Print

Email story

Comment

Letter to the editor

Guest Column

Repeal smoking ban for sake of pals

By JACK BRAY
Published September 20, 2007

Like the smoldering embers of cigar and cigarette ashes, the issue of smoking in indoor workplaces still burns. In many places. For many people. And, yeah, it bothers me a lot.

So, before I leave the "Sunshine and Smokeless State" permanently for Alabama, I would like to take one more "drag" on this topic.

The smoking ban (Amendment 6 to the Florida Constitution, approved by voters in November 2002 and effective in 2003) made smokers put out their cigars and cigarettes, but it has also, for these last, long, four years, put them out of their local bars, restaurants, meeting halls and lodges, where they ate together, drank together and talked together.

As far as I'm concerned, that separation of smokers and non-smokers who are friends, relatives, neighbors and pals, has a different stink, but one that is worse than the smoke that came from their cigars or cigarettes.

What a shame. In my opinion, there should never have been a ban. First, the Florida Clean Air Act of 1985 dealt with the issue of secondhand smoke. The happy compromise was the relegating of smoking to "smoking areas."

Second, although I'm not a lawyer, I believe the ban violates the constitutionally recognized rights associated with property ownership. The ban, in effect, is the government telling a property owner to prohibit smoking on his property and, as such, is mandating behavior. No can do. They might just as well tell the property owner how customers should dress in their place of business.

The only reason for the ban is the allegation that second-hand smoke is injurious to the health of others. If the allegation is true, why are there exceptions in the implementation of Amendment 6? Are certain locations impervious to "dangerous smoke"? Or are these places frequented only by people who are immune and unaffected by "dangerous smoke"? Exceptions repudiate the presumed validity of the medical science that prompted the law.

So now, four years after the smoking lamp was put out, if you will, the smoke has cleared. Even though I do not smoke, I am saddened that this prohibition (reminiscent of the one of yesteryear that took our drinks from our hands) was based on questionable scientific research and is, I believe, a violation of the U.S. Constitution.

What's more, I am saddened by the terrible reality that the ban has driven a wedge between smokers and nonsmokers. The price to be "smoke-free" has been paid for by the abrupt separation of friends and neighbors.

For this very powerful reason, I say the Florida law should be repealed. The Clean Air Act should be strengthened to achieve a compromise that allows everyone to get back together.

And so, as I fly off to another state for the rest of my life, I urge you to ask each other, is the absence of smoke worth the absence of friends?

Jack Bray is a retired broadcasting executive who lives in Dunedin. Guest columnists write their own opinions, which do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.

[Last modified September 19, 2007, 22:49:02]