In "Thank You for Smoking," Nick Naylor responds to a warning about exposing his son to secondhand smoke with derision: "Brad, I'm his father. You're the guy f**king his mom." That sort of callousness seems to inform the attitudes of many smokers at the College toward passive smoking. While the number of students here who smoke regularly isn't particularly high (at any stretch of the imagination not more than a fifth of all students), a prominent number of those who do consistently display an inexcusable lack of consideration for fellow students.

We are confident that most, if not all, students at the College understand the health risks that attend exposure to secondhand smoke; the recent (Feb. 12) findings of a relevant study commissioned by the University of Nottingham (U.K.) should astound no one. Passive smoking, it appears, increases the incidence of heart disease by up to 30 percent. We can add that statistic to a long list of secondhand smoke's documented effects, the best known of which is the sharply increased risk of lung cancer. The average student may not be aware, however, that passive smoking represents the third leading cause of preventable death in the U.S.

Thus the guy who draws on his cigarette at the entrance to Moore, your neighbor who smokes up her suite in Stone and that Val worker who puffs away at the rear entrance to the dining hall are all, in essence, killing the rest of us slowly. We don't think it is too much to ask students to smoke 25 feet away from College buildings, or to expect a little respect for non-smokers. Since College regulations are quite unambiguous on this matter, we can only conclude that certain students willfully subordinate the welfare of the general student body to individual convenience.

The administration's current line on smoking offenses hardly helps the problem. A trip to the Dean of Students' office and a slap on the wrist for smoking within the 25-feet bounds are, we think, at best inadequate. To compound matters, few errant smokers ever actually make the trip; conceivably still fewer feel any moral compunctions for poisoning other students. The installation of smart smoke detectors-that send a signal in event of tampering-in the Socials in the near future should eliminate the occurrence of students smoking in dorms, but what of those smokers who linger by entrances and trash bins?

Perhaps a tougher stance on irresponsible smoking is the answer. We imagine hefty fines, greater vigilance or even the designation of specific "smoking areas" may do the trick. Yet, Campus Police doubtlessly have weightier issues on which to spend their time, and really, no one should have to coerce errant smokers toward a state of affairs acceptable to everyone. At the moment, we think forceful reminders are required to preserve students' wellbeing; if these individuals continue to prove themselves incapable of thoughtfulness, then a course of punitive measures must be in order.