My friends and fellow smoking-ban advocates; We are in a hopeless discussion with at least three men and at least one, perhaps two women, whose hatred for any form of government is such an obsession that they are beyond the point of persuasion on government's having anything having to do with regulating what they consider private domains. That, of course, would be any individual or business out side government. No evidence of any kind from any source will assuage their opposition to any form of regulation. This is gut level stuff.
These are libertarians, some with a capital "L", some not, but all with this irrational hatred for government that allows for no role in the conduct of the human enterprise - except to protect their personal and property rights - no matter at whose health, safety or expense. For these people, any tax, any law, rule, or regulation is, by definition, the violent incursion by that amorphous villain, government, on their private persons and behavior. You cannot argue government's role in protecting human right or public health or the common good. For them such concepts are anathema to their government hating religion. They are not their brother's keeper and if any of us cannot fend for ourselves, we deserve nothing from the government they pay for by the forcible encroachment on their hard-earned wages and earnings. Never mind that elected officials make these decisions, representing citizens of all stripes. They're all thieves. Never mind that this democracy has, by the people and for the people, a responsibility to protect all of the people, not just those who choose to behave or believe differently from the ordered society we create as a culture, not as individuals. You will never win an argument from these angry misanthropes who live under the benefits of a well-ordered society, but prefer to look that gift horse in the mouth and reject its work for the common welfare. If one hates government more than they hate smoke, they will support smokers' rights no matter how dangerous smokers are to the rest of us. These are no-win conversations and the dysfunction of these arguments mitigates against any satisfactory resolution of the discourse. We have our smoking ban(s). Let 'em stew in their anti-societal hellfire and damnation. It will only worsen if we don't. Again, congratulations to the hard-working, courageous local representatives who stepped to the plate in support of ALL the people in Minneapolis. Andy Driscoll Saint Paul -- on 7/27/04 9:24 PM, Andrew Reineman wrote: > OK, Mr. Atherton, I will bite on the smoking room question, although > the point seems to be mostly moot right now with the passage of the > smoking ban in Minneapolis. > > For me it comes down to the ventilation system in the bars themselves, > and the effectiveness those systems might or might not have. Given > the post I made yesterday about the new evidence out showing the > effects of even a small amount of secondhand smoke on heart disease > rates, a ventilation system would need to be hospital grade in the > smoking rooms, and separate from the ventilation system of the > nonsmoking rooms for this to truly reduce the risks associated with > someone entering that establishment. > > Can this even be done? Well an engineer at Honeywell doesn't think so. > From an article in the Christian Science Monitor: "There have been big > changes in the past several years, says Scott Roberts, North American > sales and marketing manager for Honeywell Commercial Air Products in > Niceville, Fla. ... Still, Mr. Roberts concedes that he can't make any > health claims for the new systems. "Second-hand smoke is significantly > reduced," he says, but adds, "Any amount is not good.'" The link: > > http://csmonitor.com/cgi-bin/durableRedirect.pl?/durable/2001/03/21/ > fp2s2-csm.shtml > > A physicist, James Repace, an expert on secondhand smoke, told Assembly > members that purification technology will never be able to remove the > contaminants generated by burning cigarettes....Repace, who has done > field studies in bars on the effects of tobacco smoke, said > concentrations of carcinogens can't be removed by ventilation and > filtration technology....To cut contamination to safe levels, a bar > would need a machine "comparable to a tornado" that produces 100,000 > air changes per hour, Repace said. Repace worked for 30 years with the > federal government as a research physicist for the Navy, Occupational > Safety & Health Administration and Environmental Protection Agency. Now > retired, he consults with governments proposing smoking bans. The > link: > > http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp? > storyID=229005&category=STATE&newsdate=3/16/2004 > > The problem seems to be the stuff simply doesn't get out of the air > fast enough not to be harmful. And it is the non smelly stuff that is > part of the problem -- the actual smoke can be removed without > eliminating some of the heavier particulate matter, which is left > behind. Also, the particulate matter is easily transfered between > rooms on people's clothes, and by the air currents created by their > movement. > > This same problem can be seen in water filters. Anyone can purchase a > $29.00 filter at the local hardware store that reduces some of the > taste issues associated with water from the tap, but does that mean the > water is pure? Nope. Lead, arsenic, bacteria, and other nasty things > slip right through the charcoal filter and are still in the glass. The > taste is better, but the bad stuff is still there. To remove all of > the bad stuff you have to spend the big bucks on a reverse osmosis > filter, or a distiller. > > Now, am I comparing Minneapolis tap water to secondhand smoke as a > health hazard? No, I am just using a filtration example to show that > even if we can not smell it or taste it, it might still be just as bad > for us. > > That is why I can't support the concept of separate smoking rooms. > Doesn't work. > > Andrew Reineman > Linden Hills REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
