Outdoor Smoking Ban in Atlanta Under Consideration

The City of Atlanta is expected to vote next week on an outdoor ban on smoking. What do you think? Is this the right thing to do or an infringement on personal liberties?

The Atlanta City Council's Community Development and Human Resources Committee voted Tuesday to send the wide-ranging in Atlanta parks and other recreation areas to the full City Council for consideration as soon as next Monday.

If passed by the full City Council, the ban will have an impact on Atlanta's parks, playgrounds, athletic fields, aquatic areas, tennis courts, golf courses and walking trails.

An exception was approved by the committee for the , Aaron's Amphitheater at Lakewood and Park Tavern at Piedmont Park. Atlantic Station began enforcing the ban on July 14, just in time for the BB&T Open. Several local jurisdictions already have similar bans in place, but the city of

What do you think about the move toward a total ban on smoking, both indoors as well as outside? Is it necessary for the health of the general public or an infringement on the individual liberty of those in the community who smoke?

Kevin Fxr July 15, 2012 at 02:44 PM
The parks are a part of the "Hospitality industry" and that industry relies on serving the needs of all, not just the finger wags and fanatics, who, in reality we would likely be more comfortable in the parks, if they were the ones being turned away, or at least treated for their delusions. With a third the adult population smoking the loss of one third to one half of revenues that will follow this legislation, will have a devastating effect on the operations of any park or similar venue. The only way to offset that loss is to do what the surviving bars were forced to do, in the face of identical bans on their properties, and raise the prices and with higher prices all that many more will not be able to afford the service and eventually that service will become unsustainable. Is this the outcome we would like to chance? Or would it simply be more responsible and intelligent to allow smoking and educate visitors to the rules, encouraging all people with existing laws that deal with litter. There is no support anywhere even among the "dedicated professionals" that smoking outdoors, when responsible people engage, causes harm to anyone, so the only argument in favor of outdoor bans is a promotion of hatred, don't buy what this bigot is selling we would do well without it. Focus instead on the origins of the article and lets deal with that payola scandal under the law. We thrive when we work together as a whole and fail, when we support this ghetto minded ignorance.
Kevin Fxr July 15, 2012 at 03:28 PM
This is anything but a harmless "slippery slope" this represents unwarranted and illegal Government intrusion by top down "grass roots" lobbying, funded with your taxes. Where the Government is playing the role of a disinterested moderator, when it is the government financing these insults to our sole dominion and personal rights. They call it "De-normalization" I call it bigotry. Ask the Medical Experts on board the same question they asked the tobacco industry executives years ago, if they believe smoking is an addiction. The answer should have them arrested because an addiction is a "medical condition" and even if they smoke people are all protected under the same laws. If they believe it is a choice or nasty habit as some would say, then they are intruding n personal autonomy rights, remember "a woman's right to choose" precisely those rights.
Kevin Fxr July 15, 2012 at 03:28 PM
You can not have someone arrested for assault or attempted murder just for smoking, because a lifetime risk assessment is the most extreme stretch of risk, that a harm might exist with truly embarrassing evidence that it may. Risk is not "cause" or "harm" it is a theory that can not be proven in real life. "The precautionary principle" on which smoking bans rely, puts fear in place of evidence, as the only consideration. Inconsistently every other toxic "risk factor" has acceptable levels of exposure, otherwise all industry and human activity would cease. Meaning the box to selective dictatorship, is wide open. Now, how can we possible see any form of protection and national stability with this new standard and formidable example, of government powers, now firmly in place.
Kevin Fxr July 15, 2012 at 03:33 PM
You poor little dear, life must be simply horrible for you if someone passes gas in the elevator. Ban that too? Grow up and show some backbone, the world has quite enough drama queens.
John B July 15, 2012 at 04:10 PM
Ok...I think I get it now. Kevin's "right" to smoke supersedes Dave's "right" not to breath Kevin's smoke. Thanks for clearing that up for me Kevin. Speaking of drama queens....have you actually read your posts?
Billy July 15, 2012 at 04:38 PM
Couldn't resist this! See: http://www.newarkadvocate..com/article/20120714/NEWS01/120715001/Night-Thunder-allows-racers-announcer-let-loose Commented: My lord where is the Licking County Health Department at? How dare these people pollute the air with carcinogens with deadly gases mixed in. How dare these individuals create such noise that it can damage the hearing of members of the public in the area. How dare these people so boldly waste so much of our natural resources. How dare these people to indulge in a act that is so dangerous that it is against the law to do upon public property, oops if a bar is public property to protect the public health (smoking which is a legal act) the same should apply to this activity as well. Where is "It is our duty to protect the public's health as was stated by the health department to get a ban passed. Where is Commissioner Dave Smith at to protect the public health at in this outrageous activity at the trails?
Billy July 15, 2012 at 04:50 PM
What the ? Atlanta City Council's Community Development and Human Resources Committee is doing what? Let me get this straight in Atlanta they have the CDC sitting in the heart of their metropolis correct? The CDC has a collection of the most deadly know diseases know to man kind in viruses, and bacteria and has a ventilation problem within the containment of these agents? The city has a high visibility target for terrorist to strike at and they are talking about cigarette smoking in a open park? Seriously these government officials need to be fired as common sense would dictate that it appears their motives are not for public safety but are motivated by money from special interest groups!
Brian Crawford July 15, 2012 at 04:55 PM
@Kevin. I smoked for 25 years before quitting 10 years ago and have 5 coronary stents and chronic bronchitis to show for it. Inhaling your cigarette smoke now makes me physically ill. I'm ashamed of the years that I subjected others to my bad habit. Smoking is a blight on society and a drain on our economy because of related health care costs, it shouldn't be allowed in any area supported by tax dollars, period. I hope for your sake that you find the will to quit. Your friends and family will appreciate it.
David July 15, 2012 at 05:28 PM
I have a good friend that is a cardio-thoracic surgeon. He loves people that smoke. Along with car crashes and gunshot wounds, it maintains his livelihood.
Billy July 15, 2012 at 05:35 PM
Well Brian I have smoked for about 42 years I have no heat problems no respiratory problems (NOT OVER WEIGHT) and am 60 years old. It appears as if your bad health might be more related to your life style than smoking. Perhaps the stress in your life, inactivity and weight might be a lot bigger factor than blaming it upon smoking. I looked at your profile and what did I see? "As a former banker and businessman I am very concerned about the state of our national economy" I think one can fill in the possibilities of your health problems when viewing your photo in your body weight and employment behind a desk.
Dwayne July 15, 2012 at 05:37 PM
Give them an inch and they'll take it a mile. Their argument before was that a building enclosed people inside with the smoke with no room to breathe. When it's outdoors, what's the argument now? This is beginning to take form of prohibition. If you pretty much limit the space where and when you drink to be so confined, might as well call it prohibition. They already raised the taxes on that product to almost unaffordible status. It's getting ridiculous. The only places I support a ban on smoking at are INSIDE hospitals, grocery stores, and any other building that once MUST go inside of for their NEEDS. If a place falls in the WANT category, let business owners decide if they want smoker/non-smoker business. I don't see them making other pollutants illegal to use. So I take it no cars can be driven in these parks? Should they issue tickets for flagilating? Or make it illegal to have a cold in a public place? Hot showers can cause skin cancer, right? Should they regulate how hot your water can get? I heard the argument that someone's product usage can be a health care problem for those directly or indirectly exposed to it (aka cars?). But, it's one's choice where they stand outside (someone can always move to a better spot), and nobody owns anyone else, so why can't we learn how to respect the choices of others, even if we disagree with them? I smoke and do not blow directly on someone's face for goodness sake. Smoke responsibly, don't smoke respectfully.
Billy July 15, 2012 at 05:41 PM
Hey Brian you might be a bit surprised at where the tax dollars comes from and who pays it! How about the Cleveland Stadium guess who paid for it? Sure wasn't you it was paid for by smokers! Smokers pay more in taxes for more pet projects than any non smokers as we have became a minority and taxing others is easy for people to do. As we are seeing now a class warfare developing perhaps former bankers ought to be taxed to the max as they are a minority and screwed up the economy!
Dwayne July 15, 2012 at 05:51 PM
I agree with everything you said accept for calling a Park a 'need'. Humans could live if no 'park' existed on the planet. People do love parks and want them very badly. But it does fall in the 'want' category. Nobody HAS to go to the park. Since nothing forces one to go, then it stands to reason you should go if you want to mingle around others that may be sick, have a pollutant product (such as a car or cigarette), etc. It's always a risk to your health going anywhere with bacteria and such that others carry. You have the right to secure your own health. If you feel something is unhealthy for you, then avoid it. You don't HAVE to stand right next to a smoker you know. And, you're not trapped inside a building with a smoker. The smoke flies off into the sky, like the carbon monoxide from the cars. Non-smokers say 'don't impose your preferences on me'. A smoker says 'don't impose your preferences on me'. Might as well split everything in half and say this side is for these disrespectful people, and that side is for those disrespectful people.
Brian Crawford July 15, 2012 at 06:47 PM
"I smoke and do not blow directly on someone's face for goodness sake. Smoke responsibly, don't smoke respectfully." Neither did I Dwayne and I never realized how much my smoking, no matter how polite I thought I was being, bothered other people and infringed on their health. I also never realized how much I reeked of cigarette smoke or how bad my car smelled to others, Or how some folks looked at me as being less intelligent or a bad parent because I smoked. I was a fool. Quit while you're ahead.
Billy July 15, 2012 at 06:59 PM
Brian some people thought Sandusky was a great guy a role model. A persons smoking unless confined has very very little effect upon most people. But to try t hit upon or suggest that a parent smoking is a bad parent is a guilt trip usually employed by anti smoking lobbyist that are paid to blog. Brian are you calling for no one voting for Obama as he is a smoker that lacks intelligence , is a bad parent, a bad roll model because he smokes? Romney will appreciate your vote Brian.
Kevin Fxr July 15, 2012 at 07:33 PM
Sorry you don't get anything. No one has a right to smoke, or not breathe leftover smoke. Rights are our power over government, not each other. Get that straight and look in the mirror to see what I see. A programmed and politically corrected Fool. Grass roots paid for, with your own taxes to turn us against each other. and look how many so willingly jumped on board. In support of their own temporary comfort, they traded away the rights if us all. Hubris awaits.
Brian Crawford July 15, 2012 at 07:45 PM
I would also urge our President to quit if he hasn't done so already.
Kevin Fxr July 15, 2012 at 08:22 PM
I have smoked for over 40 years and have no signs of so called smoking related diseases, perhaps you should consider starting again if you have depreciated so quickly. [kidding] Smoking is only a risk factor. It takes many other factors to compile your problems. If you stay in shape and lower your stress levels, you do much more for your longevity than quitting smoking will ever accomplish. They say "half of smokers will die of smoking related diseases" and they don't say the other half don't. Which makes them just about the same as anyone else. The figures predictive of longevity are averages and to date in the past hundred years, the largest majority of those who made it to one hundred, smoked and drank their entire lives. More than half of the baby boom generation smoked and they turned out to be the longest living healthiest generation to ever walk this planet and today they are telling kids that they will not live as long as their parents did? That's progress? Treatments are much more profitable than cues and we haven't seen a cure in over 50 years. Not much wonder considering the declining processes of financially corrupted development that are standing in the way of medical innovation. Or the self indulgent fools we look to for advice. Smoking wouldn't be dangerous at all, if we had spent the billions wasted in controlling others, in legitimate research to find medical cures. Thank the pharmaceutical industry for that factoid, it keeps them healthy.
John B July 15, 2012 at 08:24 PM
Kevin: Not sure why you're trolling around here. I can see you're feeling tortured to be surrounded by fools and idiots. Your time may be better spent searching the nooks and crannies of your home for wiretaps and other forms of government surveillance. That said, I agree we all could use a little less government intervention in our lives but your rants resemble that of a paranoid zealot. What happened in your life that was so bad it has made you angry to the point where you can't be rational?
Kevin Fxr July 15, 2012 at 08:34 PM
So much for the risk factor approach to wasting your life, worrying about how much time you have left. If there is any truth in what they have been telling me for over 40 years; that if I quit my health risks will be reduced to those of non smokers within a few short years. I find it strange that only smokers seem to have this curative ability, while non smokers are dropping like flies at the mere sight of someone smoking. Do I want to join them in their delusions and miserable existence? I would sooner sacrifice the tail end and all the diapers and dependance on the care and compassion of others, with evidence by smoking bans and excessive taxing of what they call an addiction, there is not a lot of that care and compassion left to go around. You reap what you sew and I wouldn't leave my wallet lying around if a "Public Health expert" is anywhere in sight. All they know is greed and all this sudden interest in the affairs of others, is only about the money. Look for yourself. Start with Dr. Robert Proctor then read "Mr. Gates summer vacation". You will start to see the pieces of history, that the medical experts refuse to talk about. Because it makes them no different than anyone else. They hate that.
Kevin Fxr July 15, 2012 at 08:46 PM
I have a friend who is an oncology specialist, he joins his peers several times a day between operations, to have a smoke beside the Hospital dumpsters. He tells his patients the truth, although he wouldn't dare put it in writing, Gasoline fumes cause brain tumors and diesel exhaust among truckers and auto mechanics, leads to more Lung damage than a three pack a day smoker will ever see. Of course with the medico mafia who control the official line; "more research needs to be done"
Kevin Fxr July 15, 2012 at 09:06 PM
You forgot to mention in many places, he would be denied employment and a place to live. How far do we take this supposed "protection". And does it really support anyone's common good? How many will have to die this time around, before the majority sobers up?
Kevin Fxr July 15, 2012 at 09:52 PM
John, quite the mouthful there, a troll a conspiracy nutter, an irrational malcontent? Because I speak in favor of what used to be considered normal and just common sense? I used to live in a better place where government hacks knew their place. Too many today are far too willing to simply bend over and say thank you for all the ways we are being screwed out of our freedom. When it is being done to entrench the rights of people who are getting rich selling smoking patches, by governments lobbying governments, who is the troll and why is there suddenly an objection to another point of view? When I see what little is left of what I took for granted when I was younger, I believe it is a crime what little opportunities and freedom we are leaving for the younger generations to suffer. Simply because they never knew freedom as we did. The Government ruling us and interfering in our lives is not a normal state of affairs in a free society, in spite of all the tax paid promotions to the contrary. I just don''t take kindly to being asked to bend over and squeal like a pig. That to me is normal. I don't know who you are.
Dwayne July 15, 2012 at 10:25 PM
Quitting is something I plan on doing, by my choice... but not by force. On my time, not someone elses. I do not appreciate these aggressive tactics.. as usual.
Kevin Fxr July 15, 2012 at 10:45 PM
When we see a sign at an off ramp that says "do not enter" the majority gets it. When we see a sign that says microwaves inside may interfere with heart regulators most understand a danger they might have to consider, or when we see a sign on a coffee shop identifying a peanut allergy danger, again we see a problem if we might be affected and we are intelligent enough to act accordingly. Yet there is no way that a sign on the door of a bar is sufficient to solve everyone's concerns. None the least of which would be the rights of the property owner, when we essentially eliminated property rights, in order to make smoking bans legal?
Kevin Fxr July 15, 2012 at 10:45 PM
While we heard for years all they wanted was a separate non smoking seating area and no one objected. Then short haul flights, then all flights, Then smoking was banned in restaurants entirely. Then they wanted separately ventilated areas in bars, where everyone goes to protect their health, then even that wasn't enough and they demanded all of the indoor spaces with no exceptions, Then it progressed to patios and doorways, to peoples homes and cars in parking lots and on the highways, And now we see the last frontier, we need bans in parks? There is absolutely no evidence that anyone could possibly be harmed by cigarette smoke in a park to any degree close to the damage, those who are demanding protection, would be harmed by the aroma from a rotting animal, animal feces or pollen in the air. It is only a fanatical lobby with few things left to demand that even brings these nonsensical bans to the table. With nothing to cry for they loose their government funding and will be forced to do something productive in place of stealing the earnings of others. Of course most have taken advantage of their training and are busy today making fat people feel ashamed of themselves. Keep following this and standing silent because it doesn't affect you, eventually they will get around to something you enjoy and deny you the right to that freedom. Or your right to be left alone.
DaculaHood July 17, 2012 at 12:14 AM
@Fxr I personally think it's both unfortunate and silly that laws like this have to be considered (and implemented) for personal-choice decisions like smoking. Unfortunately, many smokers (apparently yourself included) attach arguments and defenses to the heath and legality debates while avoiding entirely simple courtesy and respect for your neighbors. You fail to acknowledge (and based on your response to Dave, apparently don't care), that for many of us cigarette smoke is annoying, cough-inducing, aggrevates allergies, uncomfortable, or downright disgusting.
Tammy Osier July 17, 2012 at 03:01 AM
I heard this discussed on the radio on the way home and heard a really good point of view. The guy said that if a personal business wants to ban it, they have every right. But if a personal business DOESN'T, then they have that right too. He didn't think the government should ban in that instance (where people have a choice in whether they do business or not). However, public places such as subways and enclosed spaces where people have to cohabitate for things outside of business, maybe some leeway or regulation there where it might affect safety of others (allergies). I thought it was an interesting point of view.
DaculaHood July 17, 2012 at 01:32 PM
Looks like this passed: http://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta/atlanta-passes-smoking-ban-1479016.html
Jonik July 21, 2012 at 11:12 PM
Doesn't anyone see problems in banning this and that use of so-called "tobacco" products, while not a word is said about banning the contamination of typical cigarettes with some of the worst of the worst industrial toxins and carcinogens? That's about severe imbalance..."imbalance" being a synonym for insanity. NOT banned are residues of any of 450 or so registered tobacco pesticides, carcinogenic radiation from PO-210-contaminated phosphate tobacco fertilizers, burn accelerants and other fire causing techniques, kid-attracting sweets and flavors galore, dioxin-creating chlorine pesticide residues and chlorine-bleached paper, addiction-enhancing additives, fake tobacco "helper" made from non-organic industrial waste cellulose, or any of the 1400 or so untested, non-tobacco additives that manufacturers select from to concoct their secret recipes. None of that's banned. But the unwitting, unprotected, secretly-poisoned, sickened, defrauded and even killed victims are blamed and prosecuted. The injustice is significant....whether or not one smokes or likes the smell of tobacco or cigarettes or not. Check out http://fauxbacco.blogspot.com for ample references to use to become informed on this topic. By the way, a REAL "nanny" would protect "her" children from those non-tobacco cigarette toxins and carcinogens and the rest. This govt is no more a "nanny", by blaming the victims of big time corporate crime, than the man in the moon.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something