Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 65

Thread: Smoking Ban for Beaches and Parks Is Approved

  1. #1

    Default Smoking Ban for Beaches and Parks Is Approved

    Smoking Ban for Beaches and Parks Is Approved

    By JAVIER C. HERNANDEZ
    After a bitter debate over individual liberties and the role of government, the City Council on Wednesday handily approved a bill to ban smoking in 1,700 city parks and along 14 miles of city beaches.

    By a 36-to-12 vote, the Council passed the most significant expansion of antismoking laws since Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg pushed to prohibit smoking in restaurants and bars in 2002.

    The Council speaker, Christine C. Quinn, said the ban was an affirmation of the rights of nonsmokers. “Their health and their lives should not be negatively impacted because other people have decided to smoke,” Ms. Quinn said at a news conference.

    Opponents of the bill spoke strongly against it; several members derided it as an overly broad law that would infringe on individual liberties.

    “We’re moving towards a totalitarian society if in fact we’re going to have those kinds of restrictions on New Yorkers,” said Councilman Robert Jackson of Manhattan, who described himself as a marathon runner and nonsmoker.

    Others said the ban would set a dangerous precedent. Councilman Daniel J. Halloran III of Queens said, “Once we pass this, we will next be banning smoking on sidewalks, and then in the cars of people who are driving minors and then in the homes.”

    A compromise that would establish designated smoking areas outdoors was scuttled by Council leaders in favor of an all-out ban. The bill will become law 90 days after Mr. Bloomberg signs it, which he is expected to do this month.

    “This summer, New Yorkers who go to our parks and beaches for some fresh air and fun will be able to breathe even cleaner air and sit on a beach not littered with cigarette butts,” Mr. Bloomberg said in a statement. Enforcement of the law will fall to the Department of Parks and Recreation, which can impose $50 fines.

    Councilwoman Gale A. Brewer of Manhattan, a longtime advocate for stricter antismoking laws, said increasing revenue for the city was not the goal.

    “I’m not interested in arrests; I’m not interested in revenue,” she said. “I’m just interested in public health.”

    While Ms. Quinn said she would look for more ways to reduce exposure to secondhand smoke, she declined to provide specifics.

    A city health department study published in 2009 found that 57 percent of nonsmoking adult New Yorkers had an elevated level of a nicotine byproduct in their blood indicating recent exposure to cigarette smoke. The comparable nationwide figure was 45 percent.

    City health officials say that people seated within three feet of a smoker are exposed to roughly the same levels of secondhand smoke, regardless of whether they are indoors or outdoors. The ban is also intended to help reduce trash in public places.

    In addition to applying to parks and beaches, the ban approved on Wednesday would extend to pedestrian malls and plazas like those in and around Times Square.

    One group will be exempted from the new restrictions: actors lighting up a cigarette in a park or a beach for the purposes of a theatrical production.
    Despite the fact that I will find this personally pleasant, as I've said I think this is a bit too far. And now our cops will be telling tourists to put it out all the time when they are visiting Times Square in NY.

  2. #2
    We’re moving towards a totalitarian society
    Why does his opinion matter if he's a marathon runner and a nonsmoker? Shouldn't it matter even less? I feel as though he was conveniently asked to advocate for his anarchist views.

  3. #3
    Dread (or anyone), what is your opinion on a ban of parking on odd-numbered streets (based on house numbers) until the middle of March due to concerns with "emergency vehicles" (plow trucks) being unable to run through fast enough?

    What if I said this never happened before in at least 10 years?

    What if I said the residents wouldn't even know about this until they got a ticket?

    What if I said that the aforementioned "emergency" plow drivers enjoy going through a residential street 5 at a time to clear out .5 inches of sleet?

    What if I said that there is no way in hell that this will be strictly enforced by the police -- ie, arbitrarily enforced?

    Is this worse than your smoking ban? Better? So-so?
    Last edited by agamemnus; 02-03-2011 at 06:20 AM.

  4. #4
    Others said the ban would set a dangerous precedent. Councilman Daniel J. Halloran III of Queens said, “Once we pass this, we will next be banning smoking on sidewalks, and then in the cars of people who are driving minors and then in the homes.”
    Too right! Why should people be allowed to abuse children in a confined space like a car? Or inflict those on sidewalks with second-hand smoke? Or inflict it on their children at home?

  5. #5
    One group will be exempted from the new restrictions: actors lighting up a cigarette in a park or a beach for the purposes of a theatrical production.
    Number of Actors in New York quadruples overnight

    Last Februari saw an unprecedented increase in number of actors in new York city and a sharp increase of theatrical productions sited at beaches and parks.

    The reason for this surge remains unknown, but Bloomberg opted that a New Yorkers always have been a cultural bunch and the crisis brings out the performer in them.
    I could have had class. I could have been a contender.
    I could have been somebody. Instead of a bum
    Which is what I am

    I aim at the stars
    But sometimes I hit London

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by agamemnus View Post
    Dread (or anyone), what is your opinion on a ban of parking on odd-numbered streets (based on house numbers) until the middle of March due to concerns with "emergency vehicles" (plow trucks) being unable to run through fast enough?

    What if I said this never happened before in at least 10 years?

    What if I said the residents wouldn't even know about this until they got a ticket?

    What if I said that the aforementioned "emergency" plow drivers enjoy going through a residential street 5 at a time to clear out .5 inches of sleet?

    What if I said that there is no way in hell that this will be strictly enforced by the police -- ie, arbitrarily enforced?

    Is this worse than your smoking ban? Better? So-so?


    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    Too right! Why should people be allowed to abuse children in a confined space like a car? Or inflict those on sidewalks with second-hand smoke? Or inflict it on their children at home?
    I legitimately think laws like this are a slippery slope to a wholesale banning smoking. What do you think?

  7. #7
    agrument hasn't change from the first time we had this thread.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnaught View Post
    I legitimately think laws like this are a slippery slope to a wholesale banning smoking. What do you think?
    Hope so.

  9. #9
    Stingy DM Veldan Rath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Maine! And yes, we have plumbing!
    Posts
    3,064
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    Hope so.
    Yeah, ANOTHER war on a drug on the way!

    (Cause Prohibition taught us nothing)
    Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita

  10. #10
    Maybe we can make them wear air-tight helmets
    "One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."

  11. #11
    I don't see this as a war on drugs, but more a war on the litter problem that smokers create. Butts are by far the most common trash you find on beaches. Hell, why wouldn't they be, smokers are literally playing in their ashtray. Litter laws have obviously done little to stim the problem, so now this location is a little more proactive.

    That fact that a habit, that we continue to discover is more deadly and dangerous than we previous knew, is now harder to subject innocents to...thats just icing.
    Last edited by Ominous Gamer; 02-03-2011 at 02:45 PM.

  12. #12
    Stingy DM Veldan Rath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Maine! And yes, we have plumbing!
    Posts
    3,064
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    I don't see this as a war on drugs, but more a war on the litter problem that smokers create. Butts are by far the most common trash you find on beaches. Hell, why wouldn't they be, smokers are literally playing in their ashtray. Litter laws have obviously done little stim the problem, so now its a little more proactive.
    I was really replying to Rand. Totally banning a product that a sizable chunk of the population wants leads to Hell on Earth.

    Not allowing cigarettes in public areas is fine for me, we don't allow drinking in certain areas, but Rand's post leads me to believe that he thinks they should be made illegal completely.

    We saw how well that happened with booze in the US, and drugs now.
    Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita

  13. #13
    I was just posting in general, since the slippery slope argument here makes as much sense as making two threads on the same subject.

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Veldan Rath View Post
    Yeah, ANOTHER war on a drug on the way!

    (Cause Prohibition taught us nothing)
    Well considering the percentage of people that smoke is far smaller, and even then they are dwindling. Alchohol is completely different

  15. #15
    Stingy DM Veldan Rath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Maine! And yes, we have plumbing!
    Posts
    3,064
    Quote Originally Posted by Knux897 View Post
    Well considering the percentage of people that smoke is far smaller, and even then they are dwindling. Alchohol is completely different
    Really? So how is that War on Drugs going? Do MORE people snort coke than smoke?

    Edit: And, so if more people smoked, your opinion would change?
    Last edited by Veldan Rath; 02-03-2011 at 09:13 PM.
    Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita

  16. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Veldan Rath View Post
    Really? So how is that War on Drugs going? Do MORE people snort coke than smoke?
    I'm going to guess no, in which case using your logic the war on drugs is working so why discriminate between smokers and crackheads?

  17. #17
    Stingy DM Veldan Rath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Maine! And yes, we have plumbing!
    Posts
    3,064
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    I'm going to guess no, in which case using your logic the war on drugs is working so why discriminate between smokers and crackheads?
    Is your rage against smokers making you obtuse?

    If there are less crackheads than there are smokers (who are idiots as well) then making smoking illegal will be more of a nightmare considering how much we spend on the war on already illegal drugs. Yeah, lets add more to that, by tacking on cigarettes. Jebus.

    I'm not a smoker, I think it's a stupid vice, and smokers can be very inconsiderate with their smoke.

    However, I don't think they should be made illegal, and thus give the criminal element MORE money to screw us with.
    Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita

  18. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    Hope so.
    You breathe more toxins on the freeway than you do standing next to a smoker. You want driving banned now?
    Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
    If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Veldan Rath View Post
    Is your rage against smokers making you obtuse?

    If there are less crackheads than there are smokers (who are idiots as well) then making smoking illegal will be more of a nightmare considering how much we spend on the war on already illegal drugs. Yeah, lets add more to that, by tacking on cigarettes. Jebus.
    Either that, or there are less crackheads because its illegal so the "war on drugs" is working. How about we just treat smokers the same as we treat crack addicts?
    However, I don't think they should be made illegal, and thus give the criminal element MORE money to screw us with.
    So we should make heroin and crack legal?
    Quote Originally Posted by Being View Post
    You breathe more toxins on the freeway than you do standing next to a smoker. You want driving banned now?
    Bull.

  20. #20
    Rand, do you have citations for all these occasions where you type "bull"? Even some of them?
    In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
    The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.

  21. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Nessus View Post
    Rand, do you have citations for all these occasions where you type "bull"? Even some of them?
    I didn't make the claim, how about Being makes a citation?

  22. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    I didn't make the claim, how about Being makes a citation?
    You expect something sensible out of Being?

    It's just a pattern I've noticed, you dismiss things without addressing them somewhat frequently. Do you know car exhaust is healthier than second-hand cigarette smoke? Why is it bull? Because the big bad government told you so?
    In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
    The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.

  23. #23
    Stingy DM Veldan Rath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Maine! And yes, we have plumbing!
    Posts
    3,064
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    Either that, or there are less crackheads because its illegal so the "war on drugs" is working. How about we just treat smokers the same as we treat crack addicts?

    So we should make heroin and crack legal?
    So you would declare the war a success? Wow, I must have missed the news.

    And yes, I'm for legalizing drugs. Stick what ever you want into whatever orifice (of your own) you want. You just have a boner on this smoking thing, for some reason.

    I would love smoking to disappear, just like anything that is bad for you, even in moderation and itty bitty small doses, but it will never happen. So I would rather deal with reality.
    Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita

  24. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Nessus View Post
    You expect something sensible out of Being?

    It's just a pattern I've noticed, you dismiss things without addressing them somewhat frequently. Do you know car exhaust is healthier than second-hand cigarette smoke? Why is it bull? Because the big bad government told you so?
    And you've never dismissively said "Citation Needed" without providing any counter-evidence?
    Quote Originally Posted by Veldan Rath View Post
    So you would declare the war a success? Wow, I must have missed the news.
    Depends how you measure it. When you contrast the number of people who take crack and tobacco, yes there is a difference.
    And yes, I'm for legalizing drugs. Stick what ever you want into whatever orifice (of your own) you want. You just have a boner on this smoking thing, for some reason.

    I would love smoking to disappear, just like anything that is bad for you, even in moderation and itty bitty small doses, but it will never happen. So I would rather deal with reality.
    I don't think we should criminalise tobacco instantly, but we should step-by-step eliminate areas where its OK etc on a way to it. I'm of two minds, I too would consider legalising all illegal drugs (and keeping tobacco illegal) or criminalising tobacco just like the others. Ultimately - but not overnight - I think the discrepancy between the way tobacco and heroin/cocaine are treated should be eliminated one way or another.

    As for "this smoking thing", if we had somebody saying in the OP said, “Once we pass this, we will next be banning injecting crack cocaine into minors in cars" then I think it would be given a different reaction by most people than “Once we pass this, we will next be banning smoking ... in the cars of people who are driving minor ". I don't see why injecting minors with second hand smoke should be treated differently to injecting them with cocaine.

  25. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    And you've never dismissively said "Citation Needed" without providing any counter-evidence?
    Never mind then
    In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
    The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.

  26. #26

  27. #27
    It wasn't as clever as you thought, I just can


    Ohhh

    You're sneaky
    In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
    The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.

  28. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Nessus View Post
    You expect something sensible out of Being?
    My statement was perfectly sensible. Why wouldn't you expect that from me? Edit: I' appreciate it if you leave me out of your conversations. I leave you out of mine.

    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    Bull.
    Car exhaust chemicals
    Particulate matter
    This is basically soot - it's most apparent effect is reducing visibility. It impacts on breathing and respiratory systems, damages lung tissues and causes cancer. Hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people and animals die prematurely each year due to the health effects of inhaling particulate matter.

    Benzene

    A carcinogen in humans, benzene is also very toxic aquatic life and can cause death in plants. It is a "precursor" component for formation of photochemical smog.

    Formaldehyde

    Another known carcinogen for humans, with similar effects to many animals and birds. In an aquatic environment, formaldehyde has a half life of between a day and ten days.

    Polycyclic hydrocarbons

    The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services states that some Polycyclic hydrocarbons may be carcinogens in humans and animals and can cause harmful effects on skin and the auto-immune system.

    Some recent studies have also found car exhaust can create hydrocarbon-based free radicals which can linger indefinitely. These free radicals are believed to cause lung cancer and cardiovascular diseases. Even with the use of catalytic converters to help break down pollutants that cause smog, it may be creating conditions for the creation of these free radicals to form.
    Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
    If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?

  29. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Nessus View Post
    It wasn't as clever as you thought, I just can

    Ohhh

    You're sneaky

    Quote Originally Posted by Being View Post
    My statement was perfectly sensible. Why wouldn't you expect that from me?

    Car exhaust chemicals
    I don't see anything there to show more damage from car exhausts than from cigarettes, try again.

  30. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    I don't see anything there to show more damage from car exhausts than from cigarettes, try again.
    Not worth my time. You obviously know everything there is to know about the topic.
    Faith is Hope (see Loki's sig for details)
    If hindsight is 20-20, why is it so often ignored?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •