After failing two years ago, Washington D.C. is once again going try to ban smoking on private property. This time Mayor Anthony Williams is supporting the ban. It looks like the smoke-nazis have enough votes to get an outright ban passed in bars and restaurants, but Councilman Carol Schwartz (R-at large) is pushing for a compromise which is nearly as distasteful.

Opponents of a total ban, including the chairman of the committee, council member Carol Schwartz (R-At Large), said the District is unlike other cities and states because it relies almost solely on the hospitality industry and that out-of-state competition is just a quick Metro ride away in Virginia or Prince George's County.

She appealed for a compromise that would protect freedom of choice for customers while moving toward an increasing number of smoke-free restaurants and bars in the city.

So it looks like D.C. is headed for either an outright smoking ban, or a social engineering project that would use taxpayer dollars. Smokers are just too small of a minority to stave off the temperance movement.

As a non-smoker, I stand solely on principle on this issue. I too hate going to bars and coming home smelling of smoke. But I realize that I have a choice. If it bothered me so much, I would simply go to non-smoking bars, or not go out at all. What I WOULD NOT do is use the police power of the government to force property owners to cater to my whims and personal preferences. It's not only selfish and rude, but it's anti-capitalist and anti-American.

Anti-smokers claim that there are no non-smoking restaurants or bars. Not only is this not true, it's irrelevant. All sizeable restaurants have a non-smoking section, and many are completely smoke-free. Assuming that the claim is true - that there is a huge demand for smoke-free restaurants that isn't being met - then open one. If I saw a huge demand for non-smoking bars not being met, I would open a smoke-free bar and rake in the dough. That's how free enterprise works.

Then there is the claim that secondhand smoke kills between three thousand and three million people a year. This is especially dubious since both the CDC and WHO have been unable to prove a causal link between passive smoke and cancer, despite trying to do just that. Both organizations set out with an anti-smoking agenda and were unable to prove a link between the two. And this claim having failed the personal choice argument is usually extended to helpless employees, forced to work in dangerous environments. But personal choice in where you work negates that as well. If you're allergic to cats and dogs you don't work for a pet store, if you hate fire you don't join the fire department, and if you don't like smoke you don't work in the service industry. Life is full of choices and you shouldn't blame other people for choices you've made.

But what is most astounding is how the pleasure police claim that the restaurant industry isn't hurt at all by compulsory smoking bans. As if a trumped up university study or majority rule is all the justification needed to nullify property rights. Come up with a study and all of a sudden you're empowered to tell people how to run their business or live their lives. That spells tyranny, and I refuse to support it.