Sent to: Rep. Judy Manning and Sen. Steve Thompson
Feel free to forward to your state representatives.
Dear Congress Member,
I find the idea of a state-wide smoking ban enticing. A non-smoker for my entire life, I can't honestly say that I would not personally benefit from or even appreciate such a measure. But at the same time, I am more committed to the foundation that our country was established upon when our forefathers decided that a free-market system was the optimal solution for creating a sustainable and fruitious national economy.
While it is understandable that some people feel inconvenienced by another's decision to harm themselves for the perceived benefits of voluntary nicotine use, I also appreciate the fact that I, as an individual, have the option of using my power as a consumer to decide whether or not I would like to devote my patronage to an establishment that allows people to smoke. Our market system was designed to handle these pressures without the outside influence of legislators that feel the need or pressure from outside organizations to protect people from themselves. I sincerely hope that you do not view your position as such a job.
Yes, I have been "inconvenienced" by a smoker's decision to light up by the fact that I do not enjoy the odor or lingering effects, such as "smelly clothing" etc., of such behavior. But at the same time, I also recognize my ability to remove myself from such a situation if I deemed a good and/or service to not be of substantial quality or necessity to subject myself to such an environment. The side argument that employees of smoker-friendly establishments suffer unnecessary health consequences is valid up to the point where one considers the relative number of people that are affected compared to the number of people that are having freedoms limited through either being told that they cannot smoke or by being told through force of government that they cannot allow smoking within their very own place of business. Individual freedom should be the primary argument when discussing unnecessary regulation of private business. Those individual freedoms should include, but not be limited to, the right of business owners to allow legal consumption of a federally regulated good, the freedom of individuals to decide whether or not to consume such goods and the freedom of an employee to seek alternate employment if they feel that they are subjected to an unhealthy environment.
The idea of a statewide public ban of smoking is an unnecessary expenditure of time on the behalf of our state legislature and should be reprehensible to a public servant dedicated to preserving the individual freedoms that so many have sacrificed to provide for our generations and the next. I ask you to help to eliminate any measures to impose any such bans on public smoking and any other encroachment unto the rights of individuals to make decisions for themselves.
Sincerely,
Christopher L. Neill
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I respectfully disagree with Mr. Neill. While I agree generally that the government should stay out of peoples lives, smoking is different.
I spend every Thursday night in smoke filled bars. I come home with watery red eyes and foul smelling cloths. It’s awful. While I am a strong believer in the rights of the individual, I absolutely believe that one individuals rights end the moment they impact someone else’s rights. A la, drunk driving, a la beating your wife. You have every right to swing your arm, but that right stops at the tip of my nose. Same with smoking and Second Hand Smoke. But smoking is different from other bad habits. Sitting next to a fat guy eating a donut doesn’t hurt your cholesterol. Sitting next to a drunk on his 7 beer doesn’t hurt your liver. But sitting near a smoker does impact your lungs. If you have asthma or other respiratory problems it can ruin your day or worse, including sending kids to the hospital. Smoking should be banned from all public places, including bars and restaurants.
I do agree with your point as to "where" one persons' right starts and the others' ends. However smokers should be allowed as smokers to have establishments for smokers only. Bans on smoking stop our rights as smokers completely.
Post a Comment