LAist: Smoking May Get Harder in Los Angeles

RedMercury

Wed, 03 Sep 2008 23:29:30 -0800

First, the evidence for second-hand smoke is pretty shaky at best. Most of the "confirmed" cases involve people who were exposed for hours a day over the span of years in enclosed restaurants (ie, waitresses). So sitting next to a smoker over an outdoor lunch is not increasing your danger of lung disease by any statistically significant amount (which is what most second-hand smoke studies show). Second, the smell is bad, but there are plenty of bad smells in the world. Hell, I got on an elevator the other day with some woman who bathed in her perfume. The whole elevator stank from it and she was on it for only two floors. It's one of those things you either have to learn to deal with or you have to learn to avoid. So if you don't like to smell of cigarette smoke, don't hang out around smokers. There's plenty of places for you to sit in a restaurant where you don't have to be around them. Finally, the litter is about the only argument I can agree with. But we have litter laws. Trust me--slap a $200 littering fine on some smokers and they'll learn really quickly to throw out their cigarettes.

bbkong

Wed, 03 Sep 2008 21:59:29 -0800

Most outdoor dining areas are right next to the street where an unending stream of cars are driving by. Maybe the nicotine nazis need to stay inside and breathe the nice clean filtered air and learn to mind their own business. And ride bicycles so they don't pollute. And eat vegetables so they aren't party to murder. Do-gooder laws like this are futile and exemplify hypocrisy.

Johnny

Wed, 03 Sep 2008 15:10:31 -0800

Yeah but the smog belching car is generally not parked next to my table while I eat or while I try to carry on a conversation with someone. While I applaud the ordinance 5 feet is just not far enough for smoke to disperse, especially if there is going to be several people in the same area smoking. I don't know what the answer is but for me it is to just deal with the fact there will be smokers and stay as far as I can from it.

bbkong

Wed, 03 Sep 2008 14:32:11 -0800

Seems like the loudest complainers about smokers are driving smog belching cars too. Nanny-state indeed.

Kevitivity

Wed, 03 Sep 2008 12:02:48 -0800

Yay for the nanny-state!

wilberfan

Wed, 03 Sep 2008 11:22:00 -0800

I'd like to see one of these ordinances address what I see as just as big a problem: Forcing smokers ouside? Generally a good idea--but there seems to be no thought given to the trash that's generated. Inside there were ash trays and trash cans. If we're going to mandate that smokers do their disgusting thing outside--why not also mandate that there be somewhere they can put their butts? (Instead of just dropping them where they stand.) I happen to live in Burbank--and see LOTS of cigarette butts outside of office buildings, for example--and almost never see outdoor ashtrays. The collective (non-smoker) attitude seems to be: "I don't want to breathe your smoke--but I'll tolerate your litter if you do it outside...". Sure, there are anti-litter laws on the books, but has anyone anywhere ever seen a smoker get cited for littering?

echoboom

Wed, 03 Sep 2008 10:45:52 -0800

right on! fuck smokers and the poison they piss into the air!!