Replies

The lingering illness of anyone, for any reason is a horrible experience for anyone.

I'm glad you seem to get at least part of my point. In the case of these smoking bans, many of them, including NYC, NYS and Delaware, they effect EVERY business, not just bars and/or restaurants. What you are advocating is the denial of a property owner to freely use his/her property as they see fit.

There is absolutely no statistically significant proof that exposure to the tobacco smoke of others does anything more than possibly exacerbate an already existing condition or be annoying to some people.

Is smoking a healthy habit? I don't know anyone who would say yes, including myself. Is it a sure thing death sentence to anyone that does it? Absolutely not.

And by going along with the statistics, a non-smoker has a higher chance of getting lung cancer from drinking whole milk than from exposure to second hand smoke. Of course neither risk is statistically significant and therefore should not be given any significant notice.

I do not promote smoking, in fact I am the first to be supportive of those who choose to stop doing so, but on the other hand, I despise the misuse of science and statistics to promote something that actually amounts to nothing more than social engineering.

I truly wisdh that even 1/4 of the money, time and effort that has been invested in attacking smokers and the businesses that choose them as their customers was spent in shutting down the abortion industry........which is a 100% proven killer. In my 20+ years of professional involvement with government (I do not and have never worked for any government agency) I have found a very common thread among those who support a woman's right to "choose" - they are among the most vocal in working to remove choices in other areas whether it be seat belts, guns, or smoking.

There is statistical proof that 4000 smokers contract lung cancer to the 1 non-smoker that develops lung cancer. And if smoking admittedly exacerbates an already existing condition, then why allow it?

Would you please direct me to the site for the documentation for this statement- "a nonsmoker has a higher chance of getting lung cancer from drinking whole milk than from exposure to second hand smoke"?

ITA with your statement about time, money and effort going to appropriate causes. Had my mother never smoked, the probability of her getting lc would have been astronomically reduced, that would have been money well spent.