St. Louis County residents get to vote next Tuesday about whether or not to clear tobacco smoke from restaurants. In Kirkwood, voters take on a separate anti-smoking proposition, more stringent than that of the County. If the County Proposition N passes, its smoking ban would take effect in 2011. Kirkwood’s proposition would take effect in January, 2010, and allows fewer exceptions than does the county ban.

I appreciate a smoke-free dining area. I can’t argue with evidence that second-hand smoke is harmful. I can, however, point out exaggerations from both sides.

I have not made a study of studies, but it stands to reason that frequency and intensity of exposure come into play - and I have rarely seen those cited. The danger from second-hand smoke and a host of other things we ingest is relative to exposure.

Passionate proponents would have us believe that a passing whiff of cigarette smoke endangers lives. Passionate opponents would have us believe that bar and restaurant business will evaporate like smoke if patrons can’t light up.

There has long been a national movement toward smoke-free public environments that will be nearly complete when all bar and restaurant smoking is forbidden. That is the direction of the public tide. It is unlikely that will reverse anytime soon. But the question is raised about how much freedom of living we are willing to trade for ridding our lives of risk - or more specifically, ridding the lives of our neighbors of risk whether or not they choose healthier lifestyles.

One could make a substantial case that alcohol should not be consumed in public. There are the second-hand effects of car accidents that take innocent lives. There are the unwanted pregnancies, the domestic violence and wanton acts of vandalism that occur because someone’s sense of judgment has been diluted with too much alcohol.

We tried that regulation once. It was called Prohibition. It was repealed.

The army of good people concerned about public health could attack fast foods and all manner of sugars that add to waistlines and strain hearts and shorten lives.

The insurance industry and its minions of attorneys could decide that children cannot safely play on playgrounds unless they wear protective head gear. Some day in the future we may be forbidden from walking on a beach without a full coating of heavy-duty sunscreens.

Where does regulation of public health end? Yes, healthy living is to be taught and marketed and lived by example. It is what many of us want. But do I get to make my own choices? Or does your superior embrace of a healthy life give you the right to make choices for me?

And have we found a way to support a society of people whose average member reaches a healthy century of living?

I would like to see the smoking issue be one of marketplace decision. Smoke free bars and restaurants would attract the healthiest of patrons. Those that still permit smoking would either change in the face of client choice or thrive with patrons who still choose a smoky environment. Let the marketplace decide.

So go to the polls on Tuesday. Voter turnout is predicted to be light. Your vote can make a difference. You can choose restriction or you can vote for freedom of the marketplace. It is your choice. And we will all learn to accept the outcome, however it falls. Won’t we?

Or will we take one modicum of successful control and find new targets?