Posted on 07/16/2008 7:47:50 AM PDT by SmithL
Smokers would find it harder to buy their cigarettes and light up in public under two proposals under consideration by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors.
Mayor Gavin Newsom has proposed prohibiting tobacco sales in pharmacies, including Walgreens and Rite Aid. The city's public health chief said the proposal is modeled after rules in eight provinces in Canada but has not been tried anywhere in the United States.
Supervisor Chris Daly has proposed legislation that would vastly limit areas where people can smoke.
Gone would be smoking in all businesses and bars, which now make an exception for owner-operated ones.
Gone too would be lighting up in taxicabs and rental cars, city-owned vehicles, farmers' markets, common areas of apartment buildings, tourist hotels, tobacco shops, charity bingo games, unenclosed dining areas, waiting areas such as lines at an ATM or movie theater, and anywhere within 20 feet of entrances to private, nonresidential buildings.
Mitch Katz, director of the Department of Public Health, said he strongly supports both measures - even if they are angering business owners who say it's one more example of San Francisco City Hall overstepping its bounds.
"Tobacco remains the No. 1 cause of preventable death in the U.S. - period," he said. "It's government's responsibility to protect people from obvious risks."
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
I've seen the same sentiment posted by FReepers. Some people just don't get that whole “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness” thangy!
Soon to be joined by the FR SDSers I imagine.
These neurotics don't have a clue how tiresome yet dangerous they are.
When they die in perfect health, they still won't get it.
But having illegal aliens gunning down innocent citizens is Okey-Dokey.
Oh the the irony that the city of disease-ridden perverts (whose actions helped to ensure the successful spread of AIDS) are so hung up on smoking.
Of course, most of these people don’t mind smoking illegal susbstances and each other.
“Mitch Katz, director of the Department of Public Health, ………..”It’s government’s responsibility to protect people from obvious risks.”
How’s it feel to find out you are politically aligned with the San Francisco Director of Public Health? Personally, I’d be ashamed if I were you.
I'm fine with me - I don't impose myself on anyone else. I like to drive fast but I never drive fast in residential areas or any other area where I risk someone else. I like to fly light aircraft - but I don't take chances that risk other people's lives and nobody has to fly with me that doesn't want to.
Seems to me that you're the guy that ought to be ashamed: you can't kick a habit that makes you a pariah among educated people and that will eventually kill you.
Too bad.
Where’s that da@m earthquake they’ve been predicting since the ‘70’s........
The uneducated salute you. GFYS.
Forgot to ping you, my uneducated friend...
"O wad some Power the giftie gie us -To see oursels as ithers see us!"
Amen.
You get used to eating ribs every day and you go to salad, your body is going to revolt.
Smokers in my family outlived the non-smokers on the order of two decades.
See ya' on the road there, Mad Max.
True enough, but it doesn't much matter. We are who we are and life is a finite gift. What we do with that gift, while we have it, is the only real choice we have.
Given that so many of these correspondents seem to be in the mood to throw their lives away (and take us with them), their view of me is inconsequential.
We know a good deal more know about smoking than he did - but people like you just keep smoking anyway.
How smart does that make you?
Smart enough to know what liberty is and that I want more of it instead of less.
You?
You do not have the right to inflict it on anyone else.
Clear enough for you?
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.