Good morning. Thank you for your activism to support smoke-free air. The Crime Prevention Group feels tobacco smoke harming us is a crime. I have researched the subject since 1978, and published on the matter. There is a vast body of medical and legal knowledge on the subject unknown to most people.

A smoke-free ordinance should say words to this effect, 'No Smoking on Premises or Entrances.' Signs inside buildings should be posted, on every wall, and wherever there is door or window, on both sides. Reason: Unless the sign is facing them, by experience, smokers tend to react, 'no sign here, that one over there doesn't mean me.'

Smoke-free is already the law. Officials need to be informed of this, otherwise, they don't know. Michigan law MCL § 750.27, MSA § 28.216 says: "Any person within the state who manufactures, sells or gives to anyone, any cigarette containing any ingredient deleterious to health or foreign to tobacco, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor."

No cigarettes = no smoke! Enforcement of this already standard consumer protection law, existing law, would make us smoke-free. All legitimate stores, markets, service stations, malls, etc., would comply. No cigarettes would be sold here (except some few smuggled ones). And any use would be conspicuous!

Another approach is, contacting each seller in the area, notify them of the law, provide a copy, ask for compliance.

Another approach is, contacting the police and sheriff departments, asking for enforcement.

And contacting the Governor, asking him to assign the State Police to interdict cigarette-importing trucks crossing into Michigan at the Ohio border, I-75, where they are easy to see and pull over.

And asking agencies to hire only nonsmokers—to set the right example.

Smoke-free is already the law, as a matter of Constitutional right, common law due process. Nobody may harm or kill us except with advance due process, jury trial, conviction, etc. Tobacco smoke kills without providing advance due process!

Our ancestors had more success against tobacco because they took a comprehensive approach. They cited ALL aspects of tobacco effects -- not just the "health" aspects (heart disease, cancer) but the "moral" aspects, tobacco's link to alcoholism, drug abuse, abortion, crime, drunk driving, fires. Due to the 'moral' aspect, clergymen were leaders. We've lost that focus, and need to restore it. I met Rev. Paul Turner because he has that view. Please include education about such 'moral' matters.

Officials (legislators, police, judges) need to be told these 'moral' aspects. For some, a 'moral' issue is their 'hot button.' Talking about mere 'health' is not persuasive to them. But an official concerned about 'abortion,' 'DWB,' or 'drunk driving,' may be more receptive to action on tobacco if informed about the tobacco link.

An official who cares about DWB, racial profiling issues, may be more receptive to action on tobacco if informed about the tobacco connection to drug abuse and crime, and the long-term targeting of minorities into using the starter drug, cigarettes.

I realize I have covered a lot of material, even unfamiliar data. For background, much of this material, with details, references, is posted at our Internet educational sites, linkable from the main site,


pure air law due process rights,

the Michigan law,


heart disease,


drug abuse,



lung cancer,


hiring only nonsmokers,

For success, in dealing with officials, we must keep their agenda, their 'hot buttons,' in mind, and tailor our presentation to their concerns. And we need to remember, we have already won, in law, by both the Constitutional right of due process, and the Michigan consumer protection law on cigarettes. We simply need to institutionalize, enforce the victory our ancestors already won for us.

Thank you / Questions.