Try as I might, I cannot think of a better moniker than "nanny-state" to describe exactly what you're talking about. The nanny-state is a governmental attitude that "we know what's better for you than you do, and we'll make you capitulate through law." While most people do not complain "about the "nanny-state" when traffic is managed, fire is put out, the homeless are sheltered or the poor children receive medical assistance", those are not apt analogies. While traffic is, to a certain extent, managed to protect me from myself (the definition, in my pinion of a nanny-state) in the forms of speed limits and those ridiculous seat belt laws, the main focus is to create an atmosphere that allows proper flow of traffic within the physics of the traffic system. The homeless being sheltered is not an extension of my definition, though I believe it is a questionable use of public funds and could be accomplished well and adequately through the private sector (but that's a different thread).
The smoking ban was instituted, first and foremost, for the concept of "public health." Proponents argued mostly for the health of workers (who apparently were unable to secure employment in nonsmoking businesses if smoke bothered them so much) and patrons (who patronized only a relatively small number of establishments affected by the ban). Long story short: it was the state protecting people from themselves when the people ALREADY had the choices available to protect themselves. The city said "we know what's better for you than you do" even though everybody (unless you live in a cave) knows that smoking is not good for you. By force of law, the council decided we are now unable to make those decisions. That's a nanny-state. Now, I don't have a problem with the general concept of public health. I say this because, in response to this post, somebody is gonna post a whole bunch of stuff about food safety and water safety and OSHA and on and on and on. Fine. But to bring the issue back to tobacco, I say this: if tobacco is the "public health" threat it is (and I believe it is, seriously), let's ban it. Outright. Of course that'll never happen, because politicians (government) makes a TON of money off smokes. But the mental gymnastics required of politicos who wish to ban a product for YOUR own good, but are willing to spend BILLIONS of tax dollars recouped from said product, should make everyone take pause. Mike Thompson Windom life-long non-smoker LRT: 2 MPPA: 0 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jared Chester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 9:34 AM Subject: FW: [Mpls] How quickly we get used to a smoke-free environment(but not to Hooters) > No one has said that people are not allowed to smoke. They are not > allowed to smoke inside. Comments using "nanny-state" are inaccurate at > best and inflammatory at worst. No one complains about the > "nanny-state" when traffic is managed, fire is put out, the homeless are > sheltered or the poor children receive medical assistance. Further, we > are not allowed to dump motor oil down the drain or let our dogs run > around the city without a leash on for good reason. These could both be > argued to limit personal freedom. These "nanny-state" rules are not > much debated. This country is all about the freedom and liberty to do > what you want as long as you do not hurt other people. I believe we can > all agree that smoking is not good. It kills people. It stinks, its > expensive, its annoying. Whereas smoking used to be cool, smoking is > now seen much more like a neighbor's large dog barking all night. . . > and then coming over to your house and eating you. The smoking ban is > not about limiting freedom, its about livable communities. I would say > the smoking ban keeps Minneapolis a liveable community. > > P.S. "livable wages" being earned at Hooters? Where do you live? I > want to move there, sounds cheap. > > Jared Chester > Nokomis East REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact 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 Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[email protected] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
