Tuesday, October 20, 2009

All your Biz are belong to us

For those of you living in the exceedingly misnamed Golden City that is the capital of Kansas there's a new assault on the ideal of private property. It's called the smoking ban.

Basically the smoking ban is exactly as it sounds. The city council, nine people, decided that business owners aren't smart enough to make their own decisions as to what activities their customers can engage in. They decided that, in the interest of "public health", smoking cannot be allowed except in certain types of businesses.

The many letters to the editor regarding this all seem to be harping on the idea of smokers rights versus non-smokers rights. I hate to break it to those people but this is NOT about smokers or non-smokers. It's about whether or not owners of private property or businesses have the right to control their own property or business.

There is currently a petition to get the ordinance up for a public vote but I have a problem with that as well. We, as voters, have no right to tell a property owner what legal activities their customers can engage in. Last I checked, as long as you're over 18, smoking is a legal activity. It's the owners choice as to whether or not they'll allow smokers the freedom to light up or not. I don't have the right to walk into a restaurant and demand a smoking section so what makes non-smokers think they have the right to demand a non-smoking section?

Simply put we are becoming more of a nanny state ever day. This is being couched in terms that remove it further and further away from the actual issue. Down this road lies states like California where you can be tickets for smoking in your backyard if a neighbor complains about the smoke.

Bottom line, we all have the ability to choose what businesses we deem worthy of our business. If there's a restaurant that doesn't allow smoking it's my choice to frequent that establishment or not. The same goes for non-smokers. If you don't like the smoke then stop going. If the business falls off enough the owner will change their policies in order to stay in business.

What will you non-smokers do when your favorite bars or restaurants start losing business and eventually close because those 'evil' smokers have stopped spending their money at those same bars and restaurants? Will you demand the city council pass an ordinance that those same bars and restaurants stay in business? After all, it's about your rights and not the business owners.

Here's my message to all the non-smokers that are zealous about defending the ban: go fuck yourselves. I will not allow you, or some half-assed body of lying, two-faced SOB's, to dictate what I can do on my property.


end of line


At 10:39 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Message to smokers: your minority been impolitely fucking up our air (the majority's) with your toxic fumes for years. Your 'rights' end at my nose and lungs. You release your smoke and you assault my lungs and I won't and should not have to tolerate that. It shouldn't surprise you the 75% of non-smokers don't want to put up with bullying, intolerant uncivil polluting smokers anymore. I will not allow smokers or other astro-turfers to dirty up the public's air that covers all our properties. It's not yours to abuse as you will. You cannot control the flow of your toxic substances once released into our shared air, and you irrationally refuse to be held personally responsible for your pollution or it's impacts upon the rest of us. If you uncivily light up and smoke, I involuntarily have to suck it up unless I manage to object sufficiently, while coughing, to dissuade you, or perhaps pull out my spritzer of hair spray. Smoking bans eliminate the need by fellow citizens to beg for safe breathable air from stubborn tobacco addicts. We no longer seem to have that 'civilized' breed of smoker who politely asks around before lighting up and releasing 5,000+ hazardous chemicals into the shared air or steps outside to deal with his/her habitual need for nicotine. Smoking bans in other communities have resulted in more restaurant attendance and bars seem to manage just fine. Sure, you may give up 25% of evil smokers but you are likely to gain 50% new non-smoker clientelle. And the FUD fuming evil smokers come back after being grumpy for a couple of weeks. Clean living can be profitable and it lowers our clean up and health care costs without adding to tax burdens and makes it far safer for employees to work in bars and restaurants.


Post a Comment

<< Home