cancer-causing chemicals into a public airspace? Is this any different from smoking in public?
2006-10-25 02:43:27 · 5 answers · asked by olin1963 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
For.
2006-10-25 02:44:25 · answer #1 · answered by Snickle Beast 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, I would totally be for this law. There is however a difference between that and smoking in public. Aerosols are proven to cause damage to the ozone.
While I feel as if I have been assaulted when I have to breath in someone cigaret smoke, and it has been proven to be dangerous, if not deadly to the health of human beings, the aerosols, by far, episode to episode, are much worse.
I would jump at the chance to vote against smoking in public, but at this time, it doesn't come up too much, EXCEPT in a couple of towns in California, Los Gatos is one of them. It is against the law to smoke in public there. Hooray!
2006-10-25 09:49:40 · answer #2 · answered by jmiller 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Id be for it.
smoking in public places is illigal here in SA. and many other places. U have to go to the smokers section and it has to be closed up and there has to be like an extractor fan or something there.
I think they should have stricter production standards when it comes to aerosols. The law would be a great one though.
2006-10-25 09:50:59 · answer #3 · answered by Faz 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that is why most places are trying to ban smoking. I don't smoke and I hate going in somewhere to eat where there is smoking allowed. I agree with you .
2006-10-25 09:45:22 · answer #4 · answered by elainecynthia 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would support the law. However, it is legally different than smoking. Smoking has precedent. The law is all about precedent.
2006-10-25 09:45:24 · answer #5 · answered by jack b 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋