tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7893272060787897238.post4219617408276919819..comments2024-03-19T08:42:45.690-04:00Comments on The Delaware Libertarian: Libertarians and smoking bansSteven H. Newtonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09097470960863103473noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7893272060787897238.post-66988732693886808722015-02-14T02:20:23.389-05:002015-02-14T02:20:23.389-05:00I’m trampled by your contents carry on the wonderf...I’m trampled by your contents carry on the wonderful work.<a href="http://www.vividsmoke.com/accessories/tank-systems/kanger-subtank-clearomizer.html" rel="nofollow">Kanger Subtank</a>Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13367868683316914505noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7893272060787897238.post-42172283759015997222010-12-06T17:53:59.197-05:002010-12-06T17:53:59.197-05:00I think we need to redefine "market failure&q...I think we need to redefine "market failure" here. A market fails when it does not require the participants to fully recognize the costs of their actions. In a smoker's case, their rights end at my nose... literally. If they fail to recognize the costs of their own actions, than government has the responsibility to intervene. In the event there is no reasonable way for smokers to recognize the costs of their smoking, then government should require them not to affect others with it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7893272060787897238.post-80988105214328840312009-06-18T00:25:16.198-04:002009-06-18T00:25:16.198-04:00I found an Electronic Cigarette that allows me to ...I found an Electronic Cigarette that allows me to smoke in banned areas and I really like it. The reason is because when you exhale there is no smoke only vapor and they allow you to choose the level of nicotine that you want. Friday on CNN they did a piece on the Electronic Cigarettes and said the same thing plus a number of other positive points. <br />If you want to check it out go to this link<br /><br />http://myinlife.com/smokeelcladera12https://www.blogger.com/profile/17285312053575916768noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7893272060787897238.post-75040770064045834232009-06-17T21:46:48.354-04:002009-06-17T21:46:48.354-04:00I started smoking e-cigs. I seem to smoke less si...I started smoking e-cigs. I seem to smoke less since I don't "have to" smoke a whole cigarette. I am back to enjoying smoking now that I am not forced outside to smoke and not to mention it doesn't smell at all. I tried a few brands but settled on this one since i can get the most "smoke" or vapor with it. http://greensmoke.com/indoors/VitaminNhttp://greensmoke.com/indoors/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7893272060787897238.post-32591910918161315382009-06-16T23:04:38.365-04:002009-06-16T23:04:38.365-04:00If i see every coal miner dying of black lung dise...If i see every coal miner dying of black lung disease, and then go work in a coal mine, I have no right to bitch about getting black lung disease. <br /><br />I have the right to find a job elsewhere. I don't have to live in the area where coal mining is the only occupation. I don't have to be a coal miner. <br /><br />You don't have to work in a smoking environment. If the establishment finds that it is hard to employ people because of health hazards, then he will be forced to make improvements or change his smoking policy. How hard is that?<br /><br />You have free will, use it. <br /><br />I remember my childhood, back before Massachusetts had a smoking ban implemented in the early 90's. One restaurant said they were going smoke free. They GAINED business because they were the only restaurant in the county that was smoke free. Smokers were pissed, but 99% of the restaurants in the county catered to them, so they took their business elsewhere. <br /><br />Free market system worked before the state stepped in and leveled the playing field with the smoking ban.Brian Shieldshttp://www.mourningconstitution.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7893272060787897238.post-10870731912054589282009-06-16T21:17:44.151-04:002009-06-16T21:17:44.151-04:00on private property that argument fails miserably ...on private property that argument fails miserably for pretty much anything short of murder. <br /><br />on truly public property (as opposed to private property that is open to the public under certain conditions) it would make sense that the pulmonary disease victim has as much right to be there as the smoker, so smoking in their presence could be considered a trespass. but we were discussing private property.tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06653459162258850269noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7893272060787897238.post-86428036941413875242009-06-16T20:57:38.064-04:002009-06-16T20:57:38.064-04:00By the way: there is a libertarian argument for sm...By the way: there is a libertarian argument for smoking bans, although it's not a very good one.<br /><br />Libertarianism respects the right of the individual to be secure in her person and property, in the "your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins" sense. Thus, one could argue a property owner lacks the right to say that, for example, murder is legal on her property, since inalienable natural rights trump alienable property rights. It's just a small leap from there to the claim that second-hand smoke is an unjustified aggression against the bystanders who have pulmonary disease.<br /><br />The main problem I see with this argument concerns the extent to which this right is enforcable (and against whom), since a proportional response would be an ineffective deterrent.Mikonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7893272060787897238.post-35253000441373905982009-06-16T20:45:13.881-04:002009-06-16T20:45:13.881-04:00I recall when my state banned smoking in restauran...I recall when my state banned smoking in restaurants. It was nice; it was very nice. I wouldn't mind too much if the government was wittled down to its essential function of preventing people from smoking around me, since, according to Rothbard, I'm allowed one deviation from the pure-libertarian line. (Aside: I don't care what they do when they aren't around me.)<br /><br />McArdle underestimates the power of market forces to convince restaurants to go non-smoking (I know of quite a few restaurants that were nonsmoking long before the state came in on the issue). The libertarian temptation is to make the same error in the opposite direction: I fully admit that markets aren't perfect, and that I'll miss smoking bans once we get to libertopia. The libertarian answer needn't be that the problem has a magical market-based solution, but just that a cooperative society is our best available option. Out of respect for justice, I'm willing to sacrifice some degree of personal preference/comfort out of respect for the rights of others (although I would of course still try for a market solution). That's the price of living in a free society.<br /><br />The fact that a "perfect" world isn't an available option is unfortunate, but hardly a serious challenge to the credibility of libertarianism.Mikonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7893272060787897238.post-58113336012827887792009-06-16T17:31:51.126-04:002009-06-16T17:31:51.126-04:00"The libertarian rejoinder to the smoking ban..."<i>The libertarian rejoinder to the smoking bans is that bars could choose not to smoke if people wanted it. But in practice, despite the fact that smokers are a minority, and most people hate it, almost no establishment went non-smoking without government fiat.</i>"<br /><br />These statements are not entirely correct. <br /><br />While smokers are a minority of the general population, the demographics look very different when you consider the patrons of particular types of businesses. For example, before the bans, smokers (either by themselves or in combination with non-smokers who did not object to cigarette smoke) were a strong majority at most bars. At cigar bars, nonsmokers were almost completely unrepresented. At other types of establishments where the numbers were different, smokers were often seated in separate fully enclosed dining rooms or bar areas.<br /><br />Second, I can name a handful of establishments in NCC, and a few dozen in the Philly area that voluntarily went fully non-smoking long before the respective bans went into effect. In addition, a much larger number of businesses installed or upgraded their air filtration systems in response to requests from non-smoking customers.<br /><br />While many libertarians may disagree with me, I would argue that the libertarian position is that the final decision as to what activities are permitted in any given establishment rightfully belongs to its owner. Whether or not said owner chooses to maximize their profits, or make decisions based on other factors such as their personal prejudices will strongly influence their long term success. <br /><br />Without government intervention, it looked like the market was leaning toward nonsmoking theaters & concert halls, nonsmoking or segregated restaurants, hotels with a fraction of rooms designated smoking allowed, and smoking allowed in bars, clubs, pool-halls, casinos & off-track betting parlors.<br /><br />And for the record, I've never been a smoker, and find smoke annoying or offensive, but I'm willing to tolerate it in public places as long as it's not in my personal space and not so concentrated that even smokers would find it hard to breathe.tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06653459162258850269noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7893272060787897238.post-71774701026158878322009-06-16T17:30:25.086-04:002009-06-16T17:30:25.086-04:00Megan is confused about what constitutes a market ...Megan is confused about what constitutes a market failure. She considers herself enlightened, so that her assumption of what the market SHOULD do is somehow God-given. When the rest of the consumers don't make the enlightened choice, that constitutes a failure. The truth is, and this is where Libertarianism comes in, real people weigh choices, between possible outcomes, and choose the one THEY prefer. That produces the market response. There is no failure involved. It is simply a matter of people rejecting her chosen outcome for THEM.ChrisNChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03489742185898644983noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7893272060787897238.post-26655302735370958332009-06-16T17:21:46.669-04:002009-06-16T17:21:46.669-04:00Of course, on the flip side, any establishment has...Of course, on the flip side, any establishment has the power to ban smoking, as many did long before Nanny Minner's and the General Assembly's busybodies' blanket ban.Tyler Nixonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03009459340275592274noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7893272060787897238.post-31635227258429051582009-06-16T17:17:29.913-04:002009-06-16T17:17:29.913-04:00Assumed risk, with clear notification to potential...Assumed risk, with clear notification to potential patrons has been my mantra since it was banned in Delaware establishments years ago.<br /><br />In short, prominent signs at all entrances and ingresses : "This establishment permits patrons to smoke. If you do not wished to be exposed to tobacco smoke, do not enter this establishment. The risk is yours to assume."<br /><br />Same information would be presented to potential employees, re : working in the facility.<br /><br />This protects property rights and consumer choice, without nanny state blanket bans. Quite libertarian.Tyler Nixonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03009459340275592274noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7893272060787897238.post-20094565015016633052009-06-16T15:40:36.158-04:002009-06-16T15:40:36.158-04:00Steve,
You can't just ignore the health hazar...Steve,<br /><br />You can't just ignore the health hazards because "virtually every job comes with health hazards, voluntary or involuntary." No, most jobs don't require you to breath in carcinogenic air eight hours a day.<br /><br />As somebody once noted, having a smoking area inside a public area is like having a peeing area in a swimming pool. You can't contain it. <br /><br />Licensing "All Smoking" establishments would require a whole new set of enforcement rules and a new bureaucracy. How libertarian would that be?<br /><br />The smoking ban was the best thing Ruth Ann did.<br /><br />anononeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com