Replies

LOL

So what if the buildings are privately owned? Many of the first restrictions on smoking came from private companies. The reason was because people were bothered by the smoke.

You're right, that I'd have to go somewhere to smoke, but in a FREE SOCIETY people are also allowed to request their employers set up a tolerable work environment.

Yeah, I guess if the boss wanted to hose me down with Kool Aid, I'd better just shut up or leave. But I become anti-liberty if I DARE ASK the man to call off the Kool-Aid Man.

So what if the buildings are privately owned? Many of the first restrictions on smoking came from private companies. The reason was because people were bothered by the smoke.

Owners voluntarily restricting or banning smoking is not my point - smart employers will listen to their employees concerns. My point is the government - Mayor Bloomberg and the City of New York - requiring them to. Owners setting circumstances around their property is the very essense of liberty.

You're right, that I'd have to go somewhere to smoke, but in a FREE SOCIETY people are also allowed to request their employers set up a tolerable work environment.

Requests are completely different from laws backed by force.

Yeah, I guess if the boss wanted to hose me down with Kool Aid, I'd better just shut up or leave. But I become anti-liberty if I DARE ASK the man to call off the Kool-Aid Man.

Again, making requests are not anti-liberty.

............but in a FREE SOCIETY people are also allowed to request their employers set up a tolerable work environment.

Exactly and that is the way it should be and all that the vast majority of smokers are asking for. It's the insistance of the anti-smokers that the government has to take care of it instead of speaking to their employers or the owners of their favorite establishments that drive us crazy.