New York Smoking Ban: Parks, Beaches, Outdoor Plazas May Soon Be Off Limits

iStockphoto

(CBS/AP) New York smokers have been forced out of bars, office buildings, even some apartment buildings.

Now Mayor Michael Bloomberg and other officials have announced that they will pursue a broad extension of the city's smoking ban to parks, beaches, marinas, boardwalks and pedestrian plazas throughout the city.

PICTURES: 10 Places You May Never Smoke Again

That would mean no smoking in Central Park, no lighting up on the Coney Island boardwalk.

Officials said they are basing the proposed law on claims that even brief exposure to secondhand smoke can pose health risks.

"The science is clear: prolonged exposure to secondhand smoke, whether you're indoors or out, hurts your health," Bloomberg said in a statement. "Today, we're doing something about it."

States and cities from Maine to California have banned smoking in public parks and beaches, but New York is pursuing one of the most ambitious urban efforts.

The city's parks department is responsible for 14 miles of public beaches and 29,000 acres of parkland. Smoking is already banned in some outdoor spaces, including playgrounds, but not in most open recreational areas.

The proposed law, which must first go through the City Council, would give the parks department the power to slap violators with quality-of-life summonses, which are tickets for minor offenses like panhandling or public urination. The city said smoking summonses likely would be around $50.

The effort, which follows the city's 2003 ban on smoking in bars and restaurants, was hailed Wednesday by health groups, including the American Cancer Society.

A smokers' rights group, NYC Citizens Lobbying Against Smoker Harassment, recently posted a video on its website protesting the idea. The group's founder, Audrey Silk, argues that smoke dissipates quickly outdoors, where "there's room for everybody and nobody will be affected."

Yet officials cite a May 2007 Stanford University study that found a person sitting within three feet of a smoker outdoors can be exposed to levels of secondhand smoke similar to indoor levels.

And the city's health department says 57 percent of nonsmoking New Yorkers have elevated levels of cotitine, a byproduct of nicotine, in their blood. That means they were likely recently exposed to secondhand smoke in concentrations high enough to leave behind residue in the body.

11 Photos

Smokers Beware: 10 Places You May Never Smoke Again

[MagicCarpetDealer]

So this has nothing whatsoever to do with mitigating a potential future where fraudulent claims for compensation are made against the city authorities, based upon symptoms of damage to the respiratory system, a chronic health problem that could have been caused by the 9.11.01 cloud of dust and debris.

Habitual smoking caused lung diseases may mimic those affects and leave wide open the city to multiple unwarranted claims.

If this is the case then, sadly the Terrorists have once again changed the way Americans are free to pursue their own lives as they see best fit.

[shepters]

This is not about science; it is an image campaign for NY. They don't want people lighting up in public. Sure the campaign tries to press the right buttons for support "protect non-smokers" etc. but the science should be put to the test and the legality against the constitution for sure.
<<The group's founder, Audrey Silk, argues that smoke dissipates quickly outdoors, where "there's room for everybody and nobody will be affected.">>
This organization is letting themselves be drawn into the argument. NY doesn't have a leg to stand on. They should be warning that if this law is passed, it will be disputed in every court available. The statement quoted here sounds pathetic.
As a previous contributor mentioned, according to the media, air pollution is mainly caused by electricity generation, traffic, aircraft and various other "commodities". When Mr. Bloomberg stops using his household gadgets, limousines and private Jets then he can start talking about the miniscule(if any ?) pollution caused by smoking in the open air.
America is supposed to be the "Land of the free". I live in Europe and they have been laughing at this for quite a few years now. Unfortunately this madness has a habit of seeping into Europe.
Next time you're at an airport, stood in a body scanner in your socks with your trousers falling down after being groped by a guard, it might be worth remembering that you are a respectable citizen and should be handled with respect. For some reason we are all being treated like kids these days and for some other unfathomable reason we are accepting it.
I don't even want to get into the Alcohol comparison. Another common highly taxed drug, damages health, bad example to kids etc. etc. That would be just too much. Or should all bars be banned from public view??

[rf35]

"Yet officials cite a May 2007 Stanford University study that found a person sitting within three feet of a smoker outdoors can be exposed to levels of secondhand smoke similar to indoor levels."

Sure, if the smoker was exhaling directly in the other person's face while that person was breathing deeply.

I'm a non-smoker, but this is a absolute outrage. Smokers were pushed out of indoor areas. I thought that was a crock...I mean, if they stay in the smoking section or use the smokers' lounges or smokers' break rooms, then who cares? Now this pack of petty dictators wants to tell smokers they can't even light up in many outdoor areas? Where will it stop? Why don't they just ban smoking altogether?

Mad_Dog mentioned the fat tax. This isn't a local phenomenon. Look for it nationwide. There are folks in Congress and lobbyists pushing for a tax of soda and other high sugar/fat/calorie foods. And of course, it extends to the sugar free and low/no calorie versions, too. Look for more freedoms to go away after this. I wonder what they'll come after next: alcohol or maybe those tumor-inducing cell phones...

[Mad_Dog1]

You've got to be kidding....We are still in America right? Your going to put up claims of elevated levels of Carbon in people living in and around cities as a justification for abolishing what amounts to Human Rights and Freedom?

Oh OK, well....anyone with a grammer school education can tell you..well NO DUH! That's whats gonna happen when you live in and around a city. The same markers that they say have been found in non smokers will also be found in a total non smoking enviroment due to the air pollution cause by your everyday motor vehicle traffic. It's called pollution so their claim holds no weight whatsoever, in fact a non smoker who lives in a city such as NYC is more likely to have higher levels of carbon that a non smoker who lives with a smoker in the suburbs. Stop with all these unsupported claims to get rid of peoples rights, you've already pushed these smokers out into the streets and because they submitted, you want to see just how far you can push. That's always the way it goes once you give a little bit of the pie they then want to take the whole thing! NYS thurway for example, we need to charge toll fees for this road for 5 years and then it'll become a toll free road...well going on 20 now were still paying and even more. Reasoning, maintenance...NO, that comes out of your ever increasing tax dollars, truth is they got a piece of the pie, wrote in into their budget and now can't do without it!!!
Where does all this nonsense stop this guy is no different than the baffoon in Albany wanting to pass a tax called an "OBESITY" Tax for drinks and food that some govern body deems "may" contribute to people being Fat and unhealthy. Really? I mean maybe these people just WANT to drink and eat the things they enjoy and don't need someone telling them "It may be bad for your health" It's called freedom of choice! What happened to that in America are we rewriting the Constitution or better yet are we ALLOWING the rewriting of the Constitution?