Options
NYC Smoking ban to extend to Parks, Beaches, Boardwalks
[Deleted User]
Posts: 1,074
Forum Member
✭✭✭
Marinas and plazas also.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-20016590-10391704.html
Would you like to see British cities embrace a similar stance on no smoking areas in open spaces?
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-20016590-10391704.html
Would you like to see British cities embrace a similar stance on no smoking areas in open spaces?
0
Comments
It's a filthy habit, and I don't see why non-smokers should have to put up with it in public spaces.
That title is somewhat misleading. The idea had been mentioned a while ago, that article is 5 months old, but its gone all quiet since. Eventually I imagine it will get introduced but it could be sometime yet.
RIIIGHT,
Well, in that case, as a non motorist, I would like to see all non essential fossil fuel using vehicle journeys banned,
I mean your average car driver who just 'nips' to the local shop, that's within easy walking distance, for a paper, or some milk, will pump more poisonous filth into OUR atmosphere on that one journey, than your average smoker will in a lifetime of smoking ****,
and don't get me started on jetting off to foreign holidays, stay home, save the planet?
and what about the factories that produce almost everything in our homes, what about the filth they pump into the atmosphere?
address those issues first, Then start on the smokers,
AHH but we haven't been 'instructed' to think that way.
I am off for a nice healthy non polluting ****.
:cool:
I fully agree!
They could encourage more use of boats. However, I'd never consider there to be 'non-essential' plane use. People are usually travelling with purpose.
Again, I agree. I think more do use flue scrubbers now, but certainly not enough.
Stinky
Hope you find this better.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/02/nyc-smokers-beware-city-c_n_817489.html?ir=Health
Should be in place in about 100 days time.
I could see how they could make an argument about passive smoke in an enclosed area but I'm surprised that they're enforcing the ban in parks or beaches when you're probably more likely to get respiratory problems from all the air pollution from the traffic. The air next to the Hudson Parkway is much more loaded down with pollutants than any amount of people smoking in central park.
I remember seeing a news report a long way back, they had just banned smoking in some public areas of LA in the states,
They were interviewing this woman on a car park near a beach where smoking had been banned,
She was saying what reaaaly great idea it was, and that how greaaaat it was to be able to vist the beach without having to breathe in "ignorant and selfish" peoples poison.....
she was sitting in a bloody HUGE 4 X 4 truck at the time,
I don't suppose they do 'irony' in LA,
:D
Women wearing too much perfume offend me more.
America has almost as large a proportion of nutters as DS anyway.
Come on fella, vapers are meant to be more tolerant
I think if it is brought in here it could well result in less people obeying the ban indoors.
I mean nobody is going to take any notice of an outdoor ban (as can be seen outside most hospitals). People may well think if we aren't taking any notice of an outside ban we may as well ignore the indoor ban as well.
The daft thing is, smoking is legal, smoking raises billions for the Government and people are in no doubt about the dangers these days so make an informed choice, yet they are not catered for at all in society.
Is there any other group that generates so much wealth yet has no consideration or privileges/facilities afforded them?
Yes, it is daft. Indoor (sealed off) smoking areas should be allowed in pubs/clubs imo. Non-smokers could stay out and smokers could enjoy a pint and a **** indoors again. It really is a win win for everyone, yet I can't see it happening......why?
The smoking ban seems to be about punishing smokers rather than protecting non-smokers from 2nd hand smoke.
I'm afraid it has a very vocal and aggressive lobby group and in this modern world where fear is played on to the extent that there is danger around every corner, any free will or self choice is stamped on. "It's for your own good you know" is the mantra.
The anti smokers are also very vocal and the sight of a cigarette sets them off, even if they can't smell it or are even near it. Sometimes I think it's the thought of telling others what to do that excites them, not the cigarette offending them.
I can't disagree. Fortunately there are more internet warrior anti-smokers, than ones in the real world though
As you say it's all about having power over others a lot of the time.
Right on cue
It's amazing how many people don't smoke in their home.
Ask them why?
The normal answer will include the smell, dirty wallpaper/furniture, health
They should give up then. I don't want my lungs turning black or my clothes stinking.
As long as at the same time people dropping litter on the pavement, people dropping chewing gum on the pavement and people allowing their dogs to defecate on the pavement were arrested by special armies of enforcers.
Otherwise, no.
Lol, you're worried about a bit of **** smoke outside doing that, when the air is thick with pollution of various kinds
There was a TV documentary a while back where they got a machine that 'sucked' air through filter paper. They put it next to a road for an hour and then showed the filter paper. Now that was black.
How would your lungs turn black or your clothes stink because other people smoke in their homes?
As for the main story, nothing's happened as far as i'm aware. Of course New York City would have zero pollution if it wasn't for smokers. :rolleyes:
Why should smokers have to suffer because you don't want to alter your route by a few paces to avoid their smoke?
Why 'especially' children? Do they have more intrinsic value than adults?