Posted on 08/11/2005 6:18:28 PM PDT by elkfersupper
Smokers beware: Puffing within 25 feet of the door of a publicly used building, a park or in other public spaces could cost you $500 or a year in prison. But if alcohol is being served or you're rolling the dice, well, smoke 'em if you got 'em.
The Metro Council narrowly approved an anti-smoking ordinance filled with exemptions Wednesday. Some council members expressed concern about enforcing the new ban. The long list of exemptions includes bars and lounges, restaurants with liquor licenses and casinos.
"You can smoke -- with limitations. You can drink -- with limitations. You just can't go wild," said Councilwoman Lorri Burgess, one of those pushing the law that would ban smoking in many public places or within 25 feet of a doorway of a publicly used building. The Legislature gave local governments the ability to control smoking, but it was full of those exceptions, Burgess said.
The anti-smoking ban "sends a strong message," she said. "I am realistic that we can't take policemen off the streets" to enforce it, though. Asking smokers to stand 25 feet from the door of a business or public building is not asking too much, she said.
"The issue today is clean air," Burgess said.
Council members Charles Kelly and Martha Jane Tassin also sponsored the proposed ordinance. Tassin said she has "taken a lot of grief" for supporting the smoking ban, but she compared it to the requirement of automobile seat belts or helmets for motorcyclists.
"I hate smoking," Councilman Mickey Skyring said, but he said he was not willing to send someone to jail for it. The ban as proposed includes parks and golf courses, so someone smoking on the 18th green could be sent to jail, Skyring said.
He later proposed a fine of no more than $100 and serving eight hours in community service with the City Court's litter detail. He also proposed eliminating golf courses, parks and part of the levee system. But only he and Council members Pat Culbertson, David Boneno and Joe Greco supported his amendment. Councilman Wayne Carter abstained, and Burgess did not vote.
Culbertson questioned the enforceability of the ban. He recommended a 30-day deferral. "Let's try to find some common ground here -- in a way that makes sense."
Carter, who said he understood both Burgess' and Culbertson's arguments, called on Parish Attorney Wade Shows. The new legal adviser, attending his first council meeting, told members the proposal is "problematic" and he thinks issues needed to have been worked out before passage. But that advice appeared to be ignored.
Eight members voted for the new ban: Darrell Ourso, Burgess, David Boneno, Tassin, Byron Sharper, Mike Walker, Kelly and Carter. Culbertson and Skyring voted no, and Ulysses Addison and Greco did not vote.
No smokers stepped forward to talk against the proposal.
Christina Bannister, owner of the popular Christina's Restaurant near the Governmental Complex, questioned enforcement.
"Smoking 25 feet from my building would put people in the street," she said. "It can have a negative impact on my little restaurant and other small businesses."
She had said she might get a liquor license to be exempt so she could have a smoking section.
Buddy Amoroso said he doesn't smoke and 15 years ago his family business banned smoking. "We are looking at criminalizing a legal activity" and making it the same as driving while intoxicated or possession of marijuana.
But Bill Noonan of the Clean Indoor Air Coalition said passing the ban "is the single most important thing you (the council) can do" for better health in the community. The coalition has 28 member groups, he said.
Dr. Jule Assercq, a family doctor with LSU's Mid City clinic and Earl K. Long Medical Center, said 22 percent of the population smokes, but 100 percent breathes. Smoking is known to cause cancer, she said.
Cigarettes burn 12 minutes, but smokers inhale only 30 seconds of the smoke produced, she said. The doctor ticked off a long list of complex chemicals found in cigarette smoke and suspected or known to be carcinogens, or substances that can cause cancer.
Allowing smokers to be around nonsmokers is like "allowing urination only in the deep end of the pool" for swimmers, Assercq said.
"You can smoke -- with limitations. You can drink -- with limitations. You just can't go wild,"
I love your attitude problem as well!!!!!!!!!!
Cool!!!! the antis are always looking to BLAME someone.....so now we can blame her for more smoking bans :)
BTW, is whatever-town-this-is, under discussion, going to paint a series of lines on the sidewalk - smoke|STOP|smoke - because if they don't, I will clean their clock.
The original language in the Delaware smoking ban included 50feet from entrance language, which was initially dropped to 25feet and then dropped altogether when it was explained to the idiot legislator this was a clean "INDOOR" act and he was basically banning smoking in the downtown area of any town in the state.....either that or he was going to be responsible for a bunch of traffic problems because smoking would only be permitted in the middle of the street........
Idiots one and all.
Yep. See, as a rube from out of town, no way I can be expected to know that. So a law so complicated is just about guaranteed to get the city sued for entrapment...which the city will lose.
Wonder how many of the council members are D's and how many are R's.
Protecting the unborn is one of the arguments of the antis........they claim smoking mothers hurt the baby and smoking around a pregnant woman hurts the baby.........yet many of them are in favor of abortion, at all stages.
Choice for them, but not for others.........interesting.
I have more than once been told that my (now 7yo) daughter would have been better off if I had an abortion instead of being born to a smoking mother. (this did not occur on FR)
HMMMMM....never thought about it that way. But you've got a really good point.
It doesn't matter anymore.....when it comes to the issue of tobacco - they are all the same.
When I was fighting the statewide ban in Delaware, it was the D's more than the R's fighting it.....and the biggest proponents of it we both R's.
Earlier this year they tried it in Virginia, it died an ignoble 2-1 death, but it was a Republican sponsored piece f legislation.
What if somebody told her:
Yeah, "what if?" It never ceases to amaze me that people do not rise up and fight this crap.
LOL - I was going to borrow your "give a damn" since you weren't using it. ;*)
Go right ahead!!!!!!!!!
;*) Maybe just for a couple of "special" posts. LOL
I "borrowed" it myself - it's a song title :)
Akkk - that's right. You told me about that some time ago.
I still love that song.......but I haven't heard it in a while. I haven't been in the car of late, and most of that has been on Friday afternoon when we go out, and that is time for Rush and and then Hannity. Radio reception is really bad in this house, except upstairs, and I still can't get up there :(
I "saw" you talking about that the other day. It must be the state. I get one station in the house or car. Thankfully, it is Rush.
Did you here about the meteor shower that's due between now and dawn? Since we are up I thought I might go take a peak.
I don't know about it being the state, I can get al kinds of stations in the car. I think it has something to do with the lightening rods on the roof, and that is why the stereo upstairs does better than the one down here.
*SIGH* on the meteor shower. Hubby has long gone to bed, and getting outside is a major production for me. Hopefully tonight is not the last night of them.....and with any luck I will have this stupid cast off my leg on tuesday.
On the local level in our neck o' the woods, you'd be hard pressed to see any party indentification until you're actually in the voting booth.
OTOH, at the state level just as many Rs as Ds bring up this kind of legislation. One R state rep wanted to have a $.05 a filter deposit, like on bottles, so that bums would patrol and clean up the roadsides. What a maroon...
Or, as they did in my county, the hearing notices are buried in fine print in some third-tier rag (that few read) to meet the Letter-of-the-Law regarding "Public Notice" of such hearings.
It IS interesting that whether Environmental Wacko's, Anti-smokers, Abortionists, or Gun-grabbers, or _________ (fill in the blank), these people seem to have all the time in the world to attend such gatherings, no?
Rent-A-Mob
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.