Mueller Lake Park Outdoor Amphitheater
Leave Choice to Individual
RECEIVED Thu., April 28, 2005
Dear Editor,
Why do many people feel that the government needs to step in and tell everyone else what to do? Freedom of choice is a wonderful thing, and everyone should be allowed to exercise it. It seems to me that the easiest way to solve this issue is to have both options available. This way, workers, performers, and patrons can all have a choice whether they want to be in a smoking environment or not.
Before going full-throttle in the wrong direction, maybe the ban advocates should see what happens if they allow owners and patrons to choose whether their establishments are smoking or nonsmoking. If bars surveyed their customers and a majority of them were nonsmokers, they could test banning smoking at their location. The nonsmoking majority can have that bar (and most likely, many more) to go to, and smokers can choose to go there if they want and not light up. Nonsmokers will then also have to make the choice whether they want to go to a bar that allows smoking. If performers do not want to play a show at a smoking venue, they can book at a nonsmoking one and smokers can have a choice. Even if a bar owner did not want to be smoking or nonsmoking all the time, they could have certain days of the week or a rotating schedule of smoking and nonsmoking evenings. There are many ways this issue can be addressed without totally banning smoking.
No one has the right to tell anyone else what to do with their life. Smokers have the choice to smoke; nonsmokers have the choice to go to a smoking or nonsmoking establishment. Either way, it is the Austin lifestyle to leave the choice up to the individual. Why change it?
Why do many people feel that the government needs to step in and tell everyone else what to do? Freedom of choice is a wonderful thing, and everyone should be allowed to exercise it. It seems to me that the easiest way to solve this issue is to have both options available. This way, workers, performers, and patrons can all have a choice whether they want to be in a smoking environment or not.
Before going full-throttle in the wrong direction, maybe the ban advocates should see what happens if they allow owners and patrons to choose whether their establishments are smoking or nonsmoking. If bars surveyed their customers and a majority of them were nonsmokers, they could test banning smoking at their location. The nonsmoking majority can have that bar (and most likely, many more) to go to, and smokers can choose to go there if they want and not light up. Nonsmokers will then also have to make the choice whether they want to go to a bar that allows smoking. If performers do not want to play a show at a smoking venue, they can book at a nonsmoking one and smokers can have a choice. Even if a bar owner did not want to be smoking or nonsmoking all the time, they could have certain days of the week or a rotating schedule of smoking and nonsmoking evenings. There are many ways this issue can be addressed without totally banning smoking.
No one has the right to tell anyone else what to do with their life. Smokers have the choice to smoke; nonsmokers have the choice to go to a smoking or nonsmoking establishment. Either way, it is the Austin lifestyle to leave the choice up to the individual. Why change it?
Brian Gitman
