| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#102
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On 9/11/2011 9:26 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 13:38:12 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 14:45:58 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 13:10:10 -0700, wrote: On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 15:11:30 -0400, wrote: Read up on fantasy and get back to me. The settlement was with the attorneys general of the states involved and specified that this was going to be the end of it. I am sure there might be some individual who might try to take on Altria after this but they would get ground up and spit out. The idea that anyone on the planet has not seen the warning on the side of a cigarette pack is ludicrous. Which has nothing to do with fantasy that lawsuits should be known about in advance. How many suits have there been since the settlement? What difference does that make? Tell me about how many lawsuits are known about in advance. I notice you keep avoiding telling me. I suppose you consider 12 year olds cognizant of the dangers of cigar smoke also. Typical "libertarian" nonsense. 12 year olds are prohibited by law from smoking. As I said, the tobacco companies don't seem to care. Also, does this mean you believe in certain gov't intrusion? I'm shocked! There are plenty of laws about a lot of thongs kids can't do,.. I have no problem with that. It is when you start telling consenting adults they can't do things that bother me. Thongs Greg? She must be putting some scary hinky thoughts into your head. Don't let her control you. She's evil, you know. Don't let these things bother you Greg. THEY have been telling consulting adults what they can or can't do for some time now. Get with the program. |
|
#103
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On 9/11/2011 9:26 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 9/11/2011 9:09 PM, wrote: On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 13:32:49 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 14:37:01 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 13:05:13 -0700, wrote: On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 15:07:51 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 11:49:58 -0700, wrote: On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 10:57:56 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 08:34:20 -0400, wrote: I think they should be able to put up a sign that says "this is a smoking establishment, if you don't like it, get even with me and spend your money somewhere else." Smokers shouldn't go where people are unless they refrain from exhaling. If a privately owned place is clearly marked "smoking allowed", don't go there. It is called freedom of choice. You do not have the right not to be offended, particularly on someone elses property. A privately owned place that is open to the public, is quite different than a privately owned place like your home. That is simply a perversion of the law. It is not. It's been pretty well upheld by the courts. I bet you would support the right of a restaurant owner to refuse admittance of a person wearing a T shirt that said "Kill all the fags" or something else offensive. Don't have to, since most restaurants can refuse service to people who are disruptive. So public accommodation is not an absolute. "Disruptive" is certainly an abstract assumption. Have I ever said that is was? No shirt, no shoes, and now (in San Francisco) no pants, no service. That is discriminatory too. I saw a sign yesterday that said MEN, No shirt no service. WOMEN No shirt, Free Beer. I remember when the "leather jacket" fight went down here in CT. The law supported leather jackets in all establishments, but they could make you take off your jacket if it had rockers (above and below club colors on a leather, usually depicts the club name and territory). When I first met my wife we went out a lot in leather but I would usually grab a manager to the side before we went into a restaurant with my leather on anyway... Never had one say no, but they usually liked the idea that we asked. Get ready for a rude comment from Krause. He thinks leathers should only be worn in the bedroom, and only by whoever is playing the female part. |
|
#104
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On 9/11/2011 9:27 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 17:09:54 -0400, wrote: On 9/11/2011 4:38 PM, wrote: On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 14:45:58 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 13:10:10 -0700, wrote: On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 15:11:30 -0400, wrote: Read up on fantasy and get back to me. The settlement was with the attorneys general of the states involved and specified that this was going to be the end of it. I am sure there might be some individual who might try to take on Altria after this but they would get ground up and spit out. The idea that anyone on the planet has not seen the warning on the side of a cigarette pack is ludicrous. Which has nothing to do with fantasy that lawsuits should be known about in advance. How many suits have there been since the settlement? What difference does that make? Tell me about how many lawsuits are known about in advance. I notice you keep avoiding telling me. I suppose you consider 12 year olds cognizant of the dangers of cigar smoke also. Typical "libertarian" nonsense. 12 year olds are prohibited by law from smoking. As I said, the tobacco companies don't seem to care. Also, does this mean you believe in certain gov't intrusion? I'm shocked! You're shocked at Greg doing a flippy floppy? Why? He has to in order to stay opposed to you. It is not necessary Plume will always disagree with anything I say. That is why it is fun playing with her. I can usually get her arguing with herself before it is over. We've seen that happen. Quite funny actually. |
|
#105
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On 9/11/2011 9:41 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 21:27:51 -0400, wrote: And, I usually get you to make up some false equivalent to justify and untenable position... Example: Me: The stars are far away. You: So is my cigar. My cigar LaPlume? Is that what you call it. You should take it out of tour nightstand and play with it. You talked about people going into places where they serve peanuts as an example of companies stopping service of them, as though that never happens. I pointed you to a specific example. Now, you're claiming there isn't a law about it. So? There could be a lawsuit about it, might have already been one. Feel free to do the research, since you're so dedicated. I think I'll feel good about no-smoking bans. Which one of you birds made the above comment? I want you to know that I am strictly opposed to bans on no-smoking. |
|
#106
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On 9/11/2011 9:42 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 21:26:07 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 13:38:12 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 14:45:58 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 13:10:10 -0700, wrote: On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 15:11:30 -0400, wrote: Read up on fantasy and get back to me. The settlement was with the attorneys general of the states involved and specified that this was going to be the end of it. I am sure there might be some individual who might try to take on Altria after this but they would get ground up and spit out. The idea that anyone on the planet has not seen the warning on the side of a cigarette pack is ludicrous. Which has nothing to do with fantasy that lawsuits should be known about in advance. How many suits have there been since the settlement? What difference does that make? Tell me about how many lawsuits are known about in advance. I notice you keep avoiding telling me. I suppose you consider 12 year olds cognizant of the dangers of cigar smoke also. Typical "libertarian" nonsense. 12 year olds are prohibited by law from smoking. As I said, the tobacco companies don't seem to care. Also, does this mean you believe in certain gov't intrusion? I'm shocked! There are plenty of laws about a lot of thongs kids can't do,.. I have no problem with that. It is when you start telling consenting adults they can't do things that bother me. Thongs? Heh... I have a great deal of problems allowing people to jeopardize my health in the name of their "freedom" to smoke or whatever. Well dearie, get used to the idea of people jeopardizing your health with smoke and other things. There isn't much you can do about it except avoid the places where people are exercising their freedom. IOW mind your own ****ing business. |
|
#107
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On 9/12/2011 12:25 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 18:42:27 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 21:26:07 -0400, wrote: As I said, the tobacco companies don't seem to care. Also, does this mean you believe in certain gov't intrusion? I'm shocked! There are plenty of laws about a lot of thongs kids can't do,.. I have no problem with that. It is when you start telling consenting adults they can't do things that bother me. Thongs? Heh... I have a great deal of problems allowing people to jeopardize my health in the name of their "freedom" to smoke or whatever. Things thongs whatever ;-) Your health is not in jeopardy if you see the sign "smoking permitted" and say "I will never go in that place". She would never go into a place like that unescorted. |
|
#108
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
|
|
#109
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On 9/12/2011 2:21 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 00:25:12 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 18:42:27 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 21:26:07 -0400, wrote: As I said, the tobacco companies don't seem to care. Also, does this mean you believe in certain gov't intrusion? I'm shocked! There are plenty of laws about a lot of thongs kids can't do,.. I have no problem with that. It is when you start telling consenting adults they can't do things that bother me. Thongs? Heh... I have a great deal of problems allowing people to jeopardize my health in the name of their "freedom" to smoke or whatever. Things thongs whatever ;-) Your health is not in jeopardy if you see the sign "smoking permitted" and say "I will never go in that place". So, now you're going to mandate businesses put up signs? I think you'll find that the vast majority of people do not want to breathe second hand smoke. How are you going to put up signs in a mall? Of course, no regulation is what you really want. Zero. You don't care about the environment, other people's health, corporate raiding, etc. Even Greenspan didn't think fraud was something that should be regulated. Of course, he's changed his tune lately. It's late and you're stepping on your tongue now. Put the bong away and get some sleep. |
|
#110
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Wally-Mart in trouble locally
On 9/12/2011 7:51 AM, Drifter wrote:
On 9/11/2011 9:42 PM, wrote: On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 21:26:07 -0400, wrote: On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 13:38:12 -0700, wrote: On Sun, 11 Sep 2011 14:45:58 -0400, wrote: On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 13:10:10 -0700, wrote: On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 15:11:30 -0400, wrote: Read up on fantasy and get back to me. The settlement was with the attorneys general of the states involved and specified that this was going to be the end of it. I am sure there might be some individual who might try to take on Altria after this but they would get ground up and spit out. The idea that anyone on the planet has not seen the warning on the side of a cigarette pack is ludicrous. Which has nothing to do with fantasy that lawsuits should be known about in advance. How many suits have there been since the settlement? What difference does that make? Tell me about how many lawsuits are known about in advance. I notice you keep avoiding telling me. I suppose you consider 12 year olds cognizant of the dangers of cigar smoke also. Typical "libertarian" nonsense. 12 year olds are prohibited by law from smoking. As I said, the tobacco companies don't seem to care. Also, does this mean you believe in certain gov't intrusion? I'm shocked! There are plenty of laws about a lot of thongs kids can't do,.. I have no problem with that. It is when you start telling consenting adults they can't do things that bother me. Thongs? Heh... I have a great deal of problems allowing people to jeopardize my health in the name of their "freedom" to smoke or whatever. Well dearie, get used to the idea of people jeopardizing your health with smoke and other things. There isn't much you can do about it except avoid the places where people are exercising their freedom. IOW mind your own ****ing business. Quite frankly, I am more concerned with mom texting behind the wheel of the SUV than I am second hand smoke... Talk about someone else gambling with "my" like... |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| trouble for wal-mart | General | |||
| Wal-Mart...a criminal enterprise? | General | |||
| Hillary! Loyal Wal-Mart Director? | General | |||
| Big Box Mart | ASA | |||
| Say NO NO NO to Wal-Mart!!! | General | |||
Linear Mode
