It seems like the problem with the studies was that it was hard to control for levels of long term smoke exposure. Someone in Florida who keeps the windows open most of the year might get less exposure over time compared to someone in Vermont who is closed up inside for half the year. That doesn’t mean there’s zero risk, it means it’s hard to quantify.
Either way, if it’s about freedom, is someone’s freedom to fill their lungs with smoke any more important than someone’s freedom to breathe fresh air that doesn’t stink like shit? Your freedom ends right at the tip of someone else’s nose. It’s the reason a woman’s “right to choose” shouldn’t override a baby’s right to life.
I mean, sure, I think that businesses should be able to choose if they want to be smoke free or not. They’d have the freedom to choose if they want the business from smokers or non-smokers, and people would have the freedom to do business with smoking or non-smoking businesses.
Public schools are a little different though. Kids don’t have the choice to go to school or not, they can’t just pick up and move to another public school. It’s not that hard for teachers to take it outside. That’s all I’m saying.
It seems like the problem with the studies was that it was hard to control for levels of long term smoke exposure. Someone in Florida who keeps the windows open most of the year might get less exposure over time compared to someone in Vermont who is closed up inside for half the year. That doesn’t mean there’s zero risk, it means it’s hard to quantify.
Either way, if it’s about freedom, is someone’s freedom to fill their lungs with smoke any more important than someone’s freedom to breathe fresh air that doesn’t stink like shit? Your freedom ends right at the tip of someone else’s nose. It’s the reason a woman’s “right to choose” shouldn’t override a baby’s right to life.
I mean, sure, I think that businesses should be able to choose if they want to be smoke free or not. They’d have the freedom to choose if they want the business from smokers or non-smokers, and people would have the freedom to do business with smoking or non-smoking businesses.
Public schools are a little different though. Kids don’t have the choice to go to school or not, they can’t just pick up and move to another public school. It’s not that hard for teachers to take it outside. That’s all I’m saying.
What are you even talking about at this point? When was the last time teachers smoked in the goddamned classroom? 1968?
Yes. Is a person's freedom (period) more important than a person's decision to not walk to a place where they aren't near the smoke?
Kinda like you can make the “decision” not to shop at a grocery store if they don’t allow you to carry a gun?
Kinda like you can make the “decision” not to walk down a certain street if gang members are given the freedom to control who walks down it?
There comes a point where forcing someone to make decisions they wouldn’t otherwise make is infringing on their freedom.
This one seems like a pretty fine line.
Yes, it's exactly like a store banning legal guns or gang members forcing people to NOT walk down it. Banning smoking is just like those things.