Second in a series
Re “Neither Meghan Nor Cooper Is Blowing Smoke About New Ordinance”
[img]1307|right|Meghan Sahli-Wells||no_popup[/img]Mayor Meghan Sahli-Wells presented a putative conundrum as the fire builds en route to an intended no-smoking ordinance, probably next month.
“A smoker has the choice of whether to smoke or not,” she said. “But, the person sitting next to a smoker does not have a choice whether he or she can breathe or not.”
What to do?
“If you are exposed to smoke repeatedly,” the mayor maintains, “a ton of science says this is bad for you.”
Ms. Sahli-Wells does not entertain one doubt about the negative, if not fatal, effects of a near person’s cigarette smoke.
“The first cases of second-hand smoke being damaging probably go back to the 1980s when smoking was banned in airplanes. Stewardesses and stewards were getting sick and even dying from second-hand smoke.”
Smoke harm goes even deeper, says the mayor, to third-hand smoke, which is embedded in drapes and other accoutrements of a home.
What about anti-no smoking advocates who protest their freedom to smoke has been pinched?
“The freedom of the person to smoke,” said Ms. Sahli-Wells, “is not stronger than the freedom of the person who doesn’t want to deal with smoke.”
Here is a philosophical conundrum:
Whose rights should prevail?
(To be continued)
