How can you call smoking bans an infringement on property rights when it is the restaurant owners themselves that support statewide smoking bans.
For example even in the Great State of Texas the Texas Restaurant Association supports a statewide restaurant smoking ban.
http://www.restaurantville.com/v2/std/newsrelease.cfm?newsid=22
Shouldn't the decision be up to each restaurant owner and the individual customer? If the restaurant owners are so opposed, then we should allow them to make the decision rather than having mandated by government bans. Using your logic, the effect will be the same.
From your link:
“TRA members recognize that the current disparities that exist in smoking bans enacted at the local level have had a detrimental impact on the restaurant industry in Texas,” said Richie Jackson, TRA executive vice president/CEO. “By applying an equitable ban that is enforced in all workplaces, we will ensure a level playing field and the $32 billion Texas restaurant industry will continue its vital role in our state’s economy.”
In essence, when one town or area bans smoking, some patrons go to other towns or areas without the smoking bans, thereby harming the restaurants in the areas with the bans.
The phrase ‘level playing field’ just makes it easier to back, it’s a pretty business term.
So if some group that represented a majority decides some other type of rights need be eliminted or restricted (like say gun ownership), you’re cool with that?
The mere fact that a lot of people support something is hardly and arguement that supports any given position. There’s argueably a majority of people in this country who are freakin’ morons, just look at how many democrats and RINOs get elected...
That’s texas not wyoming.