Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (15678)	1/21/1998 12:09:00 AM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

If an adult, willfully walks into a bar or Restaurant (which has a sign clearly displayed) and breathes second hand smoke, it's considered dangerous to the point that we need laws to protect that person. Meaning banning the behavior. But if a child, without any choice steps into a car with his/her parents and breathes second hand smoke, we must first prove that the smoke is doing the child some harm before a law should be passed?? And this makes sense to you?? Alexa, although we have argued back and forth on this issue. You scoring your points and (hopefully) I scoring mine. This point, it seems to me, is at the heart of this debate. I believe I have a comprimise....:-) First the major question is Does second hand smoke constitute a real public health problem? And What levels of second hand smoke are dangerous? Surely there is some scientific evidence to suggest that concentrations above or below a certain ppm level can be arrived at. Shoot! I bet with a 6 month grant Alex could figure it out pretty well! Then after the scientific data has been objectively analyzed, invent (which I'm sure someone has already) a device which measures second hand smoke, and require them to be placed in bars or Restaurants. Set a reasonable limit to exposure, and voluntarily ask the establishment to not exceed this level? Sounds allot better than forcing everyone to adhere to anti-smokers dictates. And I bet since it's voluntary, and a reasonable compromise, people would actually self-enforce it. e.g. Whoops, alarm went off, ok you guys take the next smoke outside will ya? Michael