In response to Steven Myers and Hayley Wynn’s Feb. 25 letter, I have to say that, hands down, their argument for the smoking policy is the most poorly thought out, backwards opinion piece I have ever read. I can only assume they were smoking something other than tobacco when they thought it would be great idea to equate a smoking ban with education. First of all, any Williams student is smart enough to take into consideration the health risks of smoking before deciding to smoke.
Furthermore, imposing a lifestyle on someone is not educating them. Comparing being banned from smoking in rooms or even outside the front door for four years with having to take four quarters of phys-ed classes, which may be chosen, is inappropriate. The new smoking policy offers no options and no education: it is nothing but an imposed lifestyle choice. That is the opposite of education.
Joe Buccina’s piece runs a close second for the title of most uninformed op-ed ever. Three things: 1) cigarettes, unlike candles are controlled flames (like matches) that the school allows people to use in their rooms 2) Avoid bad blood? How so? By angering the smokers on campus? 3) No one argues that second hand smoke is a risk.
What the Record said and what self-righteous people choose to overlook, is that the studies show the risk comes from consistent exposure to large amounts of smoke on a regular basis for an extended period of time. Walking past a guy smoking on your way to Driscoll for four years won’t even come close to giving you second hand smoke.
Put that in your little pipe and smoke it.
Rolando Garcia ’02
P.S. Smokers, I strongly suggest you protest this silly and ridiculous ban by gathering in the middle of Baxter Lawn (located, luckily within 25 feetof college building) and smoking.