New York City extends smoking ban to parks, boulevards

[snickers99]

To me the existing conditions you mention above are a supporting argument for legislation like this.

If there is already so much wrong, why perpetuate the problem?

Be selfless and understand that not everyone who is outside wants to have you exhale smoke in their personal space.

It's just common sense when behaving like a courteous person.

With respect, Elektrobot, I think you've missed the unstated point. Our daily lives are full of things that give offense. It could be cigar smoke, it could be a fart, or it could be your particular aftershave. Legislating away all offense is impossible and in the process you will legislate away all liberty. This is why the process should never be started. Your favorite habit, pleasure, or bumper sticker will be next.

You also use the words 'selfless' and 'courteous'. These involve voluntary actions not behavior mandated by law. Why is an authoritarian governmental response needed here? Is a whiff of fragrant cigar smoke doing any demonstrable harm? I think not. The smell of dog ****? An Obama bumper sticker? What stuff!! Live and let live, my friend. Enough of more laws, laws, laws!!

[samb]

***.

[Guest Elektrobot]

With respect, Elektrobot, I think you've missed the unstated point. Our daily lives are full of things that give offense. It could be cigar smoke, it could be a fart, or it could be your particular aftershave. Legislating away all offense is impossible and in the process you will legislate away all liberty. This is why the process should never be started. Your favorite habit, pleasure, or bumper sticker will be next.

You also use the words 'selfless' and 'courteous'. These involve voluntary actions not behavior mandated by law. Why is an authoritarian governmental response needed here? Is a whiff of fragrant cigar smoke doing any demonstrable harm? I think not. The smell of dog ****? An Obama bumper sticker? What stuff!! Live and let live, my friend. Enough of more laws, laws, laws!!

The government takes care of it when people don't have half a brain to figure it out on their own-

If people had some common decency, we wouldn't need half the laws we have right now, but instead people feel threatened and get up in arms when someone suggests something that should be common sense.

I'm glad the government has the ability to legislate in areas like this, because I don't have faith in the general public to figure it out for themselves.

[snickers99]

The government takes care of it when people don't have half a brain to figure it out on their own.

What then when the government is composed of persons who don't have half a brain?

[Guest Elektrobot]

What then when the government is composed of persons who don't have half a brain?

When the government is composed primarily of half brained dunces, there are usually no new initiatives to fight.

So to answer your question, when a government is composed of persons who don't have half a brain, you don't have to do much- because they are not doing much.

Most of their time is spent whittling away at the progress of others instead of making progress of their own.

1 step forward, 2 steps back.......

[snickers99]

Most of their time is spent whittling away at the progress of others instead of making progress of their own.

Agreed!!!

[El Presidente]

Even befors the "Law Wars" I would often be embarrassed by the behaviour of fellow lovers of the leaf who would light up a cigar at an innapropriate time.

At a restaurant, lighting up within feet of others dining without the hint of permission asked.

At a sporting event/ packed stadium. Light one up an piss off 50 people.

Some people think they have a natural right to smoke where and whenever they want to the point that cigar smoke and the inconvenience it causes to some is a power play. In many ways a lack of respect by some has come back to bite all on the arse.

The reality is that after a few weeks the police will not be able to inforce these laws. They have better things to do with their time.

You will have people running 200m across the park to tell you your smoke is affecting them and that is when you belt them and roll the body into the bushes. Fear will spread. A law unenforced is a dangerous message. Good chance for amendment in another administration.

[Babaloo]

Even befors the "Law Wars" I would often be embarrassed by the behaviour of fellow lovers of the leaf who would light up a cigar at an innapropriate time.

At a restaurant, lighting up within feet of others dining without the hint of permission asked.

At a sporting event/ packed stadium. Light one up an piss off 50 people.

Some people think they have a natural right to smoke where and whenever they want to the point that cigar smoke and the inconvenience it causes to some is a power play. In many ways a lack of respect by some has come back to bite all on the arse.

The reality is that after a few weeks the police will not be able to inforce these laws. They have better things to do with their time.

You will have people running 200m across the park to tell you your smoke is affecting them and that is when you belt them and roll the body into the bushes. Fear will spread. A law unenforced is a dangerous message. Good chance for amendment in another administration.

Well said .

[adic88]

Common sense in Malaysia seems to prevail when it comes to smoking.

If you're dining outdoors or in a bar, you can expect that someone will light up. So you don't like it? Don't sit outdoors in a restaurant, and don't go to bars.

Even some restaurants that allow smoking indoors, the tables designated as smoking tables will have a very obvious ashtray on them. Don't want to smoke, don't sit at that table. Don't like to eat in a smoking restaurant, don't go there; there are tons of other restaurants.

Quite a bit of self-legislation when it comes to these things, and i find that very practical and reasonable.

Also, generally, people do respect no smoking signs too, in places like some parks, some public areas, etc. if you're not allowed to smoke there, then don't -- there are a ton of other places where you can smoke, go there instead.

[CanuckSARTech]

...Quite a bit of self-legislation when it comes to these things, and i find that very practical and reasonable....

Unfortunately, it's this aspect that is lacking and dissappearing in most of the "western" nations (Canada, US, Britian & some EU countries, Australia, etc.).

Apparently, legislators are COMPLETE experts on everything, and everyone else is so stupid, that absolutely everything needs to be over-legislated and over-regulated. Common-sense and self-accountability has gone by the wayside.

[Nino]

Unfortunately, it's this aspect that is lacking and dissappearing in most of the "western" nations (Canada, US, Britian & some EU countries, Australia, etc.).

Not really,

we are lucky to live in a federal state of Germany and here the people actually had a vote and a say in all this - it resulted in a no-smoking ban being overturned ( while in Bavaria it was upheld due to the laziness of the voters ) and me being able to enjoy a few purely smoking-only ( yeah, you want to no-smoke : go outside ) pubs, a cafe where it's both smoking and no-smoking zones and a restaurant in my little village that still provides us with a smoking area to dine and enjoy.

So, I'm happy where I am, not having to enjoy the pussyfication of the big apple in the land of the free.

Guess common sense as Aizuddin justly stated or standing up to the man is the answer.

[CanuckSARTech]

Not really,

we are lucky to live in a federal state of Germany and here the people actually had a vote and a say in all this - it resulted in a no-smoking ban being overturned ( while in Bavaria it was upheld due to the laziness of the voters ) and me being able to enjoy a few purely smoking-only ( yeah, you want to no-smoke : go outside ) pubs, a cafe where it's both smoking and no-smoking zones and a restaurant in my little village that still provides us with a smoking area to dine and enjoy.

So, I'm happy where I am, not having to enjoy the pussyfication of the big apple in the land of the free.

Guess common sense as Aizuddin justly stated or standing up to the man is the answer.

Great input, Nino, thanks.

Yes, some EU countries, Germany included, have a bit more sound reasoning with the huge amount of input of the voting public. In Canada and the U.S., most elections/votes/referendums rarely end up getting more than 50% of the populace out to vote. Also, a great many that do go out and vote are either extremely misinformed/misunderstand the topics/policies to be voted on, and/or just vote on party lines.

Either way, without turning this into politics and voting issues, I just think it's unfortunate how most in the western world feel the huge need to intrude themselves on everyone else's lives, how they always know better than everyone else, armchair experts, etc., etc. There's no boundaries anymore for people to operate with common sense within, as all boundaries have been broken down, and everything is legislated/regulated/etc.

IMO, this is but one of a few things that we could learn from modern Germany, that's for sure. Kudos to you and your brethren, Nino, for working the votes in your favour.

[PigFish]

Elections have consequences! -Piggy

[El Presidente]

I remember NY when it actually was the "City That Never Sleeps"

Now, you can't smoke in public areas, stripclubs with fully naked women cannot serve alcohol, can't feed pigeons outside of "safe zones" Bla bla bla bla.

I love NY! But Hong Kong/Shanghai/Buenos Aires/Madrid etal have taken over the mantle from NY of vibrant pumping entertainment mecca's.

For all its flaws and from an outsiders view who has only visitied it a dozen or so times, I miss the old NYC.

[Dbone]

Soon enough we'll have to go underground to have our beer and rat burgers. Denis Leary will be our leader of the separatist movement, our only crime will be we enjoy things that have suddenly been deemed bad for us: beer, cigars, fries, meat, ect.

I believe Americans will give up our liberties and freedoms in the name of security and welfare. We've already said it's okay to have someone with a high school education fondle our wives and children to board a commercial jet... in the name of security. Smoking bans are for sure, it's for the betterment of public health. I'd be surprised if I'll even be able to enjoy cigars at my daughters wedding in 20 years.

I will add that where I live the State is seriously considering lifting the smoking ban in casinos LOL. I guess the non-smokers have less rights in the cities awarded with casinos.

Pres, your Law Wars post is right on brother.

[Colt45]

I believe Americans will give up our liberties and freedoms in the name of security and welfare.

D, as an American, all I can do is assure you that we do not all feel this way - at least not true Americans.

The government works for me, and you, and us. Remind them when you vote.

[jwm8592]

The government takes care of it when people don't have half a brain to figure it out on their own-

If people had some common decency, we wouldn't need half the laws we have right now, but instead people feel threatened and get up in arms when someone suggests something that should be common sense.

I'm glad the government has the ability to legislate in areas like this, because I don't have faith in the general public to figure it out for themselves.

Your kidding right? The Gov't handles it when the people can't figure it out.....IMHO, that statement really seems like an oxymoron.

[Guest robustog]

The government takes care of it when people don't have half a brain to figure it out on their own-

If people had some common decency, we wouldn't need half the laws we have right now, but instead people feel threatened and get up in arms when someone suggests something that should be common sense.

I'm glad the government has the ability to legislate in areas like this, because I don't have faith in the general public to figure it out for themselves.

People don’t have common decency and talk on the cell phones in public places like restaurants, in stores, etc. this is very aggravating. When I go to the park or beach I don’t want to hear it. Cell phones in public needs to be banned since people don’t have common decency.

People around my house burn fireplaces and wood stoves in their houses. I run electric because the smoke is irritating. They don’t have the common decency to not burn them and stink up my air. They should be banned.

People use outdoor grills. The smoke for searing fat is a known carcinogen. I don’t want to smell your grill and get cancer. Do people have the common decency not to grill … no. Grills should be banned.

People honk their horns at night while I am trying to sleep. Disrupted sleep has known health risks. Do people have the common decency to not honk their horns… no. Horn should be banned.

People want to go to a sports event without having to smell the stink of beer, I don’t drink. The people around me don’t have the common decency to not drink. We need to ban beer in sporting events.

People take their kids to the beaches and shores with diapers on, they fall off and pollute the areas. No common decency, people don’t want to see that crap. Ban diapered kids from the beaches.

People load up on perfume, aftershave and cologne and go out in public. Other people don’t want to smell you. No common decency for others. Ban cologne, aftershave and perfume in public.

I can go on and on.

Now since we are all half brained people (including you and me ) the government should produce stricter laws to protect us from ourselves. Where does it end?

[Peter11216]

Yes, we're invited to all become citizen-snitches! This sort of civic participation worked well in Nazi Germany and the USSR!

I was at my community board meeting last night, and a rep for our state assemblyman made an announcement that the police are not authorized to enforce the law. Further, the assemblyman's office wasn't sure who would enforce the law. The rep made clear to everyone that if they get into trouble with the police for smoking they should complain, and will be successful fighting the ticket. I got the feeling our assemblyman is sympathetic to smokers, and may even be willing to give assistance to folks who get ticketed.

My impression was that no one at the meeting was particularly worried - precisely because we are not going to snitch on each other. Since the police are not going to enforce the ban, the fact is, this law probably won't have much of an effect. Presumably, people may use it to complain against people smoking in playgrounds, or picnic areas, but I must say that I'm not particularly worried about it, and plan to continue smoking in my neighbourhood park. (Off the top of my head, I have only received positive comments about my cigars in the park. For example, people regularly ask what brands I'm smoking, which inevitably leads to a nice conversation.)

However, I think the danger with this sort of law is how it can be selectively enforced. So I would not be surprised if some people get targeted more than others. I expect problems when uptight parents (the ones with the thousand dollar strollers and bookcase of parenting manuals) realize that they can complain against certain people in the park they don't like the looks of, just because they are smoking.

I think we will have to wait and see how this plays out.

[El Presidente]

I suspect the harldine Smoke Nazis will approach people smoking and agressively ask them to stop. They may have media and/or police in tow.

This is a law that requires people to comply for it to work. Given the police can't (and don't want to) enforce it, a campaign of peaceful resistance would work well.

I have no intent to smoke a cigar around non smokers without permission. However if I am on a beach /park with no one around me then it is my space for that period of time.

[snickers99]

...My impression was that no one at the meeting was particularly worried ... I think we will have to wait and see how this plays out.

Since this law is not to be enforced...or rather it may only selectively be applied to 'undesireables' why have such a law at all? The fact is laws like this are a nuisance. They are created by the afore mentioned half-wits who crave the authority that government office gives them. It seems that once elevated to public office, many believe their mandate is to create new law (to justify their continued employment) irrespective of need. IMHO this amounts to harassment of the citizenry, who tolerate the irritation until something truly awful comes along. I don't live in NYC and if you're not worried - great! The problem is that bad law seems to be a contagion and I can expect the idiots in my local government to really be turned on by this. Our elected officials have little respect for us. Why should they? We return these kinds of people to office again and again.

“When the government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.”

-Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826)

[CohibaBehike]

I suspect the harldine Smoke Nazis will approach people smoking and agressively ask them to stop. They may have media and/or police in tow.

This is a law that requires people to comply for it to work. Given the police can't (and don't want to) enforce it, a campaign of peaceful resistance would work well.

I have no intent to smoke a cigar around non smokers without permission. However if I am on a beach /park with no one around me then it is my space for that period of time.

I agree, People who push the boundaries are the ones who seem to hurt us rather than help us, but with this sort of ban what are people supposed to do? Seems ridiculous, I doubt they will be able to keep this under control, seems more like a thorn in the side to me.

[Peter11216]

Since this law is not to be enforced...or rather it may only selectively be applied to 'undesireables' why have such a law at all? The fact is laws like this are a nuisance. They are created by the afore mentioned half-wits who crave the authority that government office gives them.

To be clear, I'm not in favour of the law. However, I'm relatively certain (not 100%), that I'll be able to continue to enjoy a cigar on Brighton Beach, and in the park. So this isn't a big deal for me . . . yet.

Why have the law? I don't know. My suspicion is that since cigarette smoking is more-or-less associated with class, it has become acceptable to make it illegal, as a way to police people. It's probably a bit like the ban on gin hundreds of years ago. Gin was popular with lower classes, the "rabble" as they say, and it was a good way to restrict them.

There's a really fascinating talk from about fifteen years ago, by a law professor Charles Whitebread, that touches on this. It was given to the California Judges Association. Whitebread concluded,

"Let me conclude, and again this is my prediction -- I will tell you I don't think it is subject to opinion. Just look at it. Just take a look at what has happened now and what will happen. I will tell you how inexorable it is. If we get together here in the year 2005, I will bet you that it is as likely as not that the possession of marijuana may not be criminal in this state. But the manufacture, sale, and possession of tobacco will be, and why? Because we love this idea of prohibitions, we can't live without them. They are our very favorite thing because we know how to solve difficult, social, economic, and medical problems -- a new criminal law with harsher penalties in every category for everybody."

On the subject of government prohibitions, it's really a fantastic talk. I would recommend it. Just search for the title of the talk, "History of the Non-Medical Use of Drugs in the United States."

[Hugomarink]

To me the existing conditions you mention above are a supporting argument for legislation like this.

If there is already so much wrong, why perpetuate the problem?

Be selfless and understand that not everyone who is outside wants to have you exhale smoke in their personal space.

It's just common sense when behaving like a courteous person.

Haha, good luck with that in a city of 8 million people. In my opinion, the diversity and unpredictability of NYC (or any big city) is what makes it special. There is wonder, beauty, and quite the opposite of both to be found in the big city. And while smokers may detract from the experience for some people, the non-smokers now have rule over most of the city so pardon me if I'm not completely sympathetic to all their gripes. Sometimes you just don't get everything you want in this world. They should be pleased enough with how they've changed the landscape in NYC over the past 10 years. It's a different place in many respects than when I moved away from there in 2002. :-(

[Hugomarink]

To me the existing conditions you mention above are a supporting argument for legislation like this.

If there is already so much wrong, why perpetuate the problem?

Be selfless and understand that not everyone who is outside wants to have you exhale smoke in their personal space.

It's just common sense when behaving like a courteous person.

Actually, I do need to add to this that I fully believe in being a courteous and respectful smoker. I only smoke in areas where I am allowed to do so, and never try to inflict my habit on others. Obviously many smokers are very inconsiderate, and this is a huge reason why laws like this get passed that penalize everybody. Basically, I have no problem with with restaurants, airplanes, and work places being smoke free. I just think that bars should have a right to decide for themselves if they want to be a smoking establishment, and if smokers are going to be relegated to street corners to indulge their particular vice then those who support those laws shouldn't be griping about it. Allow a few "smoking" bars and clubs here and there and many of the smokers will be off the streets.