The article concerning banning smoking in public places ("Smokers, nonsmokers resentful of ban," Aug. 12) was completely one-sided. There wasn't a single quote from someone supporting the ban, and I know there are many of us out there. There was one quote from a guitarist at Metro that halfheartedly supported it: "I kind of support it (the ban)."
There is nothing worse than going into a restaurant, being seated in the "no smoking" area, then realizing that it just happens to be right next to the smoking section. Most people who do not smoke get nauseated, or at the very least irritated, when trying to eat around cigarette smoke.
With more and more studies showing the detrimental effects of secondhand smoke, I think banning public smoking is the responsible thing to do. One person's right to smoke should not infringe on another person's right to a healthy life.
We've already seen that secondhand smoke can lead to asthma in children. No matter how much or how little smoke that might take, I don't want my infant breathing in someone's cigarette smoke. When my children were babies, I was always very careful about where we sat in restaurants so that we could avoid cigarette smoke. I wasn't always successful however. There were still times when the smoke would carry over and if I could smell it, I could only imagine what it was doing to my infant's fragile lungs.
I think banning public smoking is the next step our government needs to take in order to keep all of our citizens safe. I will be thrilled when a ban such as this passes! I think the article should have presented both sides of the argument. The media are supposed to be fair and balanced, right?