Smoking Now Being Banned on California Beaches

[BigToque]

Good!

If people want to smoke they can do so where their filth and fumes can hurt nobody but themselves and others who want to associate with them.

Smoking should be banned in all public places. I don't even know how the hell you guys get away with throwing your butts on the ground. Fscking inconsiderate littering asswads (I'm not saying all smokers throw their butts on the ground). You should be fined. And just so you know, no, I don't litter.

 

[GasX]

Originally posted by: Stefan
Good!

If people want to smoke they can do so where their filth and fumes can hurt nobody but themselves and others who want to associate with them.

Smoking should be banned in all public places. I don't even know how the hell you guys get away with throwing your butts on the ground. Fscking inconsiderate littering asswads (I'm not saying all smokers throw their butts on the ground). You should be fined. And just so you know, no, I don't litter.

ok, so ban littering... wait they already did. So what's the problem? the smell? then outlaw being odiferous...

 

[StageLeft]

I absolutely detest people smoking around me. Not for safety, but because I feel like I can't breath. I think it would have to be a mighty crowded beach for somebody's smoking to actually bother me, since it is outside. You'd have to be basically next to me without wind to bother me.

 

[Jeraden]

I don't live anywhere near a beach and haven't been to a beach in a while, but it just seems logical to me that smoking wouldn't be allowed there. I was kind of surprised to see this is a new law and people are opposed to it. With all the children at beaches and the fact that it would be extremely disgusting to be walking around finding butts in the sand, I'm surprised there is even a debate about it.

 

[notfred]

If smokers weren't, for a large part, inconsiderate jackasses who throw thier trash all over the ground where other people walk barefoot, then this wouldn't be an issue.

Don't want smoking banned at your local beach? Simple, don't treat the beach as a giant ashtray.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Good.

Fvckers throwing their butts on the beach should be shot. In fact, anyone throwing trash out their window should be shot.

 

[0roo0roo]

if they can ban nudity/sex/burning on the beach, they can ban sigs.


republicans certainly arent for individual rights. dying of cancer? smoke that joint and ashcroft will hunt your ass down!! gay marraige? fcc and its hunt for indecency on the air? hahaahah!!

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Good.

Fvckers throwing their butts on the beach should be shot. In fact, anyone throwing trash out their window should be shot.

Let's just shoot everyone!

 

[pulse8]

My biggest problem with smokers isn't the smoke, but that they throw their sh!t all over the ground.

 

[BigToque]

Originally posted by: Orsorum

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
Good.

Fvckers throwing their butts on the beach should be shot. In fact, anyone throwing trash out their window should be shot.

Let's just shoot everyone!

Shot with a lethal dose of Fines (for anyone that litters)

(We have garbage cans for a reason)

 

[Platypus]

*adds to the laundry list of freedoms taken away in the last 4 years*

 

[Red Dawn]

Now if they would just banned the lard asses from wearing bathing suits on the beach it would be a much more pleasant place!

 

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: jjones
It won't be long before certain cities will not allow smoking at all, anywhere, within city limits.

It's already happened in Wisconsin's Liberal Mecca ...Madison

Sysadmin

 

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Now if they would just banned the lard asses from wearing bathing suits on the beach it would be a much more pleasant place!

Remember more cushion less push'in


Sysadmin

 

[OffTopic1]

I think it is a bit much banning smoking at the beach, however I would much prefer a stiffer fine on litter specially asshat that throw bottle shards in the sand/fire.

 

[TStep]

Please Don't stop at cigs, ban anything that is unhealthy to humans or the enviroment:

alcoholic beverages, cars, lawn mowers, anything fossil fuel related, styrofoam, industrial manufacturing plants, electrical generation plants, all unheathy foods, etc.

But banning cigarettes is a great start. It really tackles the pollution issues head on, and will make a tremendous dent in the ecological garbage can that we are turning Mother Earth into. The LA air will be sooooo much better when the huge amounts of pollution caused by cigarette smoke are eliminated.

I get a kick out of these moral majority style issues. I have never seen a single one that really tackles the true problems- only the convenient issues. By the way, I'll be selling the "boy in the bubble" home conversion kit to protect all those using the enviroment/pollution issue as a reason for banning smoking.

If California legislature can just synchronized, they can both ban cigarette smoking and legalize marijuana in the same day. What a triumphant day that will be.

 

[MaxDepth]

Will someone please ban the sun from the beach?!?!?!?!?!?!!!!

My gawd, think of the cancer that is spreading on all those well-oiled buttocks and thighs!

 

[SuperTool]

They just gotta ban the dude downstairs from me from blowing cigarette smoke into my apartment, then I'll be happy.

 

[MAME]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: MAME

Originally posted by: Amused(Amused commentary: 50,000. Not 49,999... Not 50,001 but 50,000. I want a detailed list of names with conculsive proof of causation on each death. In case you didn't know, there exists no such proof. No such list. The EPA pulls this number directly out of it's collective ass.)

So what? Why should anyone have to suck down the smoke from other people's cigarettes? That's just fvcked up.

I bet you'd say that while sitting in traffic behind a big-rig joyfully sucking down the fumes... which are many, many times more carcinogenic than tobacco smoke. The irony is astounding.

There is no proof whatsoever that ETS in an outdoor environemnt is hazardous to your health. None. There is, however, proof that diesel fumes ARE hazardous (although the chances are quite small) when exposed in an outdoor area.

wtf are you talking about. driving is necessary based on our society. we don't really have much of a choice.

Smoking on the other hand is offensive and very inconsiderate to others. IT IS NOT PRODUCTIVE IN THE SLIGHTEST. Why should I have to suffer while you kill yourself? That's messed up.

 

[Cuda1447]

Originally posted by: jjones

Originally posted by: Viper GTS
In California the beaches are public property, right? Nobody can own the beach...

Anyway...

If the general public doesn't want people to smoke on their beaches, they should be able to make it a law.

We have laws against lots of other things for identical reasons (noise ordinances, public indecency, public drunkenness, etc.), why should smoking be exempt?

Viper GTS

They should ban BBQs in recreation areas also. How would that be? No more picnics. A complete ban of fireworks displays on the 4th of July would be a good thing too.

If the majority of the public wanted that ban then yes, I agree ban it. The fact of the matter is that most people DONT enjoy breathing other peoples nasty smoke, and would want it banned, while there's probably a very small percentage of people that would want to outlaw BBQ's or the 4th of July.


Lame argument.

 

[Cuda1447]

You people are so incredibly stupid its amazing.


If the majority of the public wants something, I.E. NONE OF YOUR SICK A$S SMOKE IN OUR FACES AT THE BEACH/SCHOOL/ANY OTHER PUBLIC PROPERTY, then they should get it. If the majority voted to outlaw diesel fuels, then it should be done. If the majority of the public wanted to outlaw anything that in someway negatively impacted them, then it should be done.

Your problem is that you don't understand most people don't want to outlaw productive trucks that produce some hazardous gases, cause atleast they are getting something done. We don't want to outlaw fireworks that could strike someone and kill them either, cause we like fireworks and are willing to take that chance. On the other hand smoking is nothing we like, its a big nuisance and its sick as hell! A good majority of non-smokers, and of the general population do indeed want smoking banned from public properties. I fully support that. Banning smoking in privately owned institutions shouldn't take place however.


But anyone who smokes and think they have the right to sit around doorways to schools/stores/any other public place and blow smoke in everyones face is out of their fricken mind. Keep your sick a$s habits to yourself, there is no need to bring them around me.

 

[TheNinja]

This law pisses me off. I go to the beach to enjoy the sights, inhale second hand smoke, and get cigarette butts stuck between my toes and now they are taking it away from me? Why bother going to the beach anymore, what's going to be left at the beach? Cleaner air? Cleaner sand?!? Nobody wants that.....THE HORROR!!!!

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: Viper GTS
In California the beaches are public property, right? Nobody can own the beach...

Anyway...

If the general public doesn't want people to smoke on their beaches, they should be able to make it a law.

We have laws against lots of other things for identical reasons (noise ordinances, public indecency, public drunkenness, etc.), why should smoking be exempt?

Viper GTS

AGREED!!!!

 

[dolph]

tobacco costs between $97.2 billion and $155 billion in health care and lost productivity per year, in america. somewhere around 450,000 deaths per year, again, in america.
sources are american lung association and nih, two organizations that REALLY stand to profit a lot from decreased tobacco use. wow, think of all the money they'd make if people quit smoking. wait a sec, what? they won't make any money? now i'm confused, why would they want people to stop smoking if they don't gain anything from it?

anything that has a chance of reducing tobacco usage should be encouraged. when the top three killers in the us are tobacco, alcohol, and obesity-related, maybe we're a little too over-indulgent and need someone to help us from killing ourselves. (not to mention the hundreds of billions of dollars it's costing all of us to treat these overgrown children before they die of self-inflicted causes) or maybe we're better off with the hundreds of thousands that die every year. something to think about.

 

[Linflas]

Originally posted by: Cuda1447
You people are so incredibly stupid its amazing.


If the majority of the public wants something, I.E. NONE OF YOUR SICK A$S SMOKE IN OUR FACES AT THE BEACH/SCHOOL/ANY OTHER PUBLIC PROPERTY, then they should get it. If the majority voted to outlaw diesel fuels, then it should be done. If the majority of the public wanted to outlaw anything that in someway negatively impacted them, then it should be done.

Your problem is that you don't understand most people don't want to outlaw productive trucks that produce some hazardous gases, cause atleast they are getting something done. We don't want to outlaw fireworks that could strike someone and kill them either, cause we like fireworks and are willing to take that chance. On the other hand smoking is nothing we like, its a big nuisance and its sick as hell! A good majority of non-smokers, and of the general population do indeed want smoking banned from public properties. I fully support that. Banning smoking in privately owned institutions shouldn't take place however.


But anyone who smokes and think they have the right to sit around doorways to schools/stores/any other public place and blow smoke in everyones face is out of their fricken mind. Keep your sick a$s habits to yourself, there is no need to bring them around me.

Just because the majority wants something doesn't always mean it is right.