Originally posted by sigma:
...But why does the government have to mandate it? Why do we need a law that tells businesses what they can and cannot allow on their own property -- and we're talking about something that doesn't affect surrounding land values.
But exposure to second-hand smoke has apparently convinced many that this is a health-related issue compelling enough to make the government act accordingly. When public health on a VAST level is being threatened (admittedly, one has to take a LONG-TERM look at it in this case, unless second-hand exposure is immense and consistent), the theory goes that the rights that the public has superceeds the rights that businesses have and that the US government is compelled to step in and mandate the environment inside these businesses.
McDonald's and the food issue you bring up isn't quite the correct parallel. By simply eating McDonald's and exposing others to the proximity of this food doesn't put forth any second-hand contact with that food; eating junk food in the presence of others CAN'T make those around you fat and unhealthly.
Smoking, on the other hand, certainly pollutes the air quality in the area and can cause discomfort and serious health implications if the exposure is consistent and sizeable enough.
JaTo
e-Tough Guy
Missouri City, TX
99 Contour SVT
#143/2760
00 Corvette Coupe
| 
