Belmont to be first U.S. city to ban all smoking

this is great and i agree with Agit8dChop.

people have the right to smoke but they should do so in a place where it wont effect the health of others. if they want to f up their lives good for them, we dont.

second hand smoke is killer for none smokers and is the cause for millions of deaths world wide.

we should have rooms for smokers where they can walk in light a fag and breath in their own crap

[edit on 16-11-2006 by bodrul]

That would be nice.............

just because people have always done it, doesnt mean people should HAVE to do it for ever.

proof comes out all the time about the effects of smoking.
The chemicals used..

Im glad your dad smoked for 73yrs... back in those days cigerettes were VERY DIFFERENT!

Its not about HATING SMOKERS!
its about loving life, and wanting to sustain helath in community

smoking is an addiction.
you try, then your hooked.
this is WRONG for a company to do this.

AIDS or LEPROSY?
calm down, and stop over stating this.

I will hang around a smoker.
but when they SMOKE, i will ask them to move outside 'if its my house' Or i will end our convo and move on to someone else whom isnt smoking.

Smoking should be made a privat thing. if you are that dedicated to kill yourself, do it at home.
I want to walk through my community enjoying my healthy air.
I dont want my kids seeing smoking as a publically accepted thing.

I praise this council they have taken a risk and it wil pay of for them once the addicted smokers get over the SHOCK that people are starting to accept smoking can be stopped.

Originally posted by Griff
To me, this is unequallity at it's best. If cities/states want there to be no smoking, they need to offer the smokers a place to go to smoke.

Why? We don't let people smoke crack, anywhere, so not being able to smoke tobacco in public areas isn't oppressive.

Either that or let every smoker work from home.

Why? Smokers aren't disabled. We don't let people that want to be nudists work from home.

It is also not the right of a government to dictate to PRIVATE business owners what they can and can not allow in their places of business

This bill has no exception for cigar bars? Odd. Nevertheless, private business, that operate in the public space, have to be subjected to the public will. We make them have certain numbers of toilets, we enforce building code, we regulate what can happen on their premisis. Heck, if they don't pay the government, they're not even allowed to serve alcoholic beverages.

I plan on quiting by then, but it is a very hard thing to do.

You've just got to stick with it. You can't start saying 'well, I can have one tonight cuz I am out at the bar with my friends, and it just one or two', because it will quickly go from bumming one or two now and then, to getting them every weekend, and then you'll be buying packs for those occasions, and then you'll just be smoking again.
You've just gotta do what you need to do to not light any more up. Whether thats cold turkey for ya, or if thats too tempting, the patch of something like it, you've just gotta get on with it.

Agit8dChop
I can still go and buy a bong, and some seeds of the net.. grow a pot plant in my garden and smoke a joint now n then if that was the drug of my choice.
but if i walked outside... then its a whole lotta WHOOOBANG!

?
I am not sure where you are posting from, but in the US at least, its illegal to possess marijuana, let alone to be smoking it in public.

simply banning it in public sight is the best option, because it forces people to smokin in their homes

Banning it from public places is, to a certain degree, silly. It makes sense for an enclosed environment, like a store, office, restaurant, bar, etc. But not for sidewalks and parks. Yes second hand smoke can be dangerous, no, not when its in such small concentrations. The fumes from cars on the streets is worse.

madnessinmysoul
drinking only harms others if you do illegal things, such as drunk driving

ethanol is a poison that we consume in low concentrations and relatively low doses. The psychological effects of being 'drunk' ARE the effects of being slowly poisoned. Drinking, in and of itself, is harmful. And whether or not you hurt someone because of drunk driving, people DO do it. Far more people are killed each year by drunk drivers than by second hand smoke.

except for single-family detached residences

So if you're in an apartment or condo you can't smoke? That's kinda BS. It's not like the smoke goes through walls. And no smoking in your car either. What about businesses? It doesn't mention them. Where I work, we have designated smoking areas. Where's the harm in that?

Also, bars should be given the choice to allow smoking or not. Some places are taking our freedoms a bit too far. I know they mean well, but it's a sign of things to come.

have you checked cancer rates lately?

smoking is down, cancer rates are trough the roof.....go figure

as stated before, drunk driving is illegial, because it kills people
smoking is legal, yet it kills people, knowingly, and the people who dont even smoke are affected too.
And just because we breathe in crap from our cars, doesnt mean we should also then have to breathe in crap from everything else..

If its in public, it should be banned, if ur in the middle of the bush with no one around , fine go ahead, but when someone is within distance it should stop , becuase your smoke affects them.

AS seinfeld said

'' like a bandaid.. RIGHTOFF! ''
Its your choice to smoke..
so smoke.
but do it so im not forced to smoke too!

Originally posted by born_to_be_wired
have you checked cancer rates lately?

smoking is down, cancer rates are trough the roof.....go figure

wonder how many of those cancer patients stopped smoking years ago when they GOT CANCER?
wheres that STAT?
How about the people who dont smoke, yet have cancer because theyre spouse, or friend smokes?
wheres that STAT?

granted, smoking is down because people have been made aware of the effects through media.
excellent. this is good, so lets keep going
lets HELP our community.. and obilish thus UNNESSECARY ADDICTIVE aspect of our lives, that if we remove, will bring nothing BUT benefits for humanity.

I share respect for both of your opinions, I live in California, the "OC" to be exact. We have very strict limitations on smoking ( like the beach is a no-no ) I myself have only been (tagged) as a "smoker" a.k.a. " oh you're one of them" for less than ten years. I do however think it is a little bit extraodinary to "ban" cigarette smoking completely from even outdoors in general public locations. I mean yeah, I give a nod to no smoking in restraunts, but come on, they are going to police and punish those who smoke in their OWN cars ?? (pesonal property)

How ignorant. Have YOU ever sat in traffic on the 5 freeway during rush hour (yeah, a few cigarettes keep me sane) What, are you so concerned about MY second had smoke when the four cars that have you boxed in are emitting their own engine's toxins in your face ? Just go outside and take a deep breath for Golly sake, I'm sure the repetition of daily breathing does moer damage.

In closing, I myself have respect for non-smokers, as many do. But unless I come up to you on the street, throw you into a phone booth and proceed to "hotbox" you, don't succumb to social banishment of smokers when it is already being enforced quite effectively.

I love this, finally smoking banned, its like a dream. For those who think this is stupid and do smoke, just quit killing yourself, quit killing those around you and quit smoking. And alcohol doesnt directly have near the same effect on you or those around you as smoking does. Sure alcohol can indirectly end lives or hurt people through alcholism, but smoking is a poison, it is carried through the air and inhaled by everyone and everything around you, slowly killing.

50,000 Americans die every year from second-hand smoke. I'm glad this city has taken the noble step forward in banning smoking. I'm tired of going into town and having to smell that stench which gives me a raging headache.

Originally posted by Griff
To me, this is unequallity at it's best. If cities/states want there to be no smoking, they need to offer the smokers a place to go to smoke. Either that or let every smoker work from home.

Exactly, they should increase taxes used for public property to provide places for smokers if they wish to continue this ban. Also, I support all bicycles be removed from the road.

Originally posted by pugachev
50,000 Americans die every year from second-hand smoke. I'm glad this city has taken the noble step forward in banning smoking. I'm tired of going into town and having to smell that stench which gives me a raging headache.

...I ant to see concrete facts that second hand smoke sends 50K americans to their grave, where are all the second hand smokers on oxygen tanks?

California already has a pretty good ban against smoking in occupied places. Smoking has been otulawed in restaurants for a long time ... outlawed in bars for the last several years ... outlawed in almost all businesses. As of a couple years ago smokers must be at least 20 feet from a building entrance or air intake while smoking. A lot of city parks are designated non-smoking.

I don't see the need to add to more restrictions to those above. The article says that smoking will only be allowed in single-family detached residences. What about apartment and condo dwellers ... or people who live in duplexes and townhomes?

Second-hand smoke statistics are iffy at best ... check out this statstics page from American Lung Associations. They show 3,400 lung cancers deaths due to non-smokers second hand smoke. Can't really argue if that's accurate or not without digging into the studies more. But look at the quote below (from the same site), it says there are between 1900 and 2700 SIDS death that they attribute to second hand smoke. Are they serious? Last time I heard there is no real concrete evidence on what is causing SIDS deaths ... every couple years they come up with a new theory but nothing has ever really been proven. According to a CDC SIDS website there are 4500 sudden unexplained infant deathts about 50% of which are classified as SIDS. According to the American Lung Association that would make ALL SIDS cases in the US due to second hand smoke.

Secondhand smoke is especially harmful to young children. Secondhand smoke is responsible for between 150,000 and 300,000 lower respiratory tract infections in infants and children under 18 months of age, resulting in between 7,500 and 15,000 hospitalizations each year, and causes 1,900 to 2,700 sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) deaths in the United States annually

American Lung Association

CDC - SIDS Statistics

I don't see the issue as far as smoking in a vehicle. I can't see other drivers being bothered by the smoke. Either traffic is moving and no one is going to smell or be affected by the smoke or if traffic is stopped due to rush hour then your sucking down more harmful odors from all the idling vehicles in close proximity then from the 1 or 2 people who happen to have lighted up in their vehicle.

I'm an occasional cigar smoker who lights up at home so a ban like this wouldn't effect me. But how long before I can't smoke in my backyard because my neighbor might be bothered?

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
Smoking should be banned throughout the entire world.

Its your right to smoke correct... because you have the phyiscal ability to put a cancerstick into your mouth, its your right.

Well, its my right to physically place my hands around your neck squeeze until u go limp too...

and at that point, it's my right to put a .45 caliber bullet between your eyes. Faster than cigarette, yet accomplishes the same

[edit on 16-11-2006 by XphilesPhan]

Great, I wish theyd do that here too. They should just criminalise it and be done with it but they get too much money in taxes to do that.

Originally posted by SmallMindsBigIdeas
California already has a pretty good ban against smoking in occupied places. Smoking has been otulawed in restaurants for a long time ... outlawed in bars for the last several years ... outlawed in almost all businesses. As of a couple years ago smokers must be at least 20 feet from a building entrance or air intake while smoking. A lot of city parks are designated non-smoking.

I don't see the need to add to more restrictions to those above.

Eaxactly.

This is a class struggle, who smokes? poor people smoke...

The same rich people, who dont smoke, want to have their cake and eat it as well.

Originally posted by Agit8dChop

Making a consumable ADDICTIVE, that knowingly kills people.. should not be legal in any way shape or form.

hostile because people fly of the 'sane' argument are relate buses , fatty foods to cigerettes.

alchohol may ruin lives, but its not ADDICTIVE.. it

For one, Alcohol IS addictive. How can you say that its not?? It also kills countless people with alcohol poisoning, and drunk driving related deaths.That pretty much discounts you as uninformed about everything you speak about.

Caffiene is also addictive. Would you like us to ban coffee?? Soda??

Of course not, because YOU like to enjoy these ADDICTIVE consumables.

How would you like to know that the american cancer society has put forth a study indicating caffeine as a carcinogen? I guess you'd also be glad to know that doctors are recommending pregnant women to seriously decrease their caffeine intake, because they are seeing birth defects similar to that of smokers from caffeine consumers.

The problem with addictive consumables, is that they are only alright to consume, although they are harmful, if the majority of the population enjoys them. Smokers are an easy pick, because they make up a minority group now.

Alcohol kills more innocent people than second hand smoke does, for sure.

Before you suggest that they destroy my rights, you better make me a list of things you like to do, so I can take it to the government, and have them ban your lifestyle. Don't worry though, because if you smoking nazi's allow them to create laws that set precedents like government infringement on the rights of business owners, than I'm sure pretty soon it will come back to bite you in the arss.

I believe if one does anything to harm someone else then that should not be permitted,
But what i dont get is how were aloud to smoke ciggerettes, Which is an addictive drug that will drive you crazy when you dont have one,
Were Aloud To drink alcohol, Which is a drug, that not only impairs your judgment but your motor skills as well,
Both have negative effects and both mind altering,
Yet marijuana Has still stayed illegal,
I mean you dont hullucanate on marijuana
you dont have your motor skills screwed and it helps medically.
Yet it is treated like a killer,
I believe if they band smoking just ciggerettes they might as well through every factory that produces TOXIC EMITIONS into the down the drain,
cause being near a nuclear plant is probally just as bad as standing around someone smoking,
or what aabout cars that create carbon monoxide,
i see it has if someone is aloud to drive a car,
then im sure im aloud to smoke a plant,
i feel it is right that whatever i do to my self
for m own pleasure and liesure with out bugging no one then
i have full right to do it,

When a government decreases personal liberties and takes no responsibility for social welfare it's called fascism.

Oh goody -since they're outlawing other people's toxic crap that's polluting the air cars are sure to be next.

The single greatest cause of cancer and destruction of life as we know it.

DYK - The inside of a car is more toxic than the outside, largely because it's filled with plastics and vinyls. One molecule of poly vinyl carbon is enough to cause angiosarcoma in rats. (Heart cancer) That research was buried by the plastics industry in the 70's.
A 20 minute walk a day will reduce your chances of cancer by 20 to 40%. Plus the green leafies and orange legumes.
Synthetic beta carotene will increase the occurance of cancer in smokers, but not non-smokers. Odd.

[edit on 16-11-2006 by clearwater]