The city that never sleeps is moving closer to becoming the city that never

[Raineyrocks]

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/US/02/02...ban/index.html

The city that never sleeps is moving closer to becoming the city that never smokes, or at least the city that highly restricts it.

Nine years after the Big Apple banned smoking in its restaurants, the New York City Council on Wednesday voted to ban smoking in city parks and on city beaches, Mayor Michael Bloomberg said in a written statement.

The council voted 36 to 12 in favor of the ban, much to the chagrin of those who think the government is overstepping its role into its residents' lives.

"The city is taking it too far. I think it's ridiculous," said 25-year-old New Yorker George Wells as he pressed a lit cigarette to his lips outside the Shops at Columbus Circle.

The ban prohibits smoking in all 1,700 city parks and on its 14 miles of beaches, the statement said, and is intended to prevent the harmful effects of secondhand smoke for children.

"This summer, New Yorkers who go to our parks and beaches for some fresh air and fun will be able to breathe even cleaner air and sit on a beach not littered with cigarette butts," Bloomberg said.

The measure is expected to take affect 90 days after Bloomberg signs the bill. He has 30 days to sign the ban following the council's approval.

"The statistics don't lie: secondhand smoke kills," said City Council Member Christine Quinn, who voted for the measure.

But Council Member Robert Jackson, who opposed the bill, said the ban is "going against our liberty of the people of New York City. As someone who wants to breathe clean air, I think we are going too far and being intrusive."

In 2003, a ban designed to protect workers outlawed smoking in New York City's 13,000 bars and restaurants, with very few exceptions and with stiff fines. The penalty for a first-time offense began at $200, and businesses caught repeatedly allowing smoking ran the risk of being shut down.

Meanwhile, a measure in California that would have banned smoking in all state beaches and parks was vetoed earlier this year by cigar aficionado then-Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
__________________

[littlehawk]

How many million cars and trucks belch out exhaust fumes in that stinkin' area?

As a tobacco pipe smoker I find this ridiculous.

[Raineyrocks]

How many million cars and trucks belch out exhaust fumes in that stinkin' area?

As a tobacco pipe smoker I find this ridiculous.

Yup, I agree.  It's just another way they are trying to control people.

[Ed]

control people? jeez what is it with you guys - everything is about "trying to control people". That doesn't even make sense - anything can be framed that way, even deregulation

take it from a local of the aforementioned metro area - it's not that they want "to control people", it's more like governments around here tend to get filled with idealistic liberal types who want to do a GoodThing®. They're in government, they've got those jobs, but for a legislature (person, not the whole body) it isn't much of a job, so they feel like they have to do something. So even if the thing doesn't make sense and probably won't even do anything towards its supposed goal, they'll do it, because it fits in with the liberal worldview that really elevates the capabilities and moral worth of the state much farther than it ought to be, sometimes almost to Santa-Claus levels.
It's not a matter of controlling people, it's the inevitable outcome of very strong almost blind faith adherence to a flawed philosophy.

[Raineyrocks]

control people? jeez what is it with you guys - everything is about "trying to control people". That doesn't even make sense - anything can be framed that way, even deregulation

take it from a local of the aforementioned metro area - it's not that they want "to control people", it's more like governments around here tend to get filled with idealistic liberal types who want to do a GoodThing®. They're in government, they've got those jobs, but for a legislature (person, not the whole body) it isn't much of a job, so they feel like they have to do something. So even if the thing doesn't make sense and probably won't even do anything towards its supposed goal, they'll do it, because it fits in with the liberal worldview that really elevates the capabilities and moral worth of the state much farther than it ought to be, sometimes almost to Santa-Claus levels.
It's not a matter of controlling people, it's the inevitable outcome of very strong almost blind faith adherence to a flawed philosophy.

Huh? I'm not sure I understand your entire comment but it is to about control and if was about an idealogy, since when does someone have the right to put their philisophical beliefs into a law?

[KBCraig]

take it from a local of the aforementioned metro area - it's not that they want "to control people", it's more like governments around here tend to get filled with idealistic liberal types who want to do a GoodThing®.

Every single one of these GoodThings® they wish to do involves controlling people, either through mandating behavior, proscribing behavior, or taking/giving money based on behavior.

So, fair enough: probably none of them considers that they're trying to "control people", because they're GoodPeople® doing GoodThings®. That is actually worse, because they never question or consider the fact that they are controlling other people's lives.

We would be better, as C.S. Lewis said, with robber barons than with these GoodPeople® doing GoodThings®.

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be "cured" against one's will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.
"God in the Dock" (1948)

[AntonLee]

Ed = Retard.  Soon as I saw "you people"

[MaineShark]

Ed = Retard.

Stop insulting the mentally handicapped...

Joe