Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Belmont to be first U.S. city to ban all smoking
smdailyjournal.com ^

Posted on 11/15/2006 4:27:09 PM PST by frankiep

Belmont to be first U.S. city to ban all smoking By Dana Yates, Daily Journal Staff

Belmont is set to make history by becoming the first city in the nation to ban smoking on its streets and almost everywhere else. The Belmont City Council voted unanimously last night to pursue a strict law that will prohibit smoking anywhere in the city except for single-family detached residences. Smoking on the street, in a park and even in one’s car will become illegal and police would have the option of handing out tickets if they catch someone.

The actual language of the law still needs to be drafted and will likely come back to the council either in December or early next year.

“We have a tremendous opportunity here. We need to pass as stringent a law as we can, I would like to make it illegal,” said Councilman Dave Warden. “What if every city did this, image how many lives would be saved? If we can do one little thing here at this level it will matter.”

Armed with growing evidence that second-hand smoke causes negative health effects, the council chose to pursue the strictest law possible and deal with any legal challenges later. Last month, the council said it wanted to pursue a law similar to ones passed in Dublin and the Southern California city of Calabasas. It took up the cause after a citizen at a senior living facility requested smoke be declared a public nuisance, allowing him to sue neighbors who smoke.

The council was concerned about people smoking in multi-unit residences.

“I would just like to say ‘no smoking’ and see what happens and if they do smoke, [someone] has the right to have the police come and give them a ticket,” said Councilwoman Coralin Feierbach.

The council’s decision garnered applause from about 15 people who showed up in support of the ordinance. One woman stood up and blew kisses to the council, another pumped his fist with satisfaction.

“I’m astounded. I admire their courage and unanimous support,” said Serena Chen, policy director of the American Lung Association of California.

Chen has worked in this area since 1991 and helped many cities and counties pass no smoking policies, but not one has been willing to draft a complete ban.

“I feel like the revolution is taking place and I am trying to catch up,” Chen told the council.

The decision puts Belmont on the forefront of smoking policy and it is already attracting attention from other states.

“You have the ability to do something a little more extraordinary than Dublin or Calabasas. I see what they’ve done as five or six on the Richter Scale. What the citizens of Belmont, and of America, need is five brave people to do something that’s a seven or eight on the Richter Scale,” said Philip Henry Jarosz of the Condominium Council of Maui.

“The whole state of Hawaii is watching” he said.

Councilman Warren Lieberman said he was concerned the city will pass a law it cannot enforce because residents will still smoke unless police are specifically called to a situation. Police cannot go out and enforce smoking rules, he said.

“It makes us hypocrites by saying you know you can break the law if no one is watching,” Lieberman said.

However, both Feierbach and Warden argued it is the same as jaywalking, having a barking dog or going 10 miles over the speed limit. All are illegal, but seldom enforced.

“You can’t walk down the street with a beer, but you can have a cigarette,” Warden said. “You shouldn’t be allowed to do that. I just think it shouldn’t be allowed anywhere except in someone’s house. If you want to do that, that’s fine.”


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: california; liberty; nannystate; peninsula; pufflist; smokingnazis; tyranny; wodlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-138 last
To: libertarian27
So, have they banned the sale of tobacco in all Belmont's businesses. Or are they just banning the smoker?

Belmont - "America's Premier Gulag"

If cities and town's are going to ban smoking, then I say pull all the tobacco products off of every shelf, and stop all cigarette taxes and the Tobacco Settlement money from feeding into that town or city.

What is fair is fair.  They can't balance their state budgets without the cigarette tax dollars, but they want to ban smoking.

They can't have both!


121 posted on 11/16/2006 8:08:49 AM PST by SheLion (When you're right, take up the fight!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: sandyeggo

i live there. you don't have to tell me. and no i wasn't part of the 25%


122 posted on 11/16/2006 8:15:57 AM PST by sappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961; raybbr

I'll contribute too, as long as I can be assured there are no internet connections available in the area.


123 posted on 11/16/2006 9:27:56 AM PST by Madame Dufarge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Madame Dufarge
I'll contribute too, as long as I can be assured there are no internet connections available in the area.

You win! That's the best one yet.

124 posted on 11/16/2006 10:05:05 AM PST by raybbr (You think it's bad now - wait till the anchor babies start to vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: frankiep

Un-fooking-believable. Unfortunately, it's all too easy to believe in today's rights-averse climate.


125 posted on 11/16/2006 10:45:09 AM PST by Still Thinking (Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: raybbr
You think it's bad now, wait til the smoking Nazis gain the ascendancy.

Oh wait.....

126 posted on 11/16/2006 1:16:42 PM PST by Madame Dufarge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: frankiep

The Belmont City Council has just banned the following:
Cats
Dogs
French Fries
Hamburgers
Alcohol
Soft Drinks
Candy Bars
Snacks of all kinds
Gum
Pork
Chicken

and they are still in session...


127 posted on 11/16/2006 1:21:35 PM PST by Prost1 (Fair and Unbiased as always!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SheLion

"If cities and town's are going to ban smoking, then I say pull all the tobacco products off of every shelf, and stop all cigarette taxes and the Tobacco Settlement money from feeding into that town or city."

Agreed.


128 posted on 11/16/2006 2:23:29 PM PST by 383rr (Those who choose security over liberty deserve neither- GUN CONTROL=SLAVERY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961
It's mind boggling...

It's all that and more. In my view, these tyrants should be flogged and put into stocks.
129 posted on 11/16/2006 3:42:47 PM PST by WorkingClassFilth (Ever learning . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: southernnorthcarolina; y'all
If a developer, or a group, purchased a thousand or two acres of farmland, and laid out a new subdivision or even a town, and had "no smoking" as a policy from the start, that would be fine as far as I'm concerned. As long as prospective buyers or renters know the rules in advance, no problem.

As long as the community stays totally private, - condo type rules could apply.. --- But if the development becomes a town using taxation for revenue, then our Constitution's law of the land applies.

But to pass such an ordinance in an existing town is absurd. The tyranny of the majority writ large.

Yep. -- Obviously, our US Constitution does not allow local, state or fed officials to deprive people of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. -- Prohibitions like Belmonts cannot be enacted or enforced without infringing on such individual rights.

130 posted on 11/16/2006 3:46:38 PM PST by tpaine ( Prohibitionists fail to recognize, the very measures favored are the source of the evil deplored)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: frankiep
It's all clear. The neo-libiots created the fake "war on drugs" so they can pass "feel-good"/"it's for the children" police state legislation.

We are slowly headed toward total lifestyle FASCISM. Codex Alimentarius takes away our vitamins and minerals. Healthy People 2010 will be used to justify TOTAL GUN CONFISCATIONS.

Congratulations, idiot neo-libs of America. You are now "good, little slaves"...but if you thought the slave masters of the 1800s were bad, you ain't seen nothing yet. Bottom line is, you idiot neo-libs DESERVE to be slaves, and you DESERVE to be RAPED, TORTURED, and EXTERMINATED by the NWO slave masters.
131 posted on 11/16/2006 5:56:35 PM PST by bigdcaldavis (Xandros : In a world without fences, who needs Gates?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Publius6961
It's mind boggling that they are willing to create criminals by punishing the use of a legal product that harms no one else (prove it!)

This quote becomes applicable more and more each day.

"Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with." ('Atlas Shrugged' 1957)

132 posted on 11/17/2006 8:25:14 AM PST by beltfed308 (Democrats :Tough on Taxpayers, Soft on Terrorism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: frankiep

This is Prohibition all over again.


133 posted on 11/17/2006 8:46:11 AM PST by Aquinasfan (When you find "Sola Scriptura" in the Bible, let me know)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beltfed308

http://www.insidedenver.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_5149921,00.html


Unreal!!!


134 posted on 11/17/2006 10:00:30 AM PST by xowboy (Those who would give up FREEDOM in the pursuit of HEALTH deserves neither)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: frankiep
Write to the Belmont City Council at CityCouncil@belmont.gov
Tell them to stop this proposed ban on smoking EVERYWHERE except in a single family detached home.

Second hand smoke out doors posses no real threat to anyone. There is simple physics behind this.

What is much more serious is diesel fumes from buses and trucks, gas fumes from cars and trucks and lawnmowers and leaf blowers, and also smoke from BBQs and fireplaces. Maybe these liberal fascists should outlaw these before they discriminate even more on smokers whose outdoor smoke poses no real danger, other than irritating some people who really need to get a life of their own. I realize second hand smoke can be dangerous indoors if people are exposed to it for a long time in unventilated areas, but outdoors it poses no real threat as proven by simple physics.

BTW farting outdoors releases methane gas which helps destroy the ozone, AND it's an irritant to people who have to smell it. Belmont should consider banning this as well.
135 posted on 11/17/2006 12:17:29 PM PST by jimih2006 (Write to the Belmont City Council at CityCouncil@belmont.gov to STOP the ban)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: frankiep
I say, treat tobacco the same as pot. Anyone who has ever seen a smoker jonesing for a butt knows it's just as addictive if not more so. Ban 'em both; there is no "freedom" to be a drug addict whether it's cannabis or tobacco. Demon weeds both.

I would also say that anyone who smokes around kids is committing child abuse and ought to forfeit their house, get ten years in prison, and have their kids put in a foster home.

-ccm

136 posted on 11/19/2006 6:48:40 PM PST by ccmay (Too much Law; not enough Order.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reeses
Why should one demon weed be treated differently from another? They are both psychoactive drugs. You don't have any kind of civil right to be a drug addict. Ban 'em both outright.

-ccm

137 posted on 11/19/2006 6:52:38 PM PST by ccmay (Too much Law; not enough Order.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: ccmay
I say, treat tobacco the same as pot. Anyone who has ever seen a smoker jonesing for a butt knows it's just as addictive if not more so. Ban 'em both; there is no "freedom" to be a drug addict whether it's cannabis or tobacco. Demon weeds both.

I would also say that anyone who smokes around kids is committing child abuse and ought to forfeit their house, get ten years in prison, and have their kids put in a foster home.

I tell you what. If I ever run into anyone that gives a s##t what you think, I'll sure pass this on to them.

But I seriously doubt I ever will.
138 posted on 11/20/2006 6:35:19 PM PST by microgood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-138 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson