NYC Bans Smoking in Public Parks and Beaches

[BensonHedges]

Curious what some of the thoughts on this is from non-New Yorkers (and NYC folks, feel free to weigh in too).

NYC bans smoking in parks and on beaches (http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2011/02/02/nyc-expected-to-ban-smoking-in-parks-beaches/)

[Kozzy333]

They are debating this in Hamilton too. Personally I think it might be going too far. I don't think it should be banned in restaurants or bars, the owner should decide that.

[saysmydoctor]

It's fucking stupid and with the other issues in the city, I find it disgusting the City Council wasted time worrying about this trivial bullshit.

[Kozzy333]

Second hand smoking is bad says my doctor.

Ba dum tish.

[spiffa0]

If people want to kill themselves, let them

[BensonHedges]

If people want to kill themselves, let them

I think the issue in this case, and the reason for the ruling, is that it's no longer just about the smoker, but anyone around that can't avoid the smoke.

[spiffa0]

I think the issue in this case, and the reason for the ruling, is that it's no longer just about the smoker, but anyone around that can't avoid the smoke.

I know. I hate smokers.

[Jake Gyllenhaal]

As a non-smoker, I have no objection.

[zion the lion]

I see where they're going with this, in a few years third hand smoke in public will be banned too.

I really dont know why I scrolled down to the comments section.

[KingsCrossing]

As a non-smoker, I have no objection.

Same.

But, on the other hand, if there really aren't any health risks to outdoor secondhand smoke then this is pretty stupid.

[Jake Gyllenhaal]

Same.

But, on the other hand, if there really aren't any health risks to outdoor secondhand smoke then this is pretty stupid.

I'm not one of those anti-smoking crusaders. Smokers are fully aware of the consequences of smoking. So there is no point in trying to persuade them to quit. What they do in the privacy of their own home is their business. But second hand smoke is another issue. I'm glad more establishments have banned smoking.

[KingsCrossing]

I'm not one of those anti-smoking crusaders. Smokers are fully aware of the consequences of smoking. So there is no point in trying to persuade them to quit. What they do in the privacy of their own home is their business. But second hand smoke is another issue. I'm glad more establishments have banned smoking.

Agreed 100%. I'm just curious about the actual evidence of health risks associated with secondhand smoke when it's outdoors. I understand others can find it disgusting, but that should not be the sole reason to ban it completely.

[Scrandon]

Never really been bothered by someone smoking outside, this sounds excessive.

[Jake Gyllenhaal]

Agreed 100%. I'm just curious about the actual evidence of health risks associated with secondhand smoke when it's outdoors. I understand others can find it disgusting, but that should not be the sole reason to ban it completely.

I see what you're getting at. It would be an inconvenience for smokers who are smoking away from non-smokers. But like I said, such a ban has no impact on me, so no objection. I'm also interested in smoking stats for each age group. I'd imagine that younger generations aren't smoking.

[BensonHedges]

Agreed 100%. I'm just curious about the actual evidence of health risks associated with secondhand smoke when it's outdoors. I understand others can find it disgusting, but that should not be the sole reason to ban it completely.

There's been plenty of times when I've been in a park and someone has come to sit close enough to me that their smoke was unavoidable. Anyone who's been to Central Park in May knows how close quarters it can get, so I would imagine cases like this were the basis for this law. You're sitting down, relaxing in the sun and then someone takes the patch of grass next to you and light up a cig and it starts blowing in your face.

I think the best way to go about this would be to designate smoking areas in the larger parks. There's no reason why ALL of Central Park needs to be smoke free. There's also no reason why anyone should find it necessary to go through Times Square, which will fall under this law, with a lit cigarette.

[KingsCrossing]

There's been plenty of times when I've been in a park and someone has come to sit close enough to me that their smoke was unavoidable. Anyone who's been to Central Park in May knows how close quarters it can get, so I would imagine cases like this were the basis for this law. You're sitting down, relaxing in the sun and then someone takes the patch of grass next to you and light up a cig and it starts blowing in your face.

I think the best way to go about this would be to designate smoking areas in the larger parks. There's no reason why ALL of Central Park needs to be smoke free. There's also no reason why anyone should find it necessary to go through Times Square, which will fall under this law, with a lit cigarette.

All good points. I can get down with the bolded part in particular. I also think that would make the most sense, though I'm not sure I could see it actually happening.

[Smash Adams]

There's been plenty of times when I've been in a park and someone has come to sit close enough to me that their smoke was unavoidable. Anyone who's been to Central Park in May knows how close quarters it can get, so I would imagine cases like this were the basis for this law. You're sitting down, relaxing in the sun and then someone takes the patch of grass next to you and light up a cig and it starts blowing in your face.

I think the best way to go about this would be to designate smoking areas in the larger parks. There's no reason why ALL of Central Park needs to be smoke free. There's also no reason why anyone should find it necessary to go through Times Square, which will fall under this law, with a lit cigarette.
There's no reason to go to Time Square in general :-d
And yeah designated sections sounds smart, would this apply to Summerstage too? I can't see that going well

[ohitsmark]

Inside is one thing, outside is another. We do have options to either get up and move or like BensonHedges said, make designated places like restaurants do.

[Dan1234]

They are debating this in Hamilton too. Personally I think it might be going too far. I don't think it should be banned in restaurants or bars, the owner should decide that.

I agree. If you open up your own bar, you should be able to decide if you want it to let people smoke in it or not. The government shouldn't come in and tell people how to run their own shit. If you don't like smoke.... don't go to that bar. I never understood how this became a liberal cause because it seems they are always striving for freedom of choice and conservatives are always the ones telling everyone else how to live their social lives.

[BensonHedges]

There's no reason to go to Time Square in general :-d
And yeah designated sections sounds smart, would this apply to Summerstage too? I can't see that going well

Trust, I agree but that's where I work, so I unfortunately have to deal with it and all of its (many) annoyances on a daily basis. At least Christmas season is over.

I would imagine it would have to apply to Summerstage too, but I can't imagine they would be able to enforce it that well in that kind of setting.

[Scrandon]

I haven't seen a restaurant with a smoking section in a long time.

[BensonHedges]

I haven't seen a restaurant with a smoking section in a long time.

Smoking in restaurants and bars is already banned here, so this law is limiting where smokers can go even more.

[TheRealJohnOC]

I'm pretty sure the exhaust from all the cars in NYC hurts you a lot more than someone's second hand smoke.

[CollectiveConfusion]

I'm not a smoker, but I've got to say that this is bullshit.

[bobsheiskawy]

Inside is one thing, outside is another. We do have options to either get up and move or like BensonHedges said, make designated places like restaurants do.
the point is that if you're somewhere public, you shouldn't have to move because of someone else's habit interfering with your life.

[ohitsmark]

the point is that if you're somewhere public, you shouldn't have to move because of someone else's habit interfering with your life.

But then people who are at the beach, can complain about someone who has a loud boombox. Or someone talking another language. Or someone with crazy kids. There are plenty of things that will annoy you in life, but we can't all go about banning them or whatever. You can ask them to stop or move. I guess I'm just one who would avoid a confrontation and just move.

[bobsheiskawy]

But then people who are at the beach, can complain about someone who has a loud boombox. Or someone talking another language. Or someone with crazy kids. There are plenty of things that will annoy you in life, but we can't all go about banning them or whatever. You can ask them to stop or move. I guess I'm just one who would avoid a confrontation and just move.
there's often a difference between things that are annoying and things that may carry serious health risks. in this case, it's both.

[domotime2]

not a smoker. not a fan of this

[jwicklun]

This isn't a really good idea.

[apoemtothedead]

I haven't seen a restaurant with a smoking section in a long time.
Go to the middle of the country. You'll find plenty.

[kidinthebushes]

Seems like I read this in 1984....

But Democrats love government making decisions for them.

[saysmydoctor]

Second hand smoking is bad says my doctor.

Ba dum tish.
I laughed, I did.

[kidinthebushes]

They are debating this in Hamilton too. Personally I think it might be going too far. I don't think it should be banned in restaurants or bars, the owner should decide that.

Agreed. I'm a non smoker and don't like second hand smoke, but who is the government to tell business owners what they can/can't do in their own establishment?

[kidinthebushes]

If people want to kill themselves, let them


Obamacare won't work if unhealthy Americans.....including smokers clog up the system. If he had any brains that would be the angle he'd pull. I'm not taking away your rights....I'm just making American healthier.

[zion the lion]

Obamacare won't work if unhealthy Americans.....including smokers clog up the system. If he had any brains that would be the angle he'd pull. I'm not taking away your rights....I'm just making American healthier.

The same thing can be said about alcohol and every other drug.

[Simulcast]

Obamacare won't work if unhealthy Americans.....including smokers clog up the system. If he had any brains that would be the angle he'd pull. I'm not taking away your rights....I'm just making American healthier.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[J.C.]

Agreed. I'm a non smoker and don't like second hand smoke, but who is the government to tell business owners what they can/can't do in their own establishment?

Can you believe they make restaurants pass health inspections?!?!??!

[Steiny29]

As a non-smoker, I have no objection.

Yes, just wait until th government stats infringing on your rights then get riled up

[And Hours Pass]

Second hand smoking is bad says my doctor.

Ba dum tish.

For some reason I always saw that in my head being written as "ba dum ching."

There's been plenty of times when I've been in a park and someone has come to sit close enough to me that their smoke was unavoidable. Anyone who's been to Central Park in May knows how close quarters it can get, so I would imagine cases like this were the basis for this law. You're sitting down, relaxing in the sun and then someone takes the patch of grass next to you and light up a cig and it starts blowing in your face.

I think the best way to go about this would be to designate smoking areas in the larger parks. There's no reason why ALL of Central Park needs to be smoke free. There's also no reason why anyone should find it necessary to go through Times Square, which will fall under this law, with a lit cigarette.

Completley agree on just about all of this. CP gets super packed (especially places like sheeps meadow). I've also been at the beach a few times and walked through a cloud of smokers. It can get very unpleasant.

I'm not saying I support this or condemn it either way; I do see the point of view for it. If it were me, I'd focus on eliminating smoking indoors in public places in every state before having states focus on outdoors.

[perceptrons]

Yes, just wait until th government stats infringing on your rights then get riled up
I'll be damned if someone starts infringing on my right to slowly poison others!

[jawstheme]

If you're that close to someone who's smoking in a public park or beach that you're breathing in their second hand smoke, maybe you could just move over a little.

[perceptrons]

If you're that close to someone who's smoking in a public park or beach that you're breathing in their second hand smoke, maybe you could just move over a little.
In a lot of cases that works just fine, but sometimes it's unavoidable (e.g. on paths or in lines).

To be clear, I'm not sure this was necessary, but I fine with the outcome. I loathe breathing in second hand smoke.

[jawstheme]

In a lot of cases that works just fine, but sometimes it's unavoidable (e.g. on paths or in lines).

To be clear, I'm not sure this was necessary, but I fine with the outcome. I loathe breathing in second hand smoke.

I'm not a smoker so it's not really an issue to me.

[Jake Gyllenhaal]

Yes, just wait until th government stats infringing on your rights then get riled up

I've spent my whole life with the government telling me what I can't do, so I'm used to it. I learned the hard way that I can't walk around the mall completely naked. I can't walk into an elementary school and start yelling out obscenities. I can't snort cocaine at my church service. So yea, this smoking ban comes as no surprise for me.

[jawstheme]

I've spent my whole life with the government telling me what I can't do, so I'm used to it. I learned the hard way that I can't walk around the mall completely naked. I can't walk into an elementary school and start yelling out obscenities. I can't snort cocaine at my church service. So yea, this smoking ban comes as no surprise for me.

Haha, where can you snort cocaine?

[Until The Bombs]

As a non-smoker for all of a month and a half now, I no longer give a shit about smoker's rights.

[derekrvr]

I see where they're going with this, in a few years third hand smoke in public will be banned too.

I really dont know why I scrolled down to the comments section.


I don't know what you mean by that.

[derekrvr]

Okay:
I understand smokers' rights. It is something that is allowed, and they should be doing it. I think, though, instead of spending all the money on making laws, people should put money into researching how much harm second hand smoke can actually do to others. Once this is established, we can make a call, but we're working without enough information.

[perceptrons]

I don't know what you mean by that.
By what, third hand smoke? It's the term being used to describe the invisible yet toxic brew of gases and particles clinging to smokers’ hair and clothing, not to mention cushions and carpeting, that lingers long after second-hand smoke has cleared from a room. (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/03/health/research/03smoke.html)

Okay:
I understand smokers' rights. It is something that is allowed, and they should be doing it. I think, though, instead of spending all the money on making laws, people should put money into researching how much harm second hand smoke can actually do to others. Once this is established, we can make a call, but we're working without enough information.
There's a quite substantial amount of information on secondhand smoke, so I think we can easily make the call.

[derekrvr]

By what, third hand smoke? It's the term being used to describe the invisible yet toxic brew of gases and particles clinging to smokers’ hair and clothing, not to mention cushions and carpeting, that lingers long after second-hand smoke has cleared from a room. (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/03/health/research/03smoke.html)


There's a quite substantial amount of information on secondhand smoke, so I think we can easily make the call.


I'm aware of what third hand smoke is. I was wondering where she pulled out the information for her statement, because it felt like a slippery slope.
But, as far as second hand smoke, I don't at all think it doesn't exist. But we don't know how much smoke is put off, what safe distances are, what effect winds coming from the ocean, salt content in the air, and sand have on the smoke, etc.
At least, I don't have all that information.
And, if that sounded rude, I honestly didn't mean it to be. I'm just trying to learn.

[J.C.]

Yes, just wait until th government stats infringing on your rights then get riled up

Smoking isn't a right, it's a freedom. You have the freedom to do lots of things up until the point they infringe upon the lives/well being of others. You don't have the right to subject other people to the consequences of your own actions. Whether or not I smoke is a choice. Whether or not I subject you to second hand smoke is not a choice. Why are you sympathizing with someone who has a choice over someone who doesn't? Why are you more entitled to smoke than I am entitled to not have to put up with it?

[Mibabalou]

Good.

[joeag1985]

I can get behind this. We passed legislation to ban smoking in public places a long time ago.. not sure how many exactly.

[Scrandon]

Obamacare won't work if unhealthy Americans.....including smokers clog up the system. If he had any brains that would be the angle he'd pull. I'm not taking away your rights....I'm just making American healthier.
Haha what the fuck? This is the current problem that the mandate attempts to solve.

[xcloud66x]

according to research, designated smoking areas are said to create a much higher risk to nonsmokers who pass by than if smoking were allowed anywhere in open areas.

[crackedthesky]

I think outdoors, it's easy enough to avoid the smoke. Inside buildings, I'm all for it, but outdoors? That doesn't really make much sense.

I guess I can see parks, maybe, because there is a small fire hazard (I've actually put out cigarettes that were starting to catch fire on my way to school before; sadly, more than once) but beaches? Come on.

[Kozzy333]

I laughed, I did.

Snoop dogg doesn't believe you.

[zion the lion]

I don't know what you mean by that.

It was a half joke. If they're trying to protect joggers from half second whiff of cigarette smoke from five feet away, they might as well just ban third hand smoke in public which would protect everyone in the room. Both are ridiculously stupid.

[Steiny29]

I've spent my whole life with the government telling me what I can't do, so I'm used to it. I learned the hard way that I can't walk around the mall completely naked. I can't walk into an elementary school and start yelling out obscenities. I can't snort cocaine at my church service. So yea, this smoking ban comes as no surprise for me.

First of all, there really is no basis for society's problem with nudity. Same thing with certain words being taboo, but doing as you say is just a bit far. And, this one goes back to my first point, the government has absolutely no right telling you what you can and cannot consume. That's why the first time the government banned a drug it required a constitutional amendment, because it doesn't have that power. As for doing it in church, that's a private organization that can set rules as they wish.

[Steiny29]

Smoking isn't a right, it's a freedom. You have the freedom to do lots of things up until the point they infringe upon the lives/well being of others. You don't have the right to subject other people to the consequences of your own actions. Whether or not I smoke is a choice. Whether or not I subject you to second hand smoke is not a choice. Why are you sympathizing with someone who has a choice over someone who doesn't? Why are you more entitled to smoke than I am entitled to not have to put up with it?

Put up with it? It's outdoors where it dissipates. And Central Park and all of the beaches are big enough where you can avoid smoke so if someone immediately next to you lights up, you can walk 10 feet away and the smoke has already dissipated almost to the point where you can't even notice it anymore.

[Enolase]

Put up with it? It's outdoors where it dissipates. And Central Park and all of the beaches are big enough where you can avoid smoke so if someone immediately next to you lights up, you can walk 10 feet away and the smoke has already dissipated almost to the point where you can't even notice it anymore.
I have some mercury I don't need so I'm just going to throw it in the lake. Don't worry though once it gets in the water it will diffuse throughout the whole lake so the people who drink it won't notice it anymore.

[crackedthesky]

It was a half joke. If they're trying to protect joggers from half second whiff of cigarette smoke from five feet away, they might as well just ban third hand smoke in public which would protect everyone in the room. Both are ridiculously stupid.

Yeah, all those people who go jogging on the beach...
When you frame an argument in a stupid way, of course it's going to sound stupid.

First of all, there really is no basis for society's problem with nudity. Same thing with certain words being taboo, but doing as you say is just a bit far. And, this one goes back to my first point, the government has absolutely no right telling you what you can and cannot consume. That's why the first time the government banned a drug it required a constitutional amendment, because it doesn't have that power. As for doing it in church, that's a private organization that can set rules as they wish.

No, but they can tell you that you can't blow poison in other people's faces.

[Jake Gyllenhaal]

First of all, there really is no basis for society's problem with nudity. Same thing with certain words being taboo, but doing as you say is just a bit far. And, this one goes back to my first point, the government has absolutely no right telling you what you can and cannot consume. That's why the first time the government banned a drug it required a constitutional amendment, because it doesn't have that power. As for doing it in church, that's a private organization that can set rules as they wish.

If you believe you have to right to walk around in public naked, then go ahead and do that. If you believe you have the right to shout obscenities in front of children, then go ahead and do that. If you believe you have the right to indulge in narcotic drugs, then go ahead and do them. I'm sure you found my response in sarcasm. But if you truly believe you have a right to indulge in these activities, then go ahead and do it. Put up or shut up.

[zion the lion]

Yeah, all those people who go jogging on the beach...
When you frame an argument in a stupid way, of course it's going to sound stupid.



No, but they can tell you that you can't blow poison in other people's faces.

the beach is one of the best places to work out. And I was talking about public parks but you know, whatever.
Maybe you can frame this whole thing in a non completely fucking stupid way.

[David87]

The quicker cigarettes in their current form are outlawed, the better.


Take all the addictive chemicals out, make it straight tobacco, watch the number of smokers fall

[Dystroxia]

In my opinion, all forms of smoking that is harmful to myself in any way should be banned. In the future, if cigarettes don't harm others or myself then I don't give a shit who smokes. That's just me

[crackedthesky]

What I like is that because the Constitution doesn't say "you can't smoke pot," then the government can't tell you not to smoke pot. But the constitution also doesn't say "You CAN smoke pot," so by that logic, isn't smoking pot also unconstitutional? The constitution doesn't say you can do it, therefore it's unconstitutional?

See how the logic fails? The constitution not granting a power doesn't mean that power is therefore unconstitutional. The constitution doesn't say you CAN smoke, yet you're arguing that you can; so it not saying that you can't doesn't mean that the law telling you you can't is unconstitutional.

[crackedthesky]

the beach is one of the best places to work out. And I was talking about public parks but you know, whatever.
Maybe you can frame this whole thing in a non completely fucking stupid way.

Well, the law we're talking about was talking about beaches, so maybe you should actually follow the conversation before you end up saying something stupid. The argument was framed just fine, maybe you should actually read it instead of making up your own idea of what it says and calling it stupid based on that. That's called a straw man argument, and it doesn't fly.

[BensonHedges]

The quicker cigarettes in their current form are outlawed, the better.


Take all the addictive chemicals out, make it straight tobacco, watch the number of smokers fall

I kind of agree with this. The issue right now is that so many people are addicted and I do sympathize with the idea that people may want to quit and simply can't. But, with all that is out there about cigarettes and the dangers of smoking these days, who is STARTING? And why? You can open up an argument that people do dangerous stuff all the time knowing the risks, and that's a fair argument, and I'm not saying that cigarettes should be illegal, but I also don't completely disagree with the idea of discouraging people to start by making it less convenient. Especially when it comes to the point it does where someone's freedom to smoke is interfering with someone's freedom to not breathe smoke. Who's freedom is more important?

[zion the lion]

Well, the law we're talking about was talking about beaches, so maybe you should actually follow the conversation before you end up saying something stupid. The argument was framed just fine, maybe you should actually read it instead of making up your own idea of what it saysand calling it stupid based on that. That's called a straw man argument, and it doesn't fly.

Because I'm a nice person, I'll just go ahead and point out all of the things you missed when reading that article.

the title
NYC Council Bans Smoking in Parks, Beaches
The smoking ban will cover some 1,700 parks and 14 miles of public beaches plus boardwalks, marinas and pedestrian plazas
I counted 5 mentions of the word park, not including the title, video, comments, or poll. I read this article probably 3 times before you even brought up. You just went from telling me that I framed my argument in a stupid way, to telling me that I framed it just fine, and have yet to tell me how this law itself isnt in any way stupid. I'm going to give you a free pass, assuming that you're high or something.

[mike'smannequin]

good

[AgainstTheCurrent]

Me and my friends are still gonna use the "Great Lawn" for its GREATER purpose.


;P

[Love As Arson]

I mean, I accept it. It is just one more law I'll have to break.

[oceanic_sunrise]

I think it's a great idea. NYC has some of the smelliest, dirtiest air in any city. The less crap that's in the air the better.

Plus the city can save money on sanitation by picking up fewer butts that the smokers leave all the time on the parks and beaches.

[crackedthesky]

Because I'm a nice person, I'll just go ahead and point out all of the things you missed when reading that article.

the title


I counted 5 mentions of the word park, not including the title, video, comments, or poll. I read this article probably 3 times before you even brought up. You just went from telling me that I framed my argument in a stupid way, to telling me that I framed it just fine, and have yet to tell me how this law itself isnt in any way stupid. I'm going to give you a free pass, assuming that you're high or something.

I didn't say it never mentioned parks, I said it doesn't refer only to "joggers in the park five feet away," which is what you said. But go ahead and keep talking down to me; I'm sure those of us who can actually follow a thought process find this quite humorous :D

[saysmydoctor]

I think it's a great idea. NYC has some of the smelliest, dirtiest air in any city. The less crap that's in the air the better.

Plus the city can save money on sanitation by picking up fewer butts that the smokers leave all the time on the parks and beaches.
1. NYC has some of the best air quality in the country, if not the best.
2. Park maintenance and clean up isn't handled by Sanitation, but by the Parks Department. I'm not nearly as certain about this point as I am about the previous point, but I am fairly certain.

[crackedthesky]

I'm still torn on this issue. As it is, the space seems big enough to where it shouldn't be a problem. I know someone made an example out of mercury, but it's not really an accurate comparison. Pur mercury and cigarette smoke aren't the same and don't behave the same way. I don't know. I guess I'd have to have more information, like the population density of the areas they're talking about, the amount of problems actually created without the law, etc.

[zion the lion]

I didn't say it never mentioned parks, I said it doesn't refer only to "joggers in the park five feet away," which is what you said. But go ahead and keep talking down to me; I'm sure those of us who can actually follow a thought process find this quite humorous :D

The things you say keep changing.

[crackedthesky]

The things you say keep changing.

No, they don't, you just lack the ability to follow them. For example, 100% of the things you claim I said in your last post... I didn't say. At all.
Try reading over it a bunch of times, maybe it'll eventually sink in. If not, oh well. Lost cause. I have no desire to argue for or against things I didn't even say.

[oceanic_sunrise]

1. NYC has some of the best air quality in the country, if not the best.
2. Park maintenance and clean up isn't handled by Sanitation, but by the Parks Department. I'm not nearly as certain about this point as I am about the previous point, but I am fairly certain.

Where are you getting this from?

Have you ever been in the city during the summer after it rains? The drainage sucks so most of the water resides in these crap puddles near the sidewalks until they eventually evaporate. And the subway air is horrible.

Every morning I walk out of GCT and a wall of smelly air hits me.

[saysmydoctor]

Where are you getting this from?

Have you ever been in the city during the summer after it rains? The drainage sucks so most of the water resides in these crap puddles near the sidewalks until they eventually evaporate. And the subway air is horrible.

Every morning I walk out of GCT and a wall of smelly air hits me.
Smell =/= air quality

I know New York City still has some serious issues with air quality--I'm not saying it's perfect--but compared to other cities in this country: Houston, LA, Atlanta, Washington DC--its air quality is much, much better. Not to mention the city has made far better strides than other cities to continue to improve its pollution problems: hybrid bus fleets, introducing hybrid taxis, etc.

[oceanic_sunrise]

Smell =/= air quality

I know New York City still has some serious issues with air quality--I'm not saying it's perfect--but compared to other cities in this country: Houston, LA, Atlanta, Washington DC--its air quality is much, much better. Not to mention the city has made far better strides than other cities to continue to improve its pollution problems: hybrid bus fleets, introducing hybrid taxis, etc.

Hybrid taxis and bus fleets? I rarely see those.

I've never been to Atlanta, LA, or Houston, but D.C.'s air quality wasn't that bad the last time I went there.

[crackedthesky]

I"m pretty sure cigarette smoke is not a major contributing factor to the diminishing of overall air quality.

[crackedthesky]

Hey, my last post all but solved my opinion on the issue: Why is second-hand smoke illegal, but it's not illegal for companies to pour millions of gallons of nitrogen oxide, ammonia, sulfur dioxide etc. into the air? I'm pretty sure I'm more likely to die of the latter than the former, this seems backwards.

[saysmydoctor]

Hybrid taxis and bus fleets? I rarely see those.

I've never been to Atlanta, LA, or Houston, but D.C.'s air quality wasn't that bad the last time I went there.
You've never seen a fucking bus? We have the hybrid buses here, NYC has the biggest fleet in the country.

Ugh, I used to live outside DC and I have family there, though I'm sure it depends. My grandmother lives in the suburbs by 495 and the Fairfax Parkway. And even DC itself is bad.

My grander point was NYC gets a pretty bad rep for its improving air quality.

[caveBEAR]

As a pot smoker, NYC smokers can go fuck themselves.

[captivewear]

This is just going to be a battle of non-smokers vs smokers.
Personally, I think smoking is the stupidest and worst investment a person can make. When I see someone smoking I see someone who makes poor choices and is irresponsible. But, it is their life and their bodies and they can do as they please with them. Doesn't make me like smoking anymore and I still think you are a moron if you smoke cigs.
I do agree with Benson in that there should be designated smoking areas instead of banning it completely.
But, I do think it should be banned in indoor settings. The health of all people in the restaurant or building shouldn't be negatively impacted by a few people who make bad choices.
so...
Outdoor designated smoking areas.
Indoor banned completely.

[CollectiveConfusion]

If you are outdoors, there is no reason you should need to smoke in a designated area (except for people throwing their butts on the ground). A non-smoker like myself can simply walk away.

[BensonHedges]

If you are outdoors, there is no reason you should need to smoke in a designated area (except for people throwing their butts on the ground). A non-smoker like myself can simply walk away.

That's fine if you're on foot. But say you're having a picnic in Sheeps Meadow or something like that. A few people sit down next to you and start smoking. Should the people having the picnic have to move? It's not a matter of walking away in that case.

For reference for anyone unfamiliar with how crowded NYC parks can be, this is the proximity of people in Sheeps Meadow on an average weekend in the spring/summer, so it's also not a matter of the smoke dissipating into the air before it affects anyone.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3573/3473743577_35d4c7b3ec.jpg

[CollectiveConfusion]

That's fine if you're on foot. But say you're having a picnic in Sheeps Meadow or something like that. A few people sit down next to you and start smoking. Should the people having the picnic have to move? It's not a matter of walking away in that case.

For reference for anyone unfamiliar with how crowded NYC parks can be, this is the proximity of people in Sheeps Meadow on an average weekend in the spring/summer, so it's also not a matter of the smoke dissipating into the air before it affects anyone.



I guess that's a valid point, but you're still outside. The smokers have as much a right to be there as you do, they shouldn't be ushered off into a corner because they want to smoke. If it's an enclosed space I get it. I guess smoking doesn't bother me as much as other people :shrug:

[saysmydoctor]

That's fine if you're on foot. But say you're having a picnic in Sheeps Meadow or something like that. A few people sit down next to you and start smoking. Should the people having the picnic have to move? It's not a matter of walking away in that case.

For reference for anyone unfamiliar with how crowded NYC parks can be, this is the proximity of people in Sheeps Meadow on an average weekend in the spring/summer, so it's also not a matter of the smoke dissipating into the air before it affects anyone.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3573/3473743577_35d4c7b3ec.jpg
You found one crowded park out 1700 parks in NYC. This is misleading.

[BensonHedges]

You found one crowded park out 1700 parks in NYC. This is misleading.

Wasn't using that as a general representation of parks, but more as an example that sometimes, it's not as easy as getting up and walking away from smoke that is close enough that it affects people around the smoker. Another reason why smoking should be banned in certain areas, but not necessarily all.

[Hamlet]

Here in New Zealand, smoking is banned in pretty much anywhere indoors, including bars and restaurants. It's actually great.

Don't know about outside though. Where would smokers go? Second hand hotbox rooms?

[Smash Adams]

Here in New Zealand, smoking is banned in pretty much anywhere indoors, including bars and restaurants. It's actually great.

Don't know about outside though. Where would smokers go? Second hand hotbox rooms?
internment camps

[Dystroxia]

Here in New Zealand, smoking is banned in pretty much anywhere indoors, including bars and restaurants. It's actually great.

Don't know about outside though. Where would smokers go? Second hand hotbox rooms?

Saunas

[crackedthesky]

I guess that's a valid point, but you're still outside. The smokers have as much a right to be there as you do, they shouldn't be ushered off into a corner because they want to smoke. If it's an enclosed space I get it. I guess smoking doesn't bother me as much as other people :shrug:

The difference being that the smoker chose to start a detrimental health habit, and therefore, have no right to force that detriment onto someone else.

Back to the main point, I'd be all for banning it in this park, but I somehow doubt every park and every beach in New York looks like that. Can anyone find an average?

[perceptrons]

Designated non-smoking parks sound like a fine middle ground, though I'd rather they be banned all together.

Or! Force everyone to smoke black and milds, I'll happily get cancer to be in range of those puppies.

[CollectiveConfusion]

The difference being that the smoker chose to start a detrimental health habit, and therefore, have no right to force that detriment onto someone else.

Back to the main point, I'd be all for banning it in this park, but I somehow doubt every park and every beach in New York looks like that. Can anyone find an average?

Just being near a smoker in an outdoor park isn't having that FORCED upon you.. but that's a point that is just going to lead to a circular argument, so I'll just leave it.

Addressing your second point, that one picture is not a clear indication of what an NYC park or beach looks like. By ANY means. I've never been packed shoulder to shoulder at a park, unless I was at a festival. Even Central Park on Memorial Day is nothing like this. That's the main reason I think this is such a crazy law.

[saysmydoctor]

Here in New Zealand, smoking is banned in pretty much anywhere indoors, including bars and restaurants. It's actually great.

Don't know about outside though. Where would smokers go? Second hand hotbox rooms?
Hell.
Designated non-smoking parks sound like a fine middle ground, though I'd rather they be banned all together.

Or! Force everyone to smoke black and milds, I'll happily get cancer to be in range of those puppies.
Wine woodtips only.

[saysmydoctor]

The difference being that the smoker chose to start a detrimental health habit, and therefore, have no right to force that detriment onto someone else.

Back to the main point, I'd be all for banning it in this park, but I somehow doubt every park and every beach in New York looks like that. Can anyone find an average?
It's not typical of every park unless there is an event there that day, of course. Like I said, 1700 parks across the city.

[derekrvr]

What about asthma, though? My dad and I will walk down for a morning coffee, and whenever someone smokes, he starts having a lot of trouble breathing. I think people are getting confused by smokers (those who smoke) and people who are smoking. We don't want to start a leper camp for smokers, but we want to make sure that everyone is safe.

[SLoT]

This is just going to be a battle of non-smokers vs smokers.
Personally, I think smoking is the stupidest and worst investment a person can make. When I see someone smoking I see someone who makes poor choices and is irresponsible. But, it is their life and their bodies and they can do as they please with them. Doesn't make me like smoking anymore and I still think you are a moron if you smoke cigs.
I do agree with Benson in that there should be designated smoking areas instead of banning it completely.
But, I do think it should be banned in indoor settings. The health of all people in the restaurant or building shouldn't be negatively impacted by a few people who make bad choices.
so...
Outdoor designated smoking areas.
Indoor banned completely.
I'll do this as nicely as possible, because my intentions are not to be an asshole and call you names so here goes...

I'm not sure why you would think someone that smokes is irresponsible, but that's your opinion I suppose. I just disagree with it completely. The president of the United States recently quit smoking. Looks like he's made the right decisions in his life and is now the president. Calling someone a moron for a habit they have is ridiculous. I don't like the way you comb your hair, therefore you are a moron. Same thing. Stupid. You can think the decision to smoke is an ignorant thing to do, but to think everyone who smokes is a moron is going over board.

Disagree that there should be designated smoking areas anywhere outside, other than near hazards. Banning smoking indoors should be left up to the building owner, not the renter, leasee, etc, the owner. His/her building, his/her rules. Restaurants seem to be doing fine with a ban on smoking. No one really cares about having to go outside for a smoke, so that's better left the way it is now.

The point that all non-smokers bring up is second hand smoke, which is absolutely absurd. Understand two things: 1. Smokers who smoke their entire lives die in their 70's-80's for the most part. Non-smokers who never smoke their whole lives die in their 70's-80's for the most part. The only difference is what the cause of death is. To be seriously harmed by second hand smoke you'd have to be in a room the size of a small bathroom with someone smoking cigarettes non stop for two or three hours at a time, everyday. It might smell bad, but it won't due your body harm until those conditions have been met.

[captivewear]

I'll do this as nicely as possible, because my intentions are not to be an asshole and call you names so here goes...

I'm not sure why you would think someone that smokes is irresponsible, but that's your opinion I suppose. I just disagree with it completely. The president of the United States recently quit smoking. Looks like he's made the right decisions in his life and is now the president. Calling someone a moron for a habit they have is ridiculous. I don't like the way you comb your hair, therefore you are a moron. Same thing. Stupid. You can think the decision to smoke is an ignorant thing to do, but to think everyone who smokes is a moron is going over board.

Disagree that there should be designated smoking areas anywhere outside, other than near hazards. Banning smoking indoors should be left up to the building owner, not the renter, leasee, etc, the owner. His/her building, his/her rules. Restaurants seem to be doing fine with a ban on smoking. No one really cares about having to go outside for a smoke, so that's better left the way it is now.

The point that all non-smokers bring up is second hand smoke, which is absolutely absurd. Understand two things: 1. Smokers who smoke their entire lives die in their 70's-80's for the most part. Non-smokers who never smoke their whole lives die in their 70's-80's for the most part. The only difference is what the cause of death is. To be seriously harmed by second hand smoke you'd have to be in a room the size of a small bathroom with someone smoking cigarettes non stop for two or three hours at a time, everyday. It might smell bad, but it won't due your body harm until those conditions have been met.

Really? Really?
You are going to sit here and try and tell me that smoking isn't bad for you? And that we all will die in the 70s-80s but smokers just die in different ways? Tell me how smoke going down your throat and into your lungs could be a good thing?
Well I don't know who is telling you your "facts" but here are some real facts...
-On average smokers life expectancy is 7-10 years less then a non-smoker...
-Smokers often miss more work then non-smokers...
-Smokers pay a higher insurance rate. hmmm.. I wonder why that is?
-If you smoked 5 ciggs a day (below a smokers average) when you started at age 20 til you were 50 you would have smoked over 50,000 ciggs. You are telling me that 50,000 ciggs did nothing negative?
-Smoking is a cause in up to 90% of lung cancer cases.

I stand by my stance on smoking ciggs. It does nothing good for you or for anyone else. It is a moronic choice. Period end of story. Don't get me wrong we all have choices we make that are moronic and for everyone who smokes, that is one of them

And smoking should be banned indoors. If anyone who has ever moved into a house were the previous tenants or owners smoked inside you'll understand just how disgusting smoking can be and what it does to drywall, paint, ceilings, furniture and flooring. And it is proven that it does harm people and most certainly harms children and young babies/toddlers. If you think it does nothing then go blow smoke into a little kids face and see how the kids parents react...

[SLoT]

Really? Really?
You are going to sit here and try and tell me that smoking isn't bad for you? And that we all will die in the 70s-80s but smokers just die in different ways? Tell me how smoke going down your throat and into your lungs could be a good thing?
Well I don't know who is telling you your "facts" but here are some real facts...
-On average smokers life expectancy is 7-10 years less then a non-smoker...
-Smokers often miss more work then non-smokers...
-Smokers pay a higher insurance rate. hmmm.. I wonder why that is?
-If you smoked 5 ciggs a day (below a smokers average) when you started at age 20 til you were 50 you would have smoked over 50,000 ciggs. You are telling me that 50,000 ciggs did nothing negative?
-Smoking is a cause in up to 90% of lung cancer cases.

I stand by my stance on smoking ciggs. It does nothing good for you or for anyone else. It is a moronic choice. Period end of story. Don't get me wrong we all have choices we make that are moronic and for everyone who smokes, that is one of them

And smoking should be banned indoors. If anyone who has ever moved into a house were the previous tenants or owners smoked inside you'll understand just how disgusting smoking can be and what it does to drywall, paint, ceilings, furniture and flooring. And it is proven that it does harm people and most certainly harms children and young babies/toddlers. If you think it does nothing then go blow smoke into a little kids face and see how the kids parents react...
I didn't say smoking wasn't bad for you. I said second hand smoke is not nearly as bad as you and every other anti-smoker think it is. Do you not realize that most people who die when they're elderly die when they're in their 70's-80's, regardless of the cause of death. Lung cancer, renal failure, other forms of cancer... give me a break man you can't be that blind. I didn't say smoke going down your throat and into your lungs was a good thing, so what's your point here?

About your facts...
-I can't agree/disagree with any facts about the expectancy of life. There are too many variables in research like this.
-I've never heard anything about smokers missing work. I smoked for five years, never missed a day due to illness or other excuses. Once again, I'm thinking too many variables to be completely accurate.
-Smokers pay a higher insurance rate because insurance companies make a fortune off of the entire market. People like you who whine about smokers, give the publicity to smoking that causes insurance companies to see opportunities of profit. If you think insurance companies are legit, then you're beyond help.
-Once again, I wasn't talking about the actual smoker. I was talking about people who whine about second hand smoke. Obviously the direct intake of cigarette smoke for a period of 20 years has an effect on the human body.
-Like I said before, smoking most certainly may determine your cause of death, but you again fail to realize, that this death most likely won't occur until that person's 70's. Just like you.

My grandmother never smoked, died at 70 from renal failure. My grandfather smoked his entire life and died at 83 from health issues. He did not have lung cancer. My grandmother (married to my smoking grandfather) also smoked her entire life, and is still alive at 83. One of my good friend's mother's died when he was 14, from lung cancer... she never smoked a cigarette a day in her life. I'm not trying to fight with you, I'm trying to simply state that all these "facts" are too broad and contain too many variables when put into the context of everyday life. No one is the same, other health habits and life choices about health make a huge contributing factor to your death.

[open mind]

public parks are for taxpayers......it doesn't matter if you're a smoker or not.....the citizens of any given city have all (theoretically) paid for that park being built and maintained.....so i think all taxpayers (smokers or not) should be able to enjoy the park in the manner they see fit, provided they aren't being assholes that insist on blowing smoke into a baby's face or some such nonsense.

as an aside i'd like to point out the fact that smokers are taxed on an almost daily basis for their habit and therefore probably contribute more then the average taxpayer to maintain city parks. which in my mind means they have more of a right to be at the park then non-smokers.

[open mind]

I didn't say smoking wasn't bad for you. I said second hand smoke is not nearly as bad as you and every other anti-smoker think it is. Do you not realize that most people who die when they're elderly die when they're in their 70's-80's, regardless of the cause of death. Lung cancer, renal failure, other forms of cancer... give me a break man you can't be that blind. I didn't say smoke going down your throat and into your lungs was a good thing, so what's your point here?

About your facts...
-I can't agree/disagree with any facts about the expectancy of life. There are too many variables in research like this.
-I've never heard anything about smokers missing work. I smoked for five years, never missed a day due to illness or other excuses. Once again, I'm thinking too many variables to be completely accurate.
-Smokers pay a higher insurance rate because insurance companies make a fortune off of the entire market. People like you who whine about smokers, give the publicity to smoking that causes insurance companies to see opportunities of profit. If you think insurance companies are legit, then you're beyond help.
-Once again, I wasn't talking about the actual smoker. I was talking about people who whine about second hand smoke. Obviously the direct intake of cigarette smoke for a period of 20 years has an effect on the human body.
-Like I said before, smoking most certainly may determine your cause of death, but you again fail to realize, that this death most likely won't occur until that person's 70's. Just like you.

My grandmother never smoked, died at 70 from renal failure. My grandfather smoked his entire life and died at 83 from health issues. He did not have lung cancer. My grandmother (married to my smoking grandfather) also smoked her entire life, and is still alive at 83. One of my good friend's mother's died when he was 14, from lung cancer... she never smoked a cigarette a day in her life. I'm not trying to fight with you, I'm trying to simply state that all these "facts" are too broad and contain too many variables when put into the context of everyday life. No one is the same, other health habits and life choices about health make a huge contributing factor to your death.

i'm sorry, but it's a indisputable scientific fact that second hand smoke is detrimental to ones health.....just as smoking is.

i can provide more then anecdotal evidence to back my position....as countless studies/doctors/common sense back my position.

[SLoT]

i'm sorry, but it's a indisputable scientific fact that second hand smoke is detrimental to ones health.....just as smoking is.

i can provide more then anecdotal evidence to back my position....as countless studies/doctors/common sense back my position.
I'm well aware of the enormous amount of research done on second hand smoke being bad for health. I am also aware that smoking isn't good for a person who smokes. My original point was that to seriously cause harm to a person who doesn't smoke the situations would have to be pretty extreme. If you can provide information that proves that only slight amounts of second hand smoke are needed to be detrimental to ones health, I'll admit I'm wrong. As an ex-smoker I'm not above admitting I'm wrong if so, and on top of that I'll admit that smoking does indeed effect the smoker. To think otherwise is indeed ignorant.

[open mind]

I'm well aware of the enormous amount of research done on second hand smoke being bad for health. I am also aware that smoking isn't good for a person who smokes. My original point was that to seriously cause harm to a person who doesn't smoke the situations would have to be pretty extreme. If you can provide information that proves that only slight amounts of second hand smoke are needed to be detrimental to ones health, I'll admit I'm wrong. As an ex-smoker I'm not above admitting I'm wrong if so, and on top of that I'll admit that smoking does indeed effect the smoker. To think otherwise is indeed ignorant.

i'm a former smoker myself so i can identify with your argument to a certain extent......but i can't imagine a situation in which second-hand smoke would be anything but detrimental (if only for a short term) to someones health. there's certainly no instance in which it might prove beneficial.

[SLoT]

i'm a former smoker myself so i can identify with your argument to a certain extent......but i can't imagine a situation in which second-hand smoke would be anything but detrimental (if only for a short term) to someones health. there's certainly no instance in which it might prove beneficial.
You're right, there's no instance when it'd be considered a good thing. My original point was not that second hand smoke isn't harmful at all, but to be severe it had to be a constant intake of second hand smoke, along the same lines of actually smoking. Just being outside near a smoker, isn't going to have any lasting effects, and most definitely not be detrimental to ones health. I know I sounded quite outlandish originally, but those were not my intentions, haha.

[open mind]

You're right, there's no instance when it'd be considered a good thing. My original point was not that second hand smoke isn't harmful at all, but to be severe it had to be a constant intake of second hand smoke, along the same lines of actually smoking. Just being outside near a smoker, isn't going to have any lasting effects, and most definitely not be detrimental to ones health. I know I sounded quite outlandish originally, but those were not my intentions, haha.

ahh, i guess it's my bad for not reading enough of the thread and jumping into the middle of an argument without knowing what it was actually about....it's the nature of the internet (and my inherent laziness) i guess.

my apologies.

[SLoT]

ahh, i guess it's my bad for not reading enough of the thread and jumping into the middle of an argument without knowing what it was actually about....it's the nature of the internet (and my inherent laziness) i guess.

my apologies.
Happens all the time. Since we're both ex-smokers, I feel I should ask why you quit?

[open mind]

Happens all the time. Since we're both ex-smokers, I feel I should ask why you quit?

bronchitis every other month or so.
i really shouldn't have picked up the habit as i had asthma to begin with.

[SLoT]

bronchitis every other month or so.
i really shouldn't have picked up the habit as i had asthma to begin with.
Ahh true that. How long ago did you quit, and how are you doing now? I quit to be eligible for a job here in Florida that I'm wanting to get.

[open mind]

Ahh true that. How long ago did you quit, and how are you doing now? I quit to be eligible for a job here in Florida that I'm wanting to get.

i quit about 8 years ago.....but if i'm in a crowd of smokers and have partaken in an illicit substance or 2 i'll inevitably bum a smoke or 2 on occasion (but i always feel extra shitty the day after). other then that i stay away from the lure of nicotine......which still isn't exactly easy to do.

[SLoT]

i quit about 8 years ago.....but if i'm in a crowd of smokers and have partaken in an illicit substance or 2 i'll inevitably bum a smoke or 2 on occasion (but i always feel extra shitty the day after). other then that i stay away from the lure of nicotine......which still isn't exactly easy to do.
That's shitty man. I quit last August after smoking for five years, and haven't had one since. I was never one to believe the "smoking's addictive" stigma, so it was rather easy to just not buy them anymore. I do feel like having one every now and then, but it passes shortly afterwards.

[open mind]

That's shitty man. I quit last August after smoking for five years, and haven't had one since. I was never one to believe the "smoking's addictive" stigma, so it was rather easy to just not buy them anymore. I do feel like having one every now and then, but it passes shortly afterwards.

some things are easier to quit then others in my experience. quitting thc was no problem, caffeine is damn near impossible since it's still the most socially acceptable drug, nicotine is a bit easier.......and crank is impossible for me to get off of.

just playing with the crank bit...sorry if you didn't find it humorous.

[SLoT]

some things are easier to quit then others in my experience. quitting thc was no problem, caffeine is damn near impossible since it's still the most socially acceptable drug, nicotine is a bit easier.......and crank is impossible for me to get off of.

just playing with the crank bit...sorry if you didn't find it humorous.
I've never smoked anything other than cigarettes, but I think the addiction to cigarettes is psychological. I could very well be wrong, but for me, it wasn't a physical addiction. I quit drinking regular coke a few years ago, but I'm still drinking diet heavily. I think drinks/food are the hardest addictions to get under control. And yes, I did find the crank comment funny.

[open mind]

I've never smoked anything other than cigarettes, but I think the addiction to cigarettes is psychological. I could very well be wrong, but for me, it wasn't a physical addiction. I quit drinking regular coke a few years ago, but I'm still drinking diet heavily. I think drinks/food are the hardest addictions to get under control. And yes, I did find the crank comment funny.

when i quit smoking i slept for 2 weeks straight so for me it was a physical thing.

[SLoT]

when i quit smoking i slept for 2 weeks straight so for me it was a physical thing.
Two weeks straight... like a coma?

[open mind]

Two weeks straight... like a coma?

not a coma, but i had no energy. i'd get up and drink a glass of water or 2, maybe eat a meal....and then go back to sleep for 10 hours.

rinse and repeat until my body got used to not having nicotine in it.

i would guess that most people seeking to quit that had alot of free time on their hands would love those withdrawal symptoms.

[Broken Parachute]

The only place smoking bugs me is in hotels. I can live with smoke at a bar or in a restaurant or in a park, but one time I was forced to stay in a hotel room that was 'smoking allowed' due to lack of space and the smell made me want to gag. My little sister has asthma too so it bugged her.

[saysmydoctor]

some things are easier to quit then others in my experience. quitting thc was no problem, caffeine is damn near impossible since it's still the most socially acceptable drug, nicotine is a bit easier.......and crank is impossible for me to get off of.

just playing with the crank bit...sorry if you didn't find it humorous.
I will never quit coffee, I don't care if my doctor says the next cup will kill me. So be it. Green Mountain French Toast Roast in and around my mouth, all day, everyday.

[Scrandon]

You're right, there's no instance when it'd be considered a good thing. My original point was not that second hand smoke isn't harmful at all, but to be severe it had to be a constant intake of second hand smoke, along the same lines of actually smoking. Just being outside near a smoker, isn't going to have any lasting effects, and most definitely not be detrimental to ones health. I know I sounded quite outlandish originally, but those were not my intentions, haha.
Second hand smoke is more harmful because it doesn't go through the filter, so you don't need to be exposed to large amounts for health damage.

[llwilliamsll]

If it's such a health hazard and they feel the need to ban smoking in public places, why not just ban it all together? Oh that's right, because it's a huge money maker.

Either let it be or get rid of it all together. No need to make smokers seem like lepers, make it seem like they're in the right for ridding of these smokers from public places because of second hand smoke and such, when in reality, they don't care because it's a cash crop. They're just banning smoking from public places to make it look like they care, yet they're still making loads of money off of it because they know smokers will smoke. If they're so concerned about the people's health, do something about ridding tobacco altogether.

As for me personally, I feel it's fair. I've smoked for the past 7-8 years and I try to be considerate of those around me who don't smoke. For example, when walking down the street, if I see a child and a mother, I will immediately position myself further away from the child, not take a drag from the cigarette, and do my best to hide it from view, while trying to waft all that smoke away.

I understand banning it from indoor public places because that stale cigarette smell is indeed awful. And having to come home with your clothes wreaking of it is no fun (for non-smokers especially). Then the whole having to stand 15 ft away, kind of understandable. People are walking in and out of these places and don't want to walk through the smoke. A bit iffy on that though.

Banning from public beaches and parks? At this point you mine as well ban public smoking in general.