|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Smokers Have Rights Too!!! - 2/26/2008 9:59:20 AM
|
|
|
stellaluna
Posts: 3259
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: bluestone
Alcohol fumes do not trigger asthma attacks. It does not get into your clothing all the way to your underwear. It does not cause sinus congestion, bronchitis, or red itchy eyes. Ciggarette smoke does. It effects the health of anyone around it.
I think part of the problem is that smokers truly have no idea how bad they smell or how their smoke affects people who don't smoke.
I used to be around smoke all the time. Most of my friends smoke and I smoked a fair amount myself. But for about six months, I was never around smoke at all. Guess what? I had no idea that even being exposed to one or two cigarettes would make my clothes smell! I didn't know that spending an evening at a friend's house or at a bar would mean I had to wash my clothes not once, but twice, because even after one wash and dry cycle the smoke smell lingers. I had no idea smoking affected my sense of smell as much as it did!
I never would have imagined there would be a time when just walking through a cloud of smoke would make my eyes burn. I never imagined that a night out with friends would end with me coughing all night and not being able to sleep because I'm wheezing and have a headache.
But it's all true and being around cigarette smoke is now something I try to avoid at all costs. My smoking friends are all annoyed with me because I don't want to spend time in their smoke and because they've never been smoke-free, they really can't understand why. So while my friends are a mite selfish, perhaps more smokers would be willing to forego a cigarette in a restaurant if they knew just how bad smoking is to the non-smoker? I don't know. They can't all be that selfish...just poorly informed?
< Message edited by stellaluna -- 2/26/2008 10:09:59 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Smokers Have Rights Too!!! - 2/26/2008 10:43:33 AM
|
|
|
bzirk
Posts: 2733
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Where the deer and antelope play
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rlj
quote:
That lone hold-out for smoking inside was a McDonalds - which really surprised me, considering their child-friendly PR.
Obviously operator owned. ; )
quote:
I felt it was very rude, but as a non-smoker, I didn't know if that was typical behavior or not.
When I smoked I would have had no problem with moving or going outside.
Maybe it's just me, but I can remember the days when the non-smokers were the odd man out, and smokers would have been offended to move or go outside. The tide has certainly turned, and as libertarian as I lean, I recognize that a host of laws has helped to bring that about.
_____________________________
Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:1)
Great quote: I just ain't God and don't know it all. -- SonInMe1
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Smokers Have Rights Too!!! - 2/26/2008 1:23:33 PM
|
|
|
LaurainAL
Posts: 1543
Joined: 8/13/2005
Status: offline
|
I work with a woman who is 7 months pregnant and goes out to take her a smoke break at least every 2 hours. I wonder about the rights of her baby.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Smokers Have Rights Too!!! - 2/26/2008 2:12:29 PM
|
|
|
zmanfan38
Posts: 8757
Joined: 9/14/2006
From: ...for it's root, root, root for the CUBBIES!!!
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: briar-rose
I am an ex smoker, my boyfriend is a smoker. When we go out to eat we respect the law as not smoking indoors. But how far is the goverment going to take it. Now see ads about not smoking in the car or in your home because of the effects of second hand smoke on children. Will it go so far as the goverment will tell people they can't have a smoking room in there own house? What about alcohol. Maybe they should focus more on getting drunk drivers off the road then worry about where people smoke.
This may be unpopular, but I do hope so because, like stellaluna said, smokers really don't have any idea what they are doing to others. Children of smoking parents are trapped in their own homes. There is no such thing as a smoking room in your home because smoke doesn't hover in a cloud over the smoker's head...it spreads out all over the place.
This is my childhood with a smoking single mother. She smoked in the house and said that if she didn't smoke in my room then I should have nothing to complain about. The smoke in my room came in under the door, through the walls, and was pumped in through the heat and air ducts. I arranged my room where the top half of my bed was underneath the farthest window from my door and I always slept with my window wide open. I kept my heat vents closed and piled clean towels with dryer sheets in between on top of the heat vents and then stacked heavy books on top of the towels. I also stuffed a thick towel under my door. I slept like this my entire childhood. There were nights where my room was below 50 degrees and I was freezing, but it was still better than not being able to breathe. That is pathetic. Children should not have to live like that. Trust me, if you smoke in your house and children live there, they are desperate to escape from that nasty stuff.
I stayed sick with ear infections and upper respiratory infections and my doctors always told her she needed to keep my environment smoke free. She always said they didn't know what they were talking about. That's child abuse...there's no other label for it. Maybe smokers like the one I grew up with don't realize or care how they are ruining the health of people around them, but the government stepping in is the only hope for the children in these kinds of abusive homes.
_____________________________
GB = Gorgeous Baby
Looking for tips on moving out of state. <--LINK
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Smokers Have Rights Too!!! - 2/26/2008 2:17:56 PM
|
|
|
doinkdom
Posts: 3645
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: The higher lowcountry
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: zmanfan38
but the government stepping in is the only hope for the children in these kinds of abusive homes.
seriously? You think we need more government in our homes?
Where will the line be drawn? There are a lot of controversial issues that are determined by parents...spankings, etc. that become wide open when you start trying to legislate people's lives.
To the government: I get the smoking ban...I endorse it. But stay outta my house.
_____________________________
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Smokers Have Rights Too!!! - 2/26/2008 2:18:34 PM
|
|
|
rainbowtvp
Posts: 1072
Joined: 4/21/2005
From: The Unted State of Confusion
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: dawgfan_40
The health aspects are of lung cancer,etc.. But how come the smoker is singled out? A person with an alchahol habit can sustain liver damage,and as far as second hand smoke. A person can leave or what ever. But a person who drives drunk can kill people too..
Which is why drunk driving is against the law.
As far as a non-smoker leaving to get away from someone's smoke... Here is the difference:
If a restaurant (or other public building) is filled with smoke I, and many other people, cannot go in it at all.
If a restaurant is smoke-free, both smokers and those who are made ill by smoke can use it; the smoker just has to refrain from smoking for the short time they are there.
In the first scenario, access is limited for a segment of the population; in the second- everyone has access.
There is nothing wrong with requiring smokers to refrain frmo smoking for a short period of time. This is not infringing on their right to smoke. Just as requiring that I refrain from a zillion other behaviors that other's find offensive in some way is not limiting my rights (ie, I can go naked as much as I like at home; at the store I must wear a shirt).
And I agree with those that say perfume can be as bad. It is just a little harder to prove any physical symptoms are caused by someone else's perfume wearing- esp long-term effects and it would be difficult to regulate.
Tara P
_____________________________
http://www.geocities.com/hallscola67/KyliesHomemadeShopIndex.htm
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Smokers Have Rights Too!!! - 2/26/2008 2:21:19 PM
|
|
|
JimboFletch
Posts: 4680
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: doinkdom
quote:
ORIGINAL: zmanfan38
but the government stepping in is the only hope for the children in these kinds of abusive homes.
seriously? You think we need more government in our homes?
Where will the line be drawn? There are a lot of controversial issues that are determined by parents...spankings, etc. that become wide open when you start trying to legislate people's lives.
To the government: I get the smoking ban...I endorse it. But stay outta my house.
I'll bite:
Whose rights/welfare should government place above the other, addicted parents or helpless children?
And if they do nothing, they side with addicted parents by default...
[EDITED to correct spelling error]
< Message edited by JimboFletch -- 2/26/2008 2:34:06 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Smokers Have Rights Too!!! - 2/26/2008 2:21:53 PM
|
|
|
zmanfan38
Posts: 8757
Joined: 9/14/2006
From: ...for it's root, root, root for the CUBBIES!!!
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: doinkdom
quote:
ORIGINAL: zmanfan38
but the government stepping in is the only hope for the children in these kinds of abusive homes.
seriously? You think we need more government in our homes?
Where will the line be drawn? There are a lot of controversial issues that are determined by parents...spankings, etc. that become wide open when you start trying to legislate people's lives.
To the government: I get the smoking ban...I endorse it. But stay outta my house.
If smoking parents don't get how their disgusting addiction is ruining the health of their children, then they obviously need somebody stepping in.
_____________________________
GB = Gorgeous Baby
Looking for tips on moving out of state. <--LINK
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Smokers Have Rights Too!!! - 2/26/2008 2:23:56 PM
|
|
|
Jenny-Fair
Posts: 6187
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: WA
Status: offline
|
My mother once got angry with me because I was laying on the floor-when she asked me why I said that in school we were taught that smoke rises and so to be on the floor in case of a fire.
I have a pretty nasty allergy to cigarette smoke due to my mom's smoking. I also had chronic ear infections and the like. My sister ended up with athsma. My mother did damage to us that will last our whole lives by smoking in our home. She would probably still not admit it, because addicts are great at denial.
As for those who say drunk drivers can cause more damage--drunk driving is already illegal.
I live in WA and recently public places were made smoke-free. I almost threw a party. Finally, we can go bowling!
_____________________________
My Blog
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Smokers Have Rights Too!!! - 2/26/2008 2:24:52 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 6782
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: offline
|
quote:
Maybe it's just me, but I can remember the days when the non-smokers were the odd man out, and smokers would have been offended to move or go outside. The tide has certainly turned, and as libertarian as I lean, I recognize that a host of laws has helped to bring that about.
Yeah, I have to admit it one of those government regulations that is really hard to get worked up over because I like the results. Our state recently banned smoking in all restaurants and bars and quite frankly, I just enjoy going out with my family more now.
Though it does remind me of this little saying:
When they came for the smokers I kept silent because I don't smoke.
When they came for the meat eaters I kept silent because I'm a vegetarian.
When they came for the gun owners I kept silent because I'm a pacifist.
When they came for the drivers I kept silent because I'm a bicyclist.
They never did come for me. I'm still here because there's nobody left in the secret police except sissies with rickets.
_____________________________
Jack
“I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth”
William F. Buckley Jr. 1925-2008
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Smokers Have Rights Too!!! - 2/26/2008 2:34:00 PM
|
|
|
doinkdom
Posts: 3645
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: The higher lowcountry
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: JimboFletch
quote:
ORIGINAL: doinkdom
quote:
ORIGINAL: zmanfan38
but the government stepping in is the only hope for the children in these kinds of abusive homes.
seriously? You think we need more government in our homes?
Where will the line be drawn? There are a lot of controversial issues that are determined by parents...spankings, etc. that become wide open when you start trying to legislate people's lives.
To the government: I get the smoking ban...I endorse it. But stay outta my house.
I'll bite:
Who's rights/welfare should government place above the other, addicted parents or helpless children?
And if they do nothing, they side with addicted parents by default...
Who's rights? Well, the government generally places its own rights or agenda above all else.
I get all that you're saying - around here, DSS handles that for the most part and if DSS discovers a smoking parent with a sick child...yeah, it is brought into question and doctors are consulted, etc.
I'm talking about the government coming into my home, assuming because I spank my children, they are beaten. Assuming that because I smoke, they do or will or have by second hand means. I have a glass of wine with dinner and I'm an alcoholic. All these assumptions can be based on random phone calls and anonymous callers who may or may not have an agenda.
Mainly, I guess I'm just not as excited about people relying on our government in order to behave right.
_____________________________
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Smokers Have Rights Too!!! - 2/26/2008 2:35:10 PM
|
|
|
stamper_ben
Posts: 10840
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lone Star State
Status: offline
|
Because I smoke I have an abusive home....
Words fail me. Except for this...
Go ahead. Call the law.
_____________________________
We will be known as His by the love we show one another.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Smokers Have Rights Too!!! - 2/26/2008 2:47:49 PM
|
|
|
zmanfan38
Posts: 8757
Joined: 9/14/2006
From: ...for it's root, root, root for the CUBBIES!!!
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: stamper_ben
Because I smoke I have an abusive home....
Words fail me. Except for this...
Go ahead. Call the law.
Read it again:
quote:
ORIGINAL: zmanfan38
Maybe smokers like the one I grew up with don't realize or care how they are ruining the health of people around them, but the government stepping in is the only hope for the children in these kinds of abusive homes.
"...like the one I grew up with..." I worded that very carefully so that it would not be a sweeping generalization of all smokers.
The way my rights were spat upon as a child was indeed child abuse. If smokers like the one I grew up with care more about their next drag more than the health of their child, then yes, the government should step in.
I don't want to give the wrong impression here. I'm not against smokers. That's a personal decision. I just believe that smoking in the house with children living there is a horrible decision. If the addiction has really clouded the smoker's judgement to the extent that they don't see (or want to see) what they are doing to their children, then yes, the government should step in. Smoke...be happy, but don't think it's not child abuse to ask your children to smoke. Children do not want to smoke. If you make their childhood home full of smoke, you've made them smoke.
_____________________________
GB = Gorgeous Baby
Looking for tips on moving out of state. <--LINK
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Smokers Have Rights Too!!! - 2/26/2008 3:49:15 PM
|
|
|
phosadaud
Posts: 7643
Joined: 9/19/2005
From: Washington State
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jenny-Fair
As for those who say drunk drivers can cause more damage--drunk driving is already illegal.
I live in WA and recently public places were made smoke-free. I almost threw a party. Finally, we can go bowling!
I think this is an important point. Drunk driving is illegal. Why? Because someone's "right" and "decision" to drink while driving not only is dangerous for them, but for innocent folks on the road. We didn't make it illegal because most of us "prefer" not to get behind a drunk driver on the road. We made it illegal because, whether the intention was there or not, drunk drivers harm innocent citizens. By some of the logic in this thread, we should allow it though because after all, if we don't want to get hit by a drunk driver, we should just stay off the roads. Or maybe, each town should designate certain roads to be "drunk driver free" or "not drunk driver free" and those who don't drive drunk will just have to deal with it because folks have a "right" to drink and drive. And if you think that's not a valid comparison, maybe we'll say that only "private" roads can allow drunk drivers on them.
Again, this is not a question of preference. This is a question of harm. At what point do we say that when someone's actions cause others harm, do we say the government should step in (as they currently do with drunk drivers)?
_____________________________
~Kristin~
The easily offended...
Thousands of years ago, cats were worshipped as Gods. Cats have never forgotten this.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Smokers Have Rights Too!!! - 2/26/2008 4:04:41 PM
|
|
|
stamper_ben
Posts: 10840
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lone Star State
Status: offline
|
Christi, I am sorry for the conditions you had to grow up under.
_____________________________
We will be known as His by the love we show one another.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Smokers Have Rights Too!!! - 2/26/2008 4:15:41 PM
|
|
|
zmanfan38
Posts: 8757
Joined: 9/14/2006
From: ...for it's root, root, root for the CUBBIES!!!
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: stamper_ben
Christi, I am sorry for the conditions you had to grow up under.
Thank you, Ben.
I have friends who smoke, but not in their house and I think that's such a loving thing for them to do for their kids and I praise them for it.
_____________________________
GB = Gorgeous Baby
Looking for tips on moving out of state. <--LINK
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Smokers Have Rights Too!!! - 2/26/2008 7:53:57 PM
|
|
|
EverLearning
Posts: 1683
Joined: 5/25/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: JimboFletch
Is it okay with you if tobacco chewers begin spitting their juice at your feet in public as they once did before government began interferring with their "rights"?
by in public do you mean the sidewalks or government buildings, you know truly public places? If so then no it is not okay. If you mean in a business where the owner allows that then guess what, I don't have to go there. I can make the choice to go places where the owner caters to my preferences. I am a non-smoker who will go out their way to visit non-smoking establishments but I still don't think the government should be able to tell a business owner whether legal activities can take place on their property. I would actually prefer that smokers have to do so inside establishments that allow smoking so i don't have to walk through the cloud on the sidewalk, a truly public place.
_____________________________
Normal people believe that if it ain't broke, don't fix it."
Engineers believe that "if it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough
features yet
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Smokers Have Rights Too!!! - 2/26/2008 8:51:25 PM
|
|
|
agapetos
Posts: 5360
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: This side of the lil duck pond!
Status: offline
|
You know, there are some hospitals here where you're not allowed to smoke in the grounds. You can't even sit in your car and smoke if your car is in the hospital grounds.
I was in the supermarket where I used to work today and was told one of the ladies I knew was off sick. She has pneumonia. She's (apparently) been told to give up smoking before and she's tried many times but she's an older lady and has been smoking since she was young. I rather suspect if she knew then what is known now about cigarettes she'd have tried quitting sooner. Perhaps with the ban on smoking in pubs etc, she'd never have started.
_____________________________
Knowledge is knowing that a tomato is a fruit.
Wisdom is not using them in fruit salads!
My blog
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Smokers Have Rights Too!!! - 2/26/2008 9:06:01 PM
|
|
|
EverLearning
Posts: 1683
Joined: 5/25/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: phosadaud
No. Some governmental regulation does not equal total governmental regulation. We're not saying you can never smoke, anywhere, at anytime, for any reason. We're saying that while you are in a place the public gathers, keep your carcinogens to yourself and don't force anyone with the slightest allergies or lung problems to have to leave a place that is open to the public. Wait and hour and go smoke in your car. That's not extreme. That's common sense.
It is also common sense that if you don't like smoke don't go to a smoking establishment. And i agree when someone is on public property then they should not be allowed to infringe upon others even with second hand smoke and i think that should include parks, sidewalks, courthouses, and the likes. This isn't about smokers rights, i am talking about private business owners rights.
quote:
I would gather that you believe we should allow folks to drive drunk through "private" parking lots and on private lanes as long as the property owner thinks it's ok. Or that the government should have no standards for food establishments because if you eat enough bad food, eventually it will go out of business. Or maybe, we shouldn't have laws relating to how nursing homes treat their residents because the market will sort it out and private businesses shouldn't have any governmental regulation. Too bad if your mom dies because of abuse and neglect. You shouldn't expect the government to protect you. 
Thing is that feeding people known bad food, drunk driving and cruelty or neglect of nursing home patients is direct and willful harm. Allowing people to smoke in your place of business isn't. You don't have the right to go into someone's private business, you can make the choice to not go there.
quote:
Sorry, but you aren't helping your argument when you don't get what you are arguing against. 
I get full well what i am arguing against, i am not the one making invalid comparisons to ILLEGAL activities which smoking isn't . Not only that i am against smoking in truly public places. I am not the one making silly arguements about how we should just let people neglect the elderly if we are going to allow a business owner to decide how to run his business when he doesn't allow illegal activities. If smoking is that harmful and that destructive then push to have it outlawed and if that works, then and only then will i back preventing business owners from allowing smoking in their place of business.
_____________________________
Normal people believe that if it ain't broke, don't fix it."
Engineers believe that "if it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough
features yet
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Smokers Have Rights Too!!! - 2/26/2008 9:31:51 PM
|
|
|
phosadaud
Posts: 7643
Joined: 9/19/2005
From: Washington State
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: EverLearning
quote:
ORIGINAL: phosadaud
No. Some governmental regulation does not equal total governmental regulation. We're not saying you can never smoke, anywhere, at anytime, for any reason. We're saying that while you are in a place the public gathers, keep your carcinogens to yourself and don't force anyone with the slightest allergies or lung problems to have to leave a place that is open to the public. Wait and hour and go smoke in your car. That's not extreme. That's common sense.
It is also common sense that if you don't like smoke don't go to a smoking establishment. And i agree when someone is on public property then they should not be allowed to infringe upon others even with second hand smoke and i think that should include parks, sidewalks, courthouses, and the likes. This isn't about smokers rights, i am talking about private business owners rights.
So what happens when every place is a smoking establishment. Where I live, that was the case until they banned it. And why do you believe a business owner has the right to allow an environment that causes physical harm?
quote:
quote:
I would gather that you believe we should allow folks to drive drunk through "private" parking lots and on private lanes as long as the property owner thinks it's ok. Or that the government should have no standards for food establishments because if you eat enough bad food, eventually it will go out of business. Or maybe, we shouldn't have laws relating to how nursing homes treat their residents because the market will sort it out and private businesses shouldn't have any governmental regulation. Too bad if your mom dies because of abuse and neglect. You shouldn't expect the government to protect you.
Thing is that feeding people known bad food, drunk driving and cruelty or neglect of nursing home patients is direct and willful harm. Allowing people to smoke in your place of business isn't. You don't have the right to go into someone's private business, you can make the choice to not go there.
How is it different? An establishment that doesn't use proper food handling techniques probably isn't doing that to cause some people to get sick, but their actions will result in that. Most people driving drunk are not intending to drive drunk to kill someone on the highway, but that is often the result. We know second hand smoke causes physical harm to other people. Whether the smoker intends to cause someone to have a fatal asthma attack is no different. The fact is, their actions cause harm to other individuals. Again, what is the difference?
quote:
quote:
Sorry, but you aren't helping your argument when you don't get what you are arguing against.
I get full well what i am arguing against, i am not the one making invalid comparisons to ILLEGAL activities which smoking isn't . Not only that i am against smoking in truly public places. I am not the one making silly arguements about how we should just let people neglect the elderly if we are going to allow a business owner to decide how to run his business when he doesn't allow illegal activities. If smoking is that harmful and that destructive then push to have it outlawed and if that works, then and only then will i back preventing business owners from allowing smoking in their place of business.
If they are so silly, why don't you address them? Either you are a little on the slow side, which I don't think you are, or you won't address them because you know we have valid points. Those things I listed are only illegal because there are laws against them. WHY are their laws against them? For the same reason many places are making laws against smoking in places the public gathers.
_____________________________
~Kristin~
The easily offended...
Thousands of years ago, cats were worshipped as Gods. Cats have never forgotten this.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Smokers Have Rights Too!!! - 2/26/2008 10:14:04 PM
|
|
|
EverLearning
Posts: 1683
Joined: 5/25/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: phosadaud
So what happens when every place is a smoking establishment. Where I live, that was the case until they banned it.
Then obviously it either A) made better business sense or B) the non-smokers didn't make their voice known to the owners of establishments. Business people are out to make a profit, you hit their profit and things change.
quote:
And why do you believe a business owner has the right to allow an environment that causes physical harm?
You have the choice to not go there to have harm inflicted upon you. As long as they aren't doing anything illegal then it isn't their place to protect you.
quote:
How is it different? An establishment that doesn't use proper food handling techniques probably isn't doing that to cause some people to get sick, but their actions will result in that. Most people driving drunk are not intending to drive drunk to kill someone on the highway, but that is often the result. We know second hand smoke causes physical harm to other people. Whether the smoker intends to cause someone to have a fatal asthma attack is no different. The fact is, their actions cause harm to other individuals. Again, what is the difference?
In all of those instances the acts are ILLEGAL and willful acts except smoking which is not illegal. That is the difference. One has no choice to avoid a drunk driver, one can not know easily how their food was prepared, one CAN know if a place is a smoking establishment and make the choice to stay or go based on that knowledge.
quote:
If they are so silly, why don't you address them? Either you are a little on the slow side, which I don't think you are, or you won't address them because you know we have valid points. Those things I listed are only illegal because there are laws against them. WHY are their laws against them? For the same reason many places are making laws against smoking in places the public gathers.
I have addressed them, had i not then we wouldn't be having this conversation. There are laws against drunk driving and feeding others dirty/rotten food because the victims can be harmed without having a choice to avoid the harm. Drunk driving by the way takes place on PUBLIC roads. I can smoke in my home if I choose and you can choose not to visit me, it is the same with smoking in a privately owned business. Second hand smoke is avoidable in privately owned establishments, that is up to you. Now on public property that is a different story, you should not have to avoid smoke on public property.
_____________________________
Normal people believe that if it ain't broke, don't fix it."
Engineers believe that "if it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough
features yet
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
You do have the freedom to whine, though. 
Precisely. It's not a choice between absolutely zero governmental intereference and complete tyranny... 