So, just stay away from us. But don't use the heavy hand of govt to
screw us, deny us the right to a cigar dinner at a restaurant in a private
room, and then pretend you're a conservative.

somone is working in that room with cigar smoke.......... YUK

thats why smoking in any public place has become illegal


anyones right to smoke ends at my nose.

no need to make smoking illegal. just tax tobacco so much no one can afford it!!

On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 7:28:24 PM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 8:03:18 PM UTC-4, bob_villain wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 6:53:14 PM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 7:17:17 PM UTC-4, Ralph wrote:

So the right of one person to stink up a room trumps 100 other people's right to clean air?
You're going to FORCE everyone else to breath your stinky cigar smoke?

A private room, with it's own ventilation. Or how about a bar that wants
to allow smoking for smokers. Anyone forcing you to go there? Anyone forcing
you to do anything? No, the forcing is of the smokers, who have no rights
anymore.

Smokers have all the rights they need...stay home and smoke. It's your right to harm yourselves. Have a happy and long life, but stay the **** away from me and my family!

Typical lib attitude. But whoooh, God forbid anyone say anything about
denying say a muslim some right, or a Mexican a right to come here illegally.
Then, OMG, it's a whole different story. But cigar smokers, wanting to have
a private cigar dinner, in a private restaurant, well, they have no rights.

Now you're scrambling like Trump, trying but desperately failing to make a reasonable response. This absolutely nothing to do with any ethnics or their rights or privileges. Try not to blow a gasket.

On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 9:12:57 PM UTC-4, bob haller wrote:
So, just stay away from us. But don't use the heavy hand of govt to
screw us, deny us the right to a cigar dinner at a restaurant in a private
room, and then pretend you're a conservative.

somone is working in that room with cigar smoke.......... YUK


No one is forcing anyone to work in that cigar room. How many waiters
and waitresses smoke?



thats why smoking in any public place has become illegal


A private room at a private restaurant is not a public place.




anyones right to smoke ends at my nose.


Then just don't go to the cigar dinner. See how easy that was?



no need to make smoking illegal. just tax tobacco so much no one can afford it!!

Spoken like a true lib. Why don't we put a tax on muslims? Every terrorist
attack, the tax goes up. How would you like that?

On 7/3/2016 2:09 PM, Muggles wrote:
On 7/3/2016 12:51 PM, Stormin Mormon wrote:

Don't waste a lot of time. It appears clear that
Trader will only accept a study done by Byzantine
monks between the years 500BC and 400BC, with the
report submitted in Egyptian, on papyrus scrolls.
And stored in the Dead Sea Caves.


hahaha! Ok .. that was just funny.


BTW, Trader 4 just disappeared from my screen.
Bummer on him.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

On 7/3/2016 6:47 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2016 13:51:53 -0400, Stormin Mormon
Don't waste a lot of time. It appears clear that
Trader will only accept a study done by Byzantine
monks between the years 500BC and 400BC, with the
report submitted in Egyptian, on papyrus scrolls.
And stored in the Dead Sea Caves.
Responding to Trader is a total waste of energy and time.


I did reach that conclusion.

--
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

On 7/3/2016 5:44 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 5:49:10 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
On 7/3/2016 2:13 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 1:51:53 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:


Serious question, are you an Alzheimer's patient??


Serious question, are you the village idiot? Never mind, we know the answer.
You just posted a link to an abstract about a study that was conducted. You're
so stupid that you think that's "proof". It just says a study was done,
a little about the methodology and ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about the results. And you want to talk about my mental health and brains? If we didn't already know
you're the village idiot, that would go a long way to proving it.



I posted 4 links. Which one are you talking about? Care to discuss
what the article actually contained, or do you just enjoy being vague?




I already went through it with you. Once again, you're the village idiot.
Time to change your screen name again, to better troll, perhaps?


I like this article. Read the full article describing all the tech stuff
and results. IOW's, you'll ignore it because it proves you wrong.


"Formation of carcinogens indoors by surface-mediated reactions of
nicotine with nitrous acid, leading to potential third hand smoke hazards.

This study shows that residual nicotine from tobacco smoke sorbed
to indoor surfaces reacts with ambient nitrous acid (HONO) to
form carcinogenic tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNAs). Substan-
tial levels of TSNAs were measured on surfaces inside a smokers
vehicle. Laboratory experiments using cellulose as a model indoor
material yielded a10-fold increase of surface-bound TSNAs when
sorbed secondhand smoke was exposed to 60 ppbv HONO for 3 hours. In both
cases we identified
1-(N-methyl-N-nitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridinyl)-4-butanal, a TSNA absent in
freshly emitted tobaccosmoke, as the major product. The potent
carcinogens 4-(methy-lnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridinyl)-1-butanone and
N-nitroso nornicotine were also detected. Time-course measurements
revealed fast TSNA formation, with up to 0.4% conversion of nicotine.
Given the rapid sorption and persistence of high levels of nicotine on
indoor surfaces€”including clothing and human skin€”this recently
identified process represents an unappreciated health hazard through
dermal exposure, dust inhalation, and ingestion. These findings raise
concerns about exposures to the tobacco smoke residue that has
been recently dubbed €œthirdhand smoke.€� Our work highlights the
importance of reactions at indoor interfaces, particularly those
involving amines and NO x/HONO cycling, with potential health impacts."


http://www.pnas.org/content/107/15/6576.full.pdf


--
Maggie

On 7/3/2016 5:46 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 1:15:57 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
On 7/3/2016 8:42 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 5:40:52 PM UTC-4, bob haller wrote:
australia has raised tobacco taxes dramatically. one dollar a pack per year. year one a buck,
year 10 .........10 bucks

i hate the stink, know far too many friends who died from smoking......

I hate the stink from liberals too, how about we tax them like that until
they go away?

geesh ... Liberals just have a different viewpoint.

Liberal smokers STINK just like conservative smokers STINK just like
moderate smokers STINK ....


So, just stay away from us.

Us? So, you smoke? Don't you know you stink to the rest of the world,
or that your secondhand and third hand smoke makes other people sick
just because you show up with those chemicals in your hair and on your
clothes? Don't you know when you pass by people that that stench turns
peoples stomachs?

You claim to be an engineer and a smart man, but smart people don't
always care about how their actions affect other people.

Are you offended by what I've said - that you stink and make people sick
to their stomachs as you pass by if you're a smoker? It's just the
truth. Think about it. Do you want to have that sort of affect on people?

But don't use the heavy hand of govt to
screw us, deny us the right to a cigar dinner at a restaurant in a private
room, and then pretend you're a conservative.

Smoking a cigar at at restaurant while having dinner isn't a right.

--
Maggie

On 7/3/2016 5:48 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2016 12:55:49 -0500, Muggles
wrote:

On 7/3/2016 12:38 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 1:09:08 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
On 7/3/2016 8:30 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 4:36:03 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
On 7/2/2016 11:41 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 7/2/2016 12:20 PM, Vic Smith wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jul 2016 12:04:00 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 7/2/2016 11:48 AM, wrote:
Take a look at this weeks "Inside Man" on CNN.
He will tell you about all of the dangerous chemicals you have around
you every day. Most are in far higher concentrations than you find in
a whiff of smoke.


That may be, but it does not make smoke any less a danger. Factors
include concentration and length of exposure. Sitting in a tight space
with two chain smokers is more than a whiff.


As far as I know there is basically nowhere where you have to sit in a
tight space with two chain smokers. Unless you want to.
There are people who complain when they *see* a whiff of smoke
downwind 50 feet away.
People who complain about the *smell* of smoke on clothing.
That's what I assume he's talking about.


When we were kids it was common to have a car or living room filled with
smoke. Not so much today. Smell of smoke is not second hand smoke. I
may not like it but I don't see it as a health hazard.


Third hand smoke:

"Chemicals that are left over after smoking land on any surface in an
area where smoking has taken place. Studies have found that of chemicals


I can sy for sure a "whiff" can be more than enough to send me for my
inhaler.

Yesterday I found this little tidbit of info:

"1:
When THS reacts with nitrous oxide (for example from gas appliances or
car engines) in the air creating carcinogens known as nitrosamines. When
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in THS react with ozone in the air to
create formaldehyde among other chemicals.
2:
- Studies in mice have found that THS causes molecular changes in cells
which lead to insulin resistance (simplistically, the precursor to
diabetes.)"

https://www.verywell.com/what-is-thi...-smoke-2248867

1. That information explains why I'd get so ill riding in a car when my
parents were smoking. I wouldn't just feel bad or cough - I would get
so sick to my stomach that I couldn't function for an entire day or more
depending on how long I was exposed.
2. I was exposed to second hand and third hand smoke my entire childhood
'til the day I moved out. For years I was hypoglycemic having episodes
of nearly passing out, and I'm now a type 2 diabetic.

--
Maggie

On 7/3/2016 5:52 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 1:13:51 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:


Can you just not comprehend the many times that I've come straight out
and said I'm a conservative?


Can you not comprehend that I said, sure, that's just like all the times
Green comes in here and tells us he's a Republican. But since he's
demonstrated for years that he's not, no one believe him either. In his
case, he's yet to name a single Republican that he likes, he regularly
rants against all of them, even Reagan was no good.




Conservatives believe
that individuals have a right to live their own life and if I want to
have a cigar dinner in
a private room in a private restaurant that is an issue of my freedom
to do what I please, and none of your business. What constitutional
power gives you the right to tell us we can't a cigar dinner? Is that
the country Madison and the founders saw?


Conservatives believe in common sense, and common sense says that if
smoking in all it's forms makes people sick that it's a GOOD idea to
limit exposure to it for people who don't smoke, or don't want to be
exposed to hazardous waste.



Then why are you against allowing me to have a private cigar dinner at
a restaurant in a private room?

Smoking leaves residue and that third hand residue can make people sick.

It's like trying to defend spraying a room with toxic waste in the name
of freedom and then accusing anyone who objects to it of being
controlling and manipulative.

You wouldn't want to be the next group of people in the room that had
been saturated with toxic waste, and I don't want to be the next person
in the room where people may have been smoking.

BTW, people who smoke in one room have no control over where the smoke
goes or where the residue ends up, in addition to, the walking stench of
people going to and fro throughout the restaurant from the "smoking" room.

How about a bar that wants to allow
smoking, all the patrons that go there, the staff, are all OK with it,
how is it consistent with conservatism for you to use big govt to deny
them that right?

I imagine there are a few dives that still allow smoking, but their days
are numbered.

And conservatives don't believe in "common sense", they
believe in smaller govt and allowing people the freedom to live their
own lives, eg smokers have rights too.

I'm all for smaller government and freedom. What I am AGAINST is anyone
poisoning the air I breathe, and smoking does that.

--
Maggie

trader_4 presented the following explanation :
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 7:58:43 PM UTC-4, FromTheRafters wrote:
trader_4 wrote on 7/3/2016 :
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 5:17:41 PM UTC-4, FromTheRafters wrote:
trader_4 formulated the question :
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 1:51:53 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:


Serious question, are you an Alzheimer's patient??

--
Maggie

Serious question, are you the village idiot?

To you, everyone *else* seems to be the village idiot.

Have you figured out how 1^2 can equal 2 yet?

https://youtu.be/WwndchnEDS4?t=1134
https://youtu.be/5br-GWd_DpA?t=3655

HAve you figured out how a current of zero is a real value, isn't
a violation of Ohms Law, and doesn't involve division by zero?

It's a formula, and when the current is zero the resistance is infinity
and you can't multiply by infinity either.


See, this is why you're the village idiot. V = IR. Just because I is
zero, that doesn't make R zero. You really should have taken basic algebra.

Of course not, current and resistance are *inversely proportional* when
voltage is held invariant. The extremes would be zero and infinity.

I have a 100 ohm resistor. With 0 current, Ohms LAw gives V = 0 x 100 = 0.

Ohm's law is a formula, there are three equations to consider. With the
resistance held invariant the equation is R=V/I and the current must be
non-zero.

With 0 current through a resistance of 100 ohms, 0 voltage is produced.
What moron would ever think that somehow that resistor now has a value of
infinity? Good grief. I even suggested last time that you graph it,
voltage versus current. It's a straight line, right through the origin.

At the origin, the formula for R held invariant is R=V/I or 100=0/0 an
indeterminate form at best and undefined at worst.

Feel free to pick up your village idiot award anytime.

D=RT

If I live x distance from work (D held invariant at x) then the time to
travel and the rate of travel are related to that distance (R=D/T and
T=D/R). However, if I travel infinitely fast (R=infinity) I can get
there in no time flat (T=0) and if I proceed at a rate of 0 (R=0) I
will never get there (T=infinity) no matter the value of x.

If I lived closer or farther from work (x' and x") the numbers are
different for rates and/or times between those extremes cases and each
has has a different value but the same inverse relationship (because
they are both related to x), but not *at* those extremes - *at* those
extremes the distance x x' x" can be 'any number'.

Why are you allowing me to troll you like this, are you some kind of
mathochist?

bob haller wrote on 7/3/2016 :
So, just stay away from us. But don't use the heavy hand of govt to
screw us, deny us the right to a cigar dinner at a restaurant in a private
room, and then pretend you're a conservative.

somone is working in that room with cigar smoke.......... YUK

thats why smoking in any public place has become illegal


anyones right to smoke ends at my nose.

no need to make smoking illegal. just tax tobacco so much no one can afford
it!!

I suppose that goes for coal burning power plants too. Oh wait,
somebody already thought of that.

trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 1:13:51 PM UTC-4, Muggles
wrote:


Can you just not comprehend the many times that I've come
straight
out and said I'm a conservative?


Can you not comprehend that I said, sure, that's just like
all the
times Green comes in here and tells us he's a Republican.
But since
he's demonstrated for years that he's not, no one believe
him either.
In his case, he's yet to name a single Republican that he
likes, he
regularly rants against all of them, even Reagan was no
good.




Conservatives believe
that individuals have a right to live their own life and
if I want
to have a cigar dinner in
a private room in a private restaurant that is an issue
of my
freedom to do what I please, and none of your business.
What
constitutional power gives you the right to tell us we
can't a
cigar dinner? Is that the country Madison and the
founders saw?


Conservatives believe in common sense, and common sense
says that if
smoking in all it's forms makes people sick that it's a
GOOD idea to
limit exposure to it for people who don't smoke, or don't
want to be
exposed to hazardous waste.


--
Maggie

Then why are you against allowing me to have a private
cigar dinner at
a restaurant in a private room? How about a bar that
wants to allow
smoking, all the patrons that go there, the staff, are all
OK with it,
how is it consistent with conservatism for you to use big
govt to deny
them that right? And conservatives don't believe in
"common sense",
they believe in smaller govt and allowing people the
freedom to live
their own lives, eg smokers have rights too.

Open a Black/Hispanic/LGBT/Safe space cigar bar and you'll
be fine

On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 11:40:02 PM UTC-4, FromTheRafters wrote:


See, this is why you're the village idiot. V = IR. Just because I is
zero, that doesn't make R zero. You really should have taken basic algebra.

Of course not, current and resistance are *inversely proportional* when
voltage is held invariant. The extremes would be zero and infinity.


Irrelevant. Put zero in for I, you get V = 0. Again, please take a course
in algebra.


I have a 100 ohm resistor. With 0 current, Ohms LAw gives V = 0 x 100 = 0.

Ohm's law is a formula, there are three equations to consider. With the
resistance held invariant the equation is R=V/I and the current must be
non-zero.


The fact that manipulation of the one equation into various forms produces
one where you can divide by zero does not make the other forms of the equation
invalid, even if that variable is zero. Please take an algebra course.
You're forcing division by zero where there is no division by zero. The rest
of us know that a 100 ohm resistor is still a 100 ohm resistor with no
current flowing in it.



With 0 current through a resistance of 100 ohms, 0 voltage is produced.
What moron would ever think that somehow that resistor now has a value of
infinity? Good grief. I even suggested last time that you graph it,
voltage versus current. It's a straight line, right through the origin.

At the origin, the formula for R held invariant is R=V/I or 100=0/0 an
indeterminate form at best and undefined at worst.


Again, you are trying to force division by zero, when no division by
zero is needed. V = IR, it's all multiplication.

This is like saying I have groups of apples in threes. If I select
X groups, how many apples do I then have in total.

T = N x 3 5 groups I have 15 apples total

How many apples do I have with N=0? Equation gives 0, a valid number.

Your answer, "You can't do that because you could transform that
equation into:

T/N = 3.

And OMG we're dividing by Zero!




Why are you allowing me to troll you like this, are you some kind of
mathochist?

Good to see you admit you're a troll. I just seek to expose ignorance
wherever I find it. And I especially dislike people who are ignorant
of basic algebra trying to tell degreed engineers, electrical inspectors,
how Ohm's Law and basic algebra work.

BTW did you do that graph of V = IR yet? Graph V versus I and tell us
what you get. It's a straight line that goes right through the origin.
It's shocking how far the US has fallen in math and science.

On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 10:51:38 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
On 7/3/2016 5:46 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 1:15:57 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
On 7/3/2016 8:42 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 5:40:52 PM UTC-4, bob haller wrote:
australia has raised tobacco taxes dramatically. one dollar a pack per year. year one a buck,
year 10 .........10 bucks

i hate the stink, know far too many friends who died from smoking......

I hate the stink from liberals too, how about we tax them like that until
they go away?

geesh ... Liberals just have a different viewpoint.

Liberal smokers STINK just like conservative smokers STINK just like
moderate smokers STINK ....


So, just stay away from us.

Us? So, you smoke?

Only an occasional cigar. I just stand up for the rights of everyone,
including cigarette smokers.


Don't you know you stink to the rest of the world,

You stink to me too. Lots of things stink, should we ban them all?
How about incense? Lets' start a campaign to demonize that. Anyone
doubt that we could do "studies" that show the smoke released contains
potentially harmful substances? How about camp fires? OMG, think
of the children inhaling all those carcinogens while toasting marshmallows!



or that your secondhand and third hand smoke makes other people sick
just because you show up with those chemicals in your hair and on your
clothes?

No one is complaining to me. But just listening to you makes me sick,
so there's that.



Don't you know when you pass by people that that stench turns
peoples stomachs?


Don't you know that if I'm in a private room at a restaurant, where
everyone there agrees it's OK, it doesn't matter, that no one's
stomach is turning?



You claim to be an engineer and a smart man, but smart people don't
always care about how their actions affect other people.


The problem is that it's the libs who claim to care about everyone,
so they force their rules down everyone else's throats. Cigarette bans,
soda size limits, soda taxes, salt shaker bans, etc. If they really
cared, they'd leave us free to choose.





Are you offended by what I've said - that you stink and make people sick
to their stomachs as you pass by if you're a smoker? It's just the
truth. Think about it. Do you want to have that sort of affect on people?


You have that effect on me with every post, should we ban you from posting?


But don't use the heavy hand of govt to
screw us, deny us the right to a cigar dinner at a restaurant in a private
room, and then pretend you're a conservative.

Smoking a cigar at at restaurant while having dinner isn't a right.

--
Maggie

So what? Just because you don't think it's right doesn't give you the
right to force your view on me. And if you were a conservative, like you
claim to be, you'd understand that.

On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 11:13:34 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
On 7/3/2016 5:52 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 1:13:51 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:


Can you just not comprehend the many times that I've come straight out
and said I'm a conservative?


Can you not comprehend that I said, sure, that's just like all the times
Green comes in here and tells us he's a Republican. But since he's
demonstrated for years that he's not, no one believe him either. In his
case, he's yet to name a single Republican that he likes, he regularly
rants against all of them, even Reagan was no good.




Conservatives believe
that individuals have a right to live their own life and if I want to
have a cigar dinner in
a private room in a private restaurant that is an issue of my freedom
to do what I please, and none of your business. What constitutional
power gives you the right to tell us we can't a cigar dinner? Is that
the country Madison and the founders saw?


Conservatives believe in common sense, and common sense says that if
smoking in all it's forms makes people sick that it's a GOOD idea to
limit exposure to it for people who don't smoke, or don't want to be
exposed to hazardous waste.



Then why are you against allowing me to have a private cigar dinner at
a restaurant in a private room?

Smoking leaves residue and that third hand residue can make people sick.


So far you've given us zero proof of that. Just because you can cite a
study where they found that after someone has been smoking in a car for
hours, the worst possible environment, that byproducts can be found
doesn't prove that anyone has been made sick, nor did the researchers
say that. And that is a very long way from someone catching a whiff
of a cigarette from 25 ft away.



It's like trying to defend spraying a room with toxic waste in the name
of freedom and then accusing anyone who objects to it of being
controlling and manipulative.


BS. And no one is forcing you to be in the room with me.



You wouldn't want to be the next group of people in the room that had
been saturated with toxic waste, and I don't want to be the next person
in the room where people may have been smoking.


Fine. Then have the restaurant free to make that decision. They can
have rooms where smoking is never allowed and rooms where it is allowed.
Disclose it and allow the people to decide. That's the conservative
position. The lib position is to rant on, to force YOUR way onto
everyone, because you know what's good for us.



BTW, people who smoke in one room have no control over where the smoke
goes or where the residue ends up, in addition to, the walking stench of
people going to and fro throughout the restaurant from the "smoking" room.


Not true. You could have separate air systems for the smoking allowed
room. Or whole separate bar/restaurants where smoking is allowed.
Leave the customers free to decide, not libs shoving it down the
people's throats because you think they are too stupid to decide for
themselves.



How about a bar that wants to allow
smoking, all the patrons that go there, the staff, are all OK with it,
how is it consistent with conservatism for you to use big govt to deny
them that right?

I imagine there are a few dives that still allow smoking, but their days
are numbered.


Yes, in a few states. The problem is that people like you forced it to
be that way and want to continue to force it, until you control us totally.
That is one big reason why we can't pass any new gun legislation, because
people don't trust libs. They know it's a never ending process to suck
freedom from us all.



And conservatives don't believe in "common sense", they
believe in smaller govt and allowing people the freedom to live their
own lives, eg smokers have rights too.

I'm all for smaller government and freedom. What I am AGAINST is anyone
poisoning the air I breathe, and smoking does that.

--
Maggie

It clearly doesn't do it in bars, restaurants that leave people free
to choose. If you want to select a bar that bans smoking, you can
go there. If others want to select one that allows it, they can go
there. But from your statements, it's clear that, the conservative,
logical position, isn't good enough for you. It's typical of libs.

On Monday, July 4, 2016 at 2:06:18 AM UTC-4, ChairMan wrote:
trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 1:13:51 PM UTC-4, Muggles
wrote:


Can you just not comprehend the many times that I've come
straight
out and said I'm a conservative?


Can you not comprehend that I said, sure, that's just like
all the
times Green comes in here and tells us he's a Republican.
But since
he's demonstrated for years that he's not, no one believe
him either.
In his case, he's yet to name a single Republican that he
likes, he
regularly rants against all of them, even Reagan was no
good.




Conservatives believe
that individuals have a right to live their own life and
if I want
to have a cigar dinner in
a private room in a private restaurant that is an issue
of my
freedom to do what I please, and none of your business.
What
constitutional power gives you the right to tell us we
can't a
cigar dinner? Is that the country Madison and the
founders saw?


Conservatives believe in common sense, and common sense
says that if
smoking in all it's forms makes people sick that it's a
GOOD idea to
limit exposure to it for people who don't smoke, or don't
want to be
exposed to hazardous waste.


--
Maggie

Then why are you against allowing me to have a private
cigar dinner at
a restaurant in a private room? How about a bar that
wants to allow
smoking, all the patrons that go there, the staff, are all
OK with it,
how is it consistent with conservatism for you to use big
govt to deny
them that right? And conservatives don't believe in
"common sense",
they believe in smaller govt and allowing people the
freedom to live
their own lives, eg smokers have rights too.

Open a Black/Hispanic/LGBT/Safe space cigar bar and you'll
be fine

ROFL. Yeah, interesting how all those other groups have rights,
even special rights, yet smokers are told to go to hell.

On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 5:19:05 PM UTC-4, notX wrote:
On 07/03/2016 01:12 PM, burfordTjustice wrote:

[snip]

I noticed the wal mart welfare scooters now have a
500 pound weight limit warning on them.


I noticed that (weight limit) a couple of days ago.

I've known 2 people who used those scooters. One with a permanent
condition (ALS) and the other temporarily (recovering from hernia
surgery). Neither had a weight problem.

I'm sure that's true, but I see plenty of them riding around in Walmart
and almost all are seriously fat.

smokers must feel they are under siege

in pennsylvania smoking is illegal in just about any public place including parks. its still allowed in selected areas of casinos, but theres a move to make it illegal in casinos too.

hopefully thenew state budget will tax all tobacco / smoking products much more expensive, by jacking up the taxes


face facts smokers, soon it will be totally illegal.

On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 6:07:32 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
On 7/3/2016 2:31 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 2:08:23 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
On 7/3/2016 12:43 PM, trader_4 wrote:

I suspect you're his kind of conservative.

Now, if I'm not "YOU'RE" kind of conservative, then I can't possibly BE
a conservative?? Is that what you believe?


Wooosh! Right over your pin head. The fact is that someone who chooses
people who tell cops to **** off, resist arrest, while condemning the cops,
doesn't sound conservative. Nor someone that thinks it's govt's job to
extinguish every cigarette in America, that people shouldn't be allowed
the freedom to choose for themselves. THAT is what libs do, smoking,
now soda sizes, salt on restaurant tables.

I think you've been smoking something illegal after reading that short
paragraph.



On the smoking issue, clearly the conservative position is
that if you are an adult and you want to have a cigar dinner in a private
room at a restaurant, it's none of the govt's business.

CLEARLY, that is YOUR position, which doesn't automatically fall into a
conservative mindset.


Of course it does. Which once again demonstrates that you don't even
know what conservatives stand for today.

'Scuse you, but you shouldn't presume to define what conservatives stand
for today. Feel free to define what you believe, though.


Explain to us where in the
Constitution as the framers put it forth, it gives the govt the right
to deny people the right to have a private cigar dinner at a restaurant..
You think Madison would support your position?

Do you think it is the right of the people to pursue LIFE??


Yes, but you obviously don't. Pursuing life means the ability to be able
to have a cigar dinner in a private room at a private restaurant with out
silly libs like you banning it. I think paragliding and mountain climbing
are risky. Ok, now we need to ban it, because people die from it. See
how that works?




Have you forgotten:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created
equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
Rights, that among these are *Life*, Liberty and the pursuit of
Happiness. €”€”"

What does it mean to pursue LIFE?? It isn't just about pursuing liberty
or happiness.


See, once again you just proved you're no conservative. You're trying to
rewrite history, to try to desperately twist that into somehow giving
you the write to ban what people freely do in a private room, on private
property.




In fact, your kind of radical attitude is akin to
how many liberals approach how they respond to anyone they disagree
with. If you don't want people seeing you as being a liberal nutcase,
you need to reassess how you respond.


I'm the radical? Good grief.

You're a blowhard, and never listen to anything people say unless it's
someone stroking your ego and kissing your patootie. If you don't get
your way you resort to character assassination as if you think that
makes you sound superior or even smarter.


You're a troll who's been identified by some of your followers with
a variety of names, having embarrassed yourself in a variety of other
forums.



It just makes you look immature and unable to practice grown up self
control. Seriously, see a counselor.


Seriously, stop claiming you're a conservative.


I support the right of a group of people
to have cigar dinner in a restaurant. YOU are the one that wants to
control people, FORCE your ways on everyone. THAT is what libs do.

Wake up and smell the stench - the era of smoking is declining and the
idea that it's cool, healthy, and something to be admired has gone the
way of the dodo bird.


So, what? Square dancing has declined, I guess that means it's OK
to screw square dancers and deny them basic rights too.




Explain to us how banning a cigar dinner in a private room in
a restaurant fits in with being a conservative. You can't. It doesn't..

It's NOT a political issue - it's a HEALTH issue.


It's very much a political issue. Conservatives believe people should
have the right to have a bar where smoking is allowed and leave people
free to choose. Libs want to control it, tax it, because everyone has
to live like they do.

On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 7:17:17 PM UTC-4, Ralph wrote:
On 7/3/2016 3:31 PM, trader_4 wrote:
I'm the radical? Good grief. I support the right of a group of people
to have cigar dinner in a restaurant. YOU are the one that wants to
control people, FORCE your ways on everyone. THAT is what libs do.


So the right of one person to stink up a room trumps 100 other people's right to clean air?
You're going to FORCE everyone else to breath your stinky cigar smoke?

Are you daft? If people choose to have a cigar dinner in a private room
at a restaurant, with it's own air system, they aren't stinking up anyone
else's clean air. I'm not forcing you to be in that room. Or a whole bar.
Most states, it's illegal to smoke in any bar. If I want to have a bar
for smokers, that's a basic right. How about I want to open a restaurant
that allows smoking. I'm not forcing you or anyone else to go there.
Everyone is free to chose my restaurant that allows smoking or other
restaurants that ban it. It's YOU who is doing the forcing, by
preventing me and others from engaging in what we want to do.

On Monday, July 4, 2016 at 11:58:16 AM UTC-4, bob haller wrote:
smokers must feel they are under siege

in pennsylvania smoking is illegal in just about any public place including parks. its still allowed in selected areas of casinos, but theres a move to make it illegal in casinos too.

hopefully thenew state budget will tax all tobacco / smoking products much more expensive, by jacking up the taxes


face facts smokers, soon it will be totally illegal.

Sad that you libs don't have a clue what freedom, the constitution, and
this country are all about.

On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 9:37:44 PM UTC-4, Stormin Mormon wrote:
On 7/3/2016 6:47 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2016 13:51:53 -0400, Stormin Mormon
Don't waste a lot of time. It appears clear that
Trader will only accept a study done by Byzantine
monks between the years 500BC and 400BC, with the
report submitted in Egyptian, on papyrus scrolls.
And stored in the Dead Sea Caves.
Responding to Trader is a total waste of energy and time.


I did reach that conclusion.


Many of us here mostly reached that conclusion about you a long
time ago. But I was still courteous until now when you
opened an attack out of the blue on me for no reason.

On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 10:45:10 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
On 7/3/2016 5:44 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 5:49:10 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
On 7/3/2016 2:13 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 1:51:53 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:


Serious question, are you an Alzheimer's patient??


Serious question, are you the village idiot? Never mind, we know the answer.
You just posted a link to an abstract about a study that was conducted. You're
so stupid that you think that's "proof". It just says a study was done,
a little about the methodology and ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about the results. And you want to talk about my mental health and brains? If we didn't already know
you're the village idiot, that would go a long way to proving it.



I posted 4 links. Which one are you talking about? Care to discuss
what the article actually contained, or do you just enjoy being vague?




I already went through it with you. Once again, you're the village idiot.
Time to change your screen name again, to better troll, perhaps?


I like this article. Read the full article describing all the tech stuff
and results. IOW's, you'll ignore it because it proves you wrong.


"Formation of carcinogens indoors by surface-mediated reactions of
nicotine with nitrous acid, leading to potential third hand smoke hazards..

This study shows that residual nicotine from tobacco smoke sorbed
to indoor surfaces reacts with ambient nitrous acid (HONO) to
form carcinogenic tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNAs). Substan-
tial levels of TSNAs were measured on surfaces inside a smokers
vehicle. Laboratory experiments using cellulose as a model indoor
material yielded a10-fold increase of surface-bound TSNAs when
sorbed secondhand smoke was exposed to 60 ppbv HONO for 3 hours. In both
cases we identified
1-(N-methyl-N-nitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridinyl)-4-butanal, a TSNA absent in
freshly emitted tobaccosmoke, as the major product. The potent
carcinogens 4-(methy-lnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridinyl)-1-butanone and
N-nitroso nornicotine were also detected. Time-course measurements
revealed fast TSNA formation, with up to 0.4% conversion of nicotine.
Given the rapid sorption and persistence of high levels of nicotine on
indoor surfaces€”including clothing and human skin€”this recently
identified process represents an unappreciated health hazard through
dermal exposure, dust inhalation, and ingestion. These findings raise
concerns about exposures to the tobacco smoke residue that has
been recently dubbed €œthirdhand smoke.€� Our work highlights the
importance of reactions at indoor interfaces, particularly those
involving amines and NO x/HONO cycling, with potential health impacts."


http://www.pnas.org/content/107/15/6576.full.pdf


--
Maggie

Note what they did. They used a closed car, the worst environment
possible. And they concluded that smoking there leaves traces.
I could have saved them the money, we all know that. What did they
conclude "with potential health impacts". Almost anything today
has potential health impacts, even drinking the water in most
municipal water systems.

Since they used a car, how about the car itself?

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-car-...ars-are-worst/

"New car smell is toxic, study says: Which cars are worst?"

"Research shows that vehicle interiors contain a unique cocktail of hundreds of toxic chemicals that off-gas in small, confined spaces," Jeff Gearhart, research director at the Ecology Center, said in a written statement. "Since these chemicals are not regulated, consumers have no way of knowing the dangers they face. "

OMG, we're all gonna die! The story is complete with skull and crossbones.
This is exactly what Gfre was talking about, that there are all kinds of
traces of chemicals around us every day. Yet the smell of a cigarette from
15 ft away is gonna kill us? Sorry, I'm not buying it and as outlined above
the "study" you cited doesn't say it either.

On 7/4/2016 12:06 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 7:17:17 PM UTC-4, Ralph wrote:
On 7/3/2016 3:31 PM, trader_4 wrote:
I'm the radical? Good grief. I support the right of a group of people
to have cigar dinner in a restaurant. YOU are the one that wants to
control people, FORCE your ways on everyone. THAT is what libs do.


So the right of one person to stink up a room trumps 100 other people's right to clean air?
You're going to FORCE everyone else to breath your stinky cigar smoke?

Are you daft? If people choose to have a cigar dinner in a private room
at a restaurant, with it's own air system, they aren't stinking up anyone
else's clean air. I'm not forcing you to be in that room. Or a whole bar.
Most states, it's illegal to smoke in any bar. If I want to have a bar
for smokers, that's a basic right. How about I want to open a restaurant
that allows smoking. I'm not forcing you or anyone else to go there.
Everyone is free to chose my restaurant that allows smoking or other
restaurants that ban it. It's YOU who is doing the forcing, by
preventing me and others from engaging in what we want to do.


I'm a former smoker and know how tough it is to quit. I've known of
several smokers that died of lung cancer before their time, even a
professor on the surgeon general's committee that proclaimed that
smoking causes lung cancer. I talked to him for 20 minutes while he
smoked 4 Larks. Said he thought the charcoal filters took out some of
the carcinogens.

If someone smokes, that's their business and I don't believe that many
people are made ill by second hand smoke as toxicity is always dose related.

OTOH smokers do not realize how badly they can smell to others. If I am
walking in the park and a car with a smoker in it passes me in the paths
along the road, I can often smell them. I would not let my smoker
mother smoke in my house but when she visited the closet where she hung
her coat would smell for a week.

On 07/04/2016 10:34 AM, trader_4 wrote:

[snip]

Don't you know that if I'm in a private room at a restaurant, where
everyone there agrees it's OK, it doesn't matter, that no one's
stomach is turning?

Of course, the SMOKE continues to follow the rules, no matter how long
it's been since you exhaled :-)

[snip]


--
"The worst of madmen is a saint run mad" [Alexander Pope]

[snip]

Are you daft? If people choose to have a cigar dinner in a private room
at a restaurant, with it's own air system, they aren't stinking up anyone
else's clean air. I'm not forcing you to be in that room. Or a whole bar.
Most states, it's illegal to smoke in any bar. If I want to have a bar
for smokers, that's a basic right. How about I want to open a restaurant
that allows smoking. I'm not forcing you or anyone else to go there.
Everyone is free to chose my restaurant that allows smoking or other
restaurants that ban it. It's YOU who is doing the forcing, by
preventing me and others from engaging in what we want to do.


Recently, I walked into a room and suddenly had a serious breathing
problem. There was a smoker there. This person wasn't smoking at the
time, but had on a seriously stinky shirt.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"Theology: The study of elaborate verbal disguises for non-ideas."

On 7/4/2016 10:34 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 10:51:38 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
On 7/3/2016 5:46 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 1:15:57 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
On 7/3/2016 8:42 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 5:40:52 PM UTC-4, bob haller wrote:
australia has raised tobacco taxes dramatically. one dollar a pack per year. year one a buck,
year 10 .........10 bucks

i hate the stink, know far too many friends who died from smoking......

I hate the stink from liberals too, how about we tax them like that until
they go away?

geesh ... Liberals just have a different viewpoint.

Liberal smokers STINK just like conservative smokers STINK just like
moderate smokers STINK ....


So, just stay away from us.

Us? So, you smoke?

Only an occasional cigar. I just stand up for the rights of everyone,
including cigarette smokers.

Smoking is not a right.


[...]


Don't you know when you pass by people that that stench turns
peoples stomachs?


Don't you know that if I'm in a private room at a restaurant, where
everyone there agrees it's OK, it doesn't matter, that no one's
stomach is turning?

Your cigar smoke produces secondhand smoke and thirdhand smoke deposits
on everything in that room. Anyone who enters that room after your
group smoking can get sick from the residue left behind.

It's no different than someone spraying the room with toxic waste.

You claim to be an engineer and a smart man, but smart people don't
always care about how their actions affect other people.


The problem is that it's the libs who claim to care about everyone,

1. I'm not a lib, and 2. I don't care about everyone.

I don't know anyone who cares about everyone.

so they force their rules down everyone else's throats. Cigarette bans,
soda size limits, soda taxes, salt shaker bans, etc. If they really
cared, they'd leave us free to choose.

If smokers really cared, they'd quit smoking.


Are you offended by what I've said - that you stink and make people sick
to their stomachs as you pass by if you're a smoker? It's just the
truth. Think about it. Do you want to have that sort of affect on people?

You have that effect on me with every post, should we ban you from posting?

Who is forcing you to respond?

But don't use the heavy hand of govt to
screw us, deny us the right to a cigar dinner at a restaurant in a private
room, and then pretend you're a conservative.


Smoking a cigar at at restaurant while having dinner isn't a right.


So what? Just because you don't think it's right doesn't give you the
right to force your view on me.

I have a right to pursue LIFE granted to me under the Constitution, in
addition to the right of free speech, and in pursuing my Constitutional
rights I will protest smoking.

You're welcome to kill yourself with cigarette's, cigar's, or whatever
you choose to use.


And if you were a conservative, like you claim to be, you'd understand that.

Well, I understand how smoking has affected my health - it's not a
political issue and never has been political. Being a conservative
doesn't remove common sense to reason that if something makes people
sick that it's a good idea to restrict or eliminate the source.


--
Maggie

On 7/4/2016 11:47 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Monday, July 4, 2016 at 2:06:18 AM UTC-4, ChairMan wrote:
trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 1:13:51 PM UTC-4, Muggles
wrote:


Can you just not comprehend the many times that I've come
straight
out and said I'm a conservative?


Can you not comprehend that I said, sure, that's just like
all the
times Green comes in here and tells us he's a Republican.
But since
he's demonstrated for years that he's not, no one believe
him either.
In his case, he's yet to name a single Republican that he
likes, he
regularly rants against all of them, even Reagan was no
good.




Conservatives believe
that individuals have a right to live their own life and
if I want
to have a cigar dinner in
a private room in a private restaurant that is an issue
of my
freedom to do what I please, and none of your business.
What
constitutional power gives you the right to tell us we
can't a
cigar dinner? Is that the country Madison and the
founders saw?


Conservatives believe in common sense, and common sense
says that if
smoking in all it's forms makes people sick that it's a
GOOD idea to
limit exposure to it for people who don't smoke, or don't
want to be
exposed to hazardous waste.


--
Maggie

Then why are you against allowing me to have a private
cigar dinner at
a restaurant in a private room? How about a bar that
wants to allow
smoking, all the patrons that go there, the staff, are all
OK with it,
how is it consistent with conservatism for you to use big
govt to deny
them that right? And conservatives don't believe in
"common sense",
they believe in smaller govt and allowing people the
freedom to live
their own lives, eg smokers have rights too.

Open a Black/Hispanic/LGBT/Safe space cigar bar and you'll
be fine

ROFL. Yeah, interesting how all those other groups have rights,
even special rights, yet smokers are told to go to hell.


I've been thinking about making up a story about the bucket of water I
have on the deck to water the plants.

I would tell people that I put it there as a refuge for Zika virus
mosquitoes. Liberals want more money to remove them but I think we
should protect them to accompany their colleagues taking refuge here.

On 7/4/2016 10:46 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 11:13:34 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
On 7/3/2016 5:52 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 1:13:51 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:


Can you just not comprehend the many times that I've come straight out
and said I'm a conservative?


Can you not comprehend that I said, sure, that's just like all the times
Green comes in here and tells us he's a Republican. But since he's
demonstrated for years that he's not, no one believe him either. In his
case, he's yet to name a single Republican that he likes, he regularly
rants against all of them, even Reagan was no good.




Conservatives believe
that individuals have a right to live their own life and if I want to
have a cigar dinner in
a private room in a private restaurant that is an issue of my freedom
to do what I please, and none of your business. What constitutional
power gives you the right to tell us we can't a cigar dinner? Is that
the country Madison and the founders saw?


Conservatives believe in common sense, and common sense says that if
smoking in all it's forms makes people sick that it's a GOOD idea to
limit exposure to it for people who don't smoke, or don't want to be
exposed to hazardous waste.

Then why are you against allowing me to have a private cigar dinner at
a restaurant in a private room?

Smoking leaves residue and that third hand residue can make people sick.

So far you've given us zero proof of that. Just because you can cite a
study where they found that after someone has been smoking in a car for
hours, the worst possible environment, that byproducts can be found
doesn't prove that anyone has been made sick, nor did the researchers
say that. And that is a very long way from someone catching a whiff
of a cigarette from 25 ft away.

Please read this entire article:
http://www.pnas.org/content/107/15/6576.full.pdf

I'll even post the summary for you.

"Formation of carcinogens indoors by surface-mediated reactions of
nicotine with nitrous acid, leading to potential third hand smoke hazards.

This study shows that residual nicotine from tobacco smoke sorbed
to indoor surfaces reacts with ambient nitrous acid (HONO) to
form carcinogenic tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNAs). Substan-
tial levels of TSNAs were measured on surfaces inside a smokers
vehicle. Laboratory experiments using cellulose as a model indoor
material yielded a10-fold increase of surface-bound TSNAs when
sorbed secondhand smoke was exposed to 60 ppbv HONO for 3 hours. In both
cases we identified
1-(N-methyl-N-nitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridinyl)-4-butanal, a TSNA absent in
freshly emitted tobacco smoke, as the major product. The potent
carcinogens 4-(methy-lnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridinyl)-1-butanone and
N-nitroso nornicotine were also detected. Time-course measurements
revealed fast TSNA formation, with up to 0.4% conversion of nicotine.
Given the rapid sorption and persistence of high levels of nicotine on
indoor surfaces€”including clothing and human skin€”this recently
identified process represents an unappreciated health hazard through
dermal exposure, dust inhalation, and ingestion. These findings raise
concerns about exposures to the tobacco smoke residue that has
been recently dubbed €œthirdhand smoke.€� Our work highlights the
importance of reactions at indoor interfaces, particularly those
involving amines and NO x/HONO cycling, with potential health impacts."


http://www.pnas.org/content/107/15/6576.full.pdf

It's like trying to defend spraying a room with toxic waste in the name
of freedom and then accusing anyone who objects to it of being
controlling and manipulative.

BS. And no one is forcing you to be in the room with me.

"Toxic waste is any material in liquid, solid, or gas form that can
cause serious harm to humans as well as other animals and the
environment." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxic_waste

Smoking leaves behind toxic waste.

You wouldn't want to be the next group of people in the room that had
been saturated with toxic waste, and I don't want to be the next person
in the room where people may have been smoking.


Fine. Then have the restaurant free to make that decision. They can
have rooms where smoking is never allowed and rooms where it is allowed.
Disclose it and allow the people to decide. That's the conservative
position. The lib position is to rant on, to force YOUR way onto
everyone, because you know what's good for us.

It doesn't solve the issue of secondhand or thirdhand smoke. Even if a
room is set aside for smoking, people still open the doors, come and go
from those smoking rooms and enter the non-smoking area and expose
non-smokers to those contaminants where not only adults may be exposed,
but also children exposed to those toxic wastes.

This issue is not about politics - it's a health issue.


BTW, people who smoke in one room have no control over where the smoke
goes or where the residue ends up, in addition to, the walking stench of
people going to and fro throughout the restaurant from the "smoking" room.


Not true. You could have separate air systems for the smoking allowed
room. Or whole separate bar/restaurants where smoking is allowed.
Leave the customers free to decide, not libs shoving it down the
people's throats because you think they are too stupid to decide for
themselves.

Businesses are free to do that now, but very few of them choose to go
all smoking because too many people don't smoke, now, and that bites
into their bottom line profits. It's not fiscally smart to eliminate a
large percentage of customers in order to accommodate smoking.


How about a bar that wants to allow
smoking, all the patrons that go there, the staff, are all OK with it,
how is it consistent with conservatism for you to use big govt to deny
them that right?


I imagine there are a few dives that still allow smoking, but their days
are numbered.


Yes, in a few states. The problem is that people like you forced it to
be that way and want to continue to force it, until you control us totally.

You better believe it I'm on the side of forcing smokers to NOT smoke in
any public venue.

That is one big reason why we can't pass any new gun legislation, because
people don't trust libs. They know it's a never ending process to suck
freedom from us all.

Gun legislation has no relevance to the health issues of smoking. It's
also a separate thread.


And conservatives don't believe in "common sense", they
believe in smaller govt and allowing people the freedom to live their
own lives, eg smokers have rights too.


I'm all for smaller government and freedom. What I am AGAINST is anyone
poisoning the air I breathe, and smoking does that.



It clearly doesn't do it in bars, restaurants that leave people free
to choose. If you want to select a bar that bans smoking, you can
go there.

I don't go to bars, and never have. Bars that are in restaurants I've
been to are all non-smoking environments.


If others want to select one that allows it, they can go
there. But from your statements, it's clear that, the conservative,
logical position, isn't good enough for you. It's typical of libs.


Smoking is not a political issue. It's a health issue, and as a
conservative I'll continue to vote for people who are in agreement with
my stance.

--
Maggie

Ralph wrote:
On 7/3/2016 3:31 PM, trader_4 wrote:
I'm the radical? Good grief. I support the right of a
group of
people to have cigar dinner in a restaurant. YOU are the
one that
wants to control people, FORCE your ways on everyone.
THAT is what
libs do.


So the right of one person to stink up a room trumps 100
other
people's right to clean air? You're going to FORCE
everyone else to
breath your stinky cigar smoke?

double whoosh

After serious thinking trader_4 wrote :
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 11:40:02 PM UTC-4, FromTheRafters wrote:


See, this is why you're the village idiot. V = IR. Just because I is
zero, that doesn't make R zero. You really should have taken basic
algebra.

Of course not, current and resistance are *inversely proportional* when
voltage is held invariant. The extremes would be zero and infinity.


Irrelevant. Put zero in for I, you get V = 0. Again, please take a course
in algebra.

Ohm's law is a formula. As such I should be able to 'plug in' two
values for two of the variables and obtain the third by using one of
the other two equations.

You are now giving me V=0 and I=0 so now I should be able to determine
what the resistance is. The formula (using algebra) can be manipulated
to R=V/I for this purpose and then that equation solved for R. If I is
zero, it doesn't work.

Ohm's Law works for 'voltage drop' because 'voltage drop' *requires*
that there be (non-zero) current through a (non-zero) resistance. This
is the original point which started this discussion.

Again, you are trying to force division by zero, when no division by
zero is needed. V = IR, it's all multiplication.

Except by the *formula* for Ohm's law it can be stated that I and R are
inversely proportional for any given V. So, as 'I' goes toward zero 'R'
goes toward infinity. If 'I' *is* zero then 'R' *is* infinity and you
are attempting to multiply zero by infinity to get a non-non-zero 'V'.

This is like saying I have groups of apples in threes. If I select
X groups, how many apples do I then have in total.

T = N x 3 5 groups I have 15 apples total

You just pulled an 'N' and a 'T' out of your hat, and what happened to
'X'? Oh, I see, it shrunk and became a little 'x'. Are you trying to
come up with 3.141592 . . .?

Maybe you need an apple puree formula?

How many apples do I have with N=0? Equation gives 0, a valid number.

Of course, but you might have zero groups of 528 apples or zero groups
of 498745 apples or zero groups any number of apples to get the same
total number of apples. An equation makes no claims of the
relationships between the values.

Your answer, "You can't do that because you could transform that
equation into:

T/N = 3.

And OMG we're dividing by Zero!

I thought 'N' was five.

Maybe you need a nap?

The number of apples per group and the number of groups of apples and
the number of total apples in your example are not claiming to be a
formula, so the relationships between them is not important.

If on the other hand you claim that the number of apples per group is
inversely proportional to the number of groups of apples for any given
number of total apples then yes, because it is a formula when the
relationships are considered.

Why are you allowing me to troll you like this, are you some kind of
mathochist?

Good to see you admit you're a troll.

You're very rude to people here, so I thought you would like some
competition. If you can't take it, don't dish it out.

I just seek to expose ignorance
wherever I find it. And I especially dislike people who are ignorant
of basic algebra trying to tell degreed engineers, electrical inspectors,
how Ohm's Law and basic algebra work.

I take it that, as I predicted, you didn't understand the additive
group exponentiation explanation when it was presented. Did you even
bother to look at the videos I so kindly provided to you?

BTW did you do that graph of V = IR yet? Graph V versus I and tell us
what you get. It's a straight line that goes right through the origin.

The origin where 100=0/0, I have no need to graph it.

It's shocking how far the US has fallen in math and science.

Indeed!

Mark Lloyd wrote:
[snip]

Are you daft? If people choose to have a cigar dinner in
a private
room at a restaurant, with it's own air system, they
aren't stinking
up anyone else's clean air. I'm not forcing you to be in
that room.
Or a whole bar. Most states, it's illegal to smoke in any
bar. If I
want to have a bar for smokers, that's a basic right.
How about I
want to open a restaurant that allows smoking. I'm not
forcing you
or anyone else to go there. Everyone is free to chose my
restaurant
that allows smoking or other restaurants that ban it.
It's YOU
who is doing the forcing, by preventing me and others
from engaging
in what we want to do.

Recently, I walked into a room and suddenly had a serious
breathing
problem. There was a smoker there. This person wasn't
smoking at the
time, but had on a seriously stinky shirt.

Well then, lets put all smokers in internment camps and keep
them away from the rest of society

trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 10:51:38 PM UTC-4, Muggles
wrote:
On 7/3/2016 5:46 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 1:15:57 PM UTC-4, Muggles
wrote:
On 7/3/2016 8:42 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 5:40:52 PM UTC-4, bob
haller wrote:
australia has raised tobacco taxes dramatically. one
dollar a
pack per year. year one a buck, year 10 .........10
bucks

Smoking a cigar at at restaurant while having dinner
isn't a right.

--
Maggie

So what? Just because you don't think it's right doesn't
give you the
right to force your view on me. And if you were a
conservative, like
you claim to be, you'd understand that.

T4, quit beating your head against the wall, you are NOT
going to change anyone mind like muggy,booby, or villian.
KF 'em and it will help your BP immensely : ) It helped
mine

trader_4 wrote:
On Monday, July 4, 2016 at 2:06:18 AM UTC-4, ChairMan
wrote:
trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 1:13:51 PM UTC-4, Muggles
wrote:


Can you just not comprehend the many times that I've
come
straight
out and said I'm a conservative?


Can you not comprehend that I said, sure, that's just
like
all the
times Green comes in here and tells us he's a
Republican.
But since
he's demonstrated for years that he's not, no one
believe
him either.
In his case, he's yet to name a single Republican that
he
likes, he
regularly rants against all of them, even Reagan was no
good.




Conservatives believe
that individuals have a right to live their own life
and
if I want
to have a cigar dinner in
a private room in a private restaurant that is an
issue
of my
freedom to do what I please, and none of your
business.
What
constitutional power gives you the right to tell us we
can't a
cigar dinner? Is that the country Madison and the
founders saw?


Conservatives believe in common sense, and common sense
says that if
smoking in all it's forms makes people sick that it's a
GOOD idea to
limit exposure to it for people who don't smoke, or
don't
want to be
exposed to hazardous waste.


--
Maggie

Then why are you against allowing me to have a private
cigar dinner at
a restaurant in a private room? How about a bar that
wants to allow
smoking, all the patrons that go there, the staff, are
all
OK with it,
how is it consistent with conservatism for you to use
big
govt to deny
them that right? And conservatives don't believe in
"common sense",
they believe in smaller govt and allowing people the
freedom to live
their own lives, eg smokers have rights too.

Open a Black/Hispanic/LGBT/Safe space cigar bar and
you'll
be fine

ROFL. Yeah, interesting how all those other groups have
rights,
even special rights, yet smokers are told to go to hell.

it's not just smokers, but you already knew that

On Mon, 4 Jul 2016 08:58:11 -0700 (PDT), bob haller
wrote:

smokers must feel they are under siege

in pennsylvania smoking is illegal in just about any public place including parks. its still allowed in selected areas of casinos, but theres a move to make it illegal in casinos too.

hopefully thenew state budget will tax all tobacco / smoking products much more expensive, by jacking up the taxes


face facts smokers, soon it will be totally illegal.
Taxing tobacco has little effect on "hard core" smokers. They just
buy their illegal untaxed smokes mon Indian reservations. The bands
make out like bandits, the smokers get cheap smokes, and the
government gets even less tobacco tax.

"legalizing" and "controlling" weed will have the same effect. How can
"the law" differentiate between taxed and illegal weed?

It's illegal for underaged kids to buy smokes - so all the highschool
kids (and grade 5 and 6 "toughs" who want to smoke get their smokes
from the same pusher they get their weed from - some kid in their
class who's big brother/mom/dad/whateverpicks up trunkloads of untaxed
cigs from Brantford or Sarnia or one of the other local "first
nations" tobacco shops.". It's just like Moonshine.

On Mon, 4 Jul 2016 12:48:08 -0400, Frank "frank wrote:

On 7/4/2016 12:06 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 7:17:17 PM UTC-4, Ralph wrote:
On 7/3/2016 3:31 PM, trader_4 wrote:
I'm the radical? Good grief. I support the right of a group of people
to have cigar dinner in a restaurant. YOU are the one that wants to
control people, FORCE your ways on everyone. THAT is what libs do.


So the right of one person to stink up a room trumps 100 other people's right to clean air?
You're going to FORCE everyone else to breath your stinky cigar smoke?

Are you daft? If people choose to have a cigar dinner in a private room
at a restaurant, with it's own air system, they aren't stinking up anyone
else's clean air. I'm not forcing you to be in that room. Or a whole bar.
Most states, it's illegal to smoke in any bar. If I want to have a bar
for smokers, that's a basic right. How about I want to open a restaurant
that allows smoking. I'm not forcing you or anyone else to go there.
Everyone is free to chose my restaurant that allows smoking or other
restaurants that ban it. It's YOU who is doing the forcing, by
preventing me and others from engaging in what we want to do.


I'm a former smoker and know how tough it is to quit. I've known of
several smokers that died of lung cancer before their time, even a
professor on the surgeon general's committee that proclaimed that
smoking causes lung cancer. I talked to him for 20 minutes while he
smoked 4 Larks. Said he thought the charcoal filters took out some of
the carcinogens.

If someone smokes, that's their business and I don't believe that many
people are made ill by second hand smoke as toxicity is always dose related.

I can often tell there is someone smoking upwind even before I smell
the smoke - particularly if they are smoking menthols - because I all
of a sudden have difficulty breathing.. I don't go out into places I'm
likely to meet smokers without my Bricanyl inhaler in my pocket - just
to be safe. Sometimes it's just very irritating - other times it is
very debilitating.

OTOH smokers do not realize how badly they can smell to others. If I am
walking in the park and a car with a smoker in it passes me in the paths
along the road, I can often smell them. I would not let my smoker
mother smoke in my house but when she visited the closet where she hung
her coat would smell for a week.

On Mon, 4 Jul 2016 13:01:56 -0500, Muggles
wrote:

On 7/4/2016 10:34 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 10:51:38 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
On 7/3/2016 5:46 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 1:15:57 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
On 7/3/2016 8:42 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 5:40:52 PM UTC-4, bob haller wrote:
australia has raised tobacco taxes dramatically. one dollar a pack per year. year one a buck,
year 10 .........10 bucks

i hate the stink, know far too many friends who died from smoking......

I hate the stink from liberals too, how about we tax them like that until
they go away?

geesh ... Liberals just have a different viewpoint.

Liberal smokers STINK just like conservative smokers STINK just like
moderate smokers STINK ....


So, just stay away from us.

Us? So, you smoke?

Only an occasional cigar. I just stand up for the rights of everyone,
including cigarette smokers.

Smoking is not a right.


[...]


Don't you know when you pass by people that that stench turns
peoples stomachs?


Don't you know that if I'm in a private room at a restaurant, where
everyone there agrees it's OK, it doesn't matter, that no one's
stomach is turning?

Your cigar smoke produces secondhand smoke and thirdhand smoke deposits
on everything in that room. Anyone who enters that room after your
group smoking can get sick from the residue left behind.

It's no different than someone spraying the room with toxic waste.

You claim to be an engineer and a smart man, but smart people don't
always care about how their actions affect other people.


The problem is that it's the libs who claim to care about everyone,

1. I'm not a lib, and 2. I don't care about everyone.

I don't know anyone who cares about everyone.

so they force their rules down everyone else's throats. Cigarette bans,
soda size limits, soda taxes, salt shaker bans, etc. If they really
cared, they'd leave us free to choose.

If smokers really cared, they'd quit smoking.


Are you offended by what I've said - that you stink and make people sick
to their stomachs as you pass by if you're a smoker? It's just the
truth. Think about it. Do you want to have that sort of affect on people?

You have that effect on me with every post, should we ban you from posting?

Who is forcing you to respond?

But don't use the heavy hand of govt to
screw us, deny us the right to a cigar dinner at a restaurant in a private
room, and then pretend you're a conservative.


Smoking a cigar at at restaurant while having dinner isn't a right.


So what? Just because you don't think it's right doesn't give you the
right to force your view on me.

I have a right to pursue LIFE granted to me under the Constitution, in
addition to the right of free speech, and in pursuing my Constitutional
rights I will protest smoking.

You're welcome to kill yourself with cigarette's, cigar's, or whatever
you choose to use.


And if you were a conservative, like you claim to be, you'd understand that.

Well, I understand how smoking has affected my health - it's not a
political issue and never has been political. Being a conservative
doesn't remove common sense to reason that if something makes people
sick that it's a good idea to restrict or eliminate the source.
Can someone lock Trader in a closed room with a case of cubans and
10 packs of Sweet caps and force him to smoke them all within 3
hours?? Then mabee we'd get some peace from the idiot.

I'll buy the shovel to bury him with.

On Mon, 4 Jul 2016 13:23:26 -0500, Muggles
wrote:

On 7/4/2016 10:46 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 11:13:34 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:
On 7/3/2016 5:52 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 1:13:51 PM UTC-4, Muggles wrote:


Can you just not comprehend the many times that I've come straight out
and said I'm a conservative?


Can you not comprehend that I said, sure, that's just like all the times
Green comes in here and tells us he's a Republican. But since he's
demonstrated for years that he's not, no one believe him either. In his
case, he's yet to name a single Republican that he likes, he regularly
rants against all of them, even Reagan was no good.




Conservatives believe
that individuals have a right to live their own life and if I want to
have a cigar dinner in
a private room in a private restaurant that is an issue of my freedom
to do what I please, and none of your business. What constitutional
power gives you the right to tell us we can't a cigar dinner? Is that
the country Madison and the founders saw?


Conservatives believe in common sense, and common sense says that if
smoking in all it's forms makes people sick that it's a GOOD idea to
limit exposure to it for people who don't smoke, or don't want to be
exposed to hazardous waste.

Then why are you against allowing me to have a private cigar dinner at
a restaurant in a private room?

Smoking leaves residue and that third hand residue can make people sick.

So far you've given us zero proof of that. Just because you can cite a
study where they found that after someone has been smoking in a car for
hours, the worst possible environment, that byproducts can be found
doesn't prove that anyone has been made sick, nor did the researchers
say that. And that is a very long way from someone catching a whiff
of a cigarette from 25 ft away.

Please read this entire article:
http://www.pnas.org/content/107/15/6576.full.pdf

I'll even post the summary for you.

"Formation of carcinogens indoors by surface-mediated reactions of
nicotine with nitrous acid, leading to potential third hand smoke hazards.

This study shows that residual nicotine from tobacco smoke sorbed
to indoor surfaces reacts with ambient nitrous acid (HONO) to
form carcinogenic tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNAs). Substan-
tial levels of TSNAs were measured on surfaces inside a smoker’s
vehicle. Laboratory experiments using cellulose as a model indoor
material yielded a10-fold increase of surface-bound TSNAs when
sorbed secondhand smoke was exposed to 60 ppbv HONO for 3 hours. In both
cases we identified
1-(N-methyl-N-nitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridinyl)-4-butanal, a TSNA absent in
freshly emitted tobacco smoke, as the major product. The potent
carcinogens 4-(methy-lnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridinyl)-1-butanone and
N-nitroso nornicotine were also detected. Time-course measurements
revealed fast TSNA formation, with up to 0.4% conversion of nicotine.
Given the rapid sorption and persistence of high levels of nicotine on
indoor surfaces—including clothing and human skin—this recently
identified process represents an unappreciated health hazard through
dermal exposure, dust inhalation, and ingestion. These findings raise
concerns about exposures to the tobacco smoke residue that has
been recently dubbed “thirdhand smoke.” Our work highlights the
importance of reactions at indoor interfaces, particularly those
involving amines and NO x/HONO cycling, with potential health impacts."


http://www.pnas.org/content/107/15/6576.full.pdf

It's like trying to defend spraying a room with toxic waste in the name
of freedom and then accusing anyone who objects to it of being
controlling and manipulative.

BS. And no one is forcing you to be in the room with me.

"Toxic waste is any material in liquid, solid, or gas form that can
cause serious harm to humans as well as other animals and the
environment." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxic_waste

Smoking leaves behind toxic waste.

You wouldn't want to be the next group of people in the room that had
been saturated with toxic waste, and I don't want to be the next person
in the room where people may have been smoking.


Fine. Then have the restaurant free to make that decision. They can
have rooms where smoking is never allowed and rooms where it is allowed.
Disclose it and allow the people to decide. That's the conservative
position. The lib position is to rant on, to force YOUR way onto
everyone, because you know what's good for us.

It doesn't solve the issue of secondhand or thirdhand smoke. Even if a
room is set aside for smoking, people still open the doors, come and go
from those smoking rooms and enter the non-smoking area and expose
non-smokers to those contaminants where not only adults may be exposed,
but also children exposed to those toxic wastes.

This issue is not about politics - it's a health issue.

A good case in point is cruise ships. European cruise ships allow
smoking BUT NOT IN THE STATEROOMS ans NOT ON BALCONIES for safety
reasons

American cruise ships allow smoking only in "designated areas" such as
the casino and the "cigar bar" - but those areas are not sealed from
the rest of the ship and are inadequately ventilated. On our last
cruise there was over half of one deck - and a good section of another
deck that i could NOT safely enter. Iincluding one of the highee end
restaurants I wanted to eat in)


BTW, people who smoke in one room have no control over where the smoke
goes or where the residue ends up, in addition to, the walking stench of
people going to and fro throughout the restaurant from the "smoking" room.


Not true. You could have separate air systems for the smoking allowed
room. Or whole separate bar/restaurants where smoking is allowed.
Leave the customers free to decide, not libs shoving it down the
people's throats because you think they are too stupid to decide for
themselves.

Businesses are free to do that now, but very few of them choose to go
all smoking because too many people don't smoke, now, and that bites
into their bottom line profits. It's not fiscally smart to eliminate a
large percentage of customers in order to accommodate smoking.


How about a bar that wants to allow
smoking, all the patrons that go there, the staff, are all OK with it,
how is it consistent with conservatism for you to use big govt to deny
them that right?


I imagine there are a few dives that still allow smoking, but their days
are numbered.


Yes, in a few states. The problem is that people like you forced it to
be that way and want to continue to force it, until you control us totally.

You better believe it I'm on the side of forcing smokers to NOT smoke in
any public venue.

That is one big reason why we can't pass any new gun legislation, because
people don't trust libs. They know it's a never ending process to suck
freedom from us all.

Gun legislation has no relevance to the health issues of smoking. It's
also a separate thread.


And conservatives don't believe in "common sense", they
believe in smaller govt and allowing people the freedom to live their
own lives, eg smokers have rights too.


I'm all for smaller government and freedom. What I am AGAINST is anyone
poisoning the air I breathe, and smoking does that.



It clearly doesn't do it in bars, restaurants that leave people free
to choose. If you want to select a bar that bans smoking, you can
go there.

I don't go to bars, and never have. Bars that are in restaurants I've
been to are all non-smoking environments.


If others want to select one that allows it, they can go
there. But from your statements, it's clear that, the conservative,
logical position, isn't good enough for you. It's typical of libs.


Smoking is not a political issue. It's a health issue, and as a
conservative I'll continue to vote for people who are in agreement with
my stance.

On 7/4/2016 4:57 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2016 12:48:08 -0400, Frank "frank wrote:

I'm a former smoker and know how tough it is to quit. I've known of
several smokers that died of lung cancer before their time, even a
professor on the surgeon general's committee that proclaimed that
smoking causes lung cancer. I talked to him for 20 minutes while he
smoked 4 Larks. Said he thought the charcoal filters took out some of
the carcinogens.

If someone smokes, that's their business and I don't believe that many
people are made ill by second hand smoke as toxicity is always dose related.

I can often tell there is someone smoking upwind even before I smell
the smoke - particularly if they are smoking menthols - because I all
of a sudden have difficulty breat[And of course, the pro smokers will declare that you're lying, just as good trolls tend to do.]hing.. I don't go out into places I'm
likely to meet smokers without my Bricanyl inhaler in my pocket - just
to be safe. Sometimes it's just very irritating - other times it is
very debilitating.

OTOH smokers do not realize how badly they can smell to others. If I am
walking in the park and a car with a smoker in it passes me in the paths
along the road, I can often smell them. I would not let my smoker
mother smoke in my house but when she visited the closet where she hung
her coat would smell for a week.




Center posted, as your text is.

-
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..

On 7/4/2016 5:09 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 4 Jul 2016 13:23:26 -0500, Muggles

It doesn't solve the issue of secondhand or thirdhand smoke. Even if a
room is set aside for smoking, people still open the doors, come and go
from those smoking rooms and enter the non-smoking area and expose
non-smokers to those contaminants where not only adults may be exposed,
but also children exposed to those toxic wastes.

This issue is not about politics - it's a health issue.

A good case in point is cruise ships. European cruise ships allow
smoking BUT NOT IN THE STATEROOMS ans NOT ON BALCONIES for safety
reasons

American cruise ships allow smoking only in "designated areas" such as
the casino and the "cigar bar" - but those areas are not sealed from
the rest of the ship and are inade[And if you ask the tour guide people before hand, they will tell you "oh, it's not bad" in there.]quately ventilated. On our last
cruise there was over half of one deck - and a good section of another
deck that i could NOT safely enter. Iincluding one of the highee end
restaurants I wanted to eat in)


BTW, people who smoke in one room have no control over where the smoke
goes or where the residue ends up, in addition to, the walking stench of
people going to and fro throughout the restaurant from the "smoking" room.



Center posted, as your reply is.
Considerable text trimmed as a courtesy.

-
..
Christopher A. Young
learn more about Jesus
.. www.lds.org
..
..