| |
|
|
|
|
Share/Bookmark this Topic:
|
| Message |
Author |
by infinitethoughts
on Mon Feb 02, 2009 4:51 pm |
|
JoshNJ wrote:
The fact that smoking is a legal activity is irrelevant. You may be sued for conducting a legal activity in a prohibited location. You need to identify what you are suing for and what right or civil liberty is being "stripped away." None have been recognized in this example, so therefore it would be difficult to establish a case.
What am I suing for ? Well I dunno about you, Bubba, but it's crystal clear to me.
Harassment.
What right or civil liberty is being "stripped away"??
Last I checked I'm living in the U.S., not some third world Dictatorship where it's citizens do not have the court system to file a Lawsuit if an entity is harassing them.
Let's check the facts.
-- Anti's don't have one scientific study to back up their 10 year harassment on smokers.
-- Smokers have been actively harassed for ten years by Tobacco Control.
-- If you file a Lawsuit for Harassment, show the facts of being harassed. You win the Lawsuit.
Period. |
|
|
infinitethoughts
Smoker
Joined: Mar 14, 2007
Posts: 155
|
| |
Back to top |
|
|
| |
|
by JoshNJ
on Tue Feb 03, 2009 3:25 pm |
|
infinitethoughts wrote:
What am I suing for ? Well I dunno about you, Bubba, but it's crystal clear to me.
Harassment.
Harassment is a concept and in order for you to bring a lawsuit for harassment it needs to be objectively determined to be disturbing and threatening to a reasonable person. This is a question for a jury, but what you feel inside as harassment may not fit a criminal statute or law for harassment. In addition, what type of harassment are you arguing? Physical harassment because you are not allowed to freely smoke? Psychological harassment because of the mental anguish or stress the anti-smoking groups have caused you? These are questions you need to understand before you can sue a person or entity.
Quote: What right or civil liberty is being "stripped away"??
Last I checked I'm living in the U.S., not some third world Dictatorship where it's citizens do not have the court system to file a Lawsuit if an entity is harassing them.
That doesn't exactly answer my question. What right or civil liberty is being "stripped away?" The right "not to be harassed" is not protected under our Constitution so would need to find a more specific right that is being infringed.
Quote:
-- If you file a Lawsuit for Harassment, show the facts of being harassed. You win the Lawsuit.
Period.
Can you point to a single case in U.S. history where such a lawsuit and outcome occurred? Anyone can bring a lawsuit into court, but it must satisfy certain requirements to be valid. One of which is a defined law or right that is being violated. However, like I said before, nothing I've said would prevent you from attempting a case like this. |
|
|
JoshNJ
Enthusiastic Smoker
Joined: Apr 12, 2006
Posts: 312
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by infinitethoughts
on Tue Feb 03, 2009 6:08 pm |
|
JoshNJ wrote:
Harassment is a concept and in order for you to bring a lawsuit for harassment it needs to be objectively determined to be disturbing and threatening to a reasonable person.
In answer to your comment. Look at it from another angle. Tobacco Controls objective is to wipe out tobacco Globally by 2020. In order to do that they have to mount a concerted effort to slowly "criminalize", tobacco AND smokers.
This "concerted effort" is directly attacking a segment of the population.
Now. If you're saying that in a court of Law, this "concerted effort" can not be objectively determined to be harassment against a profiled segment of the population, then I can't say it any clearer.
JoshNJ wrote:
Can you point to a single case in U.S. history where such a lawsuit and outcome occurred? Anyone can bring a lawsuit into court, but it must satisfy certain requirements to be valid. One of which is a defined law or right that is being violated. However, like I said before, nothing I've said would prevent you from attempting a case like this.
A single case? I can point to hundreds that have been to court and won.
Stalker cases. Harassment is of course a product of stalker cases. The stalker is "harassing" the victim.
Discrimination in jobs is another. White, black, doesn't matter.
Credit card companies and their interest levels.
Telemarketing companies.
All these cases involve "harassment" of victims. |
|
|
infinitethoughts
Smoker
Joined: Mar 14, 2007
Posts: 155
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by infinitethoughts
on Tue Feb 03, 2009 6:52 pm |
|
This discussion we're having will eventually be a mute point. Reason being, Phamarcuedia backed Tobacco Control's final objective will fail miserably.
1) It's becoming more and more public knowledge that their lies on Second hand smoke are simply wisps of smoke. Their fanaticism and their urgency to complete their agenda, is their undoing.
2) Their main lie, that smoking itself is "deadly", will also fall apart at the seams. This lie started in the 50's with the infamous British Study when they did not distinguish between inhalers and non-inhalers. Inhalers had lower incidences of cancer. This was pointed out by the Famous Statistician R.A. Fischer. He made them aware of it, but they refused to consider these facts.
http://www.lcolby.com/b-chap7.htm
Lies are always uncovered...it's just a matter of time.
"That which has been believed by everyone, always and everywhere, has every chance of being false."
Paul Ambroise Valery |
|
|
infinitethoughts
Smoker
Joined: Mar 14, 2007
Posts: 155
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by JoshNJ
on Wed Feb 04, 2009 2:34 pm |
|
infinitethoughts wrote: In answer to your comment. Look at it from another angle. Tobacco Controls objective is to wipe out tobacco Globally by 2020. In order to do that they have to mount a concerted effort to slowly "criminalize", tobacco AND smokers.
This "concerted effort" is directly attacking a segment of the population.
Now. If you're saying that in a court of Law, this "concerted effort" can not be objectively determined to be harassment against a profiled segment of the population, then I can't say it any clearer.
I am not familiar with Tobacco Controls, but you are trying to advance a conspiracy theory and that will not guarantee you success in a court of law. You need to find some violation within a statute or law that exists on the books, not just a theory. Concerted effort is implying conspiracy, but a conspiracy needs to be linked to an actual law being broken or a right being infringed.
Quote: A single case? I can point to hundreds that have been to court and won.
Stalker cases. Harassment is of course a product of stalker cases. The stalker is "harassing" the victim.
Discrimination in jobs is another. White, black, doesn't matter.
Credit card companies and their interest levels.
Telemarketing companies.
Yes those are harassment cases, but I was specifically looking for a smoking harassment case that has been through the system. Stalking is a criminal act against a victim, which is defined under the law. Discrimination is defined by the protected classes under civil rights law. But can you point to a case where a smoker or smoker's group sued a company for harassment? I think there is confusion here over what they are doing and if it is amounting to harassment. In a stalker case, there is physical harassment. I don't see tobacco companies physically harassing you. A telemarketer is causing mental or emotional stress constantly calling you. Publishing articles or advertisement by a tobacco group or company is not mental harassment.
I am not aware, though, of how a credit card company's interest rate levels could be considered harassment. A little off topic but I didn't see the connection if you wanted to explain that a little more.
Quote: All these cases involve "harassment" of victims.
Correct, but this also goes back to my question over what right or civil liberty is being "stripped away?" Those are good examples of harassment, but they are not part of a general Harassment Law. If you can find a right being violated, then it would give you a stronger case. |
|
|
JoshNJ
Enthusiastic Smoker
Joined: Apr 12, 2006
Posts: 312
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by infinitethoughts
on Thu Feb 05, 2009 5:25 pm |
|
Conspiracy...?
You're not familiar with Tobacco Control and the Pharmaceutical connection ?
You signed up 1 year before me, you have 100 more posts and you're not familiar with Tobacco Control ?
Thats weird. I mean this is common knowledge for everybody once they sign up and start reading posts on NG's for smokers, especially after signing up 3 years ago.
The paper trail is everywhere of Big Pharma's Agenda with Tobacco. I'm sure a Jury would have some fun with this trail......
 |
|
|
infinitethoughts
Smoker
Joined: Mar 14, 2007
Posts: 155
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by infinitethoughts
on Thu Feb 05, 2009 5:34 pm |
|
Josh.
Here's a website, that has it all meticulously laid out, concerning Big Pharma and their agenda to wipe out the use of the ancient medicinal herb, tobacco.
http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
infinitethoughts
Smoker
Joined: Mar 14, 2007
Posts: 155
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by JoshNJ
on Fri Feb 06, 2009 12:33 am |
|
infinitethoughts wrote: Conspiracy...?
You're not familiar with Tobacco Control and the Pharmaceutical connection ?
You signed up 1 year before me, you have 100 more posts and you're not familiar with Tobacco Control ?
Thats weird. I mean this is common knowledge for everybody once they sign up and start reading posts on NG's for smokers, especially after signing up 3 years ago.
Unfortunately, I should apologize then if my status and number posts implied that I was any expert. I am still reading posts from members and learning from what they contribute all the time. It is not unreasonable to expect someone that has been around for a while to be up to speed on everything, but I still don't feel that I understand it all.
Quote: The paper trail is everywhere of Big Pharma's Agenda with Tobacco. I'm sure a Jury would have some fun with this trail......
I understand what you are saying. There is an agenda, concerted effort, conspiracy, master plan, etc. going on with the anti-smoking lobby, tobacco companies, the government, surgeon general, pharmaceutical businesses. It really isn't far-fetched to believe they could all work together to change public policy for profit or their own interests. It doesn't, however, change the fact that no rights have been violated or taken away. Throughout this discussion, all I asked was if there was a right we could pinpoint that would help advance a case against the industries or not.
What these companies, lobbyists, funded activists, legislators... everyone involved is not committing a crime even though it feels like it. They are using research studies (nobody hear likes it), money, fear, politics to get rid of public smoking. But is it wrong in the sense that what they are doing is illegal or unconsitutional? I know how you feel and you feel it is wrong, but that isn't enough to stop it from happening. |
|
|
JoshNJ
Enthusiastic Smoker
Joined: Apr 12, 2006
Posts: 312
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
by JoshNJ
on Fri Feb 06, 2009 12:45 am |
|
infinitethoughts wrote: Josh.
Here's a website, that has it all meticulously laid out, concerning Big Pharma and their agenda to wipe out the use of the ancient medicinal herb, tobacco.
http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/
I took a glance over there, thank you for the link. I know this is going on and there is a lot of evidence showing the links to this grand agenda. I feel it is too late in the game to try to fight by discrediting second-hand smoke research studies. I couldn't believe it but as a joke i did a search for third-hand smoke.
This is what i found: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081229105037.htm
"They" have already moved on from second-hand smoke to third-hand, and it will just reinforce the original sentiments and fear over the dangers and harm that come with smoking. By the time the pro-smoking lobby is ready to battle second-hand smoking studies, this will be the new argument to continue the anti-smoking movement. And to top it all off, it isn't violating any laws or rights in our country.
Big Pharmaceutical companies could come out and admit this agenda and they would not be at risk for any criminal or civil wrong. Public opinion and trust would be affected, but in my opinion I am still not seeing where this amounts to criminal or civil harassment. |
|
|
JoshNJ
Enthusiastic Smoker
Joined: Apr 12, 2006
Posts: 312
|
| |
Back to top |
| |
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
|
|
