At least the cops were biking and not riding around in SUVs like many proponents of such laws.

Um, who said they left their butts on the sidewalk?? I mean, besides Wilberfan??

Uniformed fundraisers. I don't smoke but this seems way unfair to smokers. That's robbery.

I am nearly 30 years old, I pay my taxes, I obey speed limits and I can't remember the last time I intentionally vandalized private property.

If blazingshark happens to be walking on that sidewalk, it just might.

The only thing this article has done for me is turned me on, I almost cant wait to go to Burbank and smoke on the sidewalk and then throw my butt in the street. I must be a sick f`ck because I cant wait to do it.

This policy has been on the books for almost a year now... We wrote about it in December when some of the businesses were beginning to feel an impact in terms of loss of business, as well as local workers feeling put out, due to the law.

It's frustrating to not be aware of a law, but it's not an excuse. It's an interesting time we're in with local governments implementing laws about smoking in public spaces...and even in rental units.

I live in Burbank and I don't smoke. Never have. When I noticed the posting near the entrance to my building, prohibiting smoking within 20 feet, my first thought (believe it or not) was for smokers. On a certain level, I feel as though the trend of putting smokers into a smaller and smaller box to the point where a box is a rather chicken shit way of dealing with a public health issue.

However, when I read comments such as abberrant's that seem willfully unconscious of public smoking's negative effect on the people around them, my impulse goes the other way: round 'em all up and dump 'em in the pokey.

I consider myself a fairly informed smoker, and I had no idea about the law in downtown Burbank. Every different part of LA has different laws about public smoking, and many times there are no clear signs tell tell you what the specific laws are. I'm happy to abide by them, but I need to know what they are when I'm not in my own neighborhood.

And besides that, I have never encountered so much hate for being a smoker before I lived in LA. We all have vices that affect one another, so chill out, jeez.

I think they should round up all of the secondhand smokers and put them in the clean air jail for their own protection.

They are irrational.

I hope the smokers who get this riled up about having their "rights" trampled on find another outlet for that passion. I'm a bleeding heart, but on my list of oppressed minorities, smokers come in somewhere around 4,000th.

Aberrant, isn't it enough just that the smell bothers people? We have noise codes that say you can't play music at a particular volume, not because it damages people's ears, but because it simply bothers people. Smoke stinks. I would venture that most smokers know this. I won't extrapolate to smokers at large, but most smokers I know don't smoke in their own homes, for this very reason. And they crack their car windows for the same reason. When I walk past a smoker, the smell bothers me. Not enough for me to go campaign for an ordinance, but if the people of Burbank feel that strongly about it, there's no reason for them not to ban it.

Well, thanks for being honest, paulk and hypersquared. But you might want to revist the idea of banning personal behavior just because you don't like it. Can you think of other things that are outlawed, or things that certain people want outlawed just because they find them icky? I sure can. More personal freedom is better than less personal freedom.

Aberrant, I think it's important to distinguish between banning smoking and banning smoking in a particular place. If Burbank didn't allow smoking in private homes, I would have a problem with that (although I am not without sympathy for neighbors of smokers in apartment buildings, like that couple that sued in New York, because my old apartment always smelled of my neighbor's smoke.)

BTW, takemebacktola, there really is no correlation between allowing sales of cigarettes and banning smoking on public sidewalks. They allow alcohol sales and prohibit drunk driving and public intoxication. They allow sales of guns, but don't let you walk around shooting them. They sell sex toys, but you'll get arrested for using them on public sidewalks. I won't belabor the point further.

As a smoker, this argument just gets under my skin and pisses me off to no end.

The thing that bothers me about it is the reasoning and logic behind this law.
*gets into her serious politician voice*
"We have to protect the people!"
"yeah!"
"We have to protect the children!"
"yeah!"
"These filthy smokers are polluting our lungs with their foul cigarette smoke! It must be eliminated!"
"BURN THEM ALL! YEAH!!!!"

Ok, I went a little overboard at the end, I'll admit that much. But really, imagine this:
You're walking down the street, casually strolling through downtown Burbank on a busy night (ha). As you walk, you pass by someone smoking a cigarette. Perhaps as you walk, you maybe inhale a tiny bit of the smoke through your nose. You continue walking, no break in your stride, and within seconds, the smell is gone and you're breathing, mostly, fresh air again.

No one will get Lung Cancer from the occasional inhalation of second hand smoke that occurs from walking near someone that's smoking.

What will you most likely get Lung Cancer from? Living right next to a freeway. Or hell, even just living in Los Angeles. The air sucks here. Especially in the summer, or when there's a wildfire. No breeze, plus weekday traffic, plus heat = a day to stay inside wearing a gas mask.

I know this has been a long rambling comment with a few tangents but my point is this:
-It's ridiculous, unnecessary and really not doing anything to protect public health.

@iseulb - I agree completely.

also, does anyone actually believe this law is to "protect public health"? thats just stupid talk.

cgabriel, your insults to christina will sound even funnier when you say them out of a hole in your throat.

If you people are looking for a sheltered, perfect world, there is a great town called Celebration, Florida. Look it up, there is absolutly no smoking, swearing, fighting, or fellatio of any sort allowed. However, it is acceptable to blow your own head off.

The stores in Burbank Downtown pretty much suck anyway but what do you expect of a place that has a theater, bars and a smoke shop as the number one places people go into. I wonder if the politicians even shop there oh I think I see them at the smoke shop all the time.

The city of Burbank has always prided itself on hard-lined law enforcement, including on "quality of life" issues such as the smoking ordinance. The upsides to the proactive city council and police enforcement include higher property values, lower serious crime rate, and responsive city services to its residents. There are always tradeoffs in life, right?

Most persons charged with the Burbank Smoking Ordinance accept the offer by the prosecutor and judge to an infraction violation of the same charge and a fine of about $400. A misdemeanor violation of a local municipal code charge carries up to six months in jail and $1000 fine.

If you are charged with violating this smoking ordinance, you are entitled to proceed with this charge as a misdemeanor, hire an attorney or obtain a public defender, and proceed to a jury trial.

The Burbank Leader
has provided good coverage on this subject, FYI.

Porkchop sandwhiches

The thing I got from reading this rant was that this guy is going to completely avoid going to a nearby section of town with a lot of frequented spots just because he can't smoke for an hour or two while he's there.

Okay, he paid the chickens*** fine, and now he knows the law. What is this... some kind of protest? I'm pretty sure the city of Burbank doesn't give a flying f*** if he doesn't visit them anymore, because most reasonable smokers will just stop smoking by entrances.

He's just inconveniencing himself with this little fit, and even though it's under the guise of principality, it's really just a baby whining because things didn't go his way.