The county in which we live banned smoking outdoors . . . .

[Stinky The Clown]

. . . . in all county parks.

It was voted on by County Council tonight and it goes into effect when our county executive signs it tomorrow.

[Trajan]

1. Shrugs ....

I am almost offended .... (and I smoke)

[Drale]

2. Honestly we should be working on getting people to stop smoking all together

how much does it cost our health care system every year?

[Abq_Sarah]

13. I believe alcohol places a higher burden

Cost wise on our health care system but alcohol is a sacred cow that can't be touched.

[Drale]

14. Where are the stats on that?

I don't believe it, while alcohol has its problems Cigarettes hurt the person as well as the people around that person.

[shraby]

34. Alcohol hurts the person around the drinker also.

[Abq_Sarah]

64. According the to NIDA

Overall cost: 235 billion for alcohol, 193 billion for tobacco.

http://www.drugabuse.gov/infofacts/understand.html

[edhopper]

80. That's not health costs.

They include the cost of criminal activity. That is a big cost with alcohol and almost nothing for cigarettes,
The health cost for tobacco is far greater than alcohol.
It is the number 1 cause of death in the US.

[Rebubula]

81. Pain and suffering

2nd hand smoke vs Back hand from a drunk husband\step father....


I will take 2nd hand smoke all day...

[dipsydoodle]

125. Ever heard one anyone

being run over by a car and the driver found to under the influence of smoking a cigarette ?

[surrealAmerican]

109. ... and yet alcohol in moderation ...

... is actually beneficial to your health. The same can not be said for tobacco.

[LynneSin]

116. If I drink alcohol and you are setting next to me - there are no ill effects

I'm sure someone will bring up drunk driving but that is illegal already.

[Luminous Animal]

17. We should stop people from doing anything that adds to the cost of our health system.

I suggest banning babies next. Then alcohol, then fatty foods, then driving...

[Trajan]

53. I think the intent is to keep some persons from hurting other persons ....

While I do think it is extreme to ban outdoor smoking, per se .... It is fair to allow others to be free of cigarette smoke in enclosed places ....

Smokers have no right to shove carcinogens into the systems of non-smokers ..... They have every right to shove them into their own systems, however ....

[bluethruandthru]

69. riding motorcycles, mountain climbing, skydiving, sex, kissing,

hand holding, lion-taming, skateboarding, roller blading, mountain biking, etc.

[jberryhill]

41. Less than the return generated by uncollected social security

If you want to do a real analysis, then you need to consider that smoking related illness not only kills people younger, but it kills people faster than the long lingering conditions that healthy people die from.

Unless you are planning to die from some kind of accident, you will most likely die from a relatively slower process of degeneration than, say, lung cancer.

Just what do you think is going to kill you? When? And how much social security and Medicare are you planning to benefit from?

Because if you want to smoke and die more quickly at, say, 62, then it will be quite a savings for everyone else.

Everyone is going to die from something at some age, so you can't just look at one aspect of this.

[Mojorabbit]

43. There are a lot of freedoms we can give up so that we pay less in insurance. nt

[WatsonT]

75. Force everyone to run on a treadmill for an hour a day

consider it part of their taxes. Maybe give them longer periods of time if they are on medicare.

Something equivalent can be thought of for the handicapped.

Hell that can be hooked up to a generator so we get some electricity from the effort.

Healthier people, lower medicare costs, and a small boost to our power supply.

Only downside is that tricky 'freedom' thing.

[WinkyDink]

66. NO state govt wants this to happen!

[WatsonT]

73. Obesity is a greater threat

we should ban outdoor consumption of fatty foods and not jogging while in public.

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. As somebody with Ashtma, will sound really like I got mine

but GOOD!

It is not good for you, period...

And in this day and age when we know how ahem... healthy crack tobacco is.

The Government should force the tobacco companies to start selling natural tobacco... far less bad, and far less addictive... go au naturale. It would also make us allergic to the shit be able to breath that much easier as well.

[Luminous Animal]

11. My neighbor never has an asthma attack when I smoke. She has an asthma attack

when the neighborhood breaks out the charcoal BBQ's (we got rid of ours and went to gas) and the first night of a cold snap when everyone fires up their fireplaces. In fact, she is hospitalized several times during the winter because of fireplaces.

[nadinbrzezinski]

46. Your mileage will vary

but I came this close to the ER from the crap from dad's smoking.

It was bad enough that yes, I went to see the doctor with really respiratory distress.

Having tobacco instead of crack tobacco will also reduce a lot of the crap you are inhaling that is added to the shit, like lead and cyanide

[Mojorabbit]

45. I have asthma too and I totally disagree

It is outdoors. It is legal. It is ridiculous to pass legislation like this IMO. I say this as an ex smoker.

[nadinbrzezinski]

47. A better solution would be to make this tobacco

go to NON crack tobacco, non added nicotine, non all the crap the companies put in Would make it far less damaging AND ADDICTIVE overall.

Yes we regulate alcohol time we truly regulate tobacco.

[Mojorabbit]

48. I agree

taking out all the additives would be a wonderful thing.

[nadinbrzezinski]

51. And the extra nicotine

Thom Hartmann once explained the difference between cigs and regular tobacco this way.

It is like comparing crack cocaine and cocaine... the latter is natural and far LESS addictive.

[TroglodyteScholar]

4. Good!

My city is considering a similar action, and I fully support it. I was at the public beach last weekend, and some gross creeps plopped down right in front of me and commenced to chain smoke. With the otherwise lovely breeze coming off the lake, I got to "enjoy" every cigarette. How is that even a remotely decent way to behave?

[enlightenment]

10. How do you feel about people who

insist on including you in their cell-phone conversations at the beach - in a park - in an elevator - in a restaurant . . .?

Different vice. Just as rude.

[Luminous Animal]

12. A better analogy would be, how do you feel about people who drive cars?

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Luminous Animal]

19. Please stop driving on my street. You are sending my neighbor into an early grave.

[LanternWaste]

106. I would imagine the day the a pack of cigarettes

I would imagine the day the a pack of cigarettes can distribute merchandise, transport goods, take me to the office or the store, yours becomes a valid analogy.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

35. +1

[TroglodyteScholar]

33. A jerk gabbing into a phone...

...isn't threatening my ability to breathe. Bad analogy.

[enlightenment]

104. You did not use the health argument.

I was simply responding to your post - in kind. If you intended to make an argument based on your 'ability to breathe', you should have made it. Your conclusion was that their behaviour was unacceptable, not unhealthy.

I suspect now you'll tell me I should have 'known' what you meant. If you do make that argument, please tell me why I should have known. Do I possess mind-reading skills of which I am unaware?

[TroglodyteScholar]

112. I'm sorry I failed to specify the rather obvious consequence for you.

Having smoke in my face makes it hard to breathe. But you didn't really miss that point, mind reader or not. You'll just defend your weakass position to the end, and that's that.

[21st Century FDR]

36. Rude, yes.

But I haven't heard of any such thing as second hand cell phone radiation.

Not yet anyway, at least.

[joeybee12]

83. No health risk with those...try again...nt

[enlightenment]

100. I don't have to try again.

The poster to whom I responded did not use the health argument - they used the civility argument. Your tactic is a logical fallacy.

[TroglodyteScholar]

113. Putting a stranger's health at risk is rude.

I'm sorry you were unwilling to connect the dots.

[Stinky The Clown]

16. I am a former smoker . . . . some odd things since quitting . . . .

. . . first, I still get cravings. Rare. But right out of the blue. Very intense, but they only last a second or two. I am about four years quit.

. . . I vowed to never be a smoke nazi. I have been able to stay true to that.

. . . while I am no smoke nazi, I am completely repulsed by second hand smoke or smoke on someone's breath. I can even smell it when driving and following a car with open windows and a smoker inside.

. . . I am neither excited by, nor unhappy with, this new local law. My own world is completely devoid of smoke so it matters little to me.

[juajen]

28. I'm an ex-smoker also, and I vowed that I would not be smoke nazi,

and for the most part I have been successful at this. I allow any of my smoking children to have one or two in my house, but if they are going to all smoke at one time they have to go out on the porch. Out of five children, three still smoke. One is attempting to quit, and the other two will probably also try as it is not good for their health.

I find all of this amusing. I haven't smoked in ten years now, and still insist that smoking does not cause the harm that air pollution does. As usual, the little people pay for the big people. I wish I could still smoke. I miss it terribly and always will.

[Mojorabbit]

52. It has been two years for me and I miss it very much

I also don't mind the smell like everyone said I would and I am amazed that I have stayed quit! I also try very hard not to be one of "those" exsmokers.

[TroglodyteScholar]

32. I'm a former smoker too

I like to think I'm not a smoke nazi...I don't gripe at people, make disgusted faces/sounds, etc...but I do quietly support reasonable measures for reducing second hand smoke in public places. I also support measures that could lead to reductions in teen smoking, such as the graphic labels that are coming in the near future.

I think a person should the right to smoke, but no more of a right than I have not to be engulfed in it.

[comtec]

60. i only smoked a year, but I occasionally miss it

i never got that addicted...not ocd enough i guess.
I miss the buzz tho. that 1-2 minutes of just not giving a fuck about the universe.... it was seriously relaxing.
it made the hell my exwife put me through emotionally, plus everything else, easier to deal with.
but i never got past 3 cigs a day, and even that only lasted a couple weeks at a time.

I've actually softened my stance on smoking since my time smoking.
I never complained about the smoking laws, but at the same time I became a hell of a lot more understanding.
it helps, it really helps take the edge off of life which can be very points and cruel.

[bluestateguy]

18. They used to allow smoking at MLB games

About 21 years ago my parents and I got stuck sitting next to some prune-faced old bag who chain smoked for the whole game.

[Luminous Animal]

5. Looking forward to the day when they ban the combustion engine and coal fired plants.

Then we'll have a discussion about my cigarettes.

[Bandit]

68. So because others pollute you should be able to as well

Does that hold true for robbery and murder as well. Why should you have more of a right to pollute than I have of clean air? I could care less if you want to smoke as long as you don't infringe upon me. You want to smoke in your own home, fine and dandy, but why should you be allowed to blow your smoke in my face? Cars are going electric and they all must have cataletic converters. You want to compare your pollution with cars then you should be forced to do what cars have to do to cut down their pollution...Otherwise your argument has zero merit.

[Zoeisright]

94. Bravo! Exactly.

And cars have another purpose, whereas cigarettes do not.

Smokers can smoke all they want as long as they keep that shit in their own lungs. Their "right to smoke" ends at MY nose.

[Tikki]

6. This is a good thing.....

Tikki

[FourScore]

7. Okay. n/t

[JonTheGreat]

8. Fuck, are they going to let us smoke anywhere? And if so where?

Soon it'll be banned everywhere.

I sometimes light up in the store for shits n' giggles. I did the same on the bus once and got kicked off :)

This is crazy, I can understand some places but this is just insane

[one_voice]

30. I remember when you could smoke...

in hospitals, and grocery stores. Most high schools had smoking courts. Times really have changed.

I quit smoking last September, I always tried to be mindful of non smokers. When smoking was allowed in restaurants I wouldn't smoke at the table if I was the only smoker, most times I didn't cuz I didn't want to bother others. Things like that.

I think it's too much to restrict smoking outside. I also think bars/restaurants should be able to make that decision. If you don't like smoke don't go to a place that allows it, if you smoke go where they allow it. There would be more than enough of both so everyone would be happy.

[nadinbrzezinski]

49. How about the employees

it was forbidden in Cali, leading the way, due to employees. And no, they don't have a choice, especially in a bad economy.

This is the same reason it was banned in planes.

[devilgrrl]

9. and People will still die of lung cancer

eom

[Bragi]

23. Yes, but fewer will die

The more difficult you make it to smoke, the fewer the number of people who will smoke, the less will be the resulting disease burden.

[Luminous Animal]

42. The fewer people who are born the less the disease burden. Let's ban children.

[Bragi]

65. That your best argument?

If so, too bad, as you will convince no sane person about the important right to force others to ingest smoke from their death sticks.

[ohheckyeah]

57. And non-smokers just can't wait for that

so they can point their little fingers and say 'I told you so'. I'm surprised they don't dance on the graves.

[in_cog_ni_to]

20. So fucking stupid. Yet people drive cars and have no problem breathing those cancer causing fumes.

Non smokers really suck.

I don't smoke, but I will NEVER be a rabid, foaming at the mouth, idiotic non-smoker who can't be in a PARK, OUTSIDE when someone 300 feet away from me....might be smoking. Fucking stupid. If you have asthma and see a smoker outside...here's a hint...STAY AWAY FROM THEM! Go to the other side of the damn park...or go home and hide in your sterile environment.

Smokers are welcome to smoke in my house too. This crap has gone too far. Way, way too far. Very NAZI-ish.

[Bragi]

25. Your call is important to us /nt

[joshcryer]

54. Pretty much.

[StarsInHerHair]

21. e-cigarettes, water vapor that looks like smoke, & you can control the amount of nicotine

http://www.e-cigarette-sellers.com/e-cigarettes/e-cigarette-starter-kits/electronic-cigarette-gold.html


http://www.amazon.com/Smoke-Assist-Cigarette-Menthol-Refill/dp/B005C4NNYO

[ohheckyeah]

55. And they taste like shit.

I wasted my money on one and the taste is just plain nasty. Tastes like nothing but chemicals.

[Waiting For Everyman]

62. I've vaped for a year, and mine always tastes good...

I only ever vape chocolate, nothing else. It's more of a neutral taste, than a chocolatey taste though.

Batteries (102mm) and cartomizers from Bloog.com Always work well, and moderately priced, very good quality. It's a 2-piece system which is super simple, very effective, and lasts well. (3 to 4 batteries and 2 chargers will keep even a constant vaper going.)

Refill liquid from Vapor4Life.com (Refilling cartomizers makes them last longer - I use one each day, but others have kept Bloog cartos going for a week or more, they're really good cartos.)

After lots of trial and error this past year I buy nothing but those products as of several months ago, and have no problems or issues with it at all anymore.

I started vaping last July 23rd, and haven't smoked a real cig since. Not once. Didn't even want to.

[phleshdef]

99. You got a shitty one if thats the case.

The stuff I buy tastes awesome.

[ohheckyeah]

124. It was reviewed as a good one so

I don't know how one is supposed to know until they try it.

[rucky]

78. I've tried them, but can't get a consistent draw

and the battery life is shameful. Ends up being more trouble than it's worth.

[madinmaryland]

22. K&R for our county, Stinky! Kudos to Ken Ulman!

[Stinky The Clown]

26. Highest rated school system in the US, health care for all, now this.

[madinmaryland]

31. I think Ken Ulman will be our next governor. He will then be able to support

Martin O'Malley for President in 2016!

It would be nice to remove agnew the shitstain from Maryland's history!

[Booster]

24. My question to banning smoking anywhere is why don't they

make cigarettes illegal and we all know the answer to that one. If they did they couldn't sell them to foreign countries. Have any of you smokers ever noticed when you go to a foreign country and buy a pack of your own smokes how different they taste? They pack ours with all kinds of crap. Have you also noticed that they go out a lot more when you put them in the ashtray? Wonder what kind of shit they put in them to cause that to happen.

[21st Century FDR]

37. Probably asbestos.

That way they'll give you lung cancer twice as fast, but at least they won't burn the house down.

[Motown_Johnny]

27. Today Cigarettes!! Tomorrow Coal Burning Power Plants!!!

Well, maybe not Tomorrow....

[indurancevile]

123. lol. ain't it the truth.

[roody]

29. Congratulations.

Enjoy your parks!

[Arugula Latte]

38. That's awesome. Wish we had that here.

I just had smokers ruin part of a meal by lighting up close to the outdoor tables. I just love it when delicious food is suddenly made to taste like an ashtray.

[raccoon]

95. You and me both. Not much chance of that happening here. nt

[ZombieHorde]

39. I am not a smoker, but that is pretty lame.

We just love telling other people how to live.

[greyl]

40. Howard?

Howard to ban smoking in county parks
...

"I think that's a good decision," Sean Gronholt, a 25-year-old Columbia resident, said of the ban. "Most smokers throw away their litter, but there is that one in one hundred that don't. That adds up. Aside from some hurt feelings, I don't think there will be any real detriment."

Beilenson said cigarette butts are a "sizable percentage of the stuff picked up in the parks." He said it can be dangerous to wildlife who eat discarded cigarette butts and it creates additional work for crews who maintain park spaces.

County officials said that people caught smoking in a park would be asked to stop, and, if they refused, asked to leave. They said violators could be assessed civil fines between $500 and $1,000 for refusing to vacate the property.

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2011-07-11/health/bs-md-ho-smoking-ban-parks-20110711_1_outdoor-bans-ban-smoking-smoking-indoors

[ohheckyeah]

58. Because smokers are the only

one's who ever litter. Give me a fucking break.

[pipi_k]

70. It's not just the litter....

Many smokers just hurl their butts into the grass without snuffing them out first.

Imagine you're in the park with your child who wants to run around barefoot. Hmmm...looks safe enough...no trash or cans or bottles...

But what he doesn't see is a still-lit cigarette butt smoldering away in the grass. And he gets a painful burn on the bottom of his foot.

I would imagine if that happened you would be cursing the idiot who hurled a lit cigarette into the grass.

There's also the danger of fire.

I don't care if people want to smoke even if I don't anymore. I even realize that smokers feel like they're being targeted. But you know, there are apparently enough careless slobs out there who ruin things for everyone else...

[ohheckyeah]

128. If we used the mentality of

"careless slobs ruining it for everyone" we would outlaw driving because some people are reckless drivers. Or outlaw drinking because some people are dangerous when they drink. Etc. etc. etc. But we don't do that. But we do use any possible excuse to target smokers.

It's bullshit.

[bhikkhu]

44. If something had stopped me from smoking earlier, I'd have been grateful

I smoked for 10 years and quitting was one of the best things I've done - it was finally like crawling out of a sick old body and getting back to mental and physical health. It took three years and three tries before I finally quit.

Needless to say, things that make it harder for people to destroy their lives and health are ok with me. Not many addicts complain afterwards about having kicked.

[bigwillq]

50. Is it a private park?

:shrug:

[Thegonagle]

56. A net positive... Fewer filter butts on the ground, and fewer places

where the smoke is likely to affect me.

Please quit smoking. If you fail, try again, five more times. If that doesn't work, get help.

It took me four tries over 10 years to quit. But it stuck the last time. 36 years old, tobacco free the past 5, and (knock, knock) forever more.

[EFerrari]

59. Sick bastards.

[elehhhhna]

61. It's porobably more about he risk of fire and the sloppy butt-tossing slobs..

I say this as a smoker.

People are piggies with the butts.

[pipi_k]

67. Exactly what I was going to say...those things

lie on the ground a long time.

I know, because we don't smoke and nobody smokes in our house. So they go outside. After people leave, there are usually disgusting cigarette butts all over the driveway. Sometimes people will put water in a paper cup and use that, but still it has to be disposed of somehow.

And living in the woods, one of my biggest fears is forest fires. The worst time is during deer hunting season when the hunters are all over the woods with campfires.

Fire and gross cigarette butts. I would say those are the main reasons.

[Waiting For Everyman]

63. I hate control freaks.

And no, the end doesn't justify the means.

"Land of the free, home of the brave." :sarcasm:

Some people need to find a hobby, and butt out of other peoples' lives.

[in_cog_ni_to]

114. I know and it's so-called LIBERALS who have done this.

Liberals my ass.

[Shagbark Hickory]

71. Good for them and congrats. Hopefully they'll ban the manufacture of cigarettes in my lifetime. nm

[Fuzz]

72. Any liberal who thinks we need government to protect us from ourselves with legislation like this

is as fascist as any tea-bagger, imho.

[ElboRuum]

84. Liberals come in authoritarian, too.

It's sad, but true.

[Logical]

86. LOL...you left off the sarcasm thingy.

[Bake]

107. +100,000,000,000

Thank you.

Bake

[in_cog_ni_to]

115. +900,000,000,000 It's the so-called "Liberals" who have done all this too.

They just don't get it....I'm a non-smoker but, I find this behavior really, really sick and extremely disturbing. I think we need to coin a new moniker for the Liberal anti-smoking Nazis.....Libbaggers? LibNazis? NaziLibs? LibFreakNazis? NaziLiberals?

And they're all so "proud" of themselves for implementing all their new fascist laws. Karma. They'll all get theirs eventually. What goes around...

First they came for....

[LynneSin]

117. I love it when liberals defend an organization that gives 75% of their Lobby money to the other part

:eyes:

[in_cog_ni_to]

120. Most CORPORATIONS give their money to the Repubs.

Another really bad excuse for Liberal Anti-smoking Nazis who just can't get enough control over people on this issue.

[hifiguy]

74. I have never in my life been a cigarette smoker

and that is just a fatuous and silly policy.

[WatsonT]

76. Why not make it a public nuisance like noise violations?

So you can smoke where you want (be as loud as you want) until someone calls the cops on you. And then they give you a warning or possibly a citation.

But if you want to hang out in a part of the park with your buddies who smoke away from everyone else you can. However if that starts preventing others from enjoying the park you must move.

[stuckinarut]

77. Let's start banning life, and regulating O2 usage

Seriously... We have to get this crazy world under control...We can't have people doing what they want, where they want. That would be too much for our sensibilities. We don't believe in the ability to walk away from things we don't like. We would rather raise revenues while disincentivizing activities we dislike! Woo hoo!

What about the color blue. I don't like it.

Let's ban it!

[graywarrior]

79. This is what I did to keep second hand smoke from seeping into my apartment

from the woman downstairs. And yes, I have decided to move after putting up with this for months. Non-smokers have ZERO rights.

[edhopper]

82. I love seeing addicts

justifying their addiction.

[Iggo]

102. That's part of the fun.

:thumbsup:

[Logical]

85. No problem with me. If you are taking a damn walk in the park and need to smoke...

then do not take a walk in the park.

[Nye Bevan]

87. Excellent. I fully support the right of smokers to smoke PROVIDED that

they never involuntarily expose others to the byproduct of their addiction.

For me, the issue is not so much whether it causes cancer. It just smells fucking disgusting. I don't visit parks to breath that shit.

[ElboRuum]

88. Another smoking thread.

The only thing it ever proves to me is that there are quite a few liberals who see nothing wrong with being members of the New Temperance Movement.

[Nye Bevan]

91. I like an occasional beer but I don't spray my urine over people standing nearby.

Because I don't think it's considerate or polite to expose other people involuntarily to the byproduct of my habit.

Smokers should be equally considerate.

[Dreamer Tatum]

97. +1 big time nt

[ElboRuum]

98. Was I talking about consideration?

Had nothing to do with the act of smoking or how or where. In fact, smoking isn't even the half of it. There's a deeper message there.

[Nye Bevan]

101. You referred to "temperance". I *fully* support the right of smokers to smoke

*provided* that they do so in a place where nobody will be exposed unwillingly to the byproduct of their habit.

[ElboRuum]

110. Still missing it, let me help you out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperance_movement

The future looked bright for the young movement, which advocated temperance or levelness rather than abstinence. But many of the leaders overestimated their strength; they expanded their activities and took positions on observance of the Sabbath, and other moral issues. They became involved in political in-fighting and by the early 1820s their movement stalled.

But some leaders persevered in pressing their cause forward. Americans such as Lyman Beecher, who was a Connecticut minister, had started to lecture his fellow citizens against all use of liquor in 1825. The American Temperance Society was formed in 1826 and benefited from a renewed interest in religion and morality. Within 12 years it claimed more than 8,000 local groups and over 1,500,000 members. By 1839, 18 temperance journals were being published. Simultaneously, many Protestant churches were beginning to promote temperance.

Again, not about the where or the when or the how. It's about what is. As far as I know there IS no right to smoke, so your support of a right that doesn't technically exist is interesting, but unfortunately, not relevant to the deeper message.

[Erose999]

89. I work in a county park sometimes. It'll probably save the county lots of $$$ not having to pay for

picking up all the butts on the grounds. Its not like butts just decompose... theres fiberglass and shit in them that lasts pretty much forever. Less fire hazard too. And given the situation the Western half of the country has with wildfires now thats a big deal.

And I work in a public university building too. The smoking situation ain't so bad on a sunny day when the smokers are spread out on the grounds but whenever it rains you have to run through a gauntlet of smokers puffing away near the entrances.

[Nye Bevan]

92. Yeah, what's with smokers thinking that litter laws don't apply to them?

Disgusting animals.

[jeffrey_X]

90. lucky for you!

eom

[NeedleCast]

93. Gotta love Montgomery County

Free to do what you want as long as it's exactly what they tell you to do.

[Dreamer Tatum]

96. Awesome news. nt

[CreekDog]

103. "in county parks" is an important caveat --smoking litter is a cause of fires and env. damage

when i worked at the Grand Canyon, i'd often pick up cigarette butts (right at the canyon's edge!)...many smokers are respectful and careful, unfortunately, you cannot figure out which ones aren't. but just like you can ban glass bottles and other things from places, you can ban cigarettes.

[Amaya]

105. evil smoke ... car exhaust and pollution good!

:eyes:

[pipi_k]

108. I wonder if people ever stop to think...

that maybe it's not really all about THEM.

Reading through this thread I don't think so.

There's all this outrage over smokers not being able to smoke outdoors in all country parks in your area.

"POLLUTION from cars is WORSE!!!! aughhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!"


Maybe it's not about air pollution.

Maybe it's about the fact, as someone said above, that the butts hang around forever and have to be cleaned up.

People throw lit butts into the grass where they could start a fire or be stepped on by an animal or a kid.

Maybe the park's animals were eating them and getting sick or dying. If there are ponds, maybe they're being thrown in the ponds and sickening or killing the fish, frogs, or waterfowl living in them.

Seems like all anyone has to do is mention that someone can't do what he wants to do and the outrage starts even before anyone knows what prompted the law/ban in the first place.

[Nye Bevan]

111. Temperance! Alcohol! Cars! Fatty food! Babies! Waaaaaaah!

I want want want to blow smoke in parkgoers' faces!

[demgurl]

118. Could it be....

not only a health issue but a fire issue? It is in county parks and so I wonder if it is a safety issue for people's health and for the health of the park.

[in_cog_ni_to]

119. People have been smoking in parks since parks have been in existence.

and parks STILL EXIST...so that's a pretty bad excuse. This has nothing to do with fire "issues" and everything to do with the Liberal anti-smoking Nazis trying to dictate what other people do OUTSIDE in a HUGE area where all the fresh air they could possibly ever want exists and that STILL isn't good enough for them. It's a control issue. Pure and simple.

[Nye Bevan]

126. Wildfires don't destroy parks as such. They destroy vegetation inside the parks (nt)

[Nye Bevan]

127. Yes

[Phoonzang]

121. First the came for the smokers....then they...well...that's pretty much

where they stopped actually. :hide:

[BR_Parkway]

122. Hmm, seems a drop in the bucket if they didn't ban alll driving to get to

those parks.

I hate when politicians do these purely symbolic "so many people are against this, I'll get points" stupid votes. Great, one cigarette less in the park, nothing at all about the more toxic pollution being spewed by all the combustion engines.