Smoking ban not a precedent for going further

Published 01/29/08

Somewhere out there - we're not sure where exactly - James I is having the last laugh.

In 1604, 28 years before his son granted the charter for the tobacco-growing colony of Maryland, the Scottish-British monarch wrote that smoking is "a custom loathsome to the eye, hateful to the nose, harmful to the brain, dangerous to the lungs, and in the black stinking fume thereof, nearest resembling the horrible Stygian smoke of the pit that is bottomless."

This warning, chuckled over for something like 350 years, is now exactly in line with modern sentiments. Even in regions whose economies once revolved around...

This story has expired!
You can purchase the full text in our news archives.

YOUR COMMENTS

RULES OF PARTICIPATION

If you encounter other problems, please email ewiffin@capitalgazette.com and include your name, username, and any errors or messages that are displayed. The more information you can provide, the better able we will be to assist you.

In order to post or vote on a comment, you must be signed in with a hometownannapolis account.

Report Abuse or Vote In order to allow the user community the ability to collectively rank the value of comments posted on the Capital Gazette websites we have implemented a thumbs-up/down system. All logged-in users may participate by voting up/down each comment. If others vote on your comment, your individual score will go up/down depending on the votes. Initially, everyone starts with a score of zero, and must earn credits to have significant voting weight. Individuals with higher scores will have more voting weight. 0

Smoking ban - February 1, 2008

I, along with hundreds of thousands of others, am also ecstatic to see this day come. One giant leap for mankind! One step closer to our society becoming a truly intelligent one. I'm optimistic that in my lifetime, we'll be a 100% intelligent society. Could that possibly be a bad thing? Why settle when we can strive? A few concerns regarding this joyous day; as we attempt to enjoy our expensive dining experience, we do not want to have to walk through any cigarette smoke clouds at any point in the experience and we don't want to experience any cigarette smoke odor halos follow a person past our seat. These concerns are not limited to indoor dining exclusively. If we're attempting to enjoy our dining experience outdoors, it's still 100% a restaurant (not a tennis court or a firehouse or a cornfield or anything else) and we're still dining.

unhide Comment hidden due to low ranking

Gary M. - Edgewater, MD - Karma: Bad