What I want...
Who decides where we draw the line then? Things that you deem as being acceptable are not acceptable to others and vice versa. The government is expected to step in and regulate every now and then. Just like all those morons that were too dumb to leave and got wiped out by Katrina, they all sat there and blamed the government for not helping them
...more than anything else is for us all to agree to use the great gifts we have in our constitution, our legislators, our executives and our judiciary.
A problem is presented; I hate smoke!
Debate follows; Is it a 'too bad for you' a 'well, let's think about this' a 'this IS a problem!' or something else.
A solution is offered; let's ban 'em!
More debate; what does it require; law, suggestion, simple acknowledgement?
People started drinking lite beer years ago because it was available. Not because of a law against heavier beer.
Analysis; would a law be constitutional? Why or why not?
Final debate; just because we can, should we?
Our laws allow us to have ANYTHING we want as long as enough people want it and follow the procedures. We can amend. We can argue.
What we must, in my opinion, keep in view is the process. We are not a pure democracy. Rights of individuals and rights of the minority ensure fair treatment for all of us when that day comes when we are in the minority.
Smoking has been reduced dramatically in this country because of information, public service conversation and so forth without need of one law.
Process protects us all.
