Unintended Consequences: The Killer Smoking Ban
Smoking bans are created with the best of intentions, but it can be effectively argued that business owners should be allowed to determine smoking policy and let market forces (i.e. public preferences) take care of penalizing businesses that are filled with smoke.
And now we have another reason to think twice about no smoking ordinances as public policy: America’s smoking bans are causing fatal accidents.
According to an article in the April 5th edition of The Economist two researchers at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee have determined that there is a correlation between smoking bans and increased traffic fatalities involving alcohol. They hypothesize that the increases may be the result of smokers driving farther to and from bars where smoking is allowed.
Read the full article, “Unlucky Strikes,” in The Economist online.
Filed under: Alaska Politics | Tagged: cigarette, second-hand smoke, smoking, smoking ban
Hmmmmmm so what is the problem here:
a. The fact that smoking is banned in some pubs and not others.
b. The fact that smoking is not banned everywhere to begin with.
c. The fact that smoking is banned at all.
Here in Australia, we got out a blanket, cant smoke in pubs/clubs bann implemented last year… It is going with varying success but I think it is going a lot better than certain clubs banning and others not. That will just get customers angry… With a blanket ban everywhere, clubs are not at fault and the consumer has to look at himself and realize that the only place he can smoke is in his own home…
Everyone wins! (sort of?)
Anyhow, keep up the great work dude
The courts have decided that no restaurateur has a right to kill their customers with drifting smoke. They don’t bother to consider that the goddam smoke is harmless.
I keep hoping the Supreme Court will pull the plug on the Fraud of the Cernury. But then I’m not holding my breath.
Good logic there PKay; we could also point out that correlation doesn’t necessarily show causation, but I haven’t read the actual study. The story does, however, illustrate that sometimes the results of legislation are not exactly what we intended.
Smoking is widely unpopular in the U.S. today. Therefore, I think just letting market forces work will do the job.
I know a lot of folks who just won’t go into a restaurant that smells like smoke. As a result, the majority of restaurants and businesses that I am familiar with are non-smoking establishments regardless of the local laws.
My perception: Since smoking is still legal, I’d prefer to see more anti-smoking education and less anti-smoking legislation.
If you smoke, you’re welcome to visit this site’s smoking section: http://www.rogermaynard.com/smoking.htm
If the only place a smoker can smoke is at home, why would he go out and suffer?
Those wimps who meekly step out into the cold to smoke will soon tire of that outrage and party at home. So bring on your blanket bans and let’s get a rebellion going.
Saying that smoking bans cause car accidents is like saying buying a gun kills people.