View Full Version : The Smoking Ban

Pages : 1 2 [3]

July 11th, 2012, 05:17 PM

The issue has been sidestepped.

1. The images do nothing to discourage people from smoking. Perhaps just not allowing things like half naked women or cartoon camels to advertise them would be more effective (albeit even LESS constitutional). Truth in Advertising? Never!
2. The Feds have authorities over local municipalities? Since when? When do they have the right to say "no" to more restrictions so long as they do not infringe on the freedoms of others in ways that violate the constitution? There are still laws about sex and other personal matters in localities that are allowed, but yet a gross-fest is not? i am just a little more worried about the precedent of Federal Authority on some issues....

I had a 3, but I may have already included it in my verbose bullet list... ;)

The only thing I really want to see on this is a large tax be levied on tobacco sales that is SEPARATED FROM THE GENERAL TAX FUND and devoted EXPLICITLY to cancer research and additional health care costs imbued on the health care system due to smoking illnesses.

Nevermind huge taxes to "discourage" smokers. That does not work. We are basically acting as the dealer here and forcing the addicts to pay up. But taking that money and spending it on repainting lane lines or Garbage Can Maintenance is just wrong. If they are unable to see what they are doing to themselves and the possible expense they are levying on their fellow (men), then just make them pay into a fund that will help them with O2 tanks later on.


July 12th, 2012, 02:40 PM
Let's also require posters of gruesome car accidents and gory crash scenes at every car dealership because car accidents are a high source of fatalities :rolleyes:

Total US auto fatatlities in 2011 = 32,310 http://bottomline.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/05/08/11599902-us-traffic-deaths-at-lowest-level-since-1949?lite
Total US tobacco fatalties in 2011 = approx. 500,000 http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/31/us-smoking-deaths-idUSTRE72U4E220110331

Just sayin....

July 13th, 2012, 01:53 PM
The "problem" is not them dying.

The problem is keeping them alive.

When an emphysema patient finally kicks the O2 tank, the costs get removed from the table. But until then, cancer surgeries, rehab, and removal from the labor force are HUGE financial burdens that everyone wants to ignore.

We can't just "let them die", that ain't human. But, apparently, neither is having anyone pay for it.

July 11th, 2013, 10:20 AM
It Only Took About 20 Years for the U.S. to Turn Smokers into Pariahs


Emily Badger, The Atlantic Cities Jul 10, 2013

The public smoking ban is a relatively recent invention. The first outdoor ban identified by the American Nonsmokers' Rights Foundation was put in place in 1975 in Yolo County, Calif., which outlawed smoking in all public parks. The idea didn't exactly take off. Another two decades would go by before the policy — in public parks, on beaches, in children's playgrounds — would spread around California and then throughout the U.S., rapidly transforming a once-acceptable social norm into something hazardous to your kids, your lungs and the environment.

In the late '90s, communities in Massachusetts and Rhode Island created the first beach smoking bans. By 2006, seven more states had them as well. By 2011, 23 states did. The rise of the park smoking ban has been even more dramatic: By June of 2011, municipalities in all 50 states had them.

But despite this impressive trajectory – and the abrupt shift in public perception that has accompanied it – public-health researchers argue that there's actually not a lot of scientific evidence backing up popular justifications for smoking bans. In the July issue of the journal Health Affairs, Columbia University's Ronald Bayer and Kathleen E. Bachynski pick apart three of the most common arguments: Public bans reduce second-hand smoke that endangers non-smokers. They reduce cigarette-butt litter that's toxic to the environment. And they take cigarettes out of the public view of impressionable children.

"Banning Smoking In Parks And On Beaches: Science, Policy, And The Politics Of Denormalization"
by R. Bayer and K. Bachynski in Health Affairs.

In reality, smoking bans probably do more to protect smokers themselves than the people around them. But it sounds less paternalistic to implement these policies in the name of shielding children. The short history of how these alternate arguments have become conventional wisdom reveals, Bayer and Bachynski write, "the complex relationships among scientific evidence, real-world health risks, and politics in the public policy process of denormalization."

In their own analysis of a national database maintained by the American Nonsmokers' Rights Foundation (http://www.no-smoke.org/), Bayer and Bachynski count 843 park bans and 150 beach bans imposed in the U.S. between 1993-2011. The largest share came from California, then Minnesota and New Jersey.

The scientific community, meanwhile, either hasn't kept pace with research on the effects of such bans, or hasn't found conclusive evidence of connections between second-hand smoke and some health impacts, like breast cancer (http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/tobaccocancer/secondhand-smoke). In fact, the American Lung Association, the American Heart Association and the American Cancer Society have all shied away from supporting such bans, in favor of public-health policies they believe would be more effective, like higher cigarette taxes, or tighter restrictions of tobacco ad campaigns.

In an interview with the researchers, one official with the American Lung Association put it this way: “I don’t think we should be making claims that are not supported by the data. If you try to tie it [banning smoking on beaches or in parks] to a health outcome, that’s where you get in trouble.”

The litter argument is more compelling, although it stretches farther than science has gone with the notion that cigarette butts do real damage to ecosystems (or to animals and children thought to frequently ingest them). As for the societal influence of smokers on children – research says they primarily take their cues from their parents, not strangers they see on the beach.

"Banning Smoking In Parks And On Beaches: Science, Policy, And The Politics Of Denormalization"
by R. Bayer and K. Bachynski in Health Affairs.

Of course, there's a strong if politically unpalatable argument for enacting these policies: Over time, smoking bans have helped turn cigarette butts into something disgusting, and smokers themselves into pariahs. Smoking bans help change smoking norms. And polls suggest that the shift in public opinion has been swift. Gallup began asking people in 2001 if they supported making smoking illegal in public spaces. Then, only 39 percent of people did. As of 2011, for the first time, a majority did, at 59 percent (http://www.gallup.com/poll/148514/first-time-majority-supports-public-smoking-ban.aspx).

"Denormalization," Bayer and Bachynski write, is the sanitized term for policies that actively seek to stigmatize smoking. Depending on your view of the lengths we should go to cut down on the known health consequences of tobacco, you may be OK with this. But Bayer and Bachynski warn that it's a "perilous strategy" to mask that goal with weak arguments about protecting the children from bad influence, or their parents from second-hand smoke.

Copyright © 2013 by The Atlantic Monthly Group

July 11th, 2013, 01:31 PM
But how would you control for and attribute specific health consequences to infrequent second hand smoke? You have to make assumptions, and they aren't all that far fetched

July 11th, 2013, 04:26 PM
They are just hard to empirically prove.

I am all for the bans, and still wondering why we do not consider butt-fliking littering, but I find the health argument a hard one to press in open spaces.

July 11th, 2013, 04:59 PM
You have to make assumptions, and they aren't all that far fetchedYou can make assumptions for public policy, which is what the ban is. But if you decide to justify the policy by scientific research, then the science must be based on empirical evidence. Assumptions lead to cargo cult science.

I guess at one time, smoking in a public park would be taken care of by, "Do you mind if I smoke?"

Good way to strike up a conversation. ;)

July 11th, 2013, 05:50 PM
If the purpose is "Good Public Policy" then why hasn't one elected body in the USA legislated a ban on the sale & usage of tobacco altogether?

July 11th, 2013, 08:56 PM
Pretty simple - tobacco farmers and their communities vote

July 12th, 2013, 12:17 PM
pretty simple - tobacco farmers and their communities pay

ftfy... ;)

December 20th, 2013, 04:24 PM
When they banned smoking in restaurants, as a lifelong non-smoker, I was relieved, but at the same time concerned about the government telling people what they could do in their own house (i.e. tavern, restrnt, etc). This to me is ridiculous. There is no conclusive evidence that there is anything dangerous about these things. Btw love the Cher comment regarding the styrofoam.

City Council bans Styrofoam, bars e-cigarettes as Speaker Christine Quinn makes tearful exit

Before Quinn made her farewell, the City Council passed a record 26 bills and resolutions, including a ban on Styrofoam containers, and a bar on e-cigarettes in restaurants and workplaces. An emotional Quinn said that she 'loved every moment' of her job.

By Erin Durkin (http://wirednewyork.com/authors?author=Erin Durkin) / DAILY NEWS CITY HALL

http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1553642.1387517006!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_635/farewell-christine-quinn.jpgJefferson Siegel/New York Daily News

Outgoing City Council Speaker Christine Quinn cries as she says goodbye to Council members, who gave her a standing ovation at her final meeting on Thursday.

The City Council banned Styrofoam and banished electronic cigarettes in a flurry of last-minute lawmaking Thursday at Speaker Christine Quinn (http://www.nydailynews.com/topics/Christine+Quinn)’s emotional final meeting.
Quinn said a tearful goodbye to the Council with her trademark feistiness. “The city is a better place because of all of you, and I just want to say thank you,” she said. “We were tough. We didn’t take any s---.”
CITY COUNCIL BANS STYROFOAM, BARS E-CIGARETTES INDOORS AT MARATHON MEETING (http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/2013/12/city-council-bans-styrofoam-and-bars-e-cigarettes-indoors-at-marathon-last-mee)
http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1553641.1387518132!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_635/809.jpgBryan Smith for New York Daily News

The City Council voted to ban Styrofoam containers, as well as bar e-cigarettes from restaurants and workplaces. Here, Quinn (center) speaks at a press conference on Thursday.

Before her farewell, the Council passed a record 26 bills and resolutions.
Under the foam container ban, polystyrene coffee cups and takeout containers will be outlawed. “Most foam ends up in landfills, where it can sit for literally 500 years or longer,” Quinn said. “The only thing in the world that lives longer than cockroaches or Cher is Styrofoam.”
RELATED: MAYOR-ELECT BILL DE BLASIO DENIES BACK-ROOM DEALS IN MANEUVER TO MAKE MELISSA MARK-VIVERITO CITY COUNCIL SPEAKER (http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/mayor-elect-bill-de-blasio-denies-back-room-deals-maneuver-melissa-mark-viverito-city-council-speaker-article-1.1553588)
http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1553640.1387517005!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_635/809.jpgBryan Smith

The Council voted to ban puffing on e-cigarettes at bars, restaurants and workplaces. Officials say the little-studied devices may have health risks.

The Council agreed to delay the ban for a year — giving the industry a chance to prove that the substance can be recycled. “They’ll have another year to show that, in my view, what is up is really down, but I don’t believe they’re going to be able to do that,” said Councilman Lew Fidler (D-Brooklyn), the bill’s sponsor.
The Council also voted to ban puffing on e-cigarettes at bars, restaurants and workplaces.

RELATED: PAYBACK IS A ... PENSION (http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/payback-pension-article-1.1550803)
http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1553643.1387517006!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_635/809.jpgBryan Smith

Quinn was overcome with emotion at her final meeting as City Council speaker, but maintained her trademark feistiness: 'We were tough. We didn't take any s---.'

Officials say the little-studied devices may have health risks. But e-cigarette makers and users point out that they emit only water vapor.
Miguel Martin, head of the e-cigarette company Logic, called the bill “nonsensical.”
RELATED: ARMORY PROJECT LANDS ON SOLID ICE (http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/bronx/armory-project-lands-solid-ice-article-1.1543999)
http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1553661.1387517005!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_635/farewell-christine-quinn.jpgJefferson Siegel/New York Daily News

Just before the City Council voted to ban the use of e-cigarettes indoors, political comedian Randy Credico, who ran for mayor last November, puffed away on an e-cig in the gallery of the City Council chamber in City Hall on Thursday.

The Council also signed off on a new concert amphitheater in Coney Island, a pet project of outgoing Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz.
Quinn got nostalgic as she prepared to leave city government after her mayoral candidacy failed.
RELATED: CITY COUNCIL DEBATES E-CIGARETTE BAN IN PUBLIC AREAS (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/city-council-debates-e-cigarette-ban-public-areas-article-1.1538107)
http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1553637.1387517004!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_635/457939143.jpgSpencer Platt/Getty Images

Under the foam container ban, polystyrene coffee cups and takeout containers will be outlawed.

“I love this place in a way that most people would not think of people loving local legislative bodies,” she said.
As for what she won’t miss about the job? “The truth is, no bulls---, nothing,” she said.
RELATED: AMPHITHEATER PLAN IS NOT CHILDS PLAY (http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/amphitheater-plan-childs-play-article-1.1536748)
“The crappy days, the hard days, they were on behalf of New Yorkers, on behalf of my colleagues, and I’ve loved every moment of it.”
She quoted her Irish grandfather: “Goodbye, good luck, and God bless you, and that’s all I have to say.”
RELATED: COUNCIL LOOKS TO SNUFF OUT E-CIGARETTES (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/council-snuff-e-cigarettes-article-1.1531637)
After the meeting, Council members and staff gathered in the City Hall rotunda to applaud her as she left the building.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/city-council-bans-styrofoam-e-cigs-speaker-quinn-exits-article-1.1553662#ixzz2o3I47CkD

December 20th, 2013, 05:40 PM
Quinn claims: “We were tough. We didn’t take any s---.”

I guess she thought those donations & other crap from the real estate industry were golden eggs.

She and her cohorts sure left us with a lot of turds (NYU 2031, South Street Seaport, Chelsea Market, etc. etc.)

And look what Quinn's spokesman has done, without skipping a beat (there ought to be a law against this):

Council Spokesman Jamie McShane Moving to REBNY

POLITICKER (http://politicker.com/2013/12/council-spokesman-jamie-mcshane-moving-to-rebny/)
December 20, 2013

City Council Speaker Christine Quinn’s long-time spokesman, Jamie McShane, is headed to the Real Estate Board of New York.

Mr. McShane, a former television producer who left WNBC six-and-a-half years ago to work for the council, has been tapped as the board’s senior vice president for communications, effective January 1 ...