In 1998, Drew Carey staged a sit-in over a ban on smoking in California bars. Even though Drew doesn't smoke, he did smoke that night and called the ban stupid. Three years ago, California passed a law banning smoking in bars and other workplaces, for the benefit of employees. Drew felt that “it should be up to every bar owner and customer to decide whether they want to smoke or not.” Drew Carey was not cited by police for the incident, but the owner, Irwin Held, was. Held said: “It’s smoking today. ; tomorrow it will be beer, and the next day alcohol. Hopefully they will overturn the ban and give people freedom of choice. It may not make sense to believe such a fallacious statement, but if one person's rights are threatened, then everyone's rights will be threatened at some point. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Video Violent”. Shouldn't games be banned? Get the original essay The California law was passed when bartenders and other employees complained of respiratory problems and eye irritation. Many people who have been around smoke have eye irritation and breathing problems, but second-hand smoke does not. as dangerous as we once thought. Taking a look at the study done by the World Health Organization (WHO), one might understand why second-hand smoke has long been believed to contribute to thousands of lung cancer deaths. March 1998, stating that smoking does not cause lung cancer as previously thought and that second-hand smoke may even have a protective effect on the lungs. (Dougherty) Thus, the pressure to encourage smokers to quit smoking is no longer understandable and taking away smokers' rights is absurd. If bartenders in California don't want to smoke in bars, then they should be allowed to put up signs and take care of the problem. On the other hand, if they don't care about the smoke, it's not the government's job to make it illegal. Two and a half years after the ban took effect, no smoking-related offenses have been reported against bar owners. People complained about the ineffectiveness of the law, but to no avail. The law is useless. The bar owner is more than capable of enforcing it, but since half of them are smokers, they probably don't care. When remembering the 1930s, Prohibition may come to mind. At first, drinking alcohol was banned in a few places, but then it spread to the rest of the country. It remained for several years, first causing a decrease in consumption, then a dramatic increase. Smoking now follows the same pattern. In Superior, Colorado, smoking is prohibited on restaurant patios. (AP November 7, 2000) In Eugene, Oregon, smoking has been banned in all cafes and restaurants, and adults-only bars, taverns, lounges and bingo halls will be considered in November. (The Sunday Oregonian) Smokers will be forced to go out to regain their right to the pursuit of happiness. At Penn State, smoking won't even be allowed outside because it clutters up the floor too much. (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette A01) Soon, smoking will be banned altogether. They surely don't need rights. “Children and their families should be able to play sports, eat in picnic areas and play in sandboxes, free of cigarette butts and smoke,” said Pat Etem, executive director of the Los Angeles Regional Tobacco Control Community Linkage. Project..