Are fireworks too dangerous to use?

[Damocles]

The context is exactly the same.

Someone wants to ban fireworks. Avoiding fires is clearly mentioned in the OP, as I've already pointed out.

What that "someone" was a Republican governor, you said this:

Again, the OP is about injuries from people using them, not about a temporary ban on their use to avoid fires.

Now that someone who's not a Republican governor advocates the same ban, you seem to be wavering.

Incorrect. The difference is in the different context.

Laws to keep you from doing things that are "dangerous" to yourself are wrong. Should we ban rock climbing because some people die? Skiing? Skydiving for sport? Water-skiing? Riding bikes? Riding buses? Walking on the side of the road? All of these are things people have been doing when killed in some accident.

If this "law" wasn't trying to be the parent of all people I may agree with it... Specifically setting temp bans during high fire danger when others property and lives are in danger is something government is for, stopping you from doing all things that may be dangerous to yourself is not.

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

Its good to have such loyal fans as Rootbeer.

Is it bad to have such disloyal fans as TF and Blabo?

LOL Fuck you hand wringers

Can't pinheads "Mind your own business"

 

[Canceled.2014.1]

Is it bad to have such disloyal fans as TF and Blabo?

Tinfoil and bravo weren't talking to me or using my quotes as their argument.

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

Again, the OP is about injuries from people using them, not about a temporary ban on their use to avoid fires.

Is it?

...It’s going to be an especially bad year for fireworks. The extreme heat and dryness we’ve been having won’t help matters any. http://www.kansascity.com/2012/07/03/3689483/eric-winkler-play-with-fireworks.html

Incorrect. The difference is in the different context.

How so?

Laws to keep you from doing things that are "dangerous" to yourself are wrong. Should we ban rock climbing because some people die?

What "law" is mentioned in the OP? Context?

If this law wasn't trying to be the parent of all people I may agree with it... Specifically setting temp bans during high fire danger when others property and lives are in danger is something government is for, stopping you from doing all things that may be dangerous is not.

Again, what "law"? The OP references a report, and is a editorial opinion, clearly linked. Where is this "law"?

 

[Damocles]

Is it?

It is 98% about injuries... If the post was solely about putting others in danger rather than people injuring themselves I would agree, however it is not.

How so?

I've pointed it out three times. Your post here is largely about people who injure themselves. Not the place of government.

What "law" is mentioned in the OP? Context?

In the post I quoted when I answered your question you mentioned a law and that somebody advocated the "same ban"... Hence my use of "law" with the quotes.

Again, what "law"? The OP references a report, and is a editorial opinion, clearly linked. Where is this "law"?

Again, you mentioned it in the post I quoted when I first used the word. Hence my use of "law" in quotes. If you aren't talking about a law you shouldn't use words like "ban" in the post.

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

Tinfoil and bravo weren't talking to me or using my quotes as their argument.

So they weren't "talking" to people like yourself, who agree that fireworks should be banned if they're a danger to life and property?

 

[Canceled.2014.1]

So they weren't "talking" to people like yourself, who agree that fireworks should be banned if they're a danger to life and property?

Is that what I said? No.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

Did he say that?

Didn't he?

 

[USFREEDOM911]

The context is exactly the same.

Someone wants to ban fireworks. Avoiding fires is clearly mentioned in the OP, as I've already pointed out.

What that "someone" was a Republican governor, you said this:



Now that someone who's not a Republican governor advocates the same ban, you seem to be wavering.

Does he?

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

It is 98% about injuries... If the post was solely about putting others in danger rather than people injuring themselves I would agree, however it is not.

98%, eh? Are you lacing up your dancin' shoes?

Your post here is largely about people who injure themselves.

Largely? So you missed the part about extreme heat and dryness?

Not the place of government.

The OP doesn't say it's the place of government, does it?

Yet it is the place of government when a Republican governor bans fireworks?

In the post I quoted when I answered your question you mentioned a law and that somebody advocated the "same thing"... Hence my use of "law" with the quotes.

LOL. You're limbering up.

Again, you mentioned it in the post I quoted when I first used the word. Hence my use of "law" in quotes.

What about your use of the word laws - not in quotes?

...Laws to keep you from doing things that are "dangerous" to yourself are wrong. Should we ban rock climbing because some people die? Skiing? Skydiving for sport? Water-skiing? Riding bikes? Riding buses? Walking on the side of the road? All of these are things people have been doing when killed in some accident...

If you aren't talking about a law you shouldn't use words like "ban" in the post.

Fascinating. Is that a forum rule?

 

[Canceled.2014.1]

The context is exactly the same.

Someone wants to ban fireworks. Avoiding fires is clearly mentioned in the OP, as I've already pointed out.

What that "someone" was a Republican governor, you said this:



Now that someone who's not a Republican governor advocates the same ban, you seem to be wavering.

The difference is that in the case of starting fires, the proper use of the items could result in millions of dollars in damages and possible injury or death for people who were not involved.

In the case of personal injuries, most of the time it is someone doing something stupid, and not following the manufacturer's instructions on proper use.

Yes, the OP mentioned wildfires, but more as an afterthought than as the point of the post.

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

Is that what I said? No.

Are you denying that you said they weren't talking to you, or denying that you said fireworks should be banned under some circumstances?

Tinfoil and bravo weren't talking to me...

When the proper and lawful use of something can, due to temporary conditions, cause serious loss or injury to others (especially to those not involved), I have no problem with the ban.

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

Yes, the OP mentioned wildfires, but more as an afterthought than as the point of the post.

But...?

So the Dancin' Dalai has found a partner?

 

[Damocles]

98%, eh? Are you lacing up your dancin' shoes?

Are you? Can you tell me why everything in the post but the last line is about injuries?

Largely? So you missed the part about extreme heat and dryness?

Do you in fact understand what the word largely means in such a context?

The OP doesn't say it's the place of government, does it?

Yet I do, because "bans" of this sort are enacted by governments.

Yet it is the place of government when a Republican governor bans fireworks?[/B]

Actually it doesn't matter what party the person is in, if it is to protect others from your action it is where government belongs, if it is to protect you from taking risk it isn't. It is rather simple. Is this your RCDD again?

LOL. You're limbering up.[/B]

Not really. You mention a law, then promote a different type of ban and call it the same thing.

What about your use of the word laws - not in quotes?

The one speaks about the actual law you mentioned (Governor supports blah), the second to the "law" inferred with your use of "ban".

Fascinating. Is that a forum rule?

It is simply a point of logic. If you are not inferring a need for a law "ban" is something that should be avoided. What entity can ban something other than government?

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

Are you? Can you tell me why everything in the post but the last line is about injuries?

Yep. Because that's all I excerpted. You didn't read the linked opinion piece, did you?

Do you in fact understand what the word largely means in such a context?

Yep. It doesn't mean "all", in any context, does it?

Yet I do, because "bans" of this sort are enacted by governments.

Where is a "ban" mentioned in the OP?

Actually it doesn't matter what party the person is in, if it is to protect others from your action it is where government belongs, if it is to protect you from taking risk it isn't.

It seems to matter a great deal, according to what I see.

You mention a law, then promote a different type of ban and call it the same thing.

I mentioned a law? Where?

What did say that could be construed as "promoting"?

The one speaks about the actual law you mentioned (Governor supports blah), the second to the "law" inferred with your use of "ban".

Was there a law involved? Cite it.

It is simply a point of logic. If you are not inferring a need for a law "ban" is something that should be avoided. What entity can ban something other than government?

Where in this thread is "law" mentioned, or "ban"? Except by yourself, of course.

 

[Canceled.2014.1]

Are you denying that you said they weren't talking to you, or denying that you said fireworks should be banned under some circumstances?

I said they weren't talking to me. But that is not what the post said when I answered with "Is that what I said?".

I laughed at you, for once again showing what a fan you are. You tried to make some comeback remark about tinfoil and bravo being bad fans. But they were not talking to me.

 

[Canceled.2014.1]

But...?

So the Dancin' Dalai has found a partner?

I guess he and I both see the facts of this and speak the truth.

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

I said they weren't talking to me. But that is not what the post said when I answered with "Is that what I said?". I laughed at you, for once again showing what a fan you are. You tried to make some comeback remark about tinfoil and bravo being bad fans. But they were not talking to me.

If enjoying our discussions means I'm a "fan", then I guess I must concede that point.

TF and Blabo seem to have realized that Damo and yourself actually support bans on fireworks and have apparently fled the thread to avoid a circular firing squad.

 

[Guns Guns Guns]

I guess he and I both see the facts of this and speak the truth.

So you dance to the same tune?

 

[leaningright]

I can understand the troll but ken chiming in with him....just dumb.