Why He is Wrong!

In response to “Attention nonsmokers: Butt out of our choices” Jan 31 editorial: Bradley frame smoking as an infringement up on the rights of small business owners, rather than as a public health concern. A more accurate assessment would also include the high insurance premiums these small businesses pay because millions of smokers tax the health care system with preventable illnesses. Which is the greater burden, the loss of a few dozen customers or the irretrievable health damage which must be paid for by healthy, nonsmokers? In your article, he claims that the intervention on the part of the government is unreasonable, yet there is no justification. How is it impinging the rights of business owners? Is it reducing the quantity of patrons to their restaurant or bar? Do you have any data to support your assertion that a smoking ban has somehow hurt businesses? Or is it that since he is inconvenienced, the world must also be inconvenienced and put out too? I know of no legally binding document that lists smoking as an inalienable right.
Bradley’s piece actually touches on a broader question, should the desires of a few people be permitted when they are detrimental to the health and safety of the majority? When the choices of one group impinge upon those of another, it is the province of government, be it city, state, or federal to intervene. In this case then, the city government is not “unreasonable restricting the choices of business owners” , it is rather, restricting the rights of smokers to benefit the greater population. One of the tasks of government, as outlined in the US Constitution, is to “promote the general welfare”. A smoking ban, then, is perfectly acceptable since it promotes the general welfare. Smokers, as you point out, are allowed to choose to smoke. The remainder of the population, however, should not, be involuntarily subject to second hand smoke because a smoker exercises his “right” to smoke. In short, the smoker has the dubious right to endanger his own health, but the government has the duty to safeguard the health of others. As a consequence, the smoker is ostracized.

-George