By Selwyn Duke

I’ve written about anti-smoking laws before and the zealots who often enforce them, but prohibiting lighting up at a pipe convention really takes the cake.  And that’s exactly what has happened in St. Charles, Illinois, at the Chicagoland International Pipe & Tobacciana Show.  Writing about this at ChicagoTribune.com, Steve Schmadeke tells us:

The group [of pipe aficionados] had sought, with the help of its attorney members, to get around the state smoking ban that went into effect in January by arguing that the event was essentially a private club meeting.

The hall is strictly staffed with volunteers, convention-goers were to pay $15 to join the club, and attendees were to sign a waiver stating they ‘freely and willingly accept all the risks of smoking, second-hand smoke, third-hand smoke, and all other risks, both real and imagined, regarding smoking tobacco.’

This wasn’t good enough for one Mike Grady,
the American Cancer Society’s Illinois director of public policy, who said:

"This is the first time we’ve seen such a blatant attempt . . . to
actually undermine the law through legal sophistry.  We’re very happy with the outcome. This is the perfect example that
the law is being enforced."

I suppose this is something many people don’t really care about, since far too many will accept tyranny when it affects only others.  And that’s what this is, as anti-smoking laws are a violation of the freedom of association.  But I’ve written about that before.

What strikes me right now is the unabashed hypocrisy of statist puppeteers.  Grady’s accusation of "sophistry" is pure projection, as he is guilty of just that in advancing an argument that provides a specious basis for trampling important rights.  Moreover, the supreme intolerance of the left is brought into focus here.

Why are anti-smoking zealots so unreasonable in imposing their values?  After all, while I oppose anti-smoking laws, I can understand why many, unaware of the proper hierarchy of rights, would not want those repulsed by tobacco smoke to be exposed to it in business establishments.  But the convention in question is a situation wherein all concerned accept such exposure.

The short answer (which I’ll offer here without much philosophical explanation, as that would take a while) is that these leftists are people who have deified themselves and cannot abide those who will not do their will.

I understand the mentality.  Such people are inwardly enraged when others act in ways they deem foolish or imprudent.  As far as they’re concerned, politically incorrect acts are "sins" and thus cannot be tolerated.  This is why they won’t live and let live and allow a group comprising only smokers to do their own thing in a convention hall rented with their own money.

I know that many will say I’m over-reaching, but I can tell you that these are the same kind of people who, in parts of the world such as Europe and Canada, will speak of how happy they are that a purveyor of "hate speech" (i.e., anything the left doesn’t like) was punished for improper use of the tongue.  It’s all for the good of their fellow man, you see.

Getting back to sophistry, Grady justified his position by saying that even after the conventioneers had left, dangerous contaminants that could harm others would remain in the air.  What are we talking about here, a few molecules?  If this little control freak is so concerned about trace amounts of pollution, I hope he doesn’t drive a car.

Anyway, it may serve these leftists well if they become inured to such things.  Because if they persist in their tyrannical ways, they may end up smoking in Hell.

                             Protected by Copyright