Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: sarasmom

I don’t argue from a public health standpoint. I argue from a nuisance standpoint.

For example, there are noise, urination and defecation ordinances for public spaces (among others). Likewise, a smoking ordinance would make sense on the same basis.

On private property, property owners should set their own policies.


17 posted on 07/01/2007 8:34:56 PM PDT by Lorianne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: Lorianne
From a strictly nuisance standpoint:
I could argue that “overly sensitive people” should retire to self sustaining communes where they don’t bother normal people.

It seems you are actually admitting secondary tobacco smoke is not a real public health hazard.

I particularly dislike willfully stupid people.
Can we also ban them from public places?

19 posted on 07/01/2007 9:01:56 PM PDT by sarasmom (I was called a racist, bigot, xenophobe, immigrant-hater.But I am not called a liar or communist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson