---

                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: SUNDAY, January 19, 1992                   TAG: 9201200216
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: B-2   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: 
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Short

---

NO-SMOKING LAWS ARE INCONSISTENT

ED SHAMY'S column (Jan. 7) clearly defines one of the main problems between smokers and non-smokers. No wonder there are so many hard feelings between the two, thanks to the hopeless inconsistencies of the no-smoking law(s?).

One other thing: Why would the smoke from judges and commonwealth's attorneys bother those of us with severe allergies to smoke, any less than the smoke from the rest of us common peons?

What recourse do we have when the smoke wafts through cracks in the rooms, under doors, etc.; or if one of us is called into one of these rooms (judges' chambers, office, etc.) for a few minutes and someone has just smoked?

Where do we go to relieve ourselves if smokers grab a "quickie" in the restroom?

What is done to prevent the smoke in a smoking area from spreading to no-smoking areas in the same room? I have yet to see this one effectively engineered.

Smokers need areas to smoke in; these should be in separate buildings where the smokers can be protected from the weather and have as much ventilation as possible. But to prevent suffering and medical problems for us who are highly allergic to smoke, smoking and no-smoking areas should never, ever be allowed in the same building. PATRICIA D. DEEL CLOVERDALE

---