2006-11-14 07:35:00 · 18 answers · asked by Twizz2004 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
It's happening, but I think it's a violation of free speech.
Further, I think it is government intrusion into private enterprise.
It should be up to private businesses to determine their own smoking policy.
The States are over-stepping its bounds and using their "general welfare" clause to do it.
2006-11-14 07:55:24 · answer #1 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would error first on the side of freedom with health coming in second. By this I mean, by all means, ban smoking in public places where there is no choice for a non-smoker but to suffer the indignity of swallowing lungfulls of cancer causing poisons. However, when it comes to bar/restaurant owners give them the choice to offer a smoking or non-smoking environment thereby allowing consumers the choice. I am a non-smoker, who when given the choice will go to a non-smoking restaurant. My girlfriend might choose otherwise and I suppose on occassions we may actually have to compromise...mostly in my favor of course...it's healthier!
2006-11-14 07:47:38 · answer #2 · answered by everythingmontreal 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. I have a brother who gets literally sick (can't breathe, coughing, etc) if he's exposed to tobacco smoke. I also have two nieces who have asthma. They were all thanking God when the restaurant smoking ban went into effect because it meant that an evening out for dinner didn't mean risking a trip to the hospital.
2006-11-14 07:38:27 · answer #3 · answered by triviatm 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely yes! I would love to know that I never had to deal with cigarette smoke when I go to eat or to a bar. I get really angry when I go to a non-smoking hotel and someone has smoked in the room, it's absolutely disgusting. Having been a non-smoker all my life the smell of smoke is sickening.
2006-11-14 07:40:38 · answer #4 · answered by i have no idea 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Yes, because second hand smoke has been proved to cause all kinds of health issues. If a person was sucking the smoke into their own lungs only then that would be one thing but they cannot control where their smoke goes and that is quite another.
2006-11-14 07:39:52 · answer #5 · answered by courage 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
No, smoking should not be banned or discriminated against in any way. IIf you choose to smoke that's entirely up to you. If you choose to not visit an establishment that allows smoking, that's also up to you. However, forcing people to do as you wish is just another way of taking personal freedoms away from us.
2006-11-14 07:44:41 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Personally, I'm much more concerned about the health of the people who work in these establishments than the rights of an individual smoker. Someone shouldn't need to contract lung cancer just because they serve food or drinks.
2006-11-14 07:42:28 · answer #7 · answered by leaptad 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am a smoker, and I don't believe smokers should have the right to contaminate the air of non smokers and children. Even in my own home, I go outside to smoke.
2006-11-14 07:44:55 · answer #8 · answered by sexmagnet 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes..Smoking is very bad. Than don't be crying if you get lung cancer (Not talking to none of you, but for those who smoke) But yes, I'm in 8Th grade and half my classmates either smoke regular cigarettes or WEED...That is terrible!
2006-11-14 07:43:54 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
As many as possible......for you see, even tho you may personally enjoy a ciggie - the person next to you or in that same facility may have a respiratory ailment or even a child with breathing equipment - this is of hazard to that person ..... it is most commonly called unselfishness.
2006-11-14 07:39:13 · answer #10 · answered by Marsha 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋