Ah! Shut up shut up shut up!

Ok, I don't smoke. But I'm thinking about taking it up just to piss people like this off.

Today I got a letter in response to an article opposing the proposed smoking ban in D.C. It went like this:

Harry Jaffe ("Schwartz fired up over smoking ban") sounds as much like one of the tobacco people as human rights' violator, Carol Schwartz. Obviously both are in favor of continuing to violate everyone's long-standing RIGHT to smoke-free air. Perhaps Jaffe is as brain damaged from tobacco addiction as is Schwartz.

Both of these people also deny the truth: that smoke-free air has ALWAYS been good for people and for business. All public places and workplaces - indoors and out - should be smoke-free, without exemption or exception. Only the tobacco people and their "friends" continue to dispute the facts.

The 'tobacco people'? Are you frigging kidding me? Brain damaged by tobacco addiction? This kind of wide-eyed radicalism SERIOUSLY pisses me off. But, as it's my job to engage these people in a dialogue, I responded thusly:

Thank you for your letter to the Examiner. We appreciate your readership. In regards to your letter, do you believe that business owners should have the right to decide whether or not to make their establishments smoke-free? People are not forced to enter such establishments, so shouldn't people be given the choice as to whether or not they want to spend their money in such a place? Your thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

I thought I was pretty reasonable, but apparently that warranted this response:

Do you believe that "business owners" (any that complain about toxic tobacco smoke are usually fronts for the tobacco people) should also regulate how much salmonella is in the chicken, how many rats are in the kitchen and how many cockroaches are in the dining area? This is not about spending your money in an establishment, this is about breathing deadly toxic tobacco smoke. Please, stick to the subject.

People are not "forced" to enter our nation's roadways, either, but we have laws governing vehicle operation, drinking and driving, etc.

Is your publication financed by the tobacco people? You are certainly using the same tired rhetoric that we have heard so many times. Are you in favor of continuing to let toxic tobacco smoke kill 65,000 innocent Americans every year? How pathetic!

Like I said, I don't smoke, but that pissed me off. First of all, her argument is stupid. Business owners do regulte how much salmonella is in the chicken, rats in the kitchen, roaches in the room, yata yata yata. If those things were high, no one would eat at that restaurant. You don't need government regulation to enforce that.

And her argument that no on is forced onto the roads is irrelevant. First of all, roads are funded by tax payer dollars, and thus can be regulated by the government because the government built them. Businesses are private, just like homes. And while smoking is a legal practice, the government should have no more right to regulate smoking in private businesses than it does to regulate smoking in private homes.

People like this crazy woman who advocate government regulation in private enterprises, especially to this degree, are completely nuts. Yes, smoking causes cancer and kills people. But anyone who's started smoking in the last 20 years knows this. If they choose to do it anyway, it's their business.

I don't understand the rabid opposition to smoking in bars and restaurants. If you don't want to be exposed to second hand smoke, here's an idea -- DON'T GO INTO THOSE BUILDINGS. Eat somewhere else. Holy crap. Just stop yelling. It's smoke, not the plague.

Ugh...this makes me wanna go buy a giant cigar and smoke it right in that woman's living room.