New Jersey Legislator Wants to Ban Smoking in Your Car

{STP} > wrote in :

> In article >,
> MikeSoja > wrote:
>
>> When you invite the government into your local restaurant to police
>> your tobacco use, don't be surprised when they start looking at what
>> you have on your plate, too.
>
> When one diner can force other diners to eat what's on his plate, I'll
> expect the government to do just that.
>
> {STP}
>

The government was already there to regulate food handling,workplace
safety,fire regulations,building codes....been there for a long time.
Ensuring clean air for patrons AND employees to breathe is no great stretch
from all that.


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

william lynch > wrote in
news
> wrote:
>
>> william lynch wrote:
>>
>>>Paul. wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>You mean there are still states where smoking is *allowed* in
>>>>restaurants?
>>>
>>>A lot of them. Places where their right to smoke is greater
>>>than our right to breath. All in the name of "freedom".
>>
>>
>> Funnily enough, you have the freedom to go down the street to a
>> resturant that doesn't allow smoking, if it bothers you that much.

Any place that's OPEN TO THE PUBLIC should be safe for anyone to breathe
in. Customer or employee. No different than safe food to eat.

>>
>>
>> ~angela
>> email not valid
>>
> You can guarantee a nearby non-smoking restaurant no
> matter what?
>



--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

"Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in
n.umich.edu:

> On Thu, 22 Sep 2005, Phillip wrote:
>
>> I just moved to California and love that smoking is completely banned
>> in restaurants and bars.
>
> It's interesting to see how even some staunch libertarians who oppose
> smoking bans on principle come to enjoy the results of such bans and
> find their principles...shifting.

No,libertarians believe that if one is not doing anyone else harm,then the
thing should be allowed.Smoking clearly does others harm.Even in an auto.
In an auto,it also contaminates the environment(pervasive littering,and not
done just by a "few bad apples".)
The same goes for cellphone use *while driving*.


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

On Thu, 22 Sep 2005, Jim Yanik wrote:

>> It's interesting to see how even some staunch libertarians who oppose
>> smoking bans on principle come to enjoy the results of such bans and
>> find their principles...shifting.
>
> No,libertarians believe that if one is not doing anyone else harm,then
> the thing should be allowed.

I'm sure that's a part of the uppercase-L Libertarian philosophy, but I
was speaking of lowercase-l libertarians.