‘Anarchy” is too harsh a term for lawlessness in defense of an addiction, but “civil disobedience” is way too benign.

Somewhere in between there must be an apt way to describe the kind of rebellion brewing in a few Spokane-area bars where patrons and proprietors are flaunting Washington’s new ban on smoking in public places.

The law took effect on Dec. 8 thanks to last fall’s general election vote on Initiative 901. It makes virtually every nontribal workplace or business in the state smoke-free, including the area within 25 feet of its doors, windows and ventilation inlets. It’s said to be the strictest smoking restriction in the nation.

To no one’s surprise, many citizens who want to enjoy a cigarette at a bar, bowling alley or the like are fuming. Bar owners who fear an adverse impact on their livelihoods are no happier. But most of the discontented citizens have done what you’d expect in a nation of laws: They’ve complied.

Still, the Spokane Regional Health District has issued about 150 warnings for noncompliance and dozens of fines. Only a handful of watering holes stand out as repeat offenders.

Said the defiant owner of one: “They’re not going to change the rules on me now.”

Some like-minded proprietors have boasted that business is booming and the customers are willing to feed a kitty to cover any fines – which can pile up at $100 a day plus separate fees for “reinspection” visits. To hear some tell it, this is America’s tradition of individualism in practice.

It’s true that this nation has a proud history of defying the law when issues of liberty and human dignity are at stake. Patriots pitched British tea into Boston Harbor.

Civil libertarians sat in at racially segregated lunch counters. Protesters in the ‘60s burned their draft cards, and their bras.

But burning paper-wrapped tubes of tobacco over a couple of beers hardly rises to the same level of principle. And attempts to make the current situation analogous to Prohibition are inherently flawed.

Prohibition was imposed on the people by government, and when the people made their strong opposition clear – in part through their stubborn and conspicuous defiance of the law – government relented. Initiative 901, in contrast, was not imposed on the people by the government. It was imposed on the government by the people – 63 percent of the voters, in fact – who were tired of waiting on elected lawmakers to act.

The larger issue at this point: What happens next? What if the bars don’t come around? What consequence befalls the law-abiding competitors who have done the right thing, and why should they continue to do so?

Fortunately, authorities have other recourse. After three violations, a health district spokeswoman says, scofflaw establishments will be taken to court where an injunction can be sought. In addition, the district can make recommendations to the state Liquor Control Board when it comes time for a bar’s or tavern’s annual license renewal.

Washington’s smoking ban is both new and rigorous. As unforeseen impacts are identified, there is a process for making necessary adjustments. That’s the way a self-governing nation operates.

Blowing smoke at the law may not qualify as anarchy. But it’s a close cousin.