Many reasons demand tough anti-smoking law
H 259, sponsored by Rep. Hugh Holliman of Davidson County, likely will be calendared for vote Wednesday. It originally was a comprehensive bill banning smoking in most public places and workplaces throughout North Carolina. The Health Committee approved it decisively, but Rep. Holliman may be open to compromising amendments to ensure passage.
Following strong recommendations announced last year in the Surgeon General's report, the public seems favorable to smoking restrictions. Polls by both Elon University and Civitas documented more than 60 percent favor smoking bans in North Carolina.
The Surgeon General's report concludes secondhand smoke is a health hazard that can cause death in nonsmokers from heart disease and lung cancer and increase asthma attacks. The Centers for Disease Control states even brief exposure to secondhand smoke can worsen heart disease and urges those at risk to avoid such exposure.
With bans now in place in 18 states, eight countries and 577 cities, no negative economic impacts are found.
Smokers have a right to smoke, but not in places where it endangers the health of innocent bystanders. Urge your representatives to vote for H 259 without weakening amendments to protect the health of all North Carolinians.
Richard J. Rosen, M.D.
Greensboro
Comments (8)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
A big Amen to your letter Dr. Rosen.
Posted on April 1, 2007 7:32 AM
i agree. what could be more fitting than to be getting s--tfaced on alcohol, puking in your lap while weaving down the highway, and then to remember that the government cares so much as to not let you light one up?
cheers!
Posted on April 1, 2007 11:09 AM
While I favor restrictions on smoking, buckyreeds has already brought up the issue I was pondering when reading this LTTE.
Why not ask the family of the late Casey Bokhoven whether they would have had Tolly Carr smoking in the establishment he left or lighting one up? Had he lit one up I wonder if Casey would have died in March?
Yet, we know that the alcohol industry has more $$$ and clout than the tobacco industry. The tobacco industry rolled over 15-20 years ago.
And please do not misunderstand me in this matter. I still believe in smoking restrictions. I only wish that someone would take a stand to enact and THEN ENFORCE alcohol restrictions. Yvonne, I believe you are also a victim of a repeated drunk driver. I would hope that some of what I say resonates with you.
Shalom
Posted on April 1, 2007 1:52 PM
You know someone has run out of arguments when he starts comparing deadly vices.
"Oh, yeah? Well, um, oh, oh- I got it! How about drinking and driving, huh? What about people who get s**tfaced on alcohol and then they puke on themselves and, like, they weave! What about that, huh?"
"There are laws against that, already. What does that have to do with second hand smoke?"
"Well, it, uh... um, well you... um... uh...umm..."
Posted on April 1, 2007 1:59 PM
Darryl... wha?
"Had he lit one up, I wonder if Casey would have died in March?"
Do you actually believe Casey Bokhoven would be alive right now if Tolly Carr had lit up a cigarette? And that smoking in public places prevents drunk driving deaths?
And would you care to explain how drunk driving has anything to do with a ban on smoking in public places?
Posted on April 1, 2007 2:22 PM
out of arguments? duh and uh?...
ok.... why are there no seatbelts on school buses?
why are unvaccinated mexicans allowed to reside as criminals here?
shouldn't stamey's be open on sunday?
Posted on April 1, 2007 4:47 PM
Ok, you got me on the Stamey's thing.
With all the unvaccinated smoking s**tfaced, lap-puking, weaving drunk driving non-seat belt wearing Mexicans residing here, the least they can do is work at Stamey's on Sundays so we can spare the lives of people walking down sidewalks in Winston-Salem at 3 in the morning.
Posted on April 1, 2007 5:35 PM
Define public places.
Is a privately owned bar that requires membership considered a public place?
This law seems to think it is.
Is a sidewalk a public place? How about a road?
What if I'm sitting in my car smoking with the window down and that smoke drifts into a car with a 3 year-old.
As an ex-smoker, I'm often more sensitive to smoke than non-smokers. Throw in a kid with asthma and you know I loathe the stuff.
However, I rarely have problems in restaurants sitting in the non-smoking section. Sometimes I have more problems walking through the smokers outside.
There are restaurants that I will not go to because of inadequate ventilation. For example: Hugo's, Ham's, and many of the 'sports' bar and grills.
Because of this, I will not go.
I feel most restaurants would be doing themself a favor by going non-smoking. But I disagree with this ban and I think the restrictions go too far.
Posted on April 2, 2007 12:49 PM