It is now illegal in Oregon to smoke in a company vehicle and the company has been vigorously enforcing the rule. I am glad, although I do feel sorry for the feeder drivers who smoke since they cant just pull over any time they want.
I do think that the current campaign being waged against smokers has gone far enough. I dont smoke and I hate the smell, but we are supposed to live in a free country and smokers have become a convenient minority to target for additional tax revenue since they lack the votes to protect themselves.
There is also a new law here in Oregon that even prohibits smoking in bars and taverns. All the bars around here have set up outdoor canopies or covered areas where the smokers have to go. It doesnt affect me either way since I dont smoke or go to bars, but there is an element of the Big Brother "nanny state" mentality that I find a bit disturbing. At some point I think you have to let adults make choices for themselves and I think it should be up to the tavern owner to decide for himself whether or not he wants to allow smoking in his establishment.
As usual I agree with most aspects of your post and thought process.
I would like to expound on one aspect of your thought process though.
While it is true that we live in a "free country", I believe that this term is sometimes thrown around loosely.
I believe that this so called "freedom" should be, and is the case of smoking, limited when it affects the "freedom" of others.
In this case it's the freedom to be able to breath clean air and work in a clean, carcinogen free environment.
Freedom is only in it's pure form as long as that freedom doesn't infringe on the liberties of another.
So if a smoker needs to go outside or to a designated area, so be it.
Perhaps that's the way it should have always been.
It could even be viewed as a common courtesy, much as other courtesies are considered common place when we omit foul smells.
Does a person have the right to smoke?
I say not unconditionally.