MISSISSIPPI: ‘Big Brother’ government should stay quiet on the idea of a state smoking ban

OFF THE WIRE
http://www.sctonline.net/articles/2011/02/02/opinion/editorials/editorial59.txt
‘Big Brother’ government should stay quiet on the idea of a state smoking ban
Wednesday, February 2, 2011 1:59 PM CST printable versione-mail this story

Years ago, the Mississippi Legislature passed laws requiring motorists to wear their seat belts and to use helmets while operating motorcycles. The laws were pitched to us as a means of protecting us from ourselves.

During the legislative process, they were debated by opponents who argued that it should be up to the individual to decide their use of seat belts and helmets. Yet, the supporters won the day in arguing that the consequences were matters of life and death and the laws were needed and passed.

Later, the seat belt law was beefed up to make it a primary offense and the debate started again. That law passed, giving law enforcement the authority to stop motorists for that offense alone if necessary.

Now, we have the debate in our legislature concerning a statewide ban on smoking in public. Again, it is the right of the smoker against the state. Only this time, they are not alone. There are different factors involved. It is also a matter of rights of private business owners to decide what happens in their establishments.

A number of cities have passed laws regulating the use of tobacco products in public. Current bans on smoking are already in place in government buildings. That is understandable in that many of the government buildings are places that smokers and non-smokers must visit to take care of business such as paying taxes attending hearings, paying a ticket or some other purpose. Since the government owns those places, it can make the rules in most cases.

Private businesses, by their very definition, are different. No business or property owner likes being told what they can or cannot do with their property. If a business owner chooses to allow smoking on their property, then so be it. Customers who object are free to visit other businesses. The business owners can make arrangements for their employees who smoke while respecting the rights of their non-smokers, but it should be the business owner’s decision.

With eminent domain, zoning regulations and all of the other laws on the books, business owners are likely increasingly finding themselves restricted in many ways and now we have another way that government is telling them what can and cannot happen on their property on a matter that they can police themselves.

The laws passed regarding seat belts and motorcycle helmets are aimed at individuals and when those laws are violated, it is usually just the individual affected. If a statewide smoking ban is passed, the government’s reach will extend much further than just cracking down on smokers. Such a ban would affect business owners’ abilities to attract their desired customers and not allow them to decide for themselves what kind of environment they can have in their location.

It is a slippery slope and this is a time that the governmental “big brother” should remain quiet.