Dallas City Council To Vote On Further Smoking RestrictionsSubmitted by SGriffiths on Wed, 11/05/2008 - 3:13pm.
On November 19, Dallas City Council members will meet and vote on proposed new restrictions on the city's smoking ordinance. This is the second time in half a decade that anti-smoking proposals have been brought before the council to be voted on. The fundamental problem with smoking bans is their infringement on the free market, and the rights of both business owners and consumers. Not to mention the negative effect further restrictions will have on the local economy. The Mayor of Dallas, Tom Leppert, scheduled a public meeting on the proposed smoking ordinance the day after Election Day when everybody has grown sick and tired of hearing about politics and elections.
It is almost as if Mayor Leppert does not want the taxpayers to give their say on the matter, but that would be ridiculous, right? The whole purpose of these smoking bans is to appease those who worry about the effects of secondhand smoke. These same people worry so much that they are more than willing to infringe on another person's right to do something that is completely legal. Regardless of the fact that the effects of secondhand smoke are still widely disputed, and there is no conclusive evidence that links secondhand smoke to lung cancer people have just as much right to choose not to enter a bar that allows smoking that a consumer does to smoke in a business that allows it. Smoking bans expand government to such an extent that they tell businesses in a free market what they can and cannot do and/or allow in their places of business. There is a simple solution, and that is for the businesses themselves to post a sign outside and in their establishments that identify the location as either a smoking or non-smoking area. Let the free market work, and it will prove to be better for the economy. Bookmark/Search this post with: |
Delicious
Digg
Technorati
Smoke Free Houston
From what I hear down here, the No Smoking regulation in Houston is working well. As a converted smoker of some 44 years,I appreciate a 'smoke-free' environment. I do however feel that there should be places where smokers can go and do their thing. Why? Non-smokers don't have to go there! There are simply so many with the restriction that they should be able to choose an equal or better restaurant to choose from with no problem.
Good intentions but wrong approach
Great article. We just went through a smoking ban fight here in Richardson, Texas http://1704.localprecinct.com/2008/02/06/richardson-city-council-to-consider-smoking-ban/
While I believe the majority of Americans would like all businesses to be smoke-free, the problem is that some non-smokers are using the government to deny other property owners their Constitutional private property right. As a non-smoker, I support non-smoking establishments with my patrionage and I boycott smoking establishments. This is the way the free market works - NOT by using the strong arm of the government to oppress someone else's rights - as the anti-smoking lobby is currently doing.
no smoking laws
the uninformed may say that second hand smoke isn't harmful, But as a x smoker, I wish we had had no smoking laws 50 years ago, maybe to day my lungs might be better than 85%, I smoked for 40 years, have been a x for 31 years and smoke 30 yards from me I can't stand it I have to move to a safe place. I love to play golf courses that are smoke free, we do have a few...francis p. murphy