As usual these people are ridiculous. They have now banned smoking in most public places except public golf courses. Why not public golf courses? Because they're afraid they'll lose some money to private courses if they implement it there.
For a liberal area they sure know how to tell you what to do, not to smoke and not to carry a gun. If you want to have promiscuous sex, crap in the streets, live homeless off the public payrolls or perform an abortion they're all for it. Now I'm no bible thumping religious zealot, but it's just hypocritical on what they judge is right and wrong.
This on top of Weyco Inc. firing all smoking employees a few days ago.
San Francisco Chronicle
San Francisco supervisors voted Tuesday to ban smoking in all parks, public squares and other outdoor spaces that the city owns, joining a handful of other California municipalities that have gotten even tougher on tobacco users.
In an 8-3 vote, the Board of Supervisors agreed that the health and environmental risks associated with discarded cigarette butts and second-hand smoke merited extending existing indoor bans to outdoor spaces.
"Like most young parents out there, I've had the wonderful experience of sitting with my children on the lawn and seeing them pick up a cigarette butt and popping it in their mouth," said Supervisor Michela Alioto-Pier, the measure's sponsor.
As a parent of two kids I've never had this happen because, even as a smoker, I educate my children and actually watch them.
Based on enforcement of similar bans in Pasadena, Santa Monica, Beverly Hills and elsewhere, city officials said little oversight would be necessary. Most smokers voluntarily comply with signs preventing them from lighting up, they said.
That's exactly right. Provide areas for smokers with ashcans and most of us will have no problems with it. An outright ban across a whole city for a legal act is absolutely asinine though.
Several supervisors objected to an exemption for public golf courses that Alioto-Pier included in her legislation. Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi made a motion to include golfers in the ban, but it failed 7-4.
"I don't think you can cherry pick who is impacted by the law or not," Mirkarimi said. "It just has this undertone of elitism."
Alioto-Pier said she would be open to adding the city's public courses later. But she first wanted to study whether a smoking ban would drive away golfers and their fees -- an important source of revenue that funds other recreation programs.
It is elitism. They know what's best for us unless it's somewhere they may frequent and want to have a cigar or somehow will make them look bad by having revenues go down.
I don't see how banning smoking in an outside open area is going to protect anyone from second hand smoke. Second hand smoke is arguably a fallacy based on an error ridden report from the EPA in 1992 that claimed 3000 people a year died from second hand smoke.
Tipped by: Right Thinking From The Left Coast