Raleigh to Ban Smoking in City Owned Public Space

Aaron
01/19 02:19 AM

I vote for many more cig receptacles to be placed throughout the city. Not that I’m on City Council, but I think that would be a better place for city tax funds.

JeffS
01/19 04:51 AM

Banning smoking to prevent littering is like banning cars to prevent drunk driving.

Instead, maybe we should use our money to line Glenwood with ugly banners advertising Pepsi. Oh wait…

RaleighRob
01/19 10:48 AM

I didn’t think City Plaza counted as a park.  I just see it as a stretch of Fayetteville Street with REALLY wide sidewalks.
.

I think the omission of Moore and Nash Squares is because they are state-owned property.  (They were built along with the Union Square that houses the old capital.)
.

As far as the ban in general.  I dunno.  I totally understand it in playground areas and along walking trails.  At least they allow it for the parking areas.

Adam
01/19 11:29 AM

The EPA characterizes second hand smoke as a Group ‘A’ carcinogen (along with other such “benign” things as asbestos, radon, and benzene).

http://www.epa.gov/smokefree/pubs/etsfs.html

What does this mean? It means someone’s freedom to smoke in public is outweighed by my freedom not to be killed by your choice. If you want to kill yourself and smoke, i say have at it and let evolution do its job. Just don’t drag me into it.

JeffS
01/19 12:34 PM

Adam, does our freedom extend to carbon monoxide? nitrogen oxides? VOC’s?

Are you willing to ban our cars, lawn mowers and leaf blowers in defense of that freedom?

It’s so much easier to think of outlawing something you don’t use.

Adam
01/19 01:02 PM

Assuming the items mentioned are in fact in the EPA’s Group ‘A’ designation (which i do not recall them being), they are unhappy consequences of vital societal activities. If you can get nicotine smoke to power vehicles you may have a winning argument.

Picture a person walking through a park spewing out asbestos as they walked. Sound like a society you want to live in?

Look, this is the classic libertarian view i am expressing. People should be able to do whatever they want to. But as soon as your actions cause me harm, it is no longer just about you.

JeffS
01/19 01:32 PM

And I am just pointing out the lack of conviction you have in your argument.

If you are concerned about protecting your health, and the health of those around you, logic dictates that you would begin your movement with the largest health risks. You, however, have inexplicably decided to start with one of the smallest.

When you are willing to apply your argument across the board, I will begin to believe in your libertarian ideals. Until then, I can concede that you are targeting activities based on personal bias.

And as for the “group a” thing… that’s a red herring. First, because EPA actions are dictated by the political agenda of others, but mostly because fearing a carcinogen over a poison is illogical.

———-
For the record, I am not fighting for my right to smoke in public. I do not smoke. I simply realize that on a list of my 100 greatest health risks, secondhand smoke would likely not even appear.

bc
01/19 01:39 PM

Adam, I almost agree with your point.

Although, the public park is as much my property is it yours and no one is forcing you to be exposed to my less evolved genetic shortcomings.

I’m not puffing down a butt while pushing your kid on a swing but, I may be enjoying a smoke while fishing on the opposite side of a lake. Invasion of your personal freedom, or mine? That is like saying my dog pooping in my back yard is affecting your drinking water.

Aaron
01/19 01:41 PM

I’d honestly like to say that I believe you would have to be in constant exposure and in close proximity (bars, restaurants) to second-hand smoke in order for it to be carcinogenic. JeffS made a good point, but don’t stretch its limits. For the record, I do smoke and I do not mind not having in a cigarette in closed areas or especially around the elderly or children. It should be common courtesy.

Clay
01/19 01:46 PM

So is this helping to lay a precedent for a future ban on smoking in any outdoor area? What about a sidewalk? Is that any different than a park? People do hang around on Fayetville St at lunch time, are they not effected by the smokers who go outside on the street to smoke?

Adam
01/19 02:01 PM

As far as largest risks, i’ll stay away from conspiracy theories and trust the government institutions whom are the experts.

Public parks are public property and should comport to public interests (including what is best for public health). It should not be about what i want or what you want. the selfishness of smoking around others baffles me. all because you want to get some kind of buzz or release? that’s the noble cause that we are protecting at the expense of others around you? What narcissism.

There is one other point that i’d like to make. I’m on the right side of history. I feel a little like i am protesting in favor of gay rights. The people on the opposite side of the argument don’t seem to think of themselves as the whites in Selma in the early 60’s. But if we time capsule this conversation, i think it will be equally as stark. My message: the writing is on the wall. While the fight is going on, just remember what side you were on.

Ok, now that i’ve compared my stance to the great political struggles of the last century, i can sign off

RaleighRob
01/19 03:41 PM

I think some of y’all are off here.  This ban wasn’t targeting second-hand smoke like the indoor ban did.  This ban came out mostly because of the littering issue.  I mean, it got so bad the sandy areas that have playground equipment started becoming giant ashtrays. 

Smokers did this to themselves.  They can’t properly dispose of their butts, and this is the result.  Sure you can say not all smokers are litterbugs but let’s face it…most trash you find in parks is in the form of cigarette butts.

Nancy
01/21 11:55 AM

The litter from cigarette butts is not good for the environment or us.  There are far too many cigarette butts going into our sewer systems and water supply.  I don’t live in Raleigh, I live in the midwest and the litter pollution from cigarette butts is just tremendous.  This cannot be a good thing.  We don’t need any more pollution that we have and I don’t understand why in this day and age anyone would smoke because we know what it does to lungs, etc.  A good way to get cancer or kill yourself.

JeffS
01/21 12:14 PM

You’re right. Cigarette litter is annoying. More appropriately, all litter is annoying. Walk the side of our roads and you will find them littered with plastic bottles, beer cans, fast food bags, etc.

Somehow though, we have managed not to propose a public ban on Coke, McDonalds or Deer Park to solve the problem.

We already have a law against littering. Enforce that law. If you are unwilling to enforce that law, then what logic leads us to create another law that we will not enforce?

Enforce a law, or remove it from the books.

Phil S.
01/24 12:16 PM

I agree with Jeff S that if they aren’t enforcing a litter ban now, that a new littering ban on this one product doesn’t seem logical.  But I wholeheartedly support a smoking ban in public places.  I believe that smoking shouldn’t be allowed in public (city or state) parks, or anywhere on public university grounds throughout the state, or even sidewalks.

It is downright disgusting when I have to walk from one place to another and some smoker happens to be in front of me - every time they take a puff, I get a great whiff of carcinogens!  Oh, I guess I shouldn’t go outside or use public sidewalks…

Why do smokers get a pass here???  We can’t drink alcohol in public parks or on sidewalks legally…and alcohol, in moderation, doesn’t affect those walking next to you!

AC
01/27 05:14 PM

Don’t forget to create an ordinance to fine the (hypothetical) people who smell so bad that I vomit a little bit in my mouth. It erodes my esophagus.

AC
01/27 05:16 PM

Also, don’t forget it will cost $250K+ just for the signs, not to mention the enforcement and sign upkeep. I am sure there are better things to do with $250k of limited city funds. Or we can just bump the property tax again…

bob
01/29 02:42 AM

Amen!  Smoking anything but a pole should be illegal.

Adam
02/03 10:18 AM

Attention smokers: Freedom for others to breath is now socially valued more than your freedom to smoke (finally). Or will be come July.

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/9039721/

It should make all progressive North Carolinians happy to know that we beat NYC by 2 days…

http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/02/02/new.york.smoking.ban/index.html?hpt=T2

Sir Walter
02/21 04:58 PM

Yeah, glad I moved away 2 years ago. It’s sad to see how my beloved hometown has been ruined by “progressives”. Most citizens just accepted the fact the Chapel Hill was ruined (which was also a shame since it is a beautiful place). However, enough was enough for me when the Praetorian Guard of Progressives started ruining Raleigh. The city was once a great place to live and was certainly a great place to grow up. Alas, the culturally conservative, beautiful southern town of my youth is no more. It’s now “littered” with riff raff, crime, deviates, Liberals, and yankees (actually, using the words deviate and Liberal in the same sentence is rather redundant IMHO). That’s a damn shame that ya’ll ruined my hometown (douche-rockets). Oh well, I don’t live there anymore so ya’ll and the city can go to the Devil as far as I’m concerned.

Aaron
02/21 05:04 PM

Good riddance, shitbag.

Sir Walter
02/21 05:21 PM

Thank you Aaron. I appreciate your insightful and intelligent comments, FUCKSTICK.

Aaron
02/21 05:23 PM

Bahah, as if that cute little spiel of yours is somehow more insightful and intelligent.

Adam
02/21 05:26 PM

Enjoy Mississippi.

P.S. We’re coming there next.

JeffS
02/21 05:46 PM

I don’t think of smoking bans as a progressive-backed issue. Maybe it’s just me.

In my experience, it’s usually the people like Sir Walter pushing social controls on others while yammering on about their own “constitutional rights”.

Sir Walter
02/21 05:48 PM

Well, I’ll tell you what Adam, I have heard it said that “Jesus was a carpetbagger”. So with that in mind, I’ll try and be hospitable when ya’ll get down here.

Sir Walter
02/21 06:06 PM

Jeff, this may come as a surprise to you but, prohibition was a sterling example of “progressive” reform. Besides, tobacco is a vital component in the economic life of NC. The cultivation of and use of tobacco is part of the cultural heritage of the state. Now, I’m sure that you good Libs. wouldn’t want to interfere with any of our historic cultural practices would you?

matt
02/22 09:19 AM

There is no God. IN MY HUMBLE OPINION.