David Malmo Levine could care less what Thomas Jefferson thought because Jefferson owned slaves amking anything he had to say moot.


"...rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our own will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add ‘within the limits of the law,’ because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual." --Thomas Jefferson--


David is a big time fan of everybody being a slave to the government.


"That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.

His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant. He cannot rightfully be compelled to do or forbear because it will be better for him to do so, because it will make him happier, because, in the opinions of others, to do so would be wise, or even right." --John Stuart Mill--

David wouldn't see any merit in John Stuart Mill's argument either.

I`ve always been partial to staying away from government. I`m a big fan of local community existence; the higher up you go in US government, the more frustrating the experience gets. I`m accustomed to living in rural environments where people settle their differences amongst each other much more often without any asisstance from government which is usually too wound up in metropolitan affairs(that`s where the money`s at) to become interested in a whining hayseed in a podunk town 200 miles from the nearest megalopolis; rural authority reasons correctly,that one whiner out of 3,000 souls is usually only trying to draw attention to themselves, so eventually the sheriff or someone shows up and has a sitdown with both sides seperately and helps get things sorted out.

A couple of Summers ago, three friends and I were sitting under my carport smoking weed. All of a sudden a sheriff`s rig pulls up and stops in front of my next door neighbor`s house and the old battle axe walks out and we could plainly hear her tell the officers,"They`re smoking marijuana!" I knew both officers and they both know I smoke weed and really don`t give a shit about that either. The LEO looks over at us and I smile and wave and he tells the old battle axe loud enough for us and half the neighborhood to hear"Lot`s of people smoke marijuana outside because they don`t want to have the odor inside." He turns and waves at us, gets back in his rig and drives away. Oh the fucking joy of small town living!

Of course DML loves government. It`s there for the purpose of spreading his misery, eh? You see, Thomas Jefferson was a hayseed country dweller also. He predicted the horrors living in cities would bring to future generations of Americans; including the cops not being allowed the discretion of leaving an old retired gentleman alone to smoke some bowls in peace.
"I view great cities as pestilential to the morals, the health and the liberties of man. True, they nourish some of the elegant arts, but the useful ones can thrive elsewhere, and less perfection in the others, with more health, virtue and freedom, would be my choice." Thomas Jefferson.

I`ve been avoiding the DMLs of this world for a very long time. Misery just loves the shit out of company.

"The word "ONLY" was valid in referencing the only places private business's offer the courtesy to smoke, I thought it was clear to everyone."

It is clear. It's just different than what Gibson is asking for. You included limitations that don't exist in Gibson's request, which is why your question is a poor method of judging what Gibson is asking for.

You said:

"I ASK any medpot patient, Do you want to be able to only smoke your medical cannabis in Tobacco Smoking Zones?"

Since there are places med-necessity pot users can smoke now in addition to the tobacco friendly places (such as BYOB cafes & Vapor Lounges, certain compassion clubs, residences where people don't like tobacco etc etc), why would any med-necessity pot user want to REDUCE the number of places they can smoke?



"Again, It makes no sense to anyone but you and him that he's asking to have his permissible zone (which is at least 90% of all the land area in Canada) INCLUDE cigarette zones that are unhealthy private environments by claiming his health reasons trump the property rights."

Everyone who uses pot for pain (or deal it to those in pain) agrees with me that people shouldn't have to walk thirty meters away from all storefronts to use their meds. They should be able to smoke in AT THE VERY LEAST - BUT NOT LIMITED TO anywhere tobacco smoking is allowed.

Walking two feet to stand upwind of the tobacco smokers is easier than walking thirty meters away from every intolerant store-owner (which could be all of them in some places).

"Good luck activists; keep pushing and forcing."

Firing people for smoking tobacco? I'm sure some "employer's rights" fanatics would approve, but nobody on Gibson's side of the debate has ever claimed to support such a paternalistic policy. It's another irrational comparison in a thread with a few dozen too many.

"Fuuuugit DML, MAKE UP YOUR MIND. Be a Nazi or a communist; support government takeovers of individual freedom based on standards set by community policy, or bring in the Nazis to prohibit all smoking, or shut your gob. You`re trying to fuck Maryjane"

I support the prohibition of radioactive chemical ferts and I also support people growing their own tobacco, thus avoiding taxes entirely. I have yet to support anything you've claimed I support in this entire thread.

Quit putting words in my mouth Mr. straw-man arguing, chronic name-calling, expletive using, always-telling-me-never-showing-me armchair activist.

"Gibson is minding Gator Ted's business otherwise there would be no dispute."

When a woman is feeding her baby on some businesses private property she's minding her own business and the owner has no right to be offended ... even in the USA!:

Basically breastfeeding in public IS legal in the United States, though sometimes people simply don't know it and therefore might complain about it. This means you can nurse your baby anywhere that you are allowed to be with the baby. About 20 states have additionally passed a law that explicitly states that fact. Note: These laws exist to clarify the legality of breastfeeding. If a state does not have such a clarifying law, breastfeeding in public is still legal. See A Current Summary of Breastfeeding Legislation in the U.S. , or 50 States Summary of Breastfeeding Laws for more details.

If someone seems to be bothered by you nursing, or asks you to leave, you can kindly remind the person that breastfeeding is legal, normal and the best nutrition for the baby, or other facts about breastfeeding.

But it may still happen that they "oust" you out. If you have had problems with public breastfeeding and have been asked to leave malls, pools, restaurants, etc., or to go to restroom to nurse, or if you have had problems at workplace, you can report it to FirstRight. FirstRight takes every reported incident of discrimination seriously, aiming to establish a correspondence with the organization in question, and discuss to implement a breastfeeding friendly policy.

http://www.007b.com/breastfeeding_public.php


Same deal with med-necessity pot users ... the customer has no right to let his or her offendedness alter the actions of the harmless person, and the property owner has no right to dictate the actions of the harmless person.

Period.

"That government is best which governs the least, because its people discipline themselves."

Same goes for shopkeepers. They should bud out of the lives of their customers.

"David is a big time fan of everybody being a slave to the government."

Proof? Didn't think so.

Chris is a big time of deciding what is deviant behavior and what is not, and publicly disrespecting and avoiding all the deviants:

Later in 2005, while participating in a discussion on the subject of personal versus public discrimination, Buors commented that he has had "no respect for homosexuals" since an adult attempted to molest him in a cinema when he was thirteen. While making no judgement on homosexual activities as such, he wrote that he did not want "such deviants in [his] social circle".[13] He later refused to apologize.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Buors



"David wouldn't see any merit in John Stuart Mill's argument either."

Unlike you, I used that quote to defend my actions in court.

I just happen to see ordering someone in pain to walk 30 meters away before they can medicate-away their pain as "harm to others" and you don't. Of course, you think a man sucking another man's dick is "deviant" so you're already cold-hearted and closed-minded in your thinking ... It's not too much harder to add cripples to the list of people you have no compassion for.

It's a perfectly rational comparrison because your the only one blind to the fact that it is Steve Gibson who is asking for state intervention in the case because of health reasons.

Steve Gibson is begging for the therapuetic state to intervene on his behalf for health reasons.

I keep telling you what Szasz has to say about that, that the tyranny of the doctors will make us yearn for the good old day when we had the tyranny of the priests.

It doesn't take much imagination to see that in 30 short years, the therapeutic state went from restricting smoking on air planes to now you are not going to get a job as a smoker.

Smokers have long been second class citizens and soon enough they will be criminals too. You can solve any social problems with the law so long as you just believe!

Well, I don't believe. I fought the smoking Nazi's from day 1 and I'm still fighting them.


My latestest Published LTE.

ADDICTIONS A MYTH

Re: 'Losing proposition,' Tom Brodbeck, Aug. 19.

I strongly agree that gamblers ought to take responsibility for their actions. The notion that a supernatural force called addiction can get a hold of people and force them into engaging in pleasure vices is ludicrous. Addictions are a myth, a false explanation for what we observe.

"The devil made them do it" is essentially the defence the so-called addicts would like to have us believe. Addictions are stigmatizing terms applied to our moral judgments, not medical diagnosis. Brodbeck is right, every single addict need only take personal responsibility for their actions to cure themselves.

Chris Buors




Winnipeg

The only thing ludicrous is your view people can't get addicted to things.

"Of course DML loves government."

I love direct democracy. I hate representative democracy.

Do you need me to post the links or can you figure out the difference?