Smoking ban

[Seanjos]

On the one hand the right to property as a tenet but on the other....If it's illegal to walk into a pub with a cannister spurting toxic gas, then shouldn't it be illegal to smoke indoors for the same reason.

Second-hand smoke like toxic gas is a scientifically-demonstrable killer and to use it indoors in public, infringes upon the rights of even other smokers.

[K-Mac]

I'm willing to bet there is at least one thread already about this subject, but here's the short answer...

Property owners should be able to determine whether or not people can smoke on their property. It's a violation of their property rights for the government, you or anyone else to dictate what they do on their private property (assuming they're not violating anyone's rights.) If you are on private property and you don't want to be subjected to the smoking going on there, leave.

[Seanjos]

I did say right to property as a tenet that's not the issue. Is it ok to let someone spray a toxic gas because the landlord allows it ?

[KendallJ]

Second-hand smoke like toxic gas is a scientifically-demonstrable killer and to use it indoors in public, infringes upon the rights of even other smokers.

a. that is a scientific claim that has very little backing, in context. TO claim that second hand smoke is like toxic gas, in any context, ignores the meaning of the word toxic. Dose, concentration, time exposure, etc are all relevant factors for the label. So no, second hand smoke is rarely like toxic gas. You'll find that most studies claiming danger from 2nd hand smoke require you to be co-habitating with a chain smoker for a good part of your life. To suggest that this applies in this context would be wholy context dropping. It simply is not true.

b. which rights are those? Is that your right to be in someone else's private establishment, in the environment that you deem appropriate? in public, is actually rarely in public.

Is it ok to let someone spray a toxic gas because the landlord allows it ?

If you know that ahead of time, it sure is.

Edited April 30, 2009 by KendallJ

[K-Mac]

I did say right to property as a tenet that's not the issue. Is it ok to let someone spray a toxic gas because the landlord allows it ?

I said... " (assuming they're not violating anyone's rights.)"

If you go into a building spraying toxic gas on people, I would say that's a rights violation. If a grocery store owner tells his employee to shoot you when you come in to shop, that's obviously not okay either.

Second hand smoke, if as deadly as the claims make it out to be (and that's a huge IF in my book), takes years and years to kill someone. By putting yourself in the presence of smokers, you voluntarily subject yourself to that potential threat.

[RussK]

On the one hand the right to property as a tenet but on the other....If it's illegal to walk into a pub with a cannister spurting toxic gas, then shouldn't it be illegal to smoke indoors for the same reason.

Second-hand smoke like toxic gas is a scientifically-demonstrable killer and to use it indoors in public, infringes upon the rights of even other smokers.

Your examples go quite overboard. If someone walked into a bar spraying toxic gas, that would indeed violate rights; however, if someone entered a bar with a 'toxic gas' section, then there wouldn't be any violation. The property owner consented and all parties new about the gas, but that's pretty ridiculous.