quote:Originally posted by FDR:
What gives government the right to regulate cleanliness in a restaurant? To rate establishments? To close down unclean places? Common sense, that's what. It is entirely appropriate. Does a person have a right to blow a known carcinogen into the air in a restaurant? Of course not. No more than a person would have a right to bring a rat into a restaurant. Or to run a restaurant dirty and unclean and unhealthy in any regard. A private place is still public in the sense that government does have authority there. If a crime is committed in a private place the police still come and investigate. By what authority? It is private. This shows the fallacy of the argument that government has no business telling a business not to allow smoking. It not only has a right to do this, it has a duty to do it. A restaurant is a quasi-public place even if it is private owned. The same government that insures food safety, can and should ensure air safety as well. People have a right to expect that when they are in certain places they are protected form harmful situations, within reason. Government doing what it can to stop a carcinogen from being blown into the air in a restaurant is within reason. As is it doing what it can to make sure the food is fresh and the place is clean. It's a no-brainer.
The vast majority of "health issues" that is on the scoreboard of restuarants are because of things that needs to be repaired, NOT because of it being "dirty".
It is a NO BRAINER for a NON SMOKER to go to a smoke free restuarant, while a smoker goes to a smoking restuarant.
Your RIGHTS END when the OTHER PERSONS RIGHTS BEGIN, and in this case, we are making decisions for BUSINESS OWNERS and we have NO RIGHT to do that. We don't own it, THEY do.
Don't like their atmosphere, go elsewhere.