Posted on 05/21/2004 8:50:48 AM PDT by SheLion
Tyranny of the majority: Smoking ban is just plain wrong
Posted on Thu, May. 20, 2004
MATTHEW J. GOLLINGER
As smoking bans have made their way into law across the country, one adage has repeatedly come to mind: "What's right isn't always popular, and what's popular isn't always right."
The St. Paul City Council is threatening to enact a smoking ban. The stink of smoke in clothing, the haze obscuring the stage and sore throats induced by second-hand smoke would be worries of the past. The majority recognizes that these benefits would improve their bar/restaurant experience and pledges their support to the ban.
These benefits can explain the popularity of the proposal, yet they do not justify it. The proposed ban recklessly ignores the ability of the free market to meet public demand. Moreover, free society demands that the majority refrain from such selfish imposition.
Smoking bans make sense in the context of hospitals and airplanes, which are areas of public necessity. Restaurants and bars, however, are recreational venues, where no one is forced to be. The proposed ban is grossly overbroad regulation, marginally increasing the convenience and comfort of the nonsmoking majority by drastically reducing the rights and privileges of the smoking minority. While the clothing of nonsmokers will be good for an extra wearing between washes, smokers will be shooed outside like dogs in the dead of winter.
This is pure selfishness by those favoring the ban. Currently, smokers and nonsmokers are able to enjoy a drink/meal in their venue of choice, nearly all of which have nonsmoking sections. Furthermore, nonsmokers are free to patronize restaurants that have voluntarily banned smoking. If people truly cared about the ban, such establishments would be inundated by those seeking smoke-free hospitality. Extensive advertising would appear to attract all of those nonsmoking dollars to smoke-free joints. The sponsors of the ban seek to take away our ability to "vote with our feet/pocketbook" by eliminating our ability to choose.
The smoking ban grows out of an ever-expanding brand of idiocy; that one has a fundamental right to be free from inconvenience and offense. This insanity is patently un-American. When we venture into the public, whether it be a sidewalk, park, bar or restaurant, we subject ourselves to experiencing the whole of our society. Frequently, our society is not a perfect reflection of who we are, and it offends us. One might be offended at the sight of a homosexual couple kissing, the hearing of a racial epithet or the stench of someone who chooses not to shower.
Tough luck.
While we could outlaw physical contact by members of the same gender, institute speech codes and make showering mandatory, we do not and should not. We do not prohibit these activities because our selfish need for convenience and personal comfort must not interfere with the basic freedoms we enjoy as a society.
The most compelling argument in favor of the ban is that hospitality employees are subjected to a dangerous work environment, polluted by carcinogens. Let me be clear on this point: I do not care. Neither should you.
I have worked as a bartender for the past four years. Though I do not consider myself a smoker, I have inhaled more than my fair share of second-hand smoke. Might this exposure cause long-term adverse health effects? Yes. However, I have grown up in a time when even people living under rocks are well aware that smoking is bad for you. Nevertheless, I chose to work as a bartender and accepted the negative aspects of the job along with the positive ones. As an adult in a free society, I weighed the relevant pros and cons and made the choice to serve drinks. Nobody forced me to get behind that bar, and I certainly don't need the City Council's protection. The implicit condescension and elitism of the sponsors of the smoking ban should infuriate all employees of the hospitality industry.
I like to think that we live in a relatively enlightened community that respects the rights of those who are outnumbered. However, as the smoking ban gains momentum, I am starting to believe that those who support the ban do not care whether such a ban is right, so long as it is popular.
Gollinger is an attorney and part-time bartender.
TwinCities.com
The same for me as well. I am tired of these idiots trying to goad us into arguments. I just consider the source and move on.
Another win/win for the smoking bans. But I wonder if I had the last store on earth that sold tobacco you would buy from me.
Like I said. Its called denial. Denial is the primary trait of most addicts. If they were not in denial they would have to change behaviors.
When confronted with facts that smokers suffer from diseases that shorten lives stick their fingers in there ears and refuse to hear. When told this is the actions of addicts in denial, smokers respond with silly attacks. Anything to avoid breaking the hard shell of denial that protects the smoker addict from having to deal with reality.
I wish I was as good as you doing that kind of work - my VA license plate actually has a tobacco leaf on it!!!!
I'm going to be going to Dover in early june for a political fundraiser. A good friend of mine is running for office in November and I want to give him some support.
He chose the particular venue for a couple of reasons - one he is friends with the owner and wants to give her the business; 2 while a non-smoker herself the owner was vocally opposed to the smoking ban; 3 it has an outside patio, deck and bar that are not included in the smoking ban.
There are few places I will patronize when I visit friends and family in Delaware - the owners of them all were vocal opponents to the ban and so I will at least stop by and have drink and say hello. They were not the cause of the problem and are seiously hurting from it.
OTOH the place that hosted the 2002 World Smoker's Day will never see another penny of my money. The owner and I had worked very hard and closely together in fighting the ban - then he got strongarmed by and caved into the special inteests of the Restaurant Association and turned around and supported the ban. And fought any and all moves to make modifications to it. 18 months after the ban and he still is not having as much live entertainment as in the past because he can't afford it. His lunch and dinner crowd picked up a little bit, but not enough to cover the losses from the happy hour crowd that has found other venues to spend their money in.
I WOULD NOT WISH IT ON ANYONE EITHER. That's not the point. What's so difficult about this. It's not rocket science. You are essentially insisting that experiencing or watching a death like Berg's wherein one's neck was slowly sawed off by a butcher knife is EQUAL to death by lethal injection or dying in one's sleep from a sudden heart attack. THAT to me is insensitive, ignorant, cruel to even imagine.
I only know one person who died from emphysema.
DID YOU OBSERVE the death at close range for hours on end? Have you ever felt like you were breathing through a hair and that the hair was lined with sharp burning needles?
The deaths of both were painful to them and everyone who loved them.
OF COURSE THEY WERE! THAT'S ****NOT**** THE POINT! SHEESH!
Both of them were life long non-smokers.
GREAT! At least there was not that complicating factor.
Was the emphysema death of a non-smoker any less difficult than that of a smoker? Of course not.
OF COURSE NOT! THAT'S !!!!!!!NOT!!!!!!! THE POINT! SHEESH! Are we on the same planet? Are we speaking the same language? Are we from the same culture? Do we have any common dictionaries?
Contrary to your belief, all of life's ills are not caused by smoking
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH. NOW, WHO'S?????????????? ASSUMING, PUTTING WORDS IN SOMEONE ELSE'S FINGERS; SETTING UP STRAW DOGS; BLACKWASHING??????????????????
I HAVE NO BELIEF ANYWHERE CLOSE TO the idea that "all life's ills are caused by smoking." WHAT A HIDEOUS BROADSIDE RIDICULOUS, ARROGANT AND IGNORANT COMMENT.
and for you to claim one death is worse than another because a person is a smoker is disgusting and very far from being even remotely Christianlike.
I SAID NOTHING ABOUT ONE DEATH AS A DEATH BEING WORSE AS A DEATH THAN ANOTHER'S. SHEESH. Do words mean anything reliable any more? You are essentially insisting that experiencing or watching a death like Berg's wherein one's neck was slowly sawed off by a butcher knife is
IF YOU BELIEVE THE TWO TYPES of deaths are EQUAL in pain, comfort, distress, anguish etc.,
THEN I NEVER WANT YOU TO BE A
GUARD
in my prison!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
EVERY ONE--AS IN 100% OF MY FRIENDS, RELATIVES AND ACQUAINTANCES WHO HAVE DIED FROM EMPHYSEMA HAVE REPEATEDLY DECLARED THAT IT WAS THE WORST KIND OF DEATH THEY COULD IMAGINE. THEY BEGGED EVERYONE THEY KNEW TO STOP SMOKING IMMEDIATELY. THEY OUGHT TO HAVE KNOWN WHAT THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT. THEY ENDURED IT ENDLESS EXCRUCIATING MINUTE AFTER ENDLESS EXCRUCIATING MINUTE MONTH AFTER MONTH. THEY KNEW THAT SMOKING RESULTED IN FAR MORE EMPHYSEMA THAN ANY OTHER SINGLE CAUSE.
Denial can pretend that's not true. Denial can shuck and jive and slip and slide and blame and rationalize until one's last gasping breath. It won't change that fact.
I take their word for it. They have been the experts in my life on matters of emphysema.
I do know, FROM MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE that difficulty breathing WITHOUT the complications of emphysema has been frighteningly, horribly, painfully awful for even a few minutes. When it went on for hours, I prayed to die. Imagining someone dying over months of emphysema is an awesomely awful thing to even imagine, much less watch at close range and much, much less experience.
But hey--if you are a masochist and the prospect of an extremely excruciatingly painful death where every breath feels like you're breathing through a hair lined with hypersensitive nerve endings pressed constantly by hot needles--if such a prospect brings on multiple orgasms and is at least EQUAL to dying in one's sleep from a sudden painless heart attack--then--be my guest. Just don't ask me to watch.
I don't really have any apology for trying to discourage anyone and everyone I can to do what they can to avoid a needless death by emphysema. I consider it part of Christian caring. I don't even care if they hate me now for trying. It's not fun. But I'd rather they hate me and have a greater probability of not dying from emphysema than to not hate me and merily slide down that slippery slope.
Supposedly nicotine is the "addictive" factor when it comes to tobacco and the reason people continue to smoke (I do not subscribe to this particular belief). Based upon your assumption that smokers are addicts, and the nicotine is the factor, what do you say about those who smoke non-tobacco cigarettes (non-marijuana)??????
The products are perfectly legal for purchase and for use in many jurisdictions which have banned smoking tobacco. They are also rather pleasant.
What are you going to do about that?
I DID !!!!NOT!!!! SAY THAT! I certainly did not mean that, either. I said that, perhaps someone who would say that dying by the excruciatingly painful every second process emphysema involves (or by illustration having one's neck slowly sawed off by a butcher knife)
TO DYING by lethal injection or an unconscious heart attack in one's sleep--for someone to say such diverse types of death are EQUAL IN PAIN, EQUAL IN DISTRESS, EQUAL IN DISCOMFORT, EQUAL IN FEAR, EQUAL IN AGONY
--that to say THAT would be evidence that perhaps the person saying so was medically ignorant and/or experientially ignorant. I stand by that statement. To think otherwise is mind bogglingly idiotic, blind, deaf and totally uninformed, to my experience and observations and from all the medical experits I've talked to IN ADDITION TO THE PEOPLE I KNOW WHO'VE DIED FROM EMPHYSEMA. I'll trust their very informed, trained and EXPERIENCED perspectives any day compared to anyone in denial merely trying to justify their self-destructive addiction to a poisonous chemical and smoke particles, ash particles with a list of poisonous chemicals.
Your posts are full of whining self pity,a tough childhood, lots of responsibilities now etc.
HOGWASH. I listed such things as AN ILLUSTRATION THAT I KNEW SOMETHING ABOUT SUFFERING AND RESPONSIBILITIES GIVEN THAT SUFFERING AND RESPONSIBILITY WERE IMPORTANT ISSUES IN THE DISCUSSION. I can do quite wonderfully without anyone's pity on the whole of FR. Some offer understanding and compassion, empathy and that's nice--sometimes wonderful. But it doesn't make me do a Snoopy dance when it's there nor cry in my pillow when it's not. Sheesh. Your level of insight and empathy seem to be about as informed and robust as your understanding of emphysema.
Who in the name of God do you think you are?
A voice crying in a wilderness; a flawed critter trying humbly to work out my own salvation with fear and trembling; a Blood Bought Child of The King of Kings and Lord of Lords who HE has painfully taught me a few things here and there--and who is willing to share some of what I've had to learn the hard way in the hopes that NOT EVERYONE will have to learn the same things the hard way personally but that SOME may choose to learn more safely and comfortably from my hard experiences.
If the shoe doesn't fit--get on your pogo stick and scroll on by. I don't recall holding a gun to your head demanding that you read a single word I wrote.
There isn't a poster here,pro or anti smoking,who hasn't had their share of problems.We all have tough times but life goes on and no one wants to hear the incessant self pity about which you have subjected us all. Get a life!!!!!
Oh, dear--I'm certain those parts of Genesis are not in my Bible. LOL.
And I certainly don't miss them, either!
Thanks for your clever comment.
You goofed. The last paragraph is in my words. Shouldn't that be in red also?
Don't you have a job? Where on earth do you get the time for all of this?
SOME of us
SOMETIMES
TRY
to avoid advertising our
IGNORANCE, LACK OF LOGIC, LACK OF EXPERIENCE, LACK OF A SUFFICIENT GRASP OF THE WHOLE.
Perhaps I should pray that more of us will engage in such efforts.
Sigh.
I never had any real presumptions that granite craniums would be enlightened in the least. But even for the lurkers, some exercises become too weary-ing to further bother much with.
Supposedly ?
nicotine is the "addictive" factor when it comes to tobacco and the reason people continue to smoke (I do not subscribe to this particular belief).
Physical addiction is one aspect of addiction. Other aspects are psychological. Addicted smokers are usually both.
your assumption that smokers are addicts,
What do you call someone who cannot sit for one hour without having a cigarette ? What do you call someone who forces tobacco smoke on their children ? What do you call someone who spends $5.oo per day or 2,000 per year instead of spending it on a cruise ?
and the nicotine is the factor, what do you say about those who smoke non-tobacco cigarettes (non-marijuana)??????
Nicotine is certainly one addictive quality. Insulin release is another.
Is it your implication that because some people might only be psychologically addicted that there is no such thing as a smoking addiction ?
Not going to wash here. Someone knew somebody that new someone whose great great uncle smoked since he was born and he lived to be 3 thousand years old. All these studies are fake so that the nanny government has a reason to rip cigarettes out of the mouths of children. Besides everyone has to suffer from some sort of death, it may as well be coughing up a lung.
Hello?
My "job" is helping my 81 year old step-dad with my 79 year old mother who has Alzheimer's.
I teach during the school year at the local commuinty college part time.
There isn't a poster here,pro or anti smoking,who hasn't had their share of problems.We all have tough times but life goes on and no one wants to hear the incessant self pity about which you have subjected us all. Get a life!!!!!
Oh, dear, that paragraph sounds like a lot of self-pity to me. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPSSSSS! MORE SHATTERED MIRROR evidence. Sheesh.
I sure wouldn't.
And your smoke-free state is a win/win for me - I know I don't have to worry about running into you or those of your type.
Perhaps I'm blind.
But I missed the apology for your misconstruing what I said.
Or even any hint that you understood my clarification.
Ah well, I wasn't holding my non-smokey breath.
Love it. Thanks.
I don't buy your ranting. And your fonts are painful to the eye.
Your life experiences are not mine - however both are equally valid. And you know that, else you would not have resorted to shouting.
Good day, sir.
If nicotine is so highly "addictive" why aren't people "addicted" to tomatoes and eggplant, only cigarettes?????
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.