Recent comments

No, it does not mean 13 more people will get cancer or some other ailment... You've gone and done what the media complicitly does, and the ANTI's, because it works for them, never bother to correct - even though the ACS and others know the real math... It means that the risk factor that someone in that pool of 100,000 people has increased by a very tiny amount - .013% Your probablity of getting some sort of lung or other health ailement is much higher if you wait at a bus stop every day, commute in highway traffic for long hours with the windows open (or in a car without a cabin air filter), work in any sort of manufacturing that includes industrial chemicals. Why does the government not go after all that? Easy... because they want people herded around on buses, and going after industry would be bad for the economy - though they do take their little nips and cuts there in the cause of "environmentalism". Oh, and the smoking community is a small enough minority... A lady walked past me in a resteraunt saturday and her perfume was so strong that I sneezed for like 5 minutes. Can I get the government to hold a gun to her head and tell her not to wear that stink in public? After all, it's the same thing you're trying to do to those who choose to smoke... FORCE them. The only way you can believe this is right is if you believe that you derive your rights FROM the government, and so like your parent they (big-mommy-state) can take them away. The government derives IT's right and powers from the CONSENT of the governed. There is nothing CONSTITUTIONAL about a government, of any kind, dictating to it's citizens this way. We could devolve this into a complete discussion of all the things the government does that it truly does not have the right or the power to do, but, that's beyond the point. Let's not forget, <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0407_0551_ZS.html">a private business does NOT become public property just because the public is invited...</a>