by Stanley W. Shura

Created on: July 01, 2007

The debate over where smoking should be allowed and whose rights matter more and how to settle conflicts between smokers and nonsmokers, either in the abstract or in the ever real environment, is NOT about deciding which group should be oppressed by the other. Then again, maybe that is exactly it. Just as some may argue that over-regulation is in effect a type of discriminatory treatment of smokers, some others may argue that the very presence of smoking near a nonsmoker is likewise in invasion of his/her space, health, comfort and mood - and thus similarly discriminatory.

So, should smoking be *allowed* in public pl/spaces? Yes. All the time? No. Does it depend on circumstances and context? Yes. Does *having* the right to do something mean that it is always "right" to *do* it? No. Do rules and mores, statutes and standards of etiquette, in a sentient collection of cohabitant creatures (in other words, a "society"), require active, engaged, and continuous thought? Yes.

It's no fun to sit on the fence, even for the purpose of exposition, when you are burdoned with strong biases. That said, I am personally, generally in favor of furthering individual rights over some imagined "collective good". That perspective comes from a general disdain for authority - which has a tendency to demand more respect than it has earned. I favor doing the right thing, as best and consciously as I am able, over doing the merely legal thing.

I do not like policy and statute to dictate (and take credit for) my good behavior. I wish to stop at the intersection because the other driver has been waiting and it is his/her turn to proceed - not because a light is hued either green or red. However, I am the first to admit and acknowledge, and *accuse* the general public of, COLLECTIVELY, not behaving similarly. My friend "John" will refrain from lighting up in my car because he is considerate of the impact of his choice on my environment, comfort, health, and mood. I will likewise resist the temptation to turn my volume to MAX, when Norman Greenbalm's 'Spirit in the Sky' begins to flow from 'ZLX through my speakers, if any passenger in my car would be uncomfortable, even pained, by said volume.

I have seen too many examples of a *lack* of the aformentioned empathy and kindness to say that COLLECTIVELY, the tendency toward looking out for the *other* guy, is more common than not. That, I am bregrudgingly forced to admit, is the purpose for law. It is supposed to ensure that our overall well being isn't COLLECTIVELY chipped away by an accumulation of minor offenses left unchecked, as WELL as to protect one and all - all the time - from more, even horrendously more, egregious offenses.

So, should smoking, or nudity, or profanity, or alcohol consumption be *allowed* in public spaces? Yes. I honestly believe that. Should it occur in any public space at any time? No. I favor personal good judgement over public decree, but I trust the latter more.

Your right to smoke ends where my right to breathe begins. And my right (not inclination!) to prance around nude ends where your right to keep your lunch down begins! So - do I say you should be ALLOWED to smoke in public? Yeah, *most* of the time. But, if I am near you - especially if we're inside, pleeeease - DON'T.

Learn more about this author, Stanley W. Shura.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.