Quote:
|
We were talking about the societal costs of secondhand smoke vs. alcohol.
|
Exactly right. And what did we find out? We found out that secondhand smoke has significant societal and government costs, therefore it is regulated by the government. And we found out that alcohol has significant societal and government costs, therefore it is regulated by the government. Neither alcohol nor smoking is banned. However, secondhand smoke is banned, and DD are banned for similar reasons.
No surprise.
So, to summarize, the comparison with alcohol that you introduced into the argument does nothing whatsoever to bolster your claim that banning secondhand smoke is wrong, by any criterion (e.g. by some "freedom" criterion or some "effectiveness" criterion, or by some "argument by analogy" criterion).
So the alcohol diversion that you introduced does nothing for either your argument or KMA's argument. If anything it clarifies quite convincingly why banning secondhand smoke in enclosed public spaces is consistent with other existing law and is a good idea.