From Fox 5:
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg says he is now leaning toward a ban on smoking on beaches and in parks in New York City.
It is a reversal for the mayor, who just last month was not considering a ban, according to statements made by his press secretary.
But, at a press availability on Tuesday, Bloomberg admitted he was considering a ban.
"When you ask people in parks or on beaches they say they just don't want smokers there," Bloomberg said.
But he also tried to frame the problem as a litter issue as much as a health issue saying, "People take their cigarette butts and packages and just throw them away."
Bloomberg's health commissioner, Dr. Thomas Farley, has been advocating a ban since last September. At that time, Bloomberg didn't think it was something his administration could get done.
Dr. Farley has said that children shouldn't even have to look at adults smoking.
31 comments:
its not about the health of folks, its about banging the avg guy for frivolous tickets. city needs the $$
But he also tried to frame the problem as a litter issue as much as a health issue saying, "People take their cigarette butts and packages and just throw them away."
The nerve of people just throwing things away! What happened to the good old days when people just tossed their trash on the ground?
They are tossing it on the ground.
... along with used pampers, chicken bones and bannana peels.
Those plastic water bottles are terrible for the enviornment. Not to mention the cost of shipping and trucking the "designer" water from its "source" to NYC. Those should be banned in the parks and on beaches as well. There are water fountains if someone feels thirsty.
"Dr. Farley has said that children shouldn't even have to look at adults smoking."
" Anonymous said...
... along with used pampers, chicken bones and bannana peels."
We are getting on to something here. Children are being taught to waste from the day they're born. Their bottoms should never be touched by pampers. The used ones decompose in landfills for centuries. The parents should use natural cloth diapers and should bring them home to clean themselves and re-use. If they are caught with pampers they should be fined.
The banana peels and chicken bones should be brought to community mulch centers. If you can afford to go to the park or beach, then you can afford to go to the community compost on your way back.
Kill joy said: "The parents should use natural cloth diapers and should bring them home to clean themselves and re-use. If they are caught with pampers they should be fined."
I'd be happy to - as soon as you buy me a washer and dryer and convince my landlord that I have have them installed. Otherwise, that's completely unrealistic.
"They are tossing it on the ground."
"Thrown away" implies in the trash. Poor writing. Shocking.
And while we're at it, let's convert the entire taxi fleet to Prius hybrids to save the enviornment.
I'm a normal sized man and I'm totally comfortable in the back seat of a Prius.
do muslims who plan jihad in their mosques and will plan jihad in the atrocious mosque to be built at Ground Zero also have to stop smoking in parks?
Do obnoxious commenters who raise totally irrelevant - yet seemingly thought-provoking - comments also have to stop smoking in parks?
While I tend to loathe "nanny state" legislation, the sight of cigarette butts everywhere makes me very angry. Perhaps angry enough to support this law. I should disclose that I'm a nonsmoker.
The people who eat their lunch in the park are a much bigger nusiance than the smokers.
The discarded cigarette butts are unsightly to look at and breathing in a puff of someone elses smoke can be annoying, but there is no serious danger from that amount of second hand smoke in an open place.
The leftover food from those who eat in the parks is a far bigger problem.
They are primarily responsiblre for the out of control vermin populations, especially the rats.
Even if the food eaters walk over to the trash cans and deposit their leftovers, the rats can and do get in the cans.
They should ban food before cigarettes. To do otherwise is to put ideology above good governance.
Now with the sanitation cutbacks, the problem is worse than it's ever been.
to the stupid "anonymous" who said JIHAD MOSQUES are irrelevant, you might be the first to be the victim of sharia. Bloomberg is not listening (does he ever) to the will of the people and you need to get off your smug high horse and wake up to what's going on. Muslims have more rights now - PC has taken over and Bloomberg is a fascist who bows down to Islam. And yes, smug anonymous, they have hooka bars and we can't smoke in bars, and yes, smuggy, pretty soon our city will have a domination mosque at Ground Zero - and then cigarette butts will be the least of our problems.
for everyone else who is so offended by cigarette butts, get a life - why weren't you offended the rest of the years you've been on earth? Must be liberals who want to tell the world what to do. Welcome to fascist New York, sister city to fascist San Fran. No cigs, no soda, no pets, no baked goods, no salt, no cameras, but let's have an IMAN who wants to spread JIHAD in NY. Great. WAKE THE ___UP, snotface.
That's pretty daring for Mike. What about all the empty soda cans on beaches. Maybe ban food and drinks in these public places...
Its come down to this - no smoking in public parks. I quit smoking over 2 years ago, I am glad I did and now affected/offended by cigarette smoke and would like to see everyone be helped to quit smoking.
Anonymous said...
Its come down to this - no smoking in public parks. I quit smoking over 2 years ago, I am glad I did and now affected/offended by cigarette smoke and would like to see everyone be helped to quit smoking.
================================
I've always found it interesting how a large percentage of ex-smokers vilify their old habit. And Bloomberg is no exception. He's an ex-cigarette smoker, but still smokes cigars. Note for those paying attention to the recent Federal PACT Act passed where cigarettes are now banned from being delivered through the USPS with the exception of cigars. But that's a whole 'nuther can of worms.
The interesting thing about smoking tobacco, when you look at the chemistry and how it effects the human body down to the endocrine level, is that nicotine isn't technically an addictive substance like certain narcotics (morphine or cocaine). The addictive nature of smoking is primarily psychological based on the endorphin effects nicotine has on the nervous system (very similar to cannabinoids). So punts like this poster I quoted are not only foul to reason, clueless to the psychodynamic cathexis of smoking and brazenly squashing the concept of individual liberty, but also joins the band of propagandists that spew the health lies about tobacco. The vilification of tobacco is as old as King Louis XV of France, 1719.
Klink Cannoli said:
The interesting thing about smoking tobacco, when you look at the chemistry and how it effects the human body down to the endocrine level, is that nicotine isn't technically an addictive substance like certain narcotics (morphine or cocaine).
That's incorrect. Nicotine is considered a physically addictive substance. While the physical aspect of it is less severe than heroine (it takes only around three days to get off the physical addiction to nicotine), there's plenty of studies out there that suggest a smoking addiction is considerably tougher to defeat than addictions to cocaine and even heroine.
I've never myself had an addiction to those substances, but I can confirm that quitting smoking is excruciatingly difficult. I'm now on my second smoke-free tenure. Two years ago I hadn't been smoking for half a year and while there certainly was no longer any trace of a nicotine addiction, the feeling of wanting a cigarette never really went fully away. People that have been ex-smokers for years can confirm they still have that feeling at times.
I think it's only a matter of time that smoking will become illegal entirely. This would solve things for me for sure since I wouldn't have the criminal energy to obtain cigarettes through illegal channels.
And you could certainly bemoan the loss of freedom by banning yet another thing that one might think ought to be left up to people's judgement. I would agree there, except when it comes to smoking. My own experiences have taught me what kind of devious addiction this really is. No one should be given the choice to do it.
Tassilo said,
"I think it's only a matter of time that smoking will become illegal entirely."
I think he's right, I also think cigarette prohibition will re-invigorate organizations run by our friends in Howard Beach.
Just when they were almost stomped out, this lucrative opportunity will be dropped in their laps.
That's pretty daring for Mike. What about all the empty soda cans on beaches. Maybe ban food and drinks in these public places...
Why not? Ocean Beach on Fire Island does that? It would be a boon for local business.
squashing the concept of individual liberty, but also joins the band of propagandists that spew the health lies about tobacco. The vilification of tobacco is as old as King Louis XV of France, 1719."
Oh brother...well you are good for a laugh anyway.
Here, oh clueless one, read:
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5916a3.htm
Excerpt: "In the United States, tobacco use is the single leading preventable cause of disease, disability, and death. Each year, 443,000 U.S. residents die from cigarette smoking and exposure to secondhand smoke, and another 8.6 million have a serious illness caused by smoking."
Since the first Surgeon General's report nearly fifty years ago confirmed long held suspicions about smoking and disease only and asshole would take up the habit, and an idiot would defend it.
Even in Asian countries such as Thailand there are active campaigns to curb smoking and the hugely expensive diseases it causes. Every pack sold in Thailand must carry a warning picture of the disease effects of smoking. These pics are real and truly gruesome.
It killed three older friends and my Aunt. I hope you never live to see what lung cancer and emphysema do to loved ones.
I'm an ex-smoker - I NEVER have cravings.
I loved smoking back when you could sit in the window of the local diner with a friend over a cup of coffee and a few cigarettes or after a wonderful dinner at your fav restaurant. I loved also not thinking about quitting - but, THOSE days are long gone. Cigarettes truly stopped tasting good, and I smoked only out of habit.
I WISH I could've smoked just 2 or 3 cigarettes a day like some people I knew -
the oldest person ever reported living was a woman in France who lived to be 120 years old. She only stopped her 2 cigarettes per day habit at 117 because she could no longer see well enough to light them.
Tassilo von Parseval said...
That's incorrect. Nicotine is considered a physically addictive substance. While the physical aspect of it is less severe than heroine (it takes only around three days to get off the physical addiction to nicotine), there's plenty of studies out there that suggest a smoking addiction is considerably tougher to defeat than addictions to cocaine and even heroine.
================================
Sorry, medically and scientifically you are incorrect. But your opinion is a very common one today.
Quoting the 1964 Surgeon General's Report: "…in medical and scientific terminology the practice (smoking) should be labeled habituation to distinguish it clearly from addiction, since the biological effects of tobacco, like coffee and other caffeine-containing beverages, betel morsel chewing and the like, are not comparable to those produced by morphine, alcohol, barbiturates, and many other potent addicting drugs." (p. 350)
"in contrast to drugs of addiction, withdrawal from tobacco never constitutes a threat to life." (p. 352)
Perhaps a small factoid you may not be aware of is nicotine is found in certain vegetables, notably tomatoes. Interesting how we never hear of people suffering withdrawal symptoms when they can't have their tomatoes, eh?
Also, nicotine is chiefly burnt off when burning tobacco. The average yield of nicotine in a cigarette is approximately 0.9 milligrams. That's less than a thousandth of a gram.
There's a smoking subject which is even more insidious that I haven't even touched on yet, which is the politics behind the anti-smoking crusade. Ugly.
Lino wrote:
Since the first Surgeon General's report nearly fifty years ago confirmed long held suspicions about smoking and disease only and asshole would take up the habit, and an idiot would defend it.
================================
You're so well known in these circles to drink the Kool Aid, why would this subject be any different?
If you were only worth the effort, Lino, I would go head to head with each and every bull cookie the CDC summarizes in the webpage as I have in the past. A 7 year, 300 page, brilliantly researched and analyzed book on the subject is my reference.
And by the way, your mother still dresses you funny.
"If you were only worth the effort, Lino, I would go head to head with each and every bull cookie the CDC summarizes in the webpage as I have in the past. A 7 year, 300 page, brilliantly researched and analyzed book on the subject is my reference."
-Funded by the Tobacco industry or one of their shell org's.
-Oh please, you are such a child. The links between smoking and disease are long since settled, even the cigarette industry disbanded their Tobacco "Institute" when it became an object of ridicule.
"And by the way, your mother still dresses you funny."
Now-now, pink looks good on me darling. The same can not be said for that diaper you wear. :-)
Klink Cannoli said:
Sorry, medically and scientifically you are incorrect. But your opinion is a very common one today.
Nope, a claim based on a statement from 1964 is not going to cut it. Do a little query for "Understanding nicotine addiction and physical withdrawal process" which I recall having read years ago. It might not be available in full online, but abstracts probably are.
Nicotine changes the heartbeat as well as the blood-pressure. Hence, it of course has a very significant physical component. There cannot be any discussion about this. The last time this was apparently disputed was in 1964.
I sincerely hope this law does not take effect. It is an abomination that such measures can even be considered in a free nation. Smoking is still a legal activity in America. Denying tax-paying citizens of this right is a slap in the face of democracy.
Passing this type of legislation is a slimy way to avoid the perils of what prohibition did for alcohol. I’d like to see New York try a ban on alcohol. Their already out of control crime rate would escalate to Biblical levels of chaos!
Smokers should not be demonized. I fear, if New York’s war on smokers continues, smoking will soon be banned even in private vehicles, a practice already common in some European cities.
Perhaps most heartbreaking of all is the sad fact that a ban on smoking in public places, coupled with the impending hike in tobacco tax, will hurt small businesses the most.
It will force hard-working tobacconists across the state to shut down their shops and join the ever increasing unemployment line.
"Nope, a claim based on a statement from 1964 is not going to cut it."
- In 1687 Isaac Newton published Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy. We still use these laws of classical mechanics and universal gravitation. Using your logic, I suppose this should be held in suspicion simply because it's not current information or research.
"Nicotine changes the heartbeat as well as the blood-pressure. Hence, it of course has a very significant physical component."
- So does ingesting a stalk of celery. Most anything we ingest will have biochemical and physiological ramifications. And how does a mild effect suddenly become a "very significant physical component?" Anyway, I'm sorry to have to correct you once again. Nicotine specifically doesn't change the smokers heartbeat or blood pressure. The heart rate increases slightly and subsequently effects blood pressure. The actual causative biochemical that is responsible for this is the release of epinephrine by the adrenal glands triggered by the mere act of smoking. This strange reactive process still stumps medical professionals today.
"There cannot be any discussion about this."
- Of course there can…. with men of reason. Tyrants of science, maybe not so much.
Only another 2 weeks, Lino, and then all your sexual hedonistic desires can blossom once again in the place you call your homeland… Thailand. Cross dressing, diapers and all! You must be beside yourself.
Klink Cannoli said...
"...Of course there can…. with men of reason. Tyrants of science, maybe not so much."
You obviously take some perverse pleasure at making arguments that fly against all -reputable- science.
Smoking kills over 400,000 Americans each year..the deaths are often prolonged and gruesome. The only basis for your position is some libertarian idiocy. You are simply arguing for the continued profits of an industry whose product, when used as intended, kills.
I'll leave your childish comments about my second home to stand as your embarrassment.
Post a Comment