Smoking Bans are no Match for New Yorkers

By the Left Coast Rebel

Beware the social engineer nanny-staters, enforcing their viewpoint(s) at the barrel of a gun -- especially in "progressive" states and regions like New York and California:

From Reason's Youtube page:

Smoking in bars and restaurants has been banned in New York City since 2003 but Mayor Michael Bloomberg recently added beaches, parks, and pedestrian plazas to the long and growing list of places where smoking is verboten in the Big Apple. "Sin taxes" on cigarettes have driven the average price of a pack to more than $11.

Yet in a city renowned for its innovation and drive, smokers have found ways to work around government attempts at social engineering. These include the booming "loosie" trade, where street entreprenuers risk arrest to sell loose cigarettes for a dollar each on the streets of Manhattan; tobacco crops blooming in Brooklyn; and a thriving Soho bar/restaurant that survived the smoking ban thanks to an obscure grandfather clause.

With so much tax revenue being lost to the black market, and even the green market, perhaps it's time for a mayor who made billions in the free market to consider allowing business owners to set their own policies, and let the marketplace sort out the demand for smoking and smoke-free establishments.
I don't smoke but by golly one should be able to in one's establishment or locale of choice.

When nanny-staters infringe upon an individual's freedom to choose and consume a legal product, a horrible precedent is set that inherently risks additional freedoms.

Just because it isn't "politically correct" to smoke, doesn't mean you, me or any do-gooder should having any say in whether or not a private business provides a smoke-filled environment.

Or smoke free.

Or cordoned-off between smoking and non-smoking.

Or whatever.

When in the world did, "I don't like it, therefore it should be illegal" take hold and poison the American spirit?

Hat-tip Reason @ Facebook.


  1. I totally agree with you, but you're missing the classic liberal rationale: second hand smoke is killing everyone around the smoker, so it's just not safe! We must ban all smokers for fear that the small waft of cigarette smoke may kill someone at the park.


  2. As someone who does get physically ill when around cigarette smoke (headaches and respiratory allergy symptoms), at first I was glad for the bans.

    "Smoke-free" zones didn't always work since the smoke was frequently recirculated around the restaurant. But shocker - I'd just go eat somewhere else next time!

    At any time, I could easily take my business elsewhere - and did before the bans went into effect. Hence it wasn't exactly a big deal since several "smoke-free" places existed before smoking bans appeared.

    IMO that's the way it should be. Smoking is a legal choice and the business owner should have the right to set their own policy regarding smoking.

    That being said, I do appreciate when smokers take measures to keep their smoke away from other people, since (in my case anyway) it can make others sick. However I know it won't "kill" me - I'm just miserable when around it.


Commenting here is a privilege, not a right. Comments that contain cursing or insults and those failing to add to the discussion will be summarily deleted.