Smokers Don't Have The Right To Pollute Others' Air, Part II

So, I’ve received some feedback from my previous posting on this topic. The opposition, predictably, claim infringement upon the smoker's and business owner’s rights. They also made the point that if you don’t like the smoke then go to a business that chooses to remain smoke free. They argue that measures like this are first steps to an invasion by the government against civil liberties. One person even declared that I was a liberal and not a conservative as I proclaim to be.

Most of the time, I would agree with the average person about limiting government regulation on most any topic. This, however, is different. This, for me, is more than just a matter of a person's freedom to choose. I work in health care. I see, nearly everyday, the results of smoking; both first and second hand.

I agree that there is a certain element of the establishment's right to choose, but we're not just talking about something that affect's only the smoker. Smoker's actions have a direct effect over everyone around them. My son, for instance, is a moderately bad asthmatic. He has a very difficult time after being in the house of a smoker; they don't even need to be smoking around him, because it's in the house. The same is true of a business...we have to limit the types of places we go for his benefit.

Some can argue that is our tough luck and they're right to a certain extent. However, no one should have to subject themselves to the effects of smoking. If you want to smoke in your own home, on your own property and as long as you're not adversely affecting anyone around you than more power to you.

Conversely, I feel that if you have a business that is open to the public, then you have a certain obligation to insure the public's safety. Just as you have to insure that meat is cooked through and through and that it passes inspection criteria, so to, you should provide a reasonably healthy environment for them to be in.

I am not interested in infringing on anyone's free choice simply because they choose a lifestyle different from my own. I am interested, as a human being and as a health care professional, in limiting the health effects of smoking on the public. There is no way to smoke in a public building without the toxins violating other occupants of that space and, as such, the business has an obligation to make the environment safe and healthy. I see only one way for that to happen, and that is to prohibit smoking in public buildings.

You can candy coat it into civil liberties all day long, but the fact is, that just as with other potentially dangerous items of interest, the burden to protect the public lies with the businesses open to the public and the people demand that protection through the government.