Groups for and against Chancellor Bloomberg’s proposed ban on smoking just about everywhere in the city except people’s apartments, rallied at City Hall on Thursday. Those in favor of it contend that secondhand smoke miraculously doesn’t dissipate, even when outside, and is therefore still dangerous to the public while the opponents say it’s oppressive and could lead to violence.
Audrey Silk, founder Citizens Lobbying Against Smoker Harassment, warned what could happen if city residents begin policing other city residents:
“When the law’s an ass, we will not comply,” Silk said. “Councilwoman Brewer, the sponsor of this bill, seems to think that it will be self-policing by having citizens police each other. She’s inviting hostile confrontations in a city that really doesn’t need it.”
Another member of their group, David Goerlitz, explained the increasing vilification aspect:
“I believe you should be allowed to buy a product that is still legal at a fair price that is standardized throughout the nation, and use this product without being thrown under the bus and made to feel like you’re dirty, filthy and a child killer,” Goerlitz said.
(Photo: Brandon Knopp/WSN)
Well, it's not just Tea Party douche bags who are inappropriately using the Nazi term out of ignorant rage, add left-leaning bloggers to the list.
Not even close, just giving the Nazis their due historical credit. Here's a good intro: http://bit.ly/byPsDh
microfeesh – in this case this is appropriate, the only reason Hitler did not ban cigarettes was not to cause a drop in his army's morale. But the guy was very vocal about a ban on tobacco.
First they came for my porn and I said nothing cuz I was jacking the free stuff off the intertubes anyways.
Next they came for my trans fats and I didn't complain cuz I only ate twinkies when my bong was fully stoked. Then they came for my cigarettes and I was OK with that cuz I atomize my Skoals. Doesn't everybody?
But now they've come for my fixed gear–my beloved, achingly hip, fixed gear. Condescending elitists know all about broken window theories and BMIs and the perils of the demon soda–but what do they know of this?
Excuse me, but I need a moment.
If Little Brother can leverage his power base by chipping away at other people's personal prerogatives in the name a public good, surely Little Brother knows better. Surely, it's not because of potential boundary issues and a paternalistic sense entitlement….
They're eying my fixed gear cross ways.
Aye, indeed they are.
And I can detect a whiff of revanchism in the air. They're coming for my fixed gear.
Well, let them come. Let me tell you something, twinkie haters!!! We will be in the wind, my fixed gear and me, flying towards your nostrils, brakeless, like the smoke that we puff!!!
Agreed, this issue is absolutely about Freedom of Choice. But the smoking ban isn't meant to limit Freedom – it's meant to expand Freedom. Freedom for non smokers to have the CHOICE whether or not to inhale smoke. The flaw with cigarettes has nothing to do with the drug – it's the delivery system of smoke. When smokers exhale, everyone around them is FORCED to inhale. Their liberty to make that choice is infringed upon. It's true that we should have the choice to decide what to use and not use. But when you drink, you don't get other''s drunk. So addicts, have at all the nicotine and tobacco you want – just consider using another delivery device – one that solely affects you and nobody else. Chew it, patch it, suck it, snort it, shoot up if you can – just impose your choice on others by blowing smoke down their involuntary lungs.
This law is not meant to protect smokers from themselves. It's meant to protect the non smoker from the smoker. So please don't hide behind the American flag and say that you deserve the Freedom to harm others just because you feel like it, because there's nothing Constitutional about that whatsoever.