Letters: Marlboro's demon

I didn't think it was possible for me to get upset with a staff editorial, but after reading Northern Illinois' Staff Editorial, "Smoke ban must go," Wednesday in the DI, I was proven wrong.

The editorial states that smoking is a "personal freedom" and a personal choice, but there is little personal about it. One person's decision affects everyone. Most people don't choose to breathe second-hand smoke, but they have no choice when a smoker is around. In many circumstances, smokers are violating other people's "personal choice" not to smoke.

The idea of separating a room between a smoking and a non-smoking area is asinine. Molecules in air diffuse randomly until equilibrium is reached. Sadly, the laws of physics don't obey non-smoking signs. Thus, when someone lights up, everyone around might as well do the same.

The fear that the state and local bars would lose money from a smoking ban is laughable. In my home state, New York, and many other states, legislation against public, indoor smoking has already been passed and well received. Bartenders are doing just as well, and the state governments have found other forms of revenue.

I cringed when I read the words smoking and freedom used in the same sentence. Would John Locke have considered inhaling fumes from a cigarette among the Natural Rights? I highly doubt it. Good luck finding an article for it in the Bill of Rights.

As a non-smoker, please respect my "personal freedom" and don't smoke around me.

Joe Puzey
junior in Engineering