Apparently, Columbus went smoke-free yesterday. The Republic did two or three stories on it today that were kind of fascinating, from a sociological viewpoint.
There are two local restaurant owners who fought the ordinance from the time it was proposed. They both cater to smokers and believed that the ban, which exempts bars and private clubs, would drive their business away to those other establishments. The Republic reporter went to some of the bars and clubs to check that out, but was told business was about the same.
As someone who doesn't have a dog in this fight, I have the advantage of what I think is a pretty unbiased view of the whole issue. I agree that it seems a little unfair to exempt establishments from the ban just because they serve alcohol. But on the other hand, the exemption is based on the theory that restaurants are for families who generally would rather not have somebody at the next table blowing smoke at their kids, while bars are adults-only establishments that exist for the primary purpose of letting adults pickle their livers and pollute their lungs to their hearts' content. And private clubs are by definition outside of the public domain, and their members are presumably self-selected patrons that either smoke or don't mind others smoking in their club.
Good old Indiana has one of the highest smoking rates in the country, with our resident Hoosier Hicks viewing the habit as some sort of birthright. For the government to step in and tell these people they can't smoke somewhere is to them the equivalent of some sort of Nazi tyranny.
From a personal perspective, I'm happy for the ban. It's good to know that I can get a meal at just about any restaurant in town without any fear of having the meal ruined by a chain smoker 5 or 10 feet away. And I strongly support smoking bans in the workplace, having had the experience working in a smoke-filled room for a few years in the 80's to early 90's. I remember the constant stench of cigarette smoke permeating my clothing, the blue haze that was noticable whenever I entered the cubicle farm on my way to my pitiful workspace, and the unending scratchy throat and sinusitis from being forced to work in that environment 8 to 10 hours every day.
I find it interesting that smokers mostly are oblivious to how their smoke affects others around them. Ever been around a smoker and noticed how they blow the smoke up or to the side, as if that somehow is all they need to do to keep it from bothering you? Ever been with a smoker on a flight or in a no-smoking building, and noticed that they have the cigarette in their mouth and lighter at the ready as they quicken their pace to leave the building? These observations give proof to the addictive qualities of nicotine.
But for me, there are other observations that are really disturbing. At the county fair every summer, I'm almost guaranteed to see a young pregnant woman (or girl) puffing away on a cigarette. I want to go rip it out of her mouth and tell her the awful things her habit is doing to her baby. Driving around Columbus, I occasionally see a young mother with two or three very young toddlers to infants trapped in the car with her as she puffs away on her cancer stick. I have to resist the urge to force her off the road and take the children away.
I suppose there's no particular cohesive point I'm trying to make with this post. Only that after thinking about it, I've decided that smoking in public places is not some sort of civil liberty to be protected. That people are free to smoke if they want, but there's nothing wrong with enacting laws that keep the smoke away from their co-workers and co-diners. And that parents that smoke constantly at home and in the car around their kids are doing more harm to those children than they ever imagined, and maybe it's time to do more education to convince them to at least take it outside.
No comments:
Post a Comment