be.

Thank you.

 

[rynochop]

I agree with you Hoof. I feel like I'm fortunate that I grew up in an era when we didn't have cell phones or facebook or whatever other social media outlets that are currently out there..

Yep, and you had to get your Cowboys news in the, omg, the paper!

We had 30 minutes of the NFL today before game time and 3 channels and we liked it!

 

[JBond]

Let them do whatever they want, when they're on a separate healthcare system than me. Again, more freedom for them. But when that collapses, don;t come running to me.



Again, just keep them completely separate insurance company for smokers, separate company for non-smokers. You want your own freedoms? Fine. But you need the 'freedom' to face the consequences alone too. Along with the people who somehow feel the need to have AK-47's. Heck you can make a reality show out of it to see who dies first.



You would have to give me the specifics on that issue for me to have an informed opinion as I simply don't know.

Why do you get upset when people exercise their rights? Maybe you are confused about the intent of the second amendment? I am happy to help clarify if you would like me to. Come on by Ice's new site.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Yep, and you had to get your Cowboys news in the, omg, the paper!

We had 30 minutes of the NFL today before game time and 3 channels and we liked it!

Not sure what you are trying to say here so if I am off base, please correct me.

If you feel as if you are better off, that's OK with me. Continue down the path you are on and be happy. Me, I know the difference and I feel more fortunate that I grew up when I did. You don't agree? OK with me. Do what you do but don't expect a whole lot of sympathy. I suspect it's not going to be present.

 

[Stash]

There have been some very intelligent people who smoked. I'd wager that many, many have been significantly smarter then you or I. While your not missing anything go by, be sure you don't miss that point.

If they smoked and knowingly damaged their body, how are they 'smarter than us'?

You can be tired of that all you want but keep in mind, there are many out there that look at us and say, "Those guys are stupid." Take care that a day may come when they look at it and say, "They don't work for me."

It's a double edged knife.

I think that's the 'Big Brother' story, one that I've never subscribed to.

One side of the political spectrum constantly uses it - and the guise of 'freedom' - for their 'right' to do bad things.

Again, the 'freedoms' being discuseed here come with a cost. And that cost should be assumed solely by the people exercising those freedoms - and no one else.

Until that complete separation happens, there has to be a compromise.

 

[Stash]

Why do you get upset when people exercise their rights? Maybe you are confused about the intent of the second amendment?

I believe that it was written before they had automatic weapons, wasn't it?

I am happy to help clarify if you would like me to. Come on by Ice's new site.

I'm not aware of that site, can you tell me more?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

If they smoked and knowingly damaged their body, how are they 'smarter than us'?

If you ever ate fast food or fried anything, how are those who do not not smarter then you? If you didn't buy a 200 thousand dollar policy instead of buying that new car or house or vacation or whatever the case, how are those who did not smarter? If you elected to build a house in the Midwest and it was hit by a Twister and the other guy built in Arizona and he or she's wasn't, wasn't that person smarter then you? You can't context that way. It doesn't work. Goodness sakes, Albert Einstein smoked like a chimney. He was most certainly smarter.

I think that's the 'Big Brother' story, one that I've never subscribed to.

One side of the political spectrum constantly uses it - and the guise of 'freedom' - for their 'right' to do bad things.

Again, the 'freedoms' being discuseed here come with a cost. And that cost should be assumed solely by the people exercising those freedoms - and no one else.

Until that complete separation happens, there has to be a compromise.

Since when is smoking bad? It's bad for you but is it bad? My Grandfather smoked. I didn't like it but he did it and he was not a bad man. Why do we have to demonize this in order to justify the behavior? Smoking is not a bad thing. It's bad for you but it's not bad, per say.

I don't have a problem with anybody saying that people who smoke should assume the costs associated but that's irrelevant isn't it. What we are talking about here is losing the right to make the choice to smoke or do things such as smoke. Your argument is leaking water in massive quantities here. One has nothing at all to do with the other. Your beating the wrong drum.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I believe that it was written before they had automatic weapons, wasn't it?

It was but honestly, until you can come up with a definition of what is considered Automatic Weapon that can be agreed upon, you have no room to argue the point. Revolvers are auto in comparison to flint locks. We all can only have flint locks?

 

[Stash]

If you ever ate fast food or fried anything, how are those who do not not smarter then you? If you didn't buy a 200 thousand dollar policy instead of buying that new car or house or vacation or whatever the case, how are those who did not smarter? If you elected to build a house in the Midwest and it was hit by a Twister and the other guy built in Arizona and he or she's wasn't, wasn't that person smarter then you? You can't context that way. It doesn't work. Goodness sakes, Albert Einstein smoked like a chimney. He was most certainly smarter.

Smarter in some ways then, but this 'broad brush' thing doesn't work for me.

Since when is smoking bad? It's bad for you but is it bad? My Grandfather smoked. I didn't like it but he did it and he was not a bad man. Why do we have to demonize this in order to justify the behavior? Smoking is not a bad thing. It's bad for you but it's not bad, per say.

Sounds like semantics to me. It does damage, in numerous ways. And again, if folks want the 'freedom' to damage themselves, they can have it, just don't have that damage impact me in any way, shape, or form. Because then you're infringing on my rights for your freedom.

I don't have a problem with anybody saying that people who smoke should assume the costs associated but that's irrelevant isn't it. What we are talking about here is losing the right to make the choice to smoke or do things such as smoke. Your argument is leaking water in massive quantities here. One has nothing at all to do with the other. Your beating the wrong drum.

Where did they lose their right to smoke? Last I checked they still can. What they 'lost' was the right to affect others with their own mistake. At least on some level.

And you say my argument is 'leaking water'?

 

[Stash]

It was but honestly, until you can come up with a definition of what is considered Automatic Weapon that can be agreed upon, you have no room to argue the point. Revolvers are auto in comparison to flint locks. We all can only have flint locks?

How about the weapons that the lunatic in Colorado was able to easily obtain to carry out that travesty?

 

[rynochop]

Not sure what you are trying to say here so if I am off base, please correct me.

If you feel as if you are better off, that's OK with me. Continue down the path you are on and be happy. Me, I know the difference and I feel more fortunate that I grew up when I did. You don't agree? OK with me. Do what you do but don't expect a whole lot of sympathy. I suspect it's not going to be present.

Just messing with you, just find it ironic people complaining about social media on a social media website. And how things were better in 'our day' yet here we are. I grew up in the late 70's and 80's, yeah we lived outside, we came in for lunch and that was about it, we drank from water hoses. My kids are on Xbox and the computer most of the day during the summer cause its 'too hot'.

I'm sure our kids will be complaining about their kids habits 20 years from now...just like our parents were, and there parents were.

 

[JBond]

I believe that it was written before they had automatic weapons, wasn't it?



I'm not aware of that site, can you tell me more?

PM sent....

PS. automatic weapons are already illegal. Thought you should know.

 

[Howardlittleton64]

The government deciding that I have to wear a seatbelt, that I can't smoke in certain private establisments, that I can't smoke or buy marijuana, that I can't text while walking, that I can't buy a big gulp soda, that I am not old enough to drink at 18 but I can die for my country, or until recently I had to wear a helmet to ride a motorcycle, is wrong.


To put things in perspective, I always wear my seatbelt, don't smoke, don't use any drugs of any kind, don't text, never had a big gulp, don't drink and served my country in the army, never rode a motorcycle.

 

[JBond]

How about the weapons that the lunatic in Colorado was able to easily obtain to carry out that travesty?

The real shame of that tragedy is that the theater and the city created a gun free zone where people were unable to defend themselves against a lunatic. The gun free zone did not stop the crazy person. That is the real issue.

Bad people will always find away. The governments ridiculous attempts to deny people the right to defend themselves is a travesty.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Smarter in some ways then, but this 'broad brush' thing doesn't work for me.

It doesn't work for anybody which is why it can't be reasoned out as better for people IMO. That's the whole point. It doesn't work like that, which is exactly what I am trying to tell you.

Sounds like semantics to me. It does damage, in numerous ways. And again, if folks want the 'freedom' to damage themselves, they can have it, just don't have that damage impact me in any way, shape, or form. Because then you're infringing on my rights for your freedom.

Here we go, now you are trying to reason out what you just said doesn't work for you. The argument can just as easily be turned around and stated as such: There is no danger to you because you do not have to frequent bars that allow for smoking. How is your way correct but their point of view wrong? You are OK with infringing on them by banning their ability to smoke but not OK with them telling you that you have the right to not come in. They, on the other hand, have no right that allows them to smoke. That's not compromise.

Where did they lose their right to smoke? Last I checked they still can. What they 'lost' was the right to affect others with their own mistake. At least on some level.

They can't smoke in public establishments, in parks, in an ever increasing number of places. The decision to limit this, in this way, is allowing for this decision to affect you in many ways and you don't even realize it because it's not just limited to smoking. It's going to be used in many different ways but when it is, you are not going to be able to remand it because legal precedents will be used to uphold. It's not just smoking.

And you say my argument is 'leaking water'?

Yeah, that's what I said.