I admit that when states began passing legislation to ban smoking in pubic venues (bars, restaurants, etc.), I was furious. Not because I was personally burdened as a smoker (I had part of an elite class of hipster smokers at the time), but because I felt that if a business could make more money by appealing to a certain group of people, then they should have every right to. That and I didn't think that the ban would be enough of an incentive for smokers to actually quit, but rather would cause more smoking on the streets and in the cold.Offices and restaurants have become no-smoking zones in New York City. But Galila Huff, a chain-smoking restaurateur from the Upper West Side, always thought that when it came to smoking, her apartment was her sanctuary.
But perhaps it is no longer.
Her neighbors, Jonathan Selbin, a class-action lawyer who has honed his skills suing major corporations, and his wife, Jenny Selbin, also a lawyer, are irate over the cigarette smoke that they say seeps from Ms. Huff’s apartment into the common hallway of their building, the elegant Beaux-Arts Ansonia, on Broadway between 73rd and 74th Streets.
Her smoking, they say, makes the hallway smell like “a Las Vegas casino,” and the secondhand smoke is jeopardizing the health of their 4-year-old son, Charlie.
In a lawsuit filed on Thursday, they are demanding that she “cease and desist from causing smoke to enter into the common hallway,” and that she pay punitive damages.
Well, it appears as though I was wrong about that and my opinion has since changed. The smoking ban and the increase in taxes have apparently causes a dramatic decline in smoking rates in the United States.
Still, the slippery slope argument comes into play with legislation like this. When the smoking ban was first enacted in New York, many critics suggested that the legislation would not reduce overall smoking, but rather move smoking to other locations. Consequently, smokers would congregate outside office buildings rather than inside. The argument goes that smoking would eventually be banned outside and confined to personal homes. But now with this the aforementioned lawsuit, even smoking in the privacy of personal homes is in question, as Ms Huff ( cool name for a smoker?) is facing punitive damages for endangering a child in a neighboring apartment.Here are the numbers of cigarettes sold (in billions) in 2006 by Philip Morris:
U.S./Canada: 184
The decline in U.S. smoking rates is pretty remarkable, both in terms of total percentages (42.4 percent of Americans smoked in 1965, versus 20.8 percent in 2006) and the number of cigarettes smoked by people who do smoke (from 19.8 per day in 1974 to 13.9 in 2006).
Asia Pacific: 197
Eastern Europe: 229
Western Europe: 242
I want to try and have those who read this blog actually put forth an opinion about this one. What do you think about
a) The smoking ban
b) Tax on cigarettes
c) Suing someone for smoking in his or her home.
2 comments:
I'm all for civil rights and all that jazz, but when people start spewing out toxic chemicals, I tend to support the majority more than the minority.
Smokers have trouble with the issue because how can they simultaneously hate something and want to suck on it?
If a group of people in New York start chewing Watermelon Orgasm gum that is popular for its nerve twitching flavor and overwhelming aroma, the other citizens might start to get bothered by the watermelon smell in restaurants and bars.
The watermelon smell isn't toxic, but it's making it hard for people to concentrate on their steaks and non fruity beverages
So the city of New York passes a law banning Watermelon Orgasms from restaurants and bars.
Should there be a tax on Watermelon Orgasm? No, people should still be able to chew it outside, in their cars, and in their homes
But say Ms. Huff really loved Watermelon Orgasm and chewed it all the time. She chewed it so much that the entire floor of her apartment building started to smell like watermelon, her neighbors' apartments smelled like watermelon, her neighbors' furniture and clothing soaked in the scent
I think in that situation her fellow apartment dwellers would have every right to stop her from watermeloning their lives.
I do think suing her is a little over the top. But maybe she really likes watermelon refuses to stop. Maybe she's even addicted to the stuff.
An apartment isn't really a home. It's like a room in a big colony of rooms. The things you do have a direct effect on other around you.
Not only does cigarette smoke stink up the air like Watermelon Orgasm, but it can, you know, fucking kill you in the process. And I have very little sympathy with people trying to kill me.
Lawsuits from smoking should automatically be thrown out. There would have to be some ridiculous circumstances for an individual to be able to file a lawsuit of that nature. Like intentionally throwing a cigarette butt into an apartment and causing a 3 alarm fire or something malicious in nature...
In terms of a cigarette tax, why not? Alcohol is taxed almost 20%, why not cigarettes? And it's good income for federally subsidized cancer treatment and intervention.
Smoking bans might be a little hazy. Many people went to bars for the purpose of drinking and lighting up but now it's one or the other. I can understand if you left the decision up to the business owner, but to mandate a smoking ban seems like an inappropriate restriction of free-will.
It surprises me that Europe hasn't been as successful in curbing the smoking trend with all of their radical ideas. In some nations, they will refuse to prescribe chemotherapy unless you prove that you have quit smoking for 6 months. Imagine if that were the case in America.
Approximately 30% of all diagnosed cancers in America are lung cancers, more than half of which are preventable.
Post a Comment