Sunday, June 10, 2007

Part 2 of the followup

These are some other quotes from me that was viewed as me implying that SHS is dangerous.

"You say Illinois has a right to protect nonsmokers from secondhand smoke. Illinois can do this by encouraging all public places to use adequate ventilation indoors."

If SHS is dangerous as I "imply," then why did places have ventilation in the past? Wouldn't they have been betta off banning smoking instead of making smoking sections to accomodate smoking customers? Why make accomodations for both sides (by adding ventilation to smoking sections), when SHS is supposedly deadly to inhale?

You are not protecting anyone by forcing smokers outside. You oughta make accomodations for both sides inside. I think that's where the confusion is with this quote of mine. Ventilation is supposed to make both sides happy. Even an enclosed smoking area would make both sides happy. I don't view that as implying SHS is dangerous. I view that as alternatives instead of forcing me to smoke outside in bitterly cold or darn hot weather.

The best "protection" for nonsmokers from SHS is further down.

"This state can protect nonsmokers by not allowing tobacco sales at all."

I'll stand by this quote til the day I die, or til tobacco is illegal. No politician or anti can tell me I can't smoke in places. But yet, they don't mind taking my tobacco tax money. A Smoking Ban should include banning tobacco sales. And not just ban smoking in places.

"Nonsmokers can protect themselves by not approaching areas with several smokers gathered around a building outside."

This is pure common sense! It's sorta similar to me keeping my wallet shut by not going to a nonsmoking restaurant. If you don't smoke, don't go to places where smokers hang out at, duh! Otherwise, you better be prepared for a negative reaction by complaining to smokers inside OR outside.

No comments: