So, at least in Pennsylvania, there's been a recent push to ban all cigarette smoking in Public parks, public restaurants (even where there is a bar), and other normally acceptable smoking areas.

Views?

Me, being a smoker, have a sort of biased opinion on the matter, so I'm going to let someone else start the discussion.

Does the government have the right to tell you not to smoke in public areas?

I think so, because it's very unhealthy, and not fair to people who don't wish to be breathing in smoke. But that's my opinion as a son of two smokers.

I think it's fair, because non smokers shouldn't have to breathe in the second hand smoke either.

Yes the government has the right to protect its peoples best interest smoking is to invasive to people that don't smoke.

Howso? People don't have to stand right next to someone in a Public Park if their smoking. And lets be realistic, there are already smoking sections in restaurants and no matter how much you argue, second hand smoke is going to kill you if you sit in the non-smoking section of the restaurant. Maybe if you actually lived there. But no one goes to a restaurant for the majority of their time, so how could it actually harm them?

I understand second hand smoke is bad, but only to constant exposure. Maybe if you lived with a smoker, but you aren't going to get cancer from going to a restaurant once a week and sit in the non-smoking section.

Hard to debate when I get one liner answers. Where's Obdurate...

Hi!

I don't smoke, don't care to, but here's what I think anyways. What are they trying to prove by making these strict smoking rules? If they want to protect people (and the government doesn't, who are we kidding? Gov't is chaos), then they'd get rid of smoking completely. It's like poverty, people throw money at it but as long as we're capitalists it won't go away.
And I'm not saying they need to get rid of smoking. Sure it's bad for you but so is pretty much everything. And we got factories pumping smog into the environment but they're money makers so are we getting rid of them?

In my town they were trying to pass a law so people could only smoke on the bridges. I don't know if it ever came to be, because I don't pay that much attention and I happened to be in Ontario when it was getting really heated (I think they actually protested it, which is weird because I live in a shitty town that doesn't believe in anything). But we're an industrial town and Michelin pumps so much into the air that imposing strict smoking rules on people is missing the point.

So somebody tell me why they don't ban smoking?

Pretty obvious answer right there. With addiction comes constant consumption. With constant consumption comes a steady income from the cigarette tax.

As long as people buy cigarettes, the government isn't going to step in and say "No, we don't want the money from the tax anymore."

Exactly. High five!

I feel like a broken record a lot of the time (or a preacher, OH SNAP), but I can't even stress it enough. The government doesn't care about you, it cares about money. And as long as something makes money they'll continue to allow them.
It's your right as an American to own a gun? Fine! Fire away Johnny! What else are you gonna do with a gun besides kill people? Why would they allow that?

Canadians are forced to invest their pension money in hundreds of military industries, including most of the world’s top 20 weapons producers, which are the leading prime contractors for virtually all the major weapons systems used in Iraq.

I'm disgusted by the government constantly. We may not be living under a fascist regime but it's not because they aren't trying.

The government allows the people to bear arms so that the people can be assured that the government won't become a fascist dictatorship. If George Bush tried to take over America, he'd have to get the army to fight everyone and their grandmother, because we have a right to bear weapons.

My thoughts on the main issue:

I think that smoking should be banned in public areas where other people will inhale it. I do not think that it should be banned in a privately owned sector. Bars are not in public domain, therefore it is up to the bartender to allow or disallow smoking. They should make it illegal for smoking companies to pump their cigarettes with nicotine and harmful chemicals just to get kids hooked on it.

I'm not as much of a pessimist as you guys about the government, although I do agree that the bureaucracy just stinks, and that people are too ignorant to make good decisions. Amazing how such a wild generation in their youth could end up being so reactionary in their old age. Politicians and leaders need to stop being so ignorant, and while I dislike using this term, they need to get "cool." If a kid is late to school, don't make him wait half the day in an office and then have him stay after school. That defeats the purpose of his coming at all. I only hope that the upcoming generation will get that.

And I don't think that govt. is all about money. If that was true, they wouldn't wage so many wars.

i still feel your wrong danger, yes smoking can cause cancer if you in a restrant once a week. its still invasive to your lungs and it builds up over time i used to be a smoker so i can sit here and see the things your saying, because you don't want them to make it harder for you to find a place to smoke.. but lets get real... no i don't stand next to people that smoke, but the wind blows and it blows my direction... why should you get the freedom to polute the air coming into my lungs yet i don't have the freedom to tell you to not smoke? if you want to smoke put a second hand smoke defuser on ur cigarette and im fine with it.. then ur not hurting anyone else... and then i dont' really care were you smoke. yes they actual sell a device you can put on your cig that will defuse and filter the second hand smoke.