Who wouldn't be for banning a clear necessity for our economy.



I agree, bars should be able to make that distinction.

This post was edited by TeH SaNdMaN on Feb 2 2011 06:09pm

When your actions are predicated on the greater good rather than individual rights, you create a logical problem. By the logic that we need to ban things that are harmful, the state needs to step in, ban cars, and provide public transport to reduce the clear harms that come from cars. Or mandate electric cars.

On top of that, outside effects of secondhand smoke are negligible. I see this more as an imposition of personal preference rather than any actual effort to protect public health.

As an asthmatic I would strongly disagree.

Also we're not talking about making cigarettes illegal. Only illegal in public parks and beaches. Much like Nudity, Alcohol, BBQing and so many other innocuous things are banned.

Grow a pair, please
Pretty soon it will be illegal to be ugly, and you'll have a hell of a problem going outside and being an eyesore on everybody.

Fair enough on the asthma, I hadn't considered that.

I disagree with the ban, really, just because I don't see it as necessary. It's not an end of the world scenario at all, I just feel like it was an unnecessary move.

Lots of things are bad for your health that are legal, but aren't banned in public, including driving, eating twinkies, walking on a sidewalk next to a busy street...

You do not have a liberty to breathe non-stinky air outside, else we'd be banning diesel fueled vehicles and wearing patchouli oil.



When the activity is otherwise legal, access isn't equal.

Bring your inhaler.

edit: also, you just reinforced my contention about slippery slopes. If smoking is so fucking bad, ban it. You don't treat smokers as second class citizens and "move them to the back of the bus."

This post was edited by Santara on Feb 2 2011 06:30pm

Aside from unfiltered SHS(which I know many people don't acknowledge as significant enough to worry about) and Asthma there is the major problem of littering in public parks and beaches. I don't know why new york made its decision but the beaches in LA county and Ventura county are riddled with tons of garbage, much of that being cigarette butts. It's the same reason drink and food are banned at many beaches except in the designated areas.

If smokers weren't so inconsiderate it wouldn't be as much of an issue for me.



So nothing should be banned in public parks and beaches?

This post was edited by TeH SaNdMaN on Feb 2 2011 06:30pm

Eating gives you calories which you need for energy to sustain your existence. Sure some foods are worse than others, but many with ingredients that are too harmful are banned.

Smoking serves no necessary purpose to your being, and it's definitively linked to cancer, Emphysema, etc., not to mention the fact that second-hand smoke is absolutely horrible for the people around you.

At least diesel fuel is powering a machine we need as a society to function.

I feel like that's the purpose of litter laws. The fact that they're not being enforced properly doesn't call for a ban.