New Zealand - you gotta be this old to have rights.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

All freedoms are, of necessity, limited. You, for example, don’t think people should have the freedom to riot. Why is that?

Boru

If they want to riot at home, on their own property - I say go for it - burn that motherfucker down!

..

Why do you care what they do on their own property?

Do people have the right, while burning that motherfucker down, to endanger the people inside the house?

Boru

[The Architect Of Fate]

If they want to riot at home, on their own property - I say go for it - burn that motherfucker down!

..

Why do you care what they do on their own property?

Do people have the right, while burning that motherfucker down, to endanger the people inside the house?

Boru

Or what if the fire spreads to other people's properties?

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

And do you have laws that prohibit people smoking around their children?

Boru

Or around disabled people or the very old ....etc

Not one's own children in the home. How would you enforce that law? Have children report their parents? Then the sniffer squad go around to see if anyone had recently been smoking in at that place?  People are advised not to smoke around infants and not to drink or smoke during pregnancy.

The elderly; smoking is not permitted in aged care facilities or hospitals. I'm elderly and do not allow smoking in my house or my car. It's not so much the passive smoking, but the stink.  Smoking discolours ceilings and gets into clothes and other fabric.

My late mother never smoked. My dad did, gave up cigarettes when he was 40, but still smoked the odd cigar. My mother developed emphysema, the doctors thought through passive smoking. Mum died with the disease, but not from it.

I read that most people who smoke will develop emphysema , even if they stop smoking. That means I probably already have it. There's no cure, and I'm doing all I can;  stopped smoking and do not remain near smokers.


Trivia: In the last few years I find that I can tell if anyone has been recently smoking near the entrance to the shopping centre. I can smell it.

[Rev. Rye]

If they want to riot at home, on their own property - I say go for it - burn that motherfucker down!

..

Why do you care what they do on their own property?

Do people have the right, while burning that motherfucker down, to endanger the people inside the house?

Boru

Given that he has, in the past, defended people who placed pipe bombs in and around public buildings (or, more accurately, mocked people who think the FBI should find and hold accountable those who did so), anything goes at this point.

[The Architect Of Fate]

Or around disabled people or the very old ....etc

Not one's own children in the home. How would you enforce that law? Have children report their parents? Then the sniffer squad go around to see if anyone had recently been smoking in at that place?  People are advised not to smoke around infants and not to drink or smoke during pregnancy.

The elderly; smoking is not permitted in aged care facilities or hospitals. I'm elderly and do not allow smoking in my house or my car. It's not so much the passive smoking, but the stink.  Smoking discolours ceilings and gets into clothes and other fabric.

My late mother never smoked. My dad did, gave up cigarettes when he was 40, but still smoked the odd cigar. My mother developed emphysema, the doctors thought through passive smoking. Mum died with the disease, but not from it.

I read that most people who smoke will develop emphysema , even if they stop smoking. That means I probably already have it. There's no cure, and I'm doing all I can;  stopped smoking and do not remain near smokers.


Trivia: In the last few years I find that I can tell if anyone has been recently smoking near the entrance to the shopping centre. I can sell it.

I was simply refuting OLB claim that people won't be forced to inhale smoke fumes when certain people will be forced either due to lack of ability to walk away or merely having to inhabit the same place as a smoker.

---

Do people have the right, while burning that motherfucker down, to endanger the people inside the house?

Boru

Given that he has, in the past, defended people who placed pipe bombs in and around public buildings (or, more accurately, mocked people who think the FBI should find and hold accountable those who did so), anything goes at this point.

Remember it's not terrorism if he doesn't take it seriously 

[onlinebiker]

If they want to riot at home, on their own property - I say go for it - burn that motherfucker down!

..

Why do you care what they do on their own property?

Do people have the right, while burning that motherfucker down, to endanger the people inside the house?

Boru

Quit being obtuse.


If it is your house it' s your rules. If you want to inhale poison.- have at it.

If you have kids and you want them to suck poison then sadly that is your right too.......

Your country is majority xtian... Should public opinion rule - and your kid be given a xtian education - because clearly your atheism is fucking them up????


Having freedom frequently means allowing people to do things you see as immoral or just distasteful....

[The Architect Of Fate]

Quit being obtuse.


If it is your house it' s your rules. If you want to inhale poison.- have at it.

If you have kids and you want them to suck poison then sadly that is your right too.......

Your country is majority xtian... Should public opinion rule - and your kid be given a xtian education - because clearly your atheism is fucking them up????


Having freedom frequently means allowing people to do things you see as immoral or just distasteful....

You are the one who brought up private property and he's pointing out that also has limits. And again freedom has limits

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

Do people have the right, while burning that motherfucker down, to endanger the people inside the house?

Boru

Quit being obtuse.


If it is your house it' s your rules. If you want to inhale poison.- have at it.

If you have kids and you want them to suck poison then sadly that is your right too.......

Your country is majority xtian... Should public opinion rule - and your kid be given a xtian education - because clearly your atheism is fucking them up????


Having freedom frequently means allowing people to do things you see as immoral or just distasteful....

 Interesting position.

One's children are not one's possessions. In most countries it is an offence to abuse or harm a child.   I think it's implicit that nobody has the right to harm a child. But where to draw the line? How to enforce laws that say forbid smoking around any child? Or to enforce a law we already have. IE that it is an offence here to strike a child, period.  That means that a parent may not give his/her child a smack or a hiding,  for any reason.

My brother told me this : at age 12, my brother's step son told his mother to get fucked, in a very disrespectful way. My brother backhanded the kid across the face, which knocked him down.  Bro told me he had never  hit the child before or since. I believe it, my brother despises bullies, as do I.  Today, that is illegal in my state

[Rev. Rye]

Huh. Most of us tend to work on the assumption that “the right to swing your fist ends where the other person’s nose begins.” For Biker, it seems to be “the right to swing your fist is absolute when you’re in your own home.”

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Do people have the right, while burning that motherfucker down, to endanger the people inside the house?

Boru

Imma take these one at a time.

Quit being obtuse.

I'm not. I'm trying to get you to understand the point that freedom that endangers other people must be limited.

If it is your house it' s your rules. If you want to inhale poison.- have at it.

For now, it is.

If you have kids and you want them to suck poison then sadly that is your right too.......

I thought your country had laws against child endangerment. Clearly, I was mistaken.

Your country is majority xtian... Should public opinion rule - and your kid be given a xtian education - because clearly your atheism is fucking them up????

No, my country is NOT majority Christian, it isn't even majority religious. 38% Christian, 48% non-religious (the balance is a smattering of other, non-Christian religions). Give that this is the case, the rest of your statement needs no reply.

Having freedom frequently means allowing people to do things you see as immoral or just distasteful....

Agreed. However, it does not mean allowing people to do things which endanger public health and safety (you know, like those riots that always get your knickers in a twist).  As I said before, NO freedoms are absolute - not speech, not assembly, not religion, not press. But these freedoms are legislated to exist in limited, curtailed form because doing so contributes to the public good. Tobacco use contributes nothing.

Boru