Smoking is banned in pubs and clubs throughout Queensland. But smoking is permitted in the high rollers section of casino's. This shows that if you have money the rules don't apply to you. What do you think?
2007-07-31 19:37:19 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
After reading some of the answers and being accused of being a communist I thought I would add this note to anyone who may read differently than me. I am a smoker and don't mind standing outside while I smoke. But if the law states that people are not allowed to smoke inside then that law should apply to everyone. Because you spend more money you should not have the right to change the law to suit you.
2007-08-01 14:01:35 · update #1
Hey steve, firstly ...
don't worry about the moronic wankers who have called you a communist .. it's a word some people ( from one nation in particular) throw up at other people in a pathetic attempt to take control of a debate/discussion .. it's MEANT to make you back down and roll over......... AS IF !! :)
( remember when the germans called the aussie service men serving in Tobruk, Rats ...lol )
personally I think It sucks... I actually think the smoking ban sucks( and I am a non-smoker for 99.9% of the time) ...
Pubs and clubs should be able to permit smoking if a sign is clearly displayed outside stating that " This establishment allows smoking".. that way as a non-smoker ( for 99.9% of the time) I could make an informed decision as to whether or not I chose to enter the business....
BUT back to your question .. It is wrong .. the rules re smoking SHOULD be the same for all.
I mean why should they stop at allowing them to smoke in public venues . .why not allow them to drive 20 kms over the speed limit.. or be three more points over the booze limit....
we have laws for a reason and they shouldn't be different for a person because they are wealthy .. THEY ARE LAWS ..
2007-08-01 22:40:56 · answer #1 · answered by ll_jenny_ll here AND I'M BAC 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Oh, absolutely. But it's the same with almost everything. The prison term for someone caught with crack is higher than the term for someone caught with a similar amount of high-grade cocaine. And back when I rented an apartment, I had to pay my rent by the 2nd or be fined $50/day and, if I was a week late, risk being evicted. Now that I own a house, while my mortgage is due on the 1st of the month, I can pay it anytime until the 15th without a late fee.
2007-07-31 19:40:53 · answer #2 · answered by Vaughn 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nope.
If you have enough money to go to a pub and get wasted, then you probably have enough money to gamble.
I'm a smoker, and I agree with the ban. I don't have the right to harm other people's health because of my choice to smoke.
They let people smoke in casinos, so they will stay, and play!
2007-07-31 19:41:59 · answer #3 · answered by thankgodformaryjane 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If the general public spent as much money at the casino as the high rollers do, they too would get free rooms, alcohol, limo services and the ability to smoke.
2007-07-31 19:40:12 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
LOL smoking is banned in public places here in the uk, but apparently the Members of Parliament can smoke in their bar in the House of Commons, as can prisoners in jail.
2007-07-31 19:40:54 · answer #5 · answered by Sal*UK 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Are you saying that you shouldn't be allowed to smoke anywhere because you have money. The communist seem to have made great inroads into Australia. I don't really believe that because I have been there and love Australia.
2007-07-31 19:43:45 · answer #6 · answered by bravozulu 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
OF COURSE rules don't apply when you have buttloads of money. Everyone knows that.
2007-07-31 19:39:26 · answer #7 · answered by ldybugg1752 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
are they indian casino's? if so they're their own "nation". that is messed up though. money rules.
2007-07-31 19:45:02 · answer #8 · answered by Random 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋