|
Website of the Week
For those who are gluttons for listening punishment, here is my official myspace musician page.
Local Pump Price of Unleaded Gasoline:
$3.52/gallon
Price Per Barrel of Oil:
$125.96 (previously $107.90)
last modified May 11, 2008 at 18:16
When passing through Oxford, Mississippi, the other day, I thought that I'd drop by Proud Larry's to have a quick brew and a nice smoke while enjoying a little live music. Unfortunately, it turns out that I was able to have two out of the three.
Oxford has joined the growing ranks of towns and states that have enacted indoor smoking bans in restaurants, bars, and other public indoor places. The atmosphere in bars and restaurants, to put it mildly, is becoming devoid of smoke and liveliness.
These bans are silly, unnecessary, counterproductive, and dangerous. Here are a few thoughts:
* Smoking in bars and restaurants adds to the ambience. It's like mandating that all lights must be turned on. People like to hide behind the darkness, the smoke, and the music.
* The ostensible reason for this restriction is the benefit provided to the public health. Well, why stop at cigarettes then? Maybe it should also be illegal to drink, too. While they're at it, then maybe it should also be illegal for guys and girls to "hook up" at bars. Think about all the STDs and pregnancies that could be prevented.
* If people are really bothered by this, why don't cities hold a referendum on banning smoking instead of allowing city councils to arbitrarily impose behavioral bans?
* Even referendums are unnecessary, since we are talking about restricting a behavior that can just as easily be determined by free market interaction. If patrons don't want to risk hanging out in smoke-filled bars, then they can go to a bar that does not allow it.
* Lastly, where does this stop? Smoking is a legal activity, yet some states are not only restricting smoking in public, but smoking in private such as in cars or homes with children. Should drinking be restricted? What other legal behaviors will we try to ban in the interest of the 'public health'?
|
