Smoking ban: A crock of nonsense
Chris England
Issue date: 10/10/06 Section: Opinion
- < prev Page 2 of 2
As for this "wellness movement," UND is consistently in the top ranks of the known universe for binge drinking. We are talking about a large demographic to whom spirited matches of "beer pong" and "Edward 40-Hands" represent valid intramural activities. Platinum-plated treadmills and smoking bans are rather missing the point if wellness, not publicity, is the goal. Let the students smoke. It's their party; they'll die if they want to. At least they can drive when they smoke.
Anyhow, there is indeed a point buried deep within this madness. A smoking ban is inane and brain-dead. It is not the role of society, and especially not the role of a university, to decide which personal choices are and are not acceptable. It is one thing to rule out smoking indoors, and quite another to design policies that deliberately inconvenience certain individuals.
Will our motto become "Don't tolerate. Litigate."?
It is inconceivable that anyone with an ounce of common sense thinks this ban is a good idea, and if they do, well, we need seriously to investigate the alarming deprecation of an ounce of common sense. If the sight of a person smoking truly does cause distress, to those affected individuals I recommend a simple technique perfected by "Slick Willy" Clinton himself: Don't inhale.
Anyhow, there is indeed a point buried deep within this madness. A smoking ban is inane and brain-dead. It is not the role of society, and especially not the role of a university, to decide which personal choices are and are not acceptable. It is one thing to rule out smoking indoors, and quite another to design policies that deliberately inconvenience certain individuals.
Will our motto become "Don't tolerate. Litigate."?
It is inconceivable that anyone with an ounce of common sense thinks this ban is a good idea, and if they do, well, we need seriously to investigate the alarming deprecation of an ounce of common sense. If the sight of a person smoking truly does cause distress, to those affected individuals I recommend a simple technique perfected by "Slick Willy" Clinton himself: Don't inhale.
Viewing Comments 1 - 2 of 2
Geoff V.
posted 10/09/06 @ 4:32 PM EST
I am glad Mr. England sees this for the crock that it is, but I wish he would have researched it more fully. There is no proof, and I mean NO PROOF, that occational exposure to second hand smoke is harmful. (Continued…)
G.M.
posted 10/10/06 @ 10:29 PM EST
I was expecting a strong backlash and a strong wave of support when this issue was raised. The main problem is that, as stated in the article, that this new "plan" is indeed a biased-based decision. (Continued…)
Post a Comment