Originally Posted by 101lifts2 (Post 487947)

But drinking and esctasy are OK.

Originally Posted by Adeptus_Minor (Post 487952)

Not together.
Too hard on the stomach. :lol:

Originally Posted by goof2 (Post 487935)

Most cigarettes have filters.:rockwoot:

It doesn't matter anyway as toxic gases are still expelled from vehicle exhaust. Even if they weren't are you going to ban pre-emissions equipment vehicles? My bike is "only" 10 years old and doesn't have a catalytic converter to be found. It came that way from the factory.

Originally Posted by 101lifts2 (Post 487947)

But drinking and esctasy are OK. It's a bandwagon thing more than anything IMO.

Originally Posted by Tmall (Post 487961)

You can't see the difference between a mode of transportation ( which has increasingly stringent rules placed on it's emissions) and a recreation activity which serves no means other than a "nicotine fix"?

Originally Posted by Tmall (Post 487961)

Did you know you also cannot drink alcohol anywhere you wish? There are rules in effect about where you can or cannot do it.

Originally Posted by goof2 (Post 487963)

Driving/riding can be a mode of transportation, but that doesn't mean that is all it is. Should we ban driving/riding for recreational purposes and call it a day? Maybe you have to have a note from an authority backing the validity of your trip.



I'm aware and that actually serves as a pretty good comparison. It is another rule created by uptight "puritans" who can't handle the sight of someone having a drink in front of them. It is also a rule I have ignored from time to time.

Originally Posted by Homeslice (Post 487846)

Retards. I bet if it was pot, they'd leave people alone. Hypocrites.

Originally Posted by Kaneman (Post 487976)

Despite Marijuana being Kentucky's largest cash crop they actually have very strict anti-pot laws...

Originally Posted by Tmall (Post 487966)

You're really reaching to draw the comparison between driving and smoking, it's just not working. "What if this, what if that about driving?" What about it? We're not talking about the rules pertaining to driving. We're talking about the right of a person to walk around and not breathe in another person's second hand smoke.

If you can equate that to car exhaust, have fun with that. Your right to travel sounds more familiar than your right to smoke cigarettes.

Originally Posted by goof2 (Post 488037)

There isn't any if about it, you believe my right to pollute the air should be removed while your right to pollute the air is upheld.:shrug:

Originally Posted by Tmall (Post 488040)

Neither is a right. Unless you want to include your right to travel freely in your country. I'd like to see the line about your right to smoke marlboros in the constitution.