Letter: Smoking ban does pick on bar owners

Sunday, May 6, 2007 | 7:04 a.m.

I see that a May 2 editorial by the Las Vegas Sun, "Creating a smoke screen," is again railing against tavern owners who are not making a concerted effort to enforce the smoking ban or are openly flouting it. The Sun believes that rather than "acting like they are being picked on," the tavern owners should just comply with the "reasonable" law the voters have passed.

In regards to being picked on, I think it highlights a flaw with our current system of passing ballot resolutions (and I also believe for state constitutional amendments). Because these measures only require 50 percent of the vote to pass, it makes it relatively easy for a slight majority to impose its will on the other half of the population.

The anti-smoking measure passed by a margin of 54 percent to 46 percent.

So now, slightly more than half the population is forcing the other half of the population to conform to its desires. This is a form of being picked on, especially since, in this case, the slight majority has always had the option of not frequenting businesses that allow smoking.

The Sun's editorial states that the voters passed a "reasonable" law. Apparently it hasn't occurred to the editorial board that maybe many people consider the law to be unreasonable and so in protest they are exercising a little bit of civil disobedience by smoking in or allowing smoking in their local tavern.

Maybe they believe, as Thoreau said, "That government is best that governs least."

The government has no business regulating activities like smoking in privately owned bars and taverns, which may also feel that making a distinction based on whether an establishment serves food or what type of gaming license they have is arbitrary and unfair.

Jack Nino, Las Vegas