|
Free market economy 101: If there are many people who wish to go to non-smoking bars/restaurants/whatever, these are economically viable. Nobody is preventing anyone from starting one, nor is anyone preventing non-smokers from only visiting non-smoking bars/restaurants/whatever.
Why take away freedom when you always have the choice to go to a place where there's no smoking?
Aside from that, if smoking is banned in all public places, I insist that cars, factories that produce something I don't use, etc. are also banned. After all, these are severely hurting the environment and therefore me. And, unlike with smoking, I don't have the choice to either go or not go somewhere where I'm effected... because the effects are everywhere.
__________________
/(bb|[^b]{2})/
|