Smoking Law

[JadeRaven]

When someone lights up a cigarette next to me they are infringing upon my rights and doing me harm.

The problem with the idea of "it's my restaurant, you can go somewhere else" is that "somewhere else" is going to allow smoking too. For a restaurant to ban smoking in a market where smoking in restaurants is widespread, they are sacrificing a huge market share. As such, they won't do it by themselves. They are in the business to make money, and they know the non smoking customer will put up with it because there is nowhere else to go.

You might think that "for the greater good" means Communism, but saying that there should be absolutely no regulations puts you in a third-world country. Or no country at all.

Without any regulations there would be no "my restaurant" or "my property" to begin with.

 

[LouisianaCarry]

"When someone lights up a cigarette next to me they are infringing upon my rights and doing me harm."

Um, all due respect, but you are wrong. Again, you are free not to visit my establishment. Unless I use coercion to make you breathe smoke, I am not violating your rights in any way. To force me to accommodate your needs, while sacrificing the profits that I am in business to make, is the violation of rights here. In that circumstance, you ARE forcing me to do something that I would not otherwise consent to.

What is ominous is the ease with which some people go from saying that they don't like something to saying that the government should forbid it. When you go down that road, don't expect freedom to survive very long. – Thomas Sowell

If you don't like it (and, again, I am not a smoker), and you feel there are no quality restaurants where you can avoid it, you are perfectly free to start your own eatery, or eat at home. You do not have the 'right' to have me maintain a smoke free business to accommodate you. I am in business to make money, not so you can have things just the way you want them. I make money by making as many people happy as possible. I have the right to make the decision as to how I want to accomplish that, not you or the .gov.

"For a restaurant to ban smoking in a market where smoking in restaurants is widespread, they are sacrificing a huge market share. As such, they won't do it by themselves. They are in the business to make money..."

That is the nature of capitalism and the free market. If it minimizes my profit to do something, I will only do it if that lack of profit is worth it to me for other reasons (eg. I hate smoke, I want to provide a smoke free establishment for other moral/philosophical motivations). For you to agree that the only way to get people to do this is to use the coercive power of government is to tacitly admit that it is wrong, but that you don't care. It is capitalism (in SPITE of government interference) that brought us to the amazing point of all having indoor plumbing, light with the flick of a switch, etc. People did not invent/market/perfect/make that stuff affordable to the common man for altruistic reasons. It is the very incentive of self-advancement that encourages the improvement the standard of living for everyone.

America's abundance was not created by public sacrifices to the common good, but by the productive genius of free men who pursued their own personal interests and the making of their own private fortunes. – Ayn Rand

The government's only proper job is to protect individual rights against violence by force or fraud … to protect men from foreign invaders … to settle disputes among men according to objective laws … The greatness of the Founding Fathers was how well they understood this issue and how close some of them came to understanding it perfectly. – Ayn Rand

"You might think that "for the greater good" means Communism, but saying that there should be absolutely no regulations puts you in a third-world country. Or no country at all."

I have never said that there is no law to follow. The Declaration of Independence refers to the "Laws of Nature and of Nature's God." My position is that just laws reflect that natural law. The concept that I have the right to do what I please, but no right to force you to do anything. This country used to be founded on that type of thing, but we have come so far from that that now we can't even see how ludicrous it is to allow these types of government infringements.

"Without any regulations there would be no "my restaurant" or "my property" to begin with."

I almost don't even know where to begin with this one. Virtually all reasonable laws are obeyed, not because they are the law, but because reasonable people would do that anyway. If you obey a law simply because it is the law, that's a pretty likely sign that it shouldn't be a law.

Property does not come from the government. The Bill of Rights, for example, does not 'grant' rights, it simply enumerates some of them. Our rights, as the DoI expresses, are inalienable and endowed by our Creator. A government is only just to the degree that it derives it's consent from those governed, and reflects natural rights. In all truth, property comes from our own ownership of ourselves and our talents and labor. Read (for example) the works of John Locke for an exegesis of this principle.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed..."

I have the right to pursue my own happiness by allowing smokers to eat at my place. You have the right to pursue your happiness by not eating there, if you do not wish to. Whenever we have to use force (and, make no mistake, that is exactly what government is) to make me do something that I would not otherwise do, your actions are ONLY justified as a redress in response to an infringement on your rights that I initiated. Me and my patrons eating in peace according to a mutually beneficial relationship (which includes smoking, if I choose to allow it) can in NO way be reasonably considered an infringement on your 'Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.' You coming in and saying we should all change what we are doing because you want to eat in MY establishment is, quite frankly, dead wrong. The fact that so many people seem to be ok with this is sad.

"The American heritage was one of individual liberty, personal responsibility and freedom from government … Unfortunately … that heritage has been lost. Americans no longer have the freedom to direct their own lives … Today, it is the government that is free – free to do whatever it wants. There is no subject, no issue, no matter… that is not subject to legislation." – Harry Browne



A wise and frugal government which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government. – Thomas Jefferson (1801)

These laws do not leave me free to regulate my own pursuit of industry.

Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of Liberty. – Thomas Jefferson

It may be more politically correct to have a smoke free society, but it is not right to accomplish that by force.

If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains set lightly upon you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. – Samuel Adams

The liberty of your fellow man should be more important than your desire to eat somewhere away from a little whiff of smoke.

The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg. – Thomas Jefferson (1781)

As long as no one is forcing you to eat there, you are not being injured, morally. Again, get up and LEAVE! That is ALL you have the moral right to do.

Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death! -Patrick Henry to the Virginia House of Burgesses, 1775

I do not smoke, and would rather not be in a room full of it, but I for one would fight and die for my neighbor's right to be in that room, if he feels like that is how he wants to pursue his happiness.

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. – Benjamin Franklin

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson

And THAT is really what this all comes down to, isn't it? When we say that it is OK for the .gov to make others act how we want them to, we are sacrificing the liberty of everyone, including, ultimately, ourselves. I for one, will fight against that as long as I have breath to do so.

 

[JadeRaven]

So basically you're saying that, quotes aside, in a public place, anyone should be allowed to set off smoke bombs because it is their right as a human being to do things they enjoy. I guess people should be allowed to have wild sex in restaurants too. Oh it's only a little bit of semen flung across the room at me, I can always leave.

Putting smoke into my body is a tort. Plain and simple. Smoking is bad for you and those around you. The *health* of your fellow man should be more important than your desire to inhale toxic fumes.

My mother suffers from chronic bronchitis. I suppose in the spirit of liberty she should be forced to stay home or open a business for everything she needs. That's just silly.

And I guess you really need to take a class on mortgages and real estate. Many countries would be absolutely thrilled to have the mortgage market that we have here. The idea of not only owning property, but being able to borrow money to purchase it would only be an idea if it were not for laws and regulations and their proper enforcement. You can't get a mortgage in Mexico. And look at Mexico. I don't want to be Mexico, do you?

You can say all you want that people will do the right thing just because "it is the right thing to do" all you want, but it is simply not true. Most people will. But there are these terrible things in life called bad people. They do exist.

You can throw around utopian quotes and be as idealistic as you want, but that still does not get rid of the fact that we live in a real world with real problems and real people.

If you want to be completely liberated then heck, nobody is forcing *you* to live in this *country,* let alone a restaurant. But I'll live with not being able suck tar into my body in a restaurant if it means I can live in the USA.

I admire your idealism, and I see where you're coming from. But hard lining the spirit of liberty so far is not going to accomplish much of anything.

 

[LouisianaCarry]

It is not hard to see that we are not going to agree on this.

Liberty is a hard road, I agree. Nonetheless, it is one I will always persue.

I find comfort in the knowledge that I do not walk this road alone, and am in good eternal company.

I have sworn upon the altar of god, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. – Thomas Jefferson (1800)

*offers handshake*

 

[JadeRaven]

-sigh-

*accepts handshake*

Yeah I think Jeremy had it right above. . . "Though you take the black or white approach while I take the gray approach, I respect your consistency."

 

[LouisianaCarry]

I just wanted to add that I am not trying to shy away from this debate. I have put alot of thought into my beliefs and understandings of human action. I am not perfect, of course, and I am certainly open to correction, if someone can pack a lunch and actually show me something that I am misunderstanding. Anyway, the point is, I only attempted to truncate the discussion to be respectful. If you (or anyone) want(s) to probe these issues further, I am assuredly more than willing. I hope that makes sense. I just don't want to argue and raise any hackles for no gain.

 

[topgunz1]

At first I thought it was kind of a silly law, but after they stopped smoking in restaurants and such in Baton Rouge... damn its nice! You can go have dinner and a few drinks and not come home smelling like an ash tray.

 

[LACamper]

I had my AC serviced recently. The repairman told me he had just left a local restaurant. Every six months he goes there, pulls the coils from the unit, and takes it outside. He sets up his pressure washer in the back corner of the parking lot and washes the coils for at least 30 minutes and watches for the stream to stop running yellow.
I like A-1 on my steak, not a coating of tar...

 

[CajunTim]

This was in todays Times Picayune http://blog.nola.com/times-picayune/2007/09/restaurant_smoking_ban_still_l.html & http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/frontpage/index.ssf?/base/news-9/1190529647310280.xml&coll=1
I like reading all the comments at the bottom as most of the times they turn comical. Why would they poll people about smoking bans in Bars when most of those polled don't go to bars?
I smoke only when I drink so I enjoy a game of pool with a beer and a cigarette. I use to go to Applebees quite often after work with some folks for drinks; I haven't been since the smoking ban went into affect for drinks, I have been for dinner only.
My attitude on all of this is it is the law and I must abide by it whether I agree or not.