Re: smoking in public

"Joe Long"

I know that "smoke" is a different sort of annoyance than noise or
"drinking" ... but it is still a matter of degree. When one allows the
government to take away a liberty, one must always be on the side of
"minimum" exclusion ... even for those freedoms that we personally do not
believe in. (It is hard to get someone who believes that gambling is
evil to support your desire to get on line gambling approved by saying
that it does not hurt them personally ... but you want to make sure they
are forbidden to teach their children stupid religious superstition.)

No rights exist in a vacuum, we have government because in society we have
rights in conflict which need to be resolved. vis. the Declaration of
Independence stating "To secure these rights, governments are instituted
among men."

You see smoking bans as taking away liberty, I see smoking bans as
protecting liberty. The rights of the majority of non-smokers trumps the
minority that would foul the air for everyone.


I know that you believe this; it is the imprecise language used that is the
problem. When people use words like "foul the air" without being more
precise, they open the power of the majority "too much" ... of course this
is my opinion. I think "loud music" is a good analogy ... if one
substitutes, one can say that loud music would "foul the air" for everyone
so it should be banned in all public places ... should the majority agree.
Analogies do not "prove" anything, but they are illustrative for the need to
be precise as to what words mean. How much "foul" is to be allowed? There
are those that think that perfume "fouls" the air ... and it is true that
some people are allergic to perfume and have medical reasons to avoid it.

As a non-smoker, and as someone who hates smokey rooms, I am at the edge of
my libertarian leanings, but finding exceptions to complete bans is part of
my world view of how to keep everyone as "free" as possible. I see so many
misuses of government power that I wish to prevent it as much and as often
as possible. Set standards for exactly what someone means by "foul" and I
can agree to regulation. I suspect there is a "loud music" standard out
there somewhere. Banning all music is not the answer to solving the hearing
damage caused by music that is too loud. (Isn't there any bar any where
that has music so loud that you will not go there?)


Personally, I would allow certain exemptions to smoking bans: such as
genuine private clubs, and "cigar bars" where smoking is a fundamental
part of the reason for the establishment's existence. But that's in the
details -- if the only way to get a ban politically in my State is to have
one without the exemptions, then that's what we must have. The overriding
issue of public health and human rights is too important.


I agree that there should be regulations involving tobacco smoke ... mostly
because it is "so annoying" and it was so "ubiquitous" and it was so
"invasive" to so many more than just a simple majority. It should have very
strict regulation. My problem is that it is "banned" and now we are talking
about exceptions. It should be regulated strictly. There are all sorts of
considerations short of banning that should have been considered.

But then, I always start with a perfect world and we are far from that.
Just see how the majority that abhors gambling treats people that just want
to play poker. My poker playing does not affect them at all ... from my
side of the fence. Of course, they think that it should be banned because
they know better than I do what I should do with my time and treasure ... it
is an old story. I always come down on the side of more personal freedom of
choice ... even when the majority disagrees with my personal choice.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Bush signs dollar coin bill
    ... >> think we should all agree, and I think the majority should rule. ... > Majority rule is not the form of government we have in the US. ... Not liberty and justices for the majority. ...
    (rec.collecting.coins)
  • Re: Can men overcome their sexual urges?
    ... taxpayers not only don't care but are in favor of the manger scenes. ... what we end up doing is allowing the majority to be ... Art inspired by religion has ... that whenever any form of government becomes destructive ...
    (soc.men)
  • Mass civil liberties rallies planned for UK
    ... Bastion of personal liberty, home of the ground-breaking Magna Carta, ... The government’s appetite to maintain detailed files on its citizens ... On Saturday February 28, lawyers, judges, politicians, human rights ... between the people and the government. ...
    (soc.men)
  • Re: Nanny, May I ?
    ... Utter rot, I despise liberty? ... government, ... himself with his own health care, as he sees fit and can afford, just as ...
    (alt.smokers.pipes)
  • Re: Nanny, May I ?
    ... administered somehow by the government and always has been. ... Those like you, who despise liberty and wish to promote state control, are forever suggesting that chaos is the inevitable outcomes of too much freedom. ... the failed rationale of Communism. ...
    (alt.smokers.pipes)