Tweet
Now that smoking is banned almost everywhere, the anti-smokers are delighted. Well, they won, didn't they? They keep going, naturally, because banning things is what they do for fun. But leave that aside for the moment.
The non-smokers are in several groups. Those that aren't actually anti-smokers but are happy with the ban, those that think the ban is stupid even though they don'tsmoke themselves, and the serious anti-smokers who demanded the ban in the first place and now seek to extend it.
This is for that last group. Something to think about.
Suppose you have an office, unshared, in which you deal with clients. Any business, it doesn't matter. Suppose a smoker visits your office and asks if you'd mind if he lit up. You're going to say no, I know, and that's only fair and just. It's your office and it's your choice whether you allow someone to smoke there. Absolutely fair, no problems at all. Your office, your rules. Right?
Well, no. Not really. It used to be the case but it's not any more.
You see, if someone comes into your office and asks your permission to smoke, you say no. It used to be because you wanted it that way. Now, it's not your choice. You are not permitted to say yes. I know, you wouldn't anway but the choice is no longer yours. The rules are not yours. The decision is not yours. In your private office, possibly even your own personal property, the choice is not yours to make. You are not permitted to allow anyone to smoke there whether you want to or not.
Think about it for a moment. Is it really only the smoker's freedom that is curtailed by the ban?
Let's take the other side of the coin. I smoke. If a plumber visits my house, I can't smoke in it because it becomes his place of work. If he's a smoker, he can't smoke in my house either. While he's on the premises, we would both have to go outside to smoke even though we are the only two in the place. I cannot allow him to smoke in my house. The law covers not only smoking, but the property owner's choice as to whethe to allow it. The choice is no longer mine to make. In my own home, I cannot make the rules.
The more rabid anti-smokers will react simply to the word 'smoking' and rage at me, the vile smoker, who they now think is intent on forcing any workmen who enter my home to inhale against their will. Those with a brain will notice something different about this post.
It's not actually about smoking.
Neither is the ban. The ban is about control. The control of the smoker is obvious. The control of the non-smoker is less obvious. Nobody worries about a ban on something they don't like, or even on something they don't do. What they don't notice is that the control extends beyond the thing being obviously controlled. Those who don't do that thing now might one day change their minds. Or they might decide that actually it's okay if someone else wants to do it, even if they don't want to do it themselves. They might, one day, feel like saying to the smoker in the office. "Well, okay, as long as you stand by the open window".
Well, that's not allowed. The choice is not yours any more.
You're controlled too.
(My thanks to Leg Iron for this well considered piece.)
The non-smokers are in several groups. Those that aren't actually anti-smokers but are happy with the ban, those that think the ban is stupid even though they don'tsmoke themselves, and the serious anti-smokers who demanded the ban in the first place and now seek to extend it.
This is for that last group. Something to think about.
Suppose you have an office, unshared, in which you deal with clients. Any business, it doesn't matter. Suppose a smoker visits your office and asks if you'd mind if he lit up. You're going to say no, I know, and that's only fair and just. It's your office and it's your choice whether you allow someone to smoke there. Absolutely fair, no problems at all. Your office, your rules. Right?
Well, no. Not really. It used to be the case but it's not any more.
You see, if someone comes into your office and asks your permission to smoke, you say no. It used to be because you wanted it that way. Now, it's not your choice. You are not permitted to say yes. I know, you wouldn't anway but the choice is no longer yours. The rules are not yours. The decision is not yours. In your private office, possibly even your own personal property, the choice is not yours to make. You are not permitted to allow anyone to smoke there whether you want to or not.
Think about it for a moment. Is it really only the smoker's freedom that is curtailed by the ban?
Let's take the other side of the coin. I smoke. If a plumber visits my house, I can't smoke in it because it becomes his place of work. If he's a smoker, he can't smoke in my house either. While he's on the premises, we would both have to go outside to smoke even though we are the only two in the place. I cannot allow him to smoke in my house. The law covers not only smoking, but the property owner's choice as to whethe to allow it. The choice is no longer mine to make. In my own home, I cannot make the rules.
The more rabid anti-smokers will react simply to the word 'smoking' and rage at me, the vile smoker, who they now think is intent on forcing any workmen who enter my home to inhale against their will. Those with a brain will notice something different about this post.
It's not actually about smoking.
Neither is the ban. The ban is about control. The control of the smoker is obvious. The control of the non-smoker is less obvious. Nobody worries about a ban on something they don't like, or even on something they don't do. What they don't notice is that the control extends beyond the thing being obviously controlled. Those who don't do that thing now might one day change their minds. Or they might decide that actually it's okay if someone else wants to do it, even if they don't want to do it themselves. They might, one day, feel like saying to the smoker in the office. "Well, okay, as long as you stand by the open window".
Well, that's not allowed. The choice is not yours any more.
You're controlled too.
(My thanks to Leg Iron for this well considered piece.)
Comment