> to the possibility of breathing smoke, and thus have given their
> > consent
>
> Agree, but when a smoker lets their smoke waft directly onto me,
then I
> think they are violating my rights. I have had smokers tell me
that
> they did not design the ventilation system so it is not their fault
> that the smok is going onto me. I think that logic is just plain
> faulty, but prevalent.
>
Funny. Substitute some other poisonous gas, say, chlorine--and the
deliberate venting of this gas onto another person would be considered
first degree assault--a felony. Why is the carbon-monoxide-
cocktail of gases from a cigarette considered any different?
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
.
__,_._,___
