Laws against smoking in public make good policy

I find it ironic that the folk so fond of claiming "freedom isn't free" and other limits on civil liberties are usually the first to wail "It's a slippery slope" when it comes to legal limitations on "liberties" that infringe on the rights or very existence- - the health- - of others (T.O. Acorn editorial of Aug. 2, "Anti-smoking laws have a dark side").

The slippery slope is a rhetorical fallacy that, while popular in modern usage, needs to be judiciously applied. When it comes to public health, anti-smoking bans have been very effective.

There are many examples of other municipalities and cities using them very justly and fairly, even some with considerable support amongst smokers themselves. Of course, given Thousand Oaks' penchant for Orwellian legal constraints and law enforcement, I can understand the editor's concern in this matter.

However, just because something can be done badly shouldn't prevent welleducated and reasonable minds from doing something well that benefits smokers and public health equitably. Christopher Page Thousand Oaks