Rant Space

I really don't like using my blog for discussing college related topics and opinions. While the internet, or at least this blog, isn't censored, the more I hear stories about employers and administrators scouring the 'web for opinions they don't want to hear, the more I worry. But this is just some plain discussion on a topic, throwing ideas around and whatnot. I think I'm safe this time.

The new issue of the school newspaper has a few articles on the possible smoking ban that may come to Baltimore. Its a hot topic to be sure, but so far I haven't been terribly impressed with the arguments laid out by anti-smokers. I understand their side, and their concerns, and of course a ban wouldn't make smoking illegal. Should it pass, people will just cope with it. What bothers me is the way they argue, the high and mighty stance the writers often take. For example, one writer states that "if you wish to fill your lungs with God knows what, then that is your choice". A good part of that sentence could have been removed, and the point would still have been made, in a much more civil way at that. But instead, they chose to insert that little extra bit of smarminess (I wont' say malice, because that seems far too strong a word) into it. I just can't see myself ever getting into a worthwhile discussion with this kind of person, one that seems to take a fair and balanced approach, yet make sure to throw in just enough words and phrases to give a clear indication as to what they feel, and more importantly, how they feel about their opposition. It is very easy to be objective and fair with a debate, but its even easier to be just a little nasty, and thus screw up your argument. Believe me, I've done it before, and have regretted it.

My other issue is with the complaints about how smoking causes some people to have be disturbed while going out to bars. I completely understand why a non-smoker is disturbed by a haze of smoke in their face. But I'll throw out this proposition; bars have been around a long, long time. Quite frankly, a lot of times they're pretty seedy places, where people drink, smoke, and indulge in vice. It seems odd to take that kind of avenue away from people. Why not just support the creation of clubs or bars that have no smoking, instead of wiping it out everywhere? I just think about these princesses that complain about smoking, and then dress up real fancy and take a cab down York Road to go to Craig's of all places. If they expect a clean and sanitary place to get shitfaced - no, wait, that's an oxymoron. Unless they want to go so some fancy and trendy club. That's an option too.

Smoking should go away from restaurants. It should probably be eliminated from sporting events. But bars? It just seems strange to me, and coming from Loyola students, it just seems like the voice of spoiled kids who expect everything to be nice and neat and on a platter for them, and get upset when this is not the case when they visit America's watering holes. If you don't like it, find somewhere else to drink. Same argument they used, reversed. Seems just as plausible too.

So there we have it. In the end, the ban will certainly come about. And smokers will just do what they can.

And god forbid anyone decry these people for their excessive drinking habits, and how I've seen this cause excessive noise, violence and property damage.