« Podcasts and Video Spots | Home | Graycliff Espresso Black Label PG Cigar Review »
Smoking Ban Updates
By Jesse | January 13, 2008 |
These following stories stuck out at me because of the underlying contexts or slant. The Anti-Smoking crowd will not be happy until smoking is banned everywhere and tobacco outlawed. Don’t believe me? Take a look at the following stories.
However, the Heart Foundation wants all outdoor smoking banned to shield people from second-hand smoke.
“It’s about protecting people’s health so the more we can limit the opportunities for passive smoking, the better,” cardio-vascular health director Rachelle Foreman said.
“Even though there are those designated areas, they’re still not protective of everybody, including the people who work there.”
Yes you read that right, not satisfied that you can no longer smoke indoors, they are going after outdoor smoking areas. Apparently we need protection from ourselves.
In California a bill proposed by Sen. Jenny Oropeza bans smoking in cars with children.
Beginning this month, motorists can be fined $100 for lighting up a cigarette in their own car, even in their driveway, if one passenger is a child.
Remember it is “for the children”, at least some people are smart enough to see what it is all about.
“People engage in activities that I adamantly disagree with, all the time, in the comfort and privacy of their homes,” said Republican Assemblyman Anthony Adams. “I have no business, as a legislator, interjecting myself into their private lives.” Sen. George Runner, a Republican, said the new vehicle law blurs parental rights in a dangerous way that could spark legislation to limit children’s hamburger or french fry consumption, for example, because of health risks from trans fats.
Senator Nanny Oropeza’s response?
But Oropeza said she has no intention of targeting private homes in California. “This is America, for goodness sake,” she said. “I’m not into prohibition.”
My guess is Nanny Oropeza would love to see smokers, fatties, and <insert next target here> put in government run camps to “correct” their evil ways. Suck my second hand smoke.
Vancouver “We can’t be outdone by California”, Canada toughens their smoking ban.
Hookah lounges and cigar rooms may be the next to be included in the list of where you won’t be able to smoke once the bylaw comes into effect this spring.
Let me get this straight… The place is called a Hookah Lounge or Cigar Room and we can’t smoke in it? I guess they are afraid I might inhale my own second hand smoke. I’m sorry Mohamed, but smoking seems to be more taboo than offending Muslims.
Thanks to a little chink in the law - consumer law overrides the smoking ban - I can still enjoy a fat cigar at Casa del Habano in Soho. If I go to the Casa’s cigar shop, I can legally pull up a chair to ‘’sample” a cigar and puff away ahead of, in theory, purchasing stogies to take away.
I’ve seen many articles coming out of the UK worded this way. They seem to think that it is a “loop hole” or “chink in the law” that you can smoke in a Cigar Shop. Even though the law is worded to allow exemptions for places that mainly sell tobacco. Nope, it must be a fluke how dare someone smoke in a place that sells cigars.
Fatties(yeah I’m one too), and Drinkers(Damn got me there to) you’re next. Watch as they start to sin tax that Big Mac like they do tobacco. Where do you think they are going to replace that tax revenue when they finally ban cigarettes? I bet your beer suddenly doubles in price in some states soon.
If you're new here, you may want to check out the Cigar Review Index or subscribe to get updates through RSS or Email. Thanks for visiting!
Tags: Smoking Bans
Topics: Smoking Bans |
January 14th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
Besides Paris becoming smoke free, one of the most interesting breaks in smoking censorship was the widespread report that second hand smoke isn’t really an occupational hazard. One of the most surprising studies came from Johns Hopkins which proved “that secondhand smoke levels at bars and restaurants in Baltimore, MD are 29.6 (500 divided by 16.9) to 238 (500 divided by 2.1) times SAFER than OSHA regulations.” This came 6-week’s before Baltimore’s smoking ban was enacted (1/1/08). I hope Hopkins continues their study to see if the ban is grounds for any real change in the quality of air in Baltimore.
TheIssue.com recently did a feature on the controversy surrounding smoking ban’s, culled from a variety of insightful blog post’s. It is a good piece for anyone looking to learn all aspects of the seemingly endless debate.
Cheers,
Mike
The Issue
January 15th, 2008 at 2:47 pm
Portugal as also banned smoking indoors on January 1st. The law that has been passed is so poorly written that smoking in parking lots is also forbidden.
Apparently a cigarette is worse for your health than the car smoke you have to breathe inside a parking lot.