n0nsensical

Still, there's a substantial difference between places on private property that are open to the public and those that aren't. For example, it's legal to say you won't allow any black people in your private home on private property, but it's illegal to say you won't allow any black people in your open-to-the-public restaurant on private property. Another more related example is that it's perfectly fine to have rats and cockroaches in your kitchen when you prepare your own food which wasn't properly refrigerated, but a restaurant can be shut down for having the same situation itself.

Since I usually do lean libertarian, I have some sympathy for the pro-smoking argument. The public health argument for banning smoking isn't as strong as for banning unsanitary conditions, but I still think it's valid. Maybe I would have a different opinion if I was a smoker. It's certainly nice to live in a place where smoking is banned, though to me the smoke isn't nearly as bad as the cigarette butts which smokers are determined to litter over every square foot of the planet, so I'd like to see littering laws enforced once in a while along with the smoking ban. I live for the day I see somebody get a $1,000 fine for littering a butt. (hey, I finally thought of an answer for that thread in Living!) I once went to a bar in a state where smoking wasn't banned. I made the mistake of bringing a leather jacket into this place and it reeked for a week. And there are certainly places even in California I go where illegal smoking is tolerated, but it's never nearly as bad as in a full-on smoking state, and it also helps that it's not tobacco but something else that a lot of people are smoking. Is that making things stink a property of tobacco itself or the shit that's added to cigarettes? Dried tobacco leaves themselves don't smell nearly as much as say, cannabis buds, yet you can burn down all the cannabis you want and you wouldn't know it the next day.