[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Search Archives]
Re: Smoking and Law
Poster: Lance Harrop <email@example.com>
Lord Alfredo writes:
> Lord Leifr Johansson writes, in part:
> > While the middle of a list field between rounds is still the central area
> > of an event, it is not a crowded environment likely to cause suffering
> > from second-hand smoke.
> This assertion seems to disregard postings on this list from
> gentles who have had to avoid tourneys altogether because of
> second-hand smoke.
True. I lived the first sixteen to eighteen or so years of my life with
two smokers, my parents. I really have no personal experience with the
suffering which second hand smoke can cause people like Baroness Miriam
and Lady Miriam. What smokers need to understand is that their smoke is
what is offensive, and that once asked to move, they should, without
excuse and without whining about their "rights".
> Is it a fact that flash photography _is_ banned on the grounds of
> obtrusive modernerity, rather than on the grounds that it assaults
> the sensibilities of others? After all, non-flash photography is
> also modern.
OBTRUSIVE modernerity -is- the assault on the sensibilities of others!
Non-flash photography is not obtrusive, and therefore is not an assault
Smoking in the middle of an event is argueably Obtrusive modernerity, and
therefore argueably an assault and an offense.
Smoking near others, or in a manner to drive others away from the central
area of an event, is an assault on their health or their enjoyment of the
event, and therefore an offense.
Courteous smokers understand the latter. Courteous Scadians understand
But on the other hand, I don't always wear period shoes, and I have not
made period glasses, so I shouldn't critize people for obtrusive modernerity.
List Archives, FAQ, FTP: http://sca.wayfarer.org/merryrose/
Admin. requests: firstname.lastname@example.org