I just HAVE to address the smoking issue, even if it IS a thread hijack.

Non-smokers have a right to go to a restaurant and not breathe smoke.

That does not equate to a right to ban smoking.


That DOES mean, that a restaurant has a right, as a privately owned business, to determine what, for them, constitutes acceptable behavior in their establishment, even if that includes smoking.

You, as a non-smoker, have a right to vote against this with your wallet, by not eating in a restaurant that allows smoking.

That's how capitalism works.

Not by governmental oversight.

You have a right to be smoke-free. That's great. But the thing about a "right" is, you don't get to use it to infringe upon the "rights" of others.

You see, there exist other solutions than all-or-nothing.

Banning smoking infringes on the rights of everyone who chooses to smoke. It also infringes upon the rights of businesses to regulate their own premises.

Choosing to eat in a restaurant without a smoking section infringes on the rights of... no-one.


Because restaurants, like any other business, like money, if you vote with your wallet, instead of trying to use your personal preference as a means of infringing upon the liberties of others, the end result will be a huge majority of non-smoking restaurants, and a tiny minority that cater to smokers.

Kinda like the way it works with airlines. Isn't there...

..ONE, that still allows in-flight smoking?

Because they see a niche - every other airline has chosen to cater to non-smokers, which means that the market slot for smokers who fly is open to capitalization.

See how that works?