Should smoling be banned in public places?
By dragonstar13
@dragonstar13 (1465)
United States
January 1, 2007 1:35pm CST
We, the voters, recently passed a law that would outlaw smoking in places serving food. Of course, there was an immediate appeal filed and the issue is still in the courts.
Do you think smoking should be banned in all public places? Do you think it is fair for smokers to force their second hand smoke on the rest of us?
Some time ago smoking was banned in most office buildings so the smokers have to go outside. But let anyone try to go in or out and they have to trudge through a wall of smoke. Smokers may have gone outside but no more than a foot from the door.
So you don't think I am being petty, understand this. Aside from the obvious health hazards you see on TV and even printed on cigarette pacakages, cigarette smoke blown in blown in my face can trigger a headache that leads to a sinus infection and/or a migraine. Smoke on clothing or papers (yes I can smell it on papers that have been in a room with smokers and as a government employee, I handle thousands of pieces of paper per week from the general population) causes and allergic reaction, watery eyes, sneezing and itchy skin.
Now consider that several of my children and grandchildren have asthma. When some incosiderate cretin has to grab a quick puff before coming into a public place, or stands just outside a public doorway so we have to walk through their smoke, it becomes necessary for us to carry inhalers and nebulizers to give the children immediate treatment to keep them breathing.
Would you allow someone to shoot at your children simply because the Constitution allows us to bear arms? Is it any different that their right to smoke should endanger the lives of others? I think not.
2 people like this
1 response
@emeraldisle (13139)
• United States
15 Jan 07
Personally I think on the subject of smoking it should be up to the individual business owner. If they want to allow smoking then let them, if they don't that's fine too. I just don't think the government should determine it. My thought is if they can restrict this right what might be next? What if they decide that eating red meat is bad for you, do you want them to outlaw that as well? It is too easy once they get started on one to move to another. I don't want to live in that sort of society.
I do understand your problems with the allergies. I don't have it with smoke but I do have it with perfume and cologne. I have to deal with so many women and men who seem to bathe in it daily. Recently I went into a hospital to visit someone. I was in the elevator with a worker, she had enough perfume on for at least 10 women. We only had to go 2 floors together but by the time she left I had a migraine and was having trouble breathing. This is just one example. I get it in just about every place I go. Tons of scents from perfume, cologne and sometimes even body lotion will trigger for me an allergic/asthmatic reaction.
You mentioned second hand smoke and how dangerous it is. Personally I don't buy all the statistics they have flooded us with. They are too easily manipulated to get the answers they wanted, any statistics analyst will tell you they can be. Also there are far too many other things that could have caused the same problems and yet they bypass those and just go for the second hand smoke. They want to blame it so they do.
Personally I'd like to see them stop worrying about smoking and worry about more pressing needs. Like finding an alternative fuel source for cars, getting a national health care system in, maybe even lowering the unemployment rate, reduce the amount of the homeless, or maybe get illegal immigrants off the welfar system. Those to me are more pressing issues then if someone wants to have a smoke or not.
