I used to smoke. Started when I was 19, quit for good at 26.

All it took for me to quit was two major lung infections within a year. I'm an idiot, but I'm not dumb.

...

Even though cigarettes are taxed like crazy in Minnesota (which actually did help people quit smoking), that doesn't mean the Smoker vs Non-Smoker battle has ended.

This latest battle deals with Smoking Homeowners vs Non-Smoking Homeowners. The scene? A St. Paul, MN, condo building.

The Gallery Tower board banned smoking in the building, thrilling non-smokers but energizing smokers to the point of taking over the board and ending the smoking ban.

Condo politics...it's like Country politics!


LISTEN-LIVE1311
loading...

Anyone who's lived in an apartment building that allowed smoking knows that - despite your best efforts - the smell of cigarettes will seep into your own apartment.

Lest we forget: smoking is still legal. Expensive and terrible for your health, but legal.

Also terrible for one's health: secondhand smoke. It's something that cigarette smokers share with the world.

At what point does the freedom from collateral damage (secondhand smoke/smoke smell in your non-smoking home) outweigh the freedom to puff?

It's a tough question to answer. My knee-jerk answer is: freedom from secondhand smoke/smoke smell in your non-smoking home ALWAYS and COMPLETELY outweighs the freedom to puff.

My thought-out answer: same.

To me it's a health issue. I don't believe that I should have to sacrifice my health while living in my own home so someone else can sacrifice theirs.

I'm also fortunate to live with a non-smoker.

What are YOUR thoughts? Ned@MinnesotasNewCountry.com

H/T: Fox News