Bobke, Daniel C. BOBKE at OHM.COM
Wed Dec 31 12:28:30 MST 1997

Am I having a nightmare?  Are there people on this list seriously
stating that the government should regulate where people can and
can't smoke?  C'mon!!!

Let's break this down.  Most of the comments I read centered
around the argument that being around smokers was a nuisance, a
point I agree with.  However, since when do we, as conservatives,
want the government to regulate nuisances?  Rush and others have
made the excellent point that if we allow this, where does it
stop?  How about perfume?  There are now cities that have
regulated the use of perfume because it can cause people to have
allergic reactions!!!

Now, one may argue that there is a health risk associated with
"secondhand smoke".  There are two comments I have here.  First,
there is no solid scientific causal relationship between
secondhand smoke and increased risk of cancer or other diseases.
The numbers the California Department of Health Services are
fabricated and they resort to scare tactics (a woman smoking from
the hole cut in her neck, a man (actor) who claims he killed his
wife with his smoking, etc.).  Second, if there is an increased
risk, what is it and what really is the appropriate response?  A
complete ban is extreme even if there is risk involved.

Let's temper our own distaste for the habit with the knowledge we
have of who is propagating these "statistics".  These are the
same people who are telling us that the earth is heating up, that
Freon was destroying the ozone layer, and that Bill Clinton is
the most admired man in America.  I'll say it again...C'mon!!!

More information about the Rushtalk mailing list