Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bellringer
I think you're looking at law backward. Just because there are less harmful things illegal doesn't mean those things should be illegal either! There are so many laws created to protect us from non violent crimes that the legal system is kept jammed to the point where serious criminals are not properly handled. The whole concept of being free is to be trusted to use good judgement and to not hurt each other. If you choose to drink or smoke, they normally just tax you heavy for it.
Bottom line to me is: if you choose to run an establishment and you want to allow people to experience freedom, it should be your right.
Smoking, right or wrong, has always been a choice and it's Rock and Roll! Even if it is bad for you. I don't see heart attack police monitoring people who clog their hearts with fatty foods.
So if you want to be free, sometimes you have to deal with things you don't like. That's a part of Freedom of Choice!!!!
|
The whole idea behind the ban is to protect employees of the restaurants and bars from second-hand smoke. People have the right to work in a safe environment and it is not a matter of "if you don't like smoke don't work in a bar or restaurant" because people need jobs and sometimes they don't have the luxury of choice. I understand that this pisses people off but this is an irrationally misplaced anger spurred on by a chemical addiction. A healthy anger would be focused at oneself for not being able to kick the habit or at the cigarette companies for making their product so damn tasty.
The ban is based on humanistic principles more than most other laws you see go into effect these days are.
