Spring Break
The Md. smoking ban infringes on individual and property rights
Smoking or non-smoking? The Maryland smoking ban
Issue date: 1/31/08
At the end of the day smokers get hit twice. Once by the tobacco companies, who should have been sued, as they were, and the state should maintain heavy oversight over their actions and regulation because they have proven to be untrustworthy. And secondly, smokers are hit by the state, punishing them for their highly addictive habit.
I doubt making smokers second-hand citizens will help them give up smoking, just as over 40 years of surgeon general warnings have failed to help 48 million American citizens to quit. Instead smokers will just lose even more dignity while doing it and then be hit again by the pneumonia as this ban becomes official in February. Couldn't the state legislature and O'Malley have pushed the date back to a warmer month?
This is not to overlook the apparently often forgotten issue of private property. It would be fine for Maryland to restrict smoking in the State House or other government buildings. But to go into private institutions and say that one's business or a club cannot allow someone to smoke is going to far. These businesses are privately owned. They're not all chains - many owners are people just trying to make a buck. Now, businesses can get a waiver if they can prove this ban is hurting their business, as it will, but that only lasts until 2011. Then they are left to the dogs.
The issue is not whether smoking is bad; it is whether banning smoking in private institutions is also bad. Finally, as for the issue of second-hand smoke in restaurants and bars, smoking and non-smoking is a fine solution. Maybe this is segregation in some way, but at least both individuals can be inside on a snowy February night. It never bothered me when sitting at T.G.I. Friday's that there were smokers sitting on the other side of the building. We have gone too far in sanitizing America. The state should mandate that restaurants and bars must offer a state approved non-smoking option for its patrons by 2011. That solution seems reasonable and dignified for all involved.
I doubt making smokers second-hand citizens will help them give up smoking, just as over 40 years of surgeon general warnings have failed to help 48 million American citizens to quit. Instead smokers will just lose even more dignity while doing it and then be hit again by the pneumonia as this ban becomes official in February. Couldn't the state legislature and O'Malley have pushed the date back to a warmer month?
This is not to overlook the apparently often forgotten issue of private property. It would be fine for Maryland to restrict smoking in the State House or other government buildings. But to go into private institutions and say that one's business or a club cannot allow someone to smoke is going to far. These businesses are privately owned. They're not all chains - many owners are people just trying to make a buck. Now, businesses can get a waiver if they can prove this ban is hurting their business, as it will, but that only lasts until 2011. Then they are left to the dogs.
The issue is not whether smoking is bad; it is whether banning smoking in private institutions is also bad. Finally, as for the issue of second-hand smoke in restaurants and bars, smoking and non-smoking is a fine solution. Maybe this is segregation in some way, but at least both individuals can be inside on a snowy February night. It never bothered me when sitting at T.G.I. Friday's that there were smokers sitting on the other side of the building. We have gone too far in sanitizing America. The state should mandate that restaurants and bars must offer a state approved non-smoking option for its patrons by 2011. That solution seems reasonable and dignified for all involved.
Viewing Comments 1 - 10 of 13
Bill Williams
posted 2/01/08 @ 7:30 AM EST
Thank god there's another non-smoker out there who understands what the goverment is doing to us smokers!!!
The smoker's rights issue is more one about censorship and taxatation without representation than anything else. (Continued…)
Sherry
posted 2/01/08 @ 12:35 PM EST
I understand that smokers feel they are being punished with this smoking ban. But smokers can not seem to see the other side of the coin. According to statistics 80% of americans are non smokers. (Continued…)
Vijay
posted 2/05/08 @ 7:58 PM EST
if they created a private room indoors where smokers could smoke (like they have in airports), that was indoors and warm, but separated from the rest of the bar, would that satisfy you? It would in effect shield non-smokers from second hand smoke while providing you with a warm environment to smoke in. (Continued…)
Duke Duyck
posted 2/07/08 @ 7:00 PM EST
How stupid can you get?
I have had a sister and a brother-in-law both dying of second hand smoke induced cancers.
I have talked to people who were dying of smoke induced lung cancer, regretting that they had not stopped many years earlier. (Continued…)
john
posted 3/12/08 @ 8:37 PM EST
oh quit bitching about your tobacco. Look at the drug war problem in our country if you want to see constitutional right infringements
i was laughing as i read this. (Continued…)
Confused
posted 3/13/08 @ 5:32 PM EST
What's the correlation between "tomorrow" being a sad day for democracy in the state of Maryland and the fact that a smoking ban was passed into law May 17, 2007?
Is Feb. (Continued…)
Mike
posted 3/15/08 @ 12:30 PM EST
We don't allow people who are intoxicated to drive cars. Are we infringing on their rights as well?
Nate
posted 3/15/08 @ 3:45 PM EST
Not only does the government tell you what you can and can't put into your bodies, they are also making as many attempts as possible to control the when and where as well. (Continued…)
Camel_NO
posted 3/20/08 @ 3:30 AM EST
You can continue to 'live on the edge' when it comes to matters that involve individual consequence only, such as driving without a seatbelt and hoarding/consuming trans-fat goods to your little heart's content. (Continued…)
mArYlAnD mOvERs
posted 12/26/08 @ 2:58 PM EST
i don't agree at all, i think that there should be a ban on smoking in doors, it doesn't make sense that one should be able to harm another because of their addiction, everyone knows that second hand smoke is worse for you than actually smoking so while it may be an inconvenience for you to step out side and smoke, you have made the decision to be a smoker and we should not have to suffer because of your bad decisions. (Continued…)
Post a Comment