July 19th, 2011
05:44 PM ET

Should smoking be banned in public?


A sign at the entrance of Manhattan's Battery Park. Smoking is prohibited in New York City's parks, public beaches and pedestrian plazas like Times Square. (PHOTO CREDIT: EMMANUEL DUNAND/AFP/Getty Images)

FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:

Fewer than one-quarter of American adults are smokers, meaning they've had at least one cigarette in the last week. That number has been dropping for years. And while they may be a shrinking minority, when smokers light up, people who don't smoke take notice.

Over the past 10 years or so, as study upon study has revealed the long-term danger of smoking and exposure to secondhand smoke, smokers are finding they are welcome in fewer and fewer places.

Now comes a new Gallup Poll that shows a majority of Americans, 59%, support a ban on smoking in all public places. That's the highest percentage in the 10 years since Gallup starting doing the poll.

Twenty-seven states have passed tough smoke-free laws. A new law in New York City prohibits smoking in just about any public place, including beaches and outdoor plazas. And increasingly tough laws are in the pipeline in cities and states across the country.

While the growing majority of Americans don’t want to be around people who are smoking, they aren't pushing for an all-out ban on the behavior. Only 19% say smoking should be made illegal. That percentage has been relatively unchanged over the past five years.

But suffice it to say the battle between smokers and nonsmokers will likely continue. And for now, nonsmokers seem to have the upper hand.

Here’s my question to you: Should smoking be banned in public?

Interested to know which ones made it on air?

Julieanne in Connecticut:
No, it should not be banned. "Being in public" means that you are willing to deal with the habits of others, even those habits which you find offensive.

David in Herndon, Virginia:
Absolutely. Why isn't smoking considered to be battery? The definition of battery is "harmful or offensive touching." Secondhand smoke has been shown to be harmful, and it touches everything around it.

No. I am a former smoker, and I feel that the places where smokers can smoke have been narrowed to the extreme. If they are outside, in the open, not bothering others, they should be left alone. We still have freedoms and we have taken enough of them.

Rich in Texas:
Jack the federal government gets $1.01 per pack of cigarettes sold in America. The average state tax on cigarettes is $1.44 but varies from 17 cents in Missouri to $4.35 cents in new York. That is a lot of tax revenue generated and a lot of jobs that would be lost if cigarettes and other tobacco products were banned.

Ed in California:
I don't smoke or really drink for that matter. I don't mind the addicts smoking in public, but not in restaurants. There's nothing wrong with being polite. So no, Jack, smoking doesn't have to be banned. I just hope the smoker can be considerate about their addiction.

Stinky perfume should be banned; body odors should be banned; flatulence should be banned; bus exhaust should be banned; jet plane fumes should be banned. But not smoking. It is not a health issue outdoors; it's a whining issue. Just kill me now.

Absolutely Jack! We don't have enough government intervention in the lives of our citizens yet. Let's keep going until we all end up prisoners in our own homes with all the doors and windows shut tight. I'm just sayin'.

Filed under: On Jack's radar
soundoff (301 Responses)
  1. Joe

    In public places where more than one person is nearby, then all smoking should be banned. YOU do not have to feel the discomfort that I have whenever someone's obnoxious smoke or odor is coming my way. A long time ago, 10 years, I was in Toronto at the horse racetrack, there was a sign, which said, "no public smoking, $25,000 fine;" yet, the smokers continued as they wanted with no enforcement of the law.

    Smokers can be characterized by their obnoxious attitude, which is to interfere with everyone else's rights. The smokers who follow the law should be given a large thank you.

    Joe, Binghamton, NY

    July 19, 2011 at 4:58 pm |
  2. Charles, Lansing, Michigan

    Secondary smoke has been proved to be dangerous so public smoking should be totally banned.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:01 pm |
  3. David from Herndon, VA

    Absolutely. Why isn't smoking considered to be battery? The definition of battery is "harmful or offensive touching." Secondhand smoke has been shown to be harmful, and it touches everything around it.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:09 pm |
  4. Ralph Nelson

    No. People do have some freedoms.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:14 pm |
  5. Bryan, Colorado

    No I think the current laws are sufficient. We have much bigger fish to fry these days.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:15 pm |
  6. Scott Stodden

    Absolutley It Should Be Banned In All Public Places Because Duh Second Hand Smoke Is Bad For Other People's Health! Im A Smoker And I Do Support Banning All Smoking In Public Places, I Only Smoke At Home I Never Release Smoke Onto Others In Public Places!

    Scott Stodden (Freeport, Illinois)

    July 19, 2011 at 5:15 pm |
  7. Rich McKinney, Texas

    Jack we already have way too many people in America. Let them smoke. They won't be around as long that way. Besides we have Obama care now. Sell them a pack of cigarettes that the federal government gets $1.01 cents per pack in revenue and then let the government pay the hundreds of thousands of dollars in health benefits that it costs to care for them. Another brilliant government endeavor. What the hell economist in our government thought this one up?

    July 19, 2011 at 5:17 pm |
  8. Rich McKinney, Texas

    Jack smoking should not be banned any more then farting should be banned. People do it and if you don't like the smell or the smoke then just walk away from it. The same goes for people and bad breath or stinky cologne or bad body odor. When you start banning one thing others are sure to follow. That is just what we need right now in America more governmental regulations instead of jobs.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:17 pm |
  9. wipster in Eastern WA

    Unless the smoking is noticible and interferring with non-smokers, no it should not be banned. While I don't smoke cigarettes, I do enjoy a cigar or a pipe with good tobacco occasionally and if I'm not forcing someone to breath my secondhand smoke, I think I should be allowed to enjoy my indulgence.

    What's next, banning perfume or aftershave?

    July 19, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  10. Tom in Desoto, TX

    I used to smoke, stopped many years ago. As an ex-smoker it seems the smokers are being demonized.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:23 pm |
  11. debbie c from indiana

    no, we are people too, and all these do gooders in this country should be banned from doing something they love in their life just like a smoker gets everytime we turn around. they make us smokers feel like we have a VERY bad disease. and are tired of getting taxed over and over and over for goodness sake just let business open a smoking or non smoking business

    July 19, 2011 at 5:27 pm |
  12. Donald in New Mexico

    Yes. In logical areas. No. In logical areas. Great to quit habit.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:29 pm |
  13. Allen

    Banned? Smoking is already banned. We are already working on the next logical step of shooting smokers on sight.

    Jack you're behind.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:29 pm |
  14. Garrick, MN Monticello

    I think there are some places you should have the common courtesy to not light one up like schools, busy parks, malls. That shouldn't stop someone from smoking though because a few worried mothers are afraid of second hand smoke. Just go to a less crowded place.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:33 pm |
  15. Steve M., Michigan

    The discussion would be far more apropos if those pushing for bans (in public places) would stop calling bars and restaurants 'public places'. They aren't. They are private property. We've gone down a slippery slope with these feel good pieces of legislation. The state law here in Michigan is decimating the small mom and pop taverns and bars; while of course granting an exemption for Detroit's casinos. Anyone noticed that Gallop's last poll showed the majority of Americans do not support banning it [smoking] in bars?

    July 19, 2011 at 5:33 pm |
  16. virginia - Atlanta, GA

    I can remember standing in line in the grocery store with my small children, feeling nice and clean, when a smoker in front of us lit up. (This was many years ago and happened rather often.) My skin felt slimy and dirty, my children coughed. In those days we didn't say anything because smokers had "rights" and often got indignant. No one seemed to think that non smokers and children had the right to fell clean and healthy. So yes, I prefer not to breathe someone's left over smoke, not to have children exposed, not to smell terrible and not to have that yucky greasy feeling on my skin, just so someone else can poison him/herself.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:34 pm |
  17. Lori - PA


    For those that don't, or who have quit, smoke, I'm guessing they don't want to be subjected to the second-hand smoke from someone who is smoking. I suppose they could ask the smoker to move, but given how rude, or nasty, people can be, what other choice is there but to ban smoking in public?

    July 19, 2011 at 5:35 pm |
  18. Ronda (from Canastota, NY)

    Smoking should be banned everywhere except individual residences and yards. People have the right to designate their own homes as smoking or non-smoking, and I can't see anything wrong with someone having a cigarette on their front porch or inside the home. If it's a smoking home, non-smokers can choose whether or not to enter the home. For the most part, I've found smokers to be very respectful of those of us who don't smoke. Smoking isn't allowed in stores, restaurants and buildings I frequent, so it's rarely a problem. However I do believe that smoking should be banned at public events, even those held outside, that allow families with children or that are geared toward children. The less smoking children see around them, and the more places where they see it banned, the less likely they may be inclined to smoke.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:37 pm |
  19. Ralph Spyer

    No, Jack I would love to run through the smoking car in the train ,holding my alcohol.You can:t even drink and drive any more. Next they will want to take away all my guns.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:38 pm |
  20. John Gulfport, Ms

    Sure as soon as we ban all commercial smoke stacks and tar machines, and all other kinds of smoke that also endangers the people living near and around them. I think the government needs to clean up their own house before they attempt to clean up the publics anymore. The only one convincing me they are innocent is they them theirselves. And I am not convinced after seeing all the coruption in their own house! They are the biggest users of smoke screens that I have ever seen.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:38 pm |
  21. violet pflugbeil

    No People who smoke are in the open air... Not in an enclosed area.. So it's my right to do what ever I want out in open space. I agree with not smoking in doors etc..

    July 19, 2011 at 5:39 pm |
  22. Mark, Oklahoma City

    Jack, the ONLY place a person should be allowed to poison themselves with those disgusting cancer lolly pops are in their own car, in their own home or outdoors OFF public property....period!

    July 19, 2011 at 5:40 pm |
  23. MCArmstrong

    Don't be silly, Jack. This is America, and although I can't stand second hand smoke, the government does not have the right to ban it in OPEN AIR.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:40 pm |
  24. Chris

    No....they shouldn't. Either make it illegal already or allow them the same rights as other park goers. Even people trying to quit on E-cigarettes have been told they cant use them on planes, in restaurants and even in public places.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:41 pm |
  25. Mike Hagans from Mt. Juliet, TN

    I'm not a smoker and never have been, but, NO ban on smoking in public. Remember prohibition and how that "ban" worked!

    July 19, 2011 at 5:41 pm |
  26. Dave, Orlando, FL

    Here we go again. As long as their smoke stays out of my nose I don’t care.
    X Smoker

    July 19, 2011 at 5:42 pm |
  27. Joe Ft Walton Bch Fl

    Definitely yes. In public means anywhere that we the public gather. We non-smokers don't want to inhale someone else breath for the wrong reason.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:43 pm |
  28. WDinDallas

    Soon we will be a super minority and then everyone will have to let us smoke where ever we want. Even in your house. Why....because it's America!

    It will be Politically Correct to let us smoke! Don't violate our civil rights!

    I just love America......

    July 19, 2011 at 5:44 pm |
  29. Rich McKinney, Texas

    Jack the federal government gets $1.01 per pack of cigarettes sold in America. The average state tax on cigarettes is $1.44 but varies from 17 cents in Missouri to $4.35 cents in new York. That is a lot of tax revenue generated and a lot of Jobs would be lost if cigarettes and other tobacco products were banned. Smoking is a choice and people are advised of possible health risks. the choice to smoke is theirs. The same as the choice to not smoke is also theirs. Right now with the economy in the toilet and jobs being lost each and every day and revenue also being lost to the the government banning anything that creates governmental revenue and jobs is foolish.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:45 pm |
  30. danny

    I think breathing should be banned in public!

    July 19, 2011 at 5:45 pm |
  31. Swami

    Being Obese causes health problems as well. Lets ban being fat in public. What's next circumsision, goldfish and happy meals?

    Oh thats right – meddling liberals are already trying that.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:45 pm |
  32. Dan in SLC

    How nanny state do we want to become for pete sake?

    July 19, 2011 at 5:46 pm |
  33. Tom Chapman

    It's not so much the actual smoking in public that is the problem but the fact that smokers have no decency about throwing their butts, package cellophane wrappers, and empty cigarette packs on the ground instead of properly putting their trash into the proper garbage can !!

    It's disgusting.

    But, then again, if you visit a smoker their front lawn or sidewalk looks the same way with butts all over the ground.

    Tom Chapman
    Newark, DE

    July 19, 2011 at 5:46 pm |
  34. Paul

    Allowing people to smoke in public is like allowing people to drive drunk. People choose to smoke a product that is full of addictive chemicals. They choose to do harm to themselves, and they choose to do harm to others by smoking in public. The carnage from smoking takes much longer to show up than an accident scene with a drunk driver, but the net result is the same. Too bad there are so many tobacco lobbyists... uh... "influencing" policy. Marijuana is a LOT less harmful than alcohol or tobacco, but the big (old) money can't stand anyone cutting in on their control of the market, now can they? Not pro-pot, but if we're going to do harm to ourselves, why not legalize something that's a huge industry already, tax it and make it safer?

    July 19, 2011 at 5:46 pm |
  35. Roger from Phoenix

    Jack can't we ban it around the world . Perhaps the U.S. could police it , Obama could create; another new agency the NMSA , NO MORE SMOKING AGENCY. We could spend and send a few more billion around the world and tell them all what to do.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:46 pm |
  36. danny

    Children should also be banned in public because they can not behave themselves.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:47 pm |
  37. Vader

    No. 'Public' is just that; public.

    There are many things I tolerate in 'public' that I would not in the confines of my home: the unhygenienic, noisy people, people wearing overpowering amounts of cologne/perfume, etc. The difference is that it is my HOME, not a general space shared by everyone and anyone, regardless of their personal habits that may be offensive to me.

    And no, I don't smoke myself, but there's enough room for everyone.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:47 pm |
  38. Stephen Victor

    Smoking is too big to ban from public. It was big enough to ban it from restaurants here in Florida but smokers won't be pushed to do it in private in fear of arrest.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:47 pm |
  39. Eva Posner

    With air pollutants from coal mining, oil refining, cars, factories, pesticides and dozens of other sources being pumped into our lungs on a daily basis with little to no regulation...why are we picking on smokers and their measly cigs? There are larger problems with more wide ranging impacts. Sure, second hand smoke MIGHT kill me, but chances are something else will get me first.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:47 pm |
  40. Gondo

    Katy, Texas (suburb of Houston)
    We have the smoking nazis too, but not as bad as other big cities. Banning smoking is silly. More government intrusion based on ridiculous statistics.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:48 pm |
  41. Mike

    No. The Daily Show did a great bit in those NYC parks where you are no longer allowed to smoke, but there were plenty of drunks & drug addicts all about.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:48 pm |
  42. dfas

    Sorry we have not quite got to where its a police state quite yet. But stuff like this will have us there soon.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:49 pm |
  43. patrick

    While I want americans to be free to enjoy the things they like to do and I am not for an all out ban...I do think that smoking in city and national parks should be banned......there is nothing more discouraging than seeing cigarette butts in -place where wildlife already struggles... I also think that any where the public gathers in large numbers...such as arenas and train stations...lets face it having one cigarette is not the same as having one drink or one glass of wine.....there is no such thing as second hand alcohol which can affect peoples ability to breathe

    July 19, 2011 at 5:49 pm |
  44. Karl

    Specific public places, but not all. Frankly, I think if smokers would police themselves by not thinking that the world is their ashtray, and avoiding smoking in crowds, the call for a ban would be less. Live and let live. But the burden to move should be on those performing the offense.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:49 pm |
  45. Jamie

    Private businesses should have the freedom to choose whether they want to be non-smoking, smoking, or both, it should not be a choice FORCED on them by the government. As for parks...no one is forcing anyone to stand next to a smoker, if you don't like it MOVE...you shouldn't be able to control someone else's actions.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:49 pm |
  46. Crystal Johnson

    Sure, go ahead and ban smoking in public. And to be fair they should also ban automobile exhaust, coal fired power plant fumes, pesticides and herbicides, factory hog turkey and cattle farms, people who wear too much colonge.... ban them all!
    But seriously, if we ban everything that is or could be hazardous to someone's health the list would be too long to read in our healthy and lengthened lifetimes.

    Crystal Johnson
    Bedford, IN

    July 19, 2011 at 5:49 pm |
  47. Peter from Canada

    Only when....rollerbladers get off sidewalks, women stop breast feeding their babies in public, panhandlers stop hassling us, monster SUV'S disguised as baby strollers are banned to the local park, and.......politicians stop knocking on my door asking for their vote.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:49 pm |
  48. Keith

    In an open air park .... I do not see the concentration of toxins. So no ... it should not be. Don't like some one smoking walk away.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:50 pm |
  49. John

    Wisconsin initiated this type of ban in public places. It went into effect in Bars and Restaurants last January. IT'S GREAT ! You can now eat without choking !

    July 19, 2011 at 5:50 pm |
  50. Byron Funkhouser

    Since smokers are in the minority, you can do what ever you like. However, you can't make it illegal, because the federal & state governments are addicted to the tax revenue, which is of course disproportional. I can't quit smoking because the tax revenue is used to buy health insurance for poor children whose parents make up to $200,000 a year!

    July 19, 2011 at 5:50 pm |
  51. Dennis Reeves

    Smoking should not be banned in open public places. Second hand smoke in an open area is probably no worse than the smog and other pollutants in the air. What the next thing to be banned? Cars

    July 19, 2011 at 5:51 pm |
  52. Puff Puff

    If you don't want us smoking – STOP SELLING CIGARETTES! You can't have it both ways (i.e. countries lining their pockets with the taxes they collect off cigarettes and then crucifying the people who buy them). While you're at it, stop making alcohol available too – which is the 3rd leading cause of preventable death in the U.S., and stop selling fast food and food with no nutritional value whatsoever which is the 2nd leading cause of preventable death.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:51 pm |
  53. Dave Sielaff

    No as long as it is an area that is designated for smoking. I hate strong perfumes and BO and do not like obese people taking their more than fair share of room either – lets ban them all then!

    July 19, 2011 at 5:51 pm |
  54. Mike

    I'm not one for government telling others what they can and can't do. But one's rights end when they infringe on the rights of others.
    If you want to smoke then go ahead, but don't violate another's rights in the process.
    To answer your question Jack, of course it should be banned.
    Why would one person's right to smoke outweigh another's right to clean air?

    July 19, 2011 at 5:51 pm |
  55. Ed from Harrisburg

    People who smoke should be taken out and shot to protect their health and the health of others. We might as well do that with people who eat processed high caloric foods and who drink. I say, make this world a healthier place. Overweight, get caught with a twinkie...up against the wall for wellness!!!

    July 19, 2011 at 5:51 pm |
  56. Cara

    I think it should be banned as much as possible. Such bans may infringe on smokers' rights, but smokers are infringing on others' rights by polluting the air around them. I should have a choice whether I become ill from secondhand smoke or not. As of right now, in many places, I don't have that luxury. Regardless, the country has made progressive steps in the past few years to promote healthy, cleaner air.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:52 pm |
  57. Marlyce Downen

    Although I do not smoke & I dislike smoking, my husband does smoke.
    I don't think it should be banned in public because this is still a supposedly free country where you are allowed to make life choices, even if others find it harmful, for yourself.
    If we end up with an almost complete ban, what comes next? We've already seen how eager politicians are to ban sugar, happy meal toys etc.
    I don't want others making my choices for me, I accept responsibility if I make wrong choices & will deal with the consequences.
    Taking our choices away is not democratic, it is socialism.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:52 pm |
  58. Cory Pulliam

    Yes please. Your rights stop where my lungs start. Thanks

    July 19, 2011 at 5:52 pm |
  59. Kyle

    How many more rights are we going to take away from citizens in this supposedly "free" country? It's ridiculous.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:52 pm |
  60. robert

    Smoking should be banned period. Think of the health care costs that could be saved.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:52 pm |
  61. will

    Absolutely. It's not about their freedom to smoke, it's about my freedom from their smoke. After 30+ plus years of warnings and multiple ways to quit the best thing we could do is to subsidize a mass extinction of the habit. Treat it like polio or smallpox.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:52 pm |
  62. Raphael

    Sure, but then you should also ban traffic near sidewalks too because I could argue that I have to inhale that toxic gas.


    July 19, 2011 at 5:52 pm |
  63. FatSean

    We should not. I will continue to smoke my few cigarettes a week in public. Don't try to push me around, I believe in the second amendment.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:52 pm |
  64. Greg

    Absolutely. It is a danger to everyone around it. Not only does it cause healthcare costs to go up for the smoker, those that inhale second hand smoke require healthcare in nearly the same amount. It is disgusting and it should be outlawed. If someone wants to smoke, do it in your own home where the smell of it can not be detected by anyone else. I don't smoke and I don't want to smell someone else's smoke.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:53 pm |
  65. chris


    Lets not be like the politicians who don't know the meaning of Compromise. Its a very simple solution like what we do in the Army. Make restricted area's where smokers are allowed to smoke. "Smoke Pits" as we call them. We all have a fundamental right to happiness just like it says in the Preamble, a document which this nation was founded on. We let the smoker's poison themselves a d the non smokers well... they can live to pay our nations debt.


    July 19, 2011 at 5:53 pm |
  66. Russell in LA

    No Jack, The Nanny State is what needs to be banned.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:53 pm |
  67. Berda from TN.

    Absolutely! I'm one of those 30 plus millions without health insurance. If I'm around cigarette smoke I'll start to wheeze and have been rushed to the emergency room when I couldn't get an asthma attack under control. Why should my life be endangered just because someone doesn't care about their own? And to add insult to injury, I'm stuck paying for an emergency room visit out of pocket.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:53 pm |
  68. D. Jones

    It's only historical accident that tobacco is legal and crack and heroin are not.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:53 pm |
  69. Ted S


    An excellent question with no easy answer. I smoke once and a while, maybe 5 cigarettes a month and usually in a social setting but I could quite honestly take it or leave it.
    I think the question is really a question of freedom. Living here in NYC, I doubt terribly that someone walking down the street smoking is doing any more harm to someone else's lungs than the 3 million cars on the road every day. It drives me crazy to think that I cant go to central park on a nice summer morning and find a secluded place to enjoy a handmade cuban cigar. That is one of the finer things in life.
    If we ban smoking, then what next? The guy sitting next to me this morning on the subway smelled pretty grimy, maybe we should start writing tickets to people with offensive smells. Or maybe those double wide strollers that run me off the sidewalk should be banned. Or cellphones in public, or MAYBE we should ban people from speaking in public all together, because I find most people to be a public nuisance.
    We live in society that continues to poke their noses further and further into other peoples business while our kids are less and less educated, we are further and further into debt, and spend less and less time making positive contributions to society. I think people should start minding their own business and leave me and my cigar alone.
    And doesn't our government, the one I pay an exorbitant amount of my income to, have bigger problems to worry about that smoking in public parks? Apparently not.

    Concerned Citizen

    July 19, 2011 at 5:53 pm |
  70. Rod

    I feel that smoking should be banned in public places and private vehicles with children younger than 14.

    That being said, I power through half a pack a day on a bad day, so I am a smoker who would like to be inconvenienced into smoking less.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:53 pm |
  71. Mitch

    I am in favor. People who are addicted to nicotine have no right to subject me, my kids, or grandkids to the second (or now, it seems, even THIRD) hand smoke from their filthy addiction. If they insist on killing themselves in this manner – I have no problem with that. However I REFUSE to allow them to take me with them.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:53 pm |
  72. pablo

    Smokers should be required to pay more for health insurance and also for cleaning the environment due to throwing filtered butts on the ground, polluting the ground water. They seem to think the world is their personal ashtray.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:54 pm |
  73. Beth Johnson

    Smokers are habitually throwing their cigarette butts on the ground and creating a filthy situation wherever they smoke.

    The only positive thing about them is if they ever got lost in the woods all the rescuers would have to do is to follow their trail of cigarette butts on the ground to find them !!

    Beth Johnson
    Danbury, CT

    July 19, 2011 at 5:54 pm |
  74. Beth

    When I last checked smoking is still a legal activity. What is next? No fattening food beyond this point. Don't even think of coming onto this beach unless you are wearing sunscreen. This is a slippery slope.
    I'm not perfect enough to cast the first stone.

    Wilmette, Illinois

    July 19, 2011 at 5:54 pm |
  75. Paul in Dallas

    Yes Jack, but I'm ok with it being decided by the states and not the federal government.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:54 pm |
  76. Kyle

    I believe that car fumes are more harmful than cigarette smoke. People in NYC have so many cars and they are all giving off fumes but that never seems to be an issue. It is only "nasty" smokers.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:55 pm |
  77. Donna from Wisconsin

    That would be awesome! It just ruins the moment to smell cigarettes. Yes, they can smoke in their car or home; just not where the rest of us breathe!

    July 19, 2011 at 5:55 pm |
  78. Cameron S.

    If it was not for discourteous smokers in the first place, we wouldn't have this issue. When I light up, I try and stay away from people, because frankly I know they don't want to inhale she same garbage I am addicted to. I wouldn't mind as long as there where designated places to smoke, and of course, as long as I can still smoke in my car.

    Rockwall, TX

    July 19, 2011 at 5:55 pm |
  79. Christina

    Yes! Ban smoking in public places.
    (1.) As a former smoker I understand how hard it is to quit when others are smoking around you, and (2.) I have a right to make sure my child breathes clean air. Things are out of control when I cannot take my child to a park or a playground without some inconsiderate adult blowing smoke about.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:56 pm |
  80. Richard in Alaska

    Outside, no. Inside it should be up to the proprietor. I'm a former smoker, i quit 26 years ago.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:56 pm |
  81. Ben

    Many people have complained to me that banning smoking in public places would infringe on their right to smoke. Well, what about my right not to inhale secondhand smoke? As much as I care about equal rights for all, if two rights are mutually exclusive, I think we should favor the one that supports and incentivizes good health and respect for others. I would definitely support a ban on smoking in public.

    New York, NY

    July 19, 2011 at 5:56 pm |
  82. Brian Wickremasinghe - Woodland Hills

    Yes, public space is shared by both smokers and non-smokers. Therefore it is logical that non-smokers should not be subjected to any type of discomfort – smoke, noise, drugs, pollution ect, as a result of excesses of others. The smokers should limit their habits to the confines of their living areas.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:56 pm |
  83. Jeff

    Jack, I am going to say yes, it should be banned fromall public places. It is the age old arguement, smokers say they have a right to smoke, non-smokers say they have the right to breath clean air.

    Since I am a non-smoker, it really ticks me off when we are out withour daughter and someone lights up.

    Public areas should follow rules/laws of what the majority wants, becuase it is for 'the public'.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:57 pm |
  84. Barbara Tecle

    yes, smokers should be banned from smoking in the public.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:57 pm |
  85. Max in NY


    This habit affects other people than the smokers themselves. Smoking should be confined to people's apartments or smoke only rooms.
    I think this will make it much clearer to smokers how disgusting it is when they're in a room filled with smoke and the walls (like their teeth) turn yellow.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:58 pm |
  86. Donovan in Nevada

    A few years ago I would have said that we should not infringe on other people's freedoms. However, smokers have indirectly infringed on my health insurance and medical expenses, which have gone through the roof in the last five years. Why should I have to indirectly pay for your negligence? Ban smoking! There isn't the slightest positive benefit from this drug.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:58 pm |
  87. Dan Hernandez

    Absolutely Jack! We don't have enough government intervention in the lives of our citizens yet. Let's keep going until we all end up prisoners in our own homes with all the doors and windows shut tight. I'm just sayin'.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:58 pm |
  88. Rob in Orlando

    I'm a non-smoker, but I don't think we need it banned in public. Banning it is an infringement on personal freedom. Just keep it out of my face and I'm happy.

    July 19, 2011 at 5:59 pm |
  89. Rick

    Absolutely not Jack. New York and other places get away with this because people allow thier rights to be taken away. 40+ years of smoking= pursuit of happiness. Payson,Az

    July 19, 2011 at 5:59 pm |
  90. Tracy Dutton Gaal

    Yes it absolutely should. More people die from secondhand smoke that the people who are smoking. Why should my children die for someone else?

    July 19, 2011 at 6:00 pm |
  91. Tim Gray

    Stinky perfume should be banned; body odors should be banned; flatulence should be banned; bus exhaust should be banned; jet plane fumes should be banned.
    But not smoking.
    It is not a health issue outdoors; it's a whining issue.

    Just kill me now.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:00 pm |
  92. Julie of Virginia

    As a former smoker and a current lung cancer patient, I know all about the cravings and the addiction and the pain that smoking can cause. However, even with that, I don't feel that it's any more harmful than excessive drinking, excessive eating , or any of the thousands of legal drugs and chemicals that are sold as part of our food supply. So, no, I don't think that outdoor smoking should be banned. We're a whole lot less likely to be killed by passing by a smoker than by encountering drinkers drivers on the streets that we also must navigate.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:00 pm |
  93. Bobbie

    As long as you're at it, why don't you ban talking on cell phones in public also. That is so annoying to me!! Oh, and I don't like kids crying in public either!! And please stop fat girls from wearing clothes that are too tight!! That's just gross!! Should I go on, or do you get my drift??!!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:02 pm |
  94. abe simon

    Yes it should be banned. Smoking is an insidious addictive evil which has no socially redeeming value. It has recently been proven (again) that second hand smoke is deadly. If people want to smoke themselves to death in their own home that's their choice, although the rest of us, including their families, pay for it in medical and wourkplace costs or with their health.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:02 pm |
  95. bill

    good god yes.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:02 pm |
  96. Dan Hernandez

    Absolutely Jack! We don't have enough government intervention in the lives of our citizens yet. Let's keep going until we all end up prisoners in our own homes with all the doors and windows shut tight. I'm just sayin'.

    Valencia, CA

    July 19, 2011 at 6:03 pm |
  97. Brian in IL

    I have been a staunch nonsmoker my entire life; a real thorn in the side of many I have known who did smoke. And yet I feel that the zealotry has gone too far. Might as well go the entire distance and outright ban the product. Than you would have the same bootleg-fed mob violence you had when liquor was banned. Do we really want to go through that again?

    July 19, 2011 at 6:03 pm |
  98. Henry

    Nope–Think about being in a park and getting a wiff of cig smoke–ok...is that really going to shorten your life and cause lung cancer?

    Answer–no. What annoys me about this is people demonize smoking but forget to think about everything else that can also cause issues. For example, Nail salons (High levels of acetone), public buses (forget the CO2, what about the soot, brake dust, battery fumes?), all the chmicals we slather on ourselves when we are out in nature or public, chemicals used in our everyday food, Hydrogenated oils......you can argue we have a choice but because it is so hard to find alternatives it just isnt the case any longer.

    If we are going to ban these folks from the areas, then shouldnt they get a tax break? where will they smoke, will apartment buildings ban all smoking also. WE are just making criminals out of a minority and acting spoiled.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:04 pm |
  99. Kevin S.

    Absolutely yes!!
    As a smoker myself(3 decades) I may be in the minority of smokers who believe it should be banned in all public areas. I live in Saskatchewan Canada and recently we passed legislation to make it illeagle to smoke in your car if you have children in it.
    While I think its sad that we find it necessary to legislate stupidity, I think it's required to protect not only our kids but the population at large.
    Smokers choose to risk their health. Why should I have the power to impose my wreckless decision on innocent bystanders.
    So yes Jack. An all out ban on smoking in public should be legislated and enforced.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:04 pm |
  100. Bill Weaver

    Smoking is for the mentally disabled and those who need counseling. While I do not believe it should be banned, the price per pack ought to equal any hospital charges directly linked to the habit. My guess is that would put the price at about $15.00 per pack. Go ahead and light up.
    Bill in Louisville

    July 19, 2011 at 6:04 pm |
  101. Michelle

    Yes- at least indoors. I live in Illinois, which recently banned smoking in public. It is so nice to dine in a smoke-free environment. I realized I took it for granted after a trip to MO that left us stranded at a truck stop/restaurant that wasn't smoke-free. I have an infant, toddler and adolescent who is asthmatic. It was too hot to be outside so we were stuck inside a smoke-filled room for hours. Ugh! My 6 week old smelled like a bar! To be trapped next to smokers is disgusting and infuriating.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:04 pm |
  102. No smoking anywhere in public - yes, please!

    Jack – I smoked for years, quit a long time ago, and now I just cannot even stand the smell or smoke around me at all. I'm actually allergic at this point (imagine that!) and being around even wafting cigarette smoke makes my throat swell, my sinuses and eyes burn, and I tear constantly until the fumes blow by. I choose not to smoke, choose to move seats, and even cross the street when I see smokers coming my way, so, yes, I'm doing my part, but I've just had it with inconsiderate smokers, particularly outdoors such as parks and the beach, which are just totally gross places to smoke anyway (hello – you are surrounded by green trees creating your clean air – please respect we are ALL there to appreciate them – your nasty habit can wait until you get into your ashtray of a car). Thanks for NOT smoking anywhere I have to share with you! HAPPY NON-SMOKER IN SAN DIEGO, CA!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:04 pm |
  103. Jack Rosenberg

    Jack, I used to smoke a pack a day now I am down to 3. I do not smoke around non smokers. I have no problem with banning smoking in public. Non smokers should not have to put up with this nasty and unhealthy habit!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:05 pm |
  104. Kirk Bready

    Does this refer exclusively to tobacco smoke? What about the smoke and odors that cover my yard when my neighbors burn (and eat) dead animals in their backyard or restaurants whose greasy cooking fumes travel for blocks? Are there any laws targeting these things? What about flatulence? Fact is, metro living stinks and tobacco, in open spaces, is a very minor contributor.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:05 pm |
  105. Laura, Florence, KY

    Absolutely! People who choose not to smoke should not be forced to breathe smoke filled air. Smokers should do it in the privacy of their homes, cars, etc.

    They should not, however, be allowed to expose children to secondhand smoke.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:05 pm |
  106. Ralph Hazlewood

    I completely support banning smoking in public places. I hate walking by a "designated smoking area" or on the sidewalk to have my delicate lung tissues gasping and struggling for air as the dubious smoke cloud just hovers! It's like my lungs have died and are resurrected as soon as I leave.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:06 pm |
  107. Dustin

    I don't think it's fair to ban smoking in public, I can understand enclosed or tight spaces, but outside? Let people do as they wish if it's not harming you, I don't like seeing people chew with their mouths open but I would never rally to ban it. >.<

    Harker Heights, Texas

    July 19, 2011 at 6:06 pm |
  108. uncle joe

    And what would this posibly accomplish,besides bankrupting the farmers who make their livelihood growing tobacco,never mind those employed in that industry.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:06 pm |
  109. Bobby Simons

    If the government wants to ban smoking in public places, they should have at it! Ban it in parks, beaches, sidewalks, and so forth. However I do no think the government should be able to ban it in places like restaurants, bars, stores, or any other place that while open to public is a private establishment. If a person doesn't want to be around cigarette smoke, they should simply not go to establishments where smoking is allowed. If I don't want to be around cigarette smoke, I go to places that don't allow smoking. It is really easy.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:06 pm |
  110. David

    I've lived in Madison, WI. and now in Garden Grove, CA. I've always thought the smoking bans should have been for outdoor public areas instead of inside private businesses like bars. I don't HAVE to go into a bar or work in a bar, but I do HAVE to walk through all the smokers standing outside of the bar to get to the bus stop; and there is usually someone smoking at the bus stop too. It's a personal choice where I spend my money and if the smoke bothers me at a bar, I won't spend my money there. However, there is only 1 way from my front door to the bus stop and that is on the sidewalk where people are free to smoke. I would prefer to walk my dog on smoke free sidewalks where everyone has a right to be and choose which entertainment establishment by if they allow smoking or not.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:06 pm |
  111. Michael in Albuquerque, NM

    Smokers should be made to pick up their cigarette butts. There is no excuse for littering.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:06 pm |
  112. kevin

    yes ciggerettes should be banned and no longer sold in the US

    July 19, 2011 at 6:06 pm |
  113. Jarrod Rager

    I don't mind a public smoking ban. Scientific data shows harm caused by inhaling smoke. What i don't support are private bans. If a business wants to allow patrons to smoke in their establishment then they should be able to spark up. To deny consenting adults the right to do themselves harm is absurd. What's next? A ban on razors because we occasionally draw a little blood?

    July 19, 2011 at 6:06 pm |
  114. Willa Condy Seymour

    Up in Canada the debate also rolls on. You can't smoke indoors or 30 feet from any door in B.C.
    Where is there a place for a smoker to go to safely light up without offending someone?
    Why if smoking is so offensive and dangerous is it still legal to buy cigarettes? Could it be the taxes that all governments seem to enjoy collecting from smokers?
    I think you have to be fair – let the smokers have a designated area outdoors to have their cigarettes. If you can't smoke indoors then set aside an area with an ashtray and let smokers have their fix there. Tobacco is still legal and penalizing anyone with an addiction to smoking does seem rather unfair.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:06 pm |
  115. Lisa

    El Paso, TX

    Well Jack here in Texas and in the southwest in general we've had numerous wildfires started left and right and the land just isn't fit for some smoker who's not concerned with others well being. Smoking causes fires and harms the health of others. If you want to smoke, do it in your own house, not around others who value their lungs. Countries purposely created a non-smoking environment in restaurants and other public places to reduce the harm. I say we should continue to ban smoking.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:07 pm |
  116. Gigi Oregon

    Yes in all public places it's not just the young but many older people have developed health issues over the years from smoke.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:07 pm |
  117. TODAY

    Americans are so depressed they do not even smoke anymore....can't enjoy anything anymore

    July 19, 2011 at 6:07 pm |
  118. Robert

    I believe smoking should be banned in public places. If you need to smoke contaminate your own lungs not others. Its disgusting to walkk to a smokefree restaurant just to walk through a cloud of smoke or smoking" smokers pot" by the door. I dont want to walk through a public park and smell someone elses breath just so they can get a fix.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:08 pm |
  119. Kate in San Jose

    Jack, as a former smoker, I'm very glad that I've managed to stay away from tobacco for nearly five years, however, I don't think smoking should be banned. I have a hard time believing that second hand smoke is as hazardous as it is made out to be. If it were so bad, why are so many of us baby boomers still breathing just fine? Virtually all of our parents smoked indoors and out day after day when we were children. If the anti-smoking proponents are so afraid of the stuff, let's create designated smoking areas in public places like parks and beaches, in some corner far away from playgrounds. The anti-smokers can be so annoyinging strident.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:09 pm |
  120. TODAY

    Instead of chasing people who are smoking better fix justice system so killers do not walk out free

    July 19, 2011 at 6:09 pm |
  121. Andrew

    I am writing from St.Paul, Minnesota where a recent ban on smoking in 'public' places has taken effect.

    I accentuate 'public' because the places that smoking was banned in aren't 'public' places at all, but privately owned restaurants, clubs, and bars.

    Now, I am a former smoker, and since quitting I feel just as put-off by the smell of cigarette smoke as any non-smoker (maybe more-so) but there is no part of me that understands how the government (local, state or federal) has the right to tell private business owners that they cannot allow the use of a legal product within their establishment.

    If a bar wants to be smoke-free...they have to compete for the patrons of bars that allow smoking...and each would have their own client-base...but now there's only one option at the expense of the right of the business owners to choose for themselves. It sets a very scary precedent in my mind.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:09 pm |
  122. squawky

    that is ridiculous. I am a reformed smoker. I am also a staunch believer in 'the fewer laws, the better'.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:09 pm |
  123. Rosemary

    If you're going to ban smoking, what's next? Eating french fries? Impossible to legislate these types of human behavior. We see how well the "war on drugs" has done. Most of the people who get their knicker's in a twist about smoking, that I have seen, anyway, seem to be the arm-waving, strident, mean-spirited variety who would likely come into your home to check on you and narc you out. I don't like smoke and don't want it around my child, but I have no problem if establishments and cities want to designate smoker areas and let people choose for themselves. It's only fair.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:09 pm |
  124. Gene

    You bet !!! Smoking should be banned in public!!! If you want to smoke, go ahead but stay at home. Do you have any idea how many cigarette butts are fouling up the beaches, parks, waterways and oceans. It is in the BILLIONS! I think the tougher the laws get the more inclined people will be to quit (Albeit reluctantly) Many are extremely livid that their rights are being taken away as to where they can and cannot not smoke. We're taking away your right to kill yourself and others? Right.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:10 pm |
  125. 2011eyes

    Jack, if alcohol had been banned years ago,you would not have had to battle alcoholism. However, it's still not banned today. No restrictions on drinking in public. Doesn't mean it's not dangerous to others; driving drunk. Leave smokers along.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:10 pm |
  126. Kerry

    I am a smoker and do not expect to be able to smoke in public places nor would I want to. It's rude and uncomfortable for both me and the non-smokers but be careful how you define public places. Designated areas CAN be made for smokers, and I, for one really appreciate the restaurant owner who creates a clean, comfortable area round the corner from the main door and out of sight of other patrons so that I can enjoy a relaxing smoke. We have rights too!

    Kerry from Fort McMurray, Alberta Canada

    July 19, 2011 at 6:10 pm |
  127. Jeff In Minnesota

    The problem with smoking is that it was approved by society for so long and came to stand for suave and "cool." Now, even though we know better, it is still viewed in that light by at least a quarter of our society. And that quarter of society is going to smoke whether it is legal or not. So, as a society, we have to ask if we are going to add tobacco to the list of illegal drugs or just let smoking , literally, die out – pun definitely intended.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:11 pm |
  128. Ken G

    Yes! As an ex-smoker, I find the smell of tobacco smoke obnoxious – indoors and outdoors.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:11 pm |
  129. Joe Milstead


    The assinine responses from these people who don't want to breath cig smoke make me laugh. Surely they know that the very vehicles we drive daily cause more cancer and pollution that all of the remaining smokers combined. Now if you were to ask me if I'd rather be locked in a garage with a running car or a smoker, I'll chose the smoker anyday....and for those of you that think you have all of the rights and us smokers have none, well we will just lock you in with the running car and we'll see who dies first....

    July 19, 2011 at 6:11 pm |
  130. bad habit

    Don't worry! We are going to get around to your bad habits next.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:11 pm |
  131. Marcelo - Los Anageles

    You know what they should ban in Public places? Bums and transients. Seriously, I will take a guy smoking a cigarette over one more guy that smells like urine asking me for change...WITHOUT a business license, mind you!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:12 pm |
  132. steve

    St Louis


    If we keep infringing on everybody's rights, soon we will be banning obese people from walking around because they might make an impression on our youth promoting that the fat life is the healthy life!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:13 pm |
  133. Frances

    Should bug killer spray be allowed in public? Should knives be allowed to be thrown at people in public? Should poison be placed in our public drinking fountains? Should people be allowed to blow their killer smoke in our face? NO!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:13 pm |
  134. Ernesto

    The question here should not be whether to ban cigarettes or Smoking but rather to outlaw Tobacco Products.
    Again I ask why is it that the 2 drugs that combined "Cigarettes and Alcohol" kill more humans then all the other so called illegal drugs combined and yet are the only 2 legal drugs! Could it be the revenue from the tax that would be missed?
    And while we are on the subject Cigarettes kill thousands of Smokers and even non smokers every year yet all we hear about is this need to ban Steroids which to date have been indirectly linked to a handful of deaths.
    I'll bet if the Phillip Morris family threatened to stopped selling cigarettes today, shut down all their businesses and lay off the hundreds of thousands of workers who produce tobacco and tobacco products There will be such an uproar from those who benefit from the cigarette tax pleading their case that more study is needed before tobacco is outlawed!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:14 pm |
  135. watinka

    alcohol is a public danger and tragedy and should be banned everywhere

    July 19, 2011 at 6:14 pm |
  136. Pat Kelley

    Of course it should be banned in public- this is a no-brainer. Even this libertarian (note lower case = pragmatic libertarian) recognizes that the state has to take measures to protect the public from those selfish inconsiderate jerks who stomp on the rights and well being of others. In Utopia, everyone does the right thing. In our world, we have to pass laws like this.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:14 pm |
  137. cal

    Sure ban somking .now they want to due drug.pot would not be as bad as cig. It all depends what your bad habit is.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:16 pm |
  138. Louis

    If you should be allowed to smoke in public, i should be allowed to be naked in public. FREEDOM!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:16 pm |
  139. Laura

    I am a proponent of banning smoking in public places - however...first and foremost, I believe it should be banned anywhere that children under the age of 16 are allowed. As adults, we can make a decision of whether to go to a restaurant that allows smoking; children don't have that same choice.

    This should be a federal law...not one left up to state and local politicians.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:16 pm |
  140. scott

    I don't care about this I want to complain about congress being worthless and the debt ceiling.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:17 pm |
  141. Elizabeth

    I do smoke, but I'm courteous. However, ban smoking more than it is already banned, and I will run a one-person campaign against drinking, promiscuity, drugs and saying moronic things!!!! Get a life, people! Live and let live....or is THAT something you miserly little complainers cannot do?

    July 19, 2011 at 6:17 pm |
  142. Paul Cooper

    While we're at it, can we also ban perfume and cologne in public? We all have to smell them too. And you may not find that gallon of Brut you're wearing offensive, but I do. And talking on cell phones? Not only is it annoying to have to listen to you prattle on about how you're getting on or off the bus, but it also turns you into a blind imbecile much more likely to get in other people's way and possibly end up in the street as road kill. Those sidewalks and streets belong to all of us, and they were not put there to serve as your personal phone booth. And what about offensive food odors? You may love your broccoli with garlic sauce, but do you have any idea how much it reeks? So no more chinese takeout for you. For that matter, how dare anyone put their stinking trash out on the public curb, for everyone who passes by to smell and see? Can't you keep that stuff inside until the trash man arrives to collect it?

    I could go on, but I think the point is obvious.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:17 pm |
  143. Henry

    And to add–if you are out doors, at a park, and you dont like oders–you would hate to be down wind of me after a weekend of camping and hiking–wouldnt you? Should i be banned?

    And dont get me started on health care–because though a person doesnt smoke, they probably have other unhealthy habits–For example Working all the time (stress), random sex partners, drinking, unhealthy eating, obesity, never exercising, perscription drugs...the list goes on.

    If we are going to nickle and dime everything, well, then lets get to. If not, lets get back to being reasonable and stop believing eveything thing you hear. DO REAL REASEARCH–not i saw it on a commercial so it must be true..Take a look at OSHA standards for all the chemicals in cigs and get the real info yourself.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:18 pm |
  144. Mike from Wisco

    No it should not!! Those 2nd hand smoke statistics are way off, pollution from cars is way more harmful then 2nd hand smoke. That smog you see in the sky that was not caused by smokers. Alcohol kills more people than smoking......try to ban that and see what happens. Lets ban hair spray while were at it and bon fires and air conditioning.....bunch of crap!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:18 pm |
  145. bad habit

    What about property rights?

    If I want to cater to smokers in my business it becomes a property right to tell others that they can not.

    Smoking in a crowd is different than smoking in public. It is amazing how many people will cross the street to indulge in their self righteous bossing.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:18 pm |
  146. vikki jones

    All of those city dwellers should be more concerned with car exhaust that they breathe and not cigarettes and second hand smoke.
    This dumbed down nation is too much to bear sometimes.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:18 pm |
  147. tom c

    Jack! People have been out of work for two years or more. Smoke, smoke smoke that cigarette! People are freaking out! I guess these people that are responding to ban it all are happily at work (at the moment). Stay tuned folks...

    July 19, 2011 at 6:18 pm |
  148. c.dalpiaz

    no! We are loosing our individual choices every day! Salt, alcohol, coffee, air pollution are all bad for you. Do we prohibit alcohol? Let the smokers smoke in the few places where it is still allowed!!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:18 pm |
  149. Tim in Phoenix

    Smoking should be controlled, but it shouldn't be banned. There's no reason why there can't be smoking sections outdoors. I don't agree with eliminating peoples' rights if they're not hurting anybody other than themselves.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:19 pm |
  150. glyder

    i think those of you who would ban smoking are more dangerous than the smoke itself.nazi pigs! and i don't smoke.i think it makes some of you feel like you have accomplished something.you people never stop.go ahead,make them illegal.i would love to see the government eat the lack of revenue and watch you morons pat each other on the back.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:19 pm |
  151. Dean Wyman

    Smoking drugs (yes nicotine is a DRUG!) in public should be banned. We have cops who bust somone for smoking a marijuana joint, yet light up a nicotine joint while they process the arrest.
    Either all drug use in public is wrong or all drug use in public should be allowed, but end the hypocracy.....

    July 19, 2011 at 6:19 pm |
  152. Doug

    No, I hate stupid people and senseless postings in forums, but I still put up with them. Leave us smokers alone.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:20 pm |
  153. Richard

    I once set up a non-smoking lunchroom for the non-smokers to be smoke free. Funny thing was nobody used this nice air-conditioned room , instead they sat out in the open air and heat with the smokers. I asked them why and was told they wanted to socialize with the smokers more then they wanted to avoid the smoke. I think some people just want to complain and try to control others. I no longer smoke myself but don't run from those that do. Guess it just depends on what side of the coin you want to call up.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:20 pm |
  154. Charles


    We need the tax revenue.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:20 pm |
  155. JaynPortland (Oregon)

    Non-Smokers should be banned from complaining

    July 19, 2011 at 6:20 pm |
  156. Paddy, Pennsylvania

    Banning overweight people and alcohol in public should happen before smoking- the health costs associated with obesity and alcohol consumption are WAY higher than cigarettes. Now, time for a smoke.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  157. Anne S.

    I don't believe smoking should be banned. I feel I'm being considerate when I go off in my own little corner and smoke. So why is it when I'm all alone people have to come over and bother me? It's like this I can't stand the smell of alcohol or beer, then I don't go and stand by a person that has been drinking. There are other pollutants in the air besides cigarette smoking that can cause cancer. I try to be considerate of others. If they want to do that then have an area where only smokers are allowed.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  158. Maria Raymond

    Yes. Public smokers should go up in a puff of, well, smoke!


    July 19, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  159. Rocky in LA

    YES!....at the same time that they ban breaking wind in public...I mean, think of all of that Methane!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  160. Margie from Phoenix

    Yes Jack ban smoking sounds good to me.
    I'm making reservations right now for dinner at that place that allows no kids and no smoking see you there

    July 19, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  161. Angelique

    Absolutely YES!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  162. American

    Plain and simple this is a bad rule of law. It has been bad since it started and I voted against it in CA. When this started, I suggested we ban all cars because we all know what comes out of a tail pipe is much worse then a cigarette. However, this is even worse to outlaw it in State parks? The smokers are out in the open. You have got to be kidding me? There are other things that need taking care of by our government. What's next are they going to make us all join a gym...... Don't even go there I am just joking and it was to make a point. This isn't about health this is about telling people what to do. It is not a good presendence for a supposed "free" country.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  163. Beran B London

    Yes it should hands down!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  164. Tyler

    Smoking in public should be banned.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  165. marc

    Ban it everywhere.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  166. jane wilson

    Smokers don't seem to realize how awful their clothes, homes – and themselves! – smell to mon-smokers. Since second-hand smoke is harmful, and we all know this, et's keep it away from those who choose not to smoke.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  167. Jeff of Peoria

    Illinois did away w/ Smoking in buildings 2 years ago and I love it (I'm an EX SMOKER) I don't agree to banning it outside though. That's taking it a little too far.


    Jeff in Peoria IL

    July 19, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  168. Bryon

    Jack, as a lifelong asthmatic, why should I be oppressed with a smoker's bad habit? I think there should be a ban and a banishment to a small island in the south Pacific....

    July 19, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  169. Rick

    Try banning fast food first that will kill you as well but Americans gobble down pounds and pounds of that greasy crap per year thinking that a full stomach at low cost will earn them a place in paradise.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  170. Glen

    As a non-smoker, no I don't like breathing it. But a new law? For now I think the politicians have much greater priorities. Like getting positioned for their next election. Don't give lawmakers another chance to dissapoint the US people~

    Glen, Florida

    July 19, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  171. bruce

    Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose......

    July 19, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  172. Awbarnfield

    Absolutely! I do not want to enjoy time in the park with my family only to have it ruined by second hand smoke!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  173. Steve D

    Absolutely. If the odds of catching AIDS from smokers were as high as the odds of catching heart and/or lung disease or cancer we wouldn't even be having this conversation. People have the god given right to kill their darn selves but they have no right to kill others.

    Steve D
    New Windsor, Maryland

    July 19, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  174. Bruce - Richmond VA

    YES....and it will a total YES soon

    July 19, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  175. Alexander J Snyder

    As a perpetual non-smoker/quitting smoker I think smoking SHOULD be banned in public areas, to include the outdoor patio of the bar/restaurant private property. It is a deadly habit that should not be exposed to others. Imagine if I carried around a tin of Asbestos, I wouldn't be allowed to sprinkle it on the public streets and around others! Why is smoking (which is deadlier) allowed?

    July 19, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  176. Conor, Chicago

    I quit smoking 18 months ago. Since then when I am around someone who smokes it doesn't bother me at all. If you are outside you should be able to smoke-period. If you are inside you should have to go outside. It's pretty simply when you think about it.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  177. ben dover

    It doesn't matter where you go, to the curb, to the post office, bank,
    public restroom, anywhere you see cig butts everywhere, if you get within 15 feet of a smoker you can smell it. I pull up to a light, my A/C (even if it is set on recirculate) pulls smoke into my car. My buddy know I don't like smoking and smokes outside my house or my car then he gets in
    damn I want to puke, he smells nasty. Why do the majority of America
    (around 80%) have to smell that everywhere we go?

    July 19, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  178. Charlotte

    definitly should be banned in public, on sidewalks, next to other people.Also mother with children should not be allowed to smoke at all

    July 19, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  179. Mel

    NO! How many of our civil liberties will we have to give up before people revolt? You wait, next it will be fat people.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  180. Steve

    In addition to banning smoking in public places, i would like to see a ban placed on obese men and women who are doused in obnoxious perfumes and colognes. They are every bit as sickening as the smell of smoke.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  181. jimaka

    In a word YES. But here is a question, Should they be allowed to marry?

    July 19, 2011 at 6:22 pm |
  182. Denise

    Yes, I do think that smoking should be banned in public places.
    Scenario: You are walking in the park and you take a rest on the bench.
    A smoker wants to rest too, no problem except they decide to light up.
    I would then find another bench to sit on.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  183. Dave

    Yes, as well as flatulence in public and any type of annoying body oder for that matter.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  184. John

    If we strive for consistency in our regulations, then we should also ban the emission of automobile exhaust in public places, which is released into the lungs of the unsuspecting public MUCH more frequently and in vastly greater quantities than tobacco smoke. And what about the smoke from barbecues, fireplaces, and campfires?

    July 19, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  185. A. OReilly

    Where we live, most of the townhomes are rentals which means no smoking indoors. You can imagine what it is like for me to open a window, let alone sit outside on a nice day, it is horrible. We told these addicts to go outside with their "hobby" and now being outdoors means second hand smoke for everybody. Can't they get their own planet and smoke to their hearts content? Oh well.
    Portalnd Oregon

    July 19, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  186. John

    Yes, smoking should be banned in public. I am a smoker and I can personnally tell you that as soon as I see a child looking at me smoking, even at a large distance, I put the cigarette out and hide the remains. I remember how I started, I was looking at someonelse smoking with interest at a vulnerable age. Put'em out for the kids!!!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  187. Margot

    My former employer used to smoke freely indoors, year round, offending all of us regularly ! I was appalled at the gull and lack of responsibility and abuse of power ! It took a lot of protests for the man to finally get the picture.
    But even then he would leave the door open a bit, just to let in a bit of smoke, all in defiance. What arrogance ! Stop killing others with your cigarette smoke ! Grow up !

    July 19, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  188. Risa

    Smoking should be BANNED in all public places. As a non-smoker its disgusting to be around that stench!!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  189. Matt, Little Rock

    No, smoking should not be banned in public. Any establishment that sells alcohol for immediate consumption (bars, some restaurants, etc.) should go back to having smoking and non-smoking sections. I would support banning smoking in public areas that see high numbers of children, such as amusement parts, though.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  190. Tim, Tulsa

    You know, crying kids in public raise my blood pressure and stress levels, which is only countered by a relaxing smoke. I'll agree to stop bringing my cigs in public if the rest of society agrees to stop bringing their kids out in public. If not, it will just be another pointless law we ignore. Pot is illegal right, and we all no that NO ONE does that. Seriously, just ban cigs outright, the black market needs another source of revenue. And people that are worried about their health due to second hand smoke should be more worried about what will happen if it's banned. You know what kills 5.4 million Americans a year? We do, if you ban smoking. =)

    July 19, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  191. Vox

    As long as all smells ever were banned, that would make sense.
    But i would prefer to see cologne banned on airplanes before i see smoking banned in public. But thats just my ideal world, and i can't have everything i want all the time, apparently.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  192. Smoke'Em

    Alright non smoking losers, enough is enough. You do not have the right to every inch of the world being smoke free, period.

    Instead of opening non smoking establishments you force others to run their business your way. This nonsense stops TODAY.

    The next person that tells me to put out my smoke is getting decked so hard they won't wake up for two days.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  193. ed

    Breathing is a right, smoking is a privelege.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  194. Gail Wempner

    Yes, it should be banned in public.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  195. Josh

    Are you kidding me? That is the last thing this country needs is more nanny laws.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  196. Jeremy

    No, smokes should not be banned in public. Imagine second-hand cigarette smoke as you would car emissions. Yes, second hand smoke is a high risk factor for certain things but do cigarettes cause as many problems in the long run? why aren't cars banned in public? OH wait, cars have an AIR FILTER, how are cigarettes different in that aspect?

    Myself personally, I do the respectful thing and stay away from anyone, especially children, while smoking in public.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  197. JaynPortland (Oregon)

    Non-Smokers should be banned from banning things

    July 19, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  198. Erik A.

    It would be next to impossible to have enough officers to enforce a ban on smoking in public places. People who smoke often seek out areas that they know they will not be around people. If it's that bothersome to those who do not smoke, simply walk away.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  199. exsmoker

    Smoking should be banned inside, period. NOT outside. Enjoy your police state lemmings! Good luck collecting tax revues from somewhere else. Camp fires and fireplaces should be banned too, they get pretty smokey. Idiots.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  200. Felipe De Aguiar

    Yes, smoking should definitely be banned in public and I applaud all the states (unfortunately Nevada is not included yet) that have enabled tough smoke-free laws! It is not only a matter of public health, but also a matter of a non-smoker's right to be able to breathe, without having to worry about the effects of second-hand smoke on his/her lungs from someone next to them puffing on a cigarette or cigar. After all, a non-smoker does never pollute a smoker's breathing air, but the smoker's bad habit of smoking always does! I live in Las Vegas, where the minority (the smokers) arrogantly rule over the majority (the non-smokers), and I am appalled that thousands of casino workers, and non-smoking patrons as well, have to work 8 hours a day in a smoking environment, supposedly because if smoking was prohibited in public places, fewer people would come to gamble and there would be less profit for the casinos or bars! I would say that if smoking were to be prohibited in casinos, more non-smokers would come to gamble, because they would not be so worried anymore about their health – it is a smoker's right to shorten their lifespan if they so choose, but not to impose the same fate to the non-smokers around them! Let's enable tough smoke-free laws to ban smoking in public immediately all across America, and help put less strain on the healthcare system!
    Las Vegas, NV

    July 19, 2011 at 6:23 pm |
  201. Martin Wielgus

    Absolutely. Smokers are the most inconsiderate people in the world. I am allergic to cigarette smoke, and have used an inhaler for years. One friend who smoked casually said, "Well, you have your inhaler." So non-smokers are expected to medicate themselves to keep from having adverse reactions to smoking. I quite smoking forty years ago because it's a filthy, disgusting habit, and it caused me to have bronchitis twice in one year. I have never wanted to go back.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  202. Mike

    Absolutely. The issue centers on the fact that the smoke is not contained to the user. It spreads. It wafts about and infects all the air nearby. It is analogous to putting alcohol in the water supply from which everyone must drink.

    I smoked for 5 years. I know how it feels to be pushed away from areas because of my cigarettes. Now that I've quit I understand how right they were to push me away.

    If a person wants to smoke they have the right to do so. But the clear limit of that liberty is the lip or nostril of the user through with those toxins inevitably must pass.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  203. Jim

    Absolutely Jack, ban smoking every where. Then after we have done that, we can go after other groups. Put police in fast food restaurants and stop anybody overweight from ordering anything fattening. Then onto the grocery stores, anything that leads to obesity, diabetes or any other health concern.

    Next, let's go back to prohibition, alcohol kills people every day of every year. Next, confiscate any car that emits any pollution that exceeds california emission standards, it is just as unhealthy as smoking cigarettes.

    I am sure the list of things offense to any one group is endless so I say let's get it over with, if you do anything that is offensive to anybody we should eliminate it. Anything that contribtes to ANY health ailment should also be banned, in fact shut down the entire dairy industry and peanuts as well.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  204. BH

    if people want to kill themselves slowly with cancer then do it in ur own house. I should not be subjected to a smokers poison while I go out in public.

    I also think it should be illegal to smoke in a car while there are children present in that car.

    smokers cost this country BILLIONS of dollars every year in health care cost.

    its disgusting!!!!!!!!!!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  205. Mike. Boston

    Many places ban drinking in public... and drinking isn't directly harmful to other people. It's that simple.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  206. Jennifer S.

    Since second hand smoke effects non smokers in a greater way then it does the smokers themselves it gives those that don't smoke the right to not want to endanger their lives. I personally have asthma and it has only gotten worse. The last thing I want to do is worsen that because someone has a craving to light up.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  207. Cori

    Yes, smoking should be banned in public places. The dangers of second hand smoke are well know at this point through extensive research. I do not believe it is fair to pollute the air or endanger others health for the sake of a bad habit. I also feel I have a right to breath clean air.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  208. Nic Brandenberger

    NO WAY! What's the guiding principle behind this anyways? Nobody would come to conclude that cars should be banned from public roads (and they stink, too!).
    If you want your kid (or your own lungs) protected, you'd just not hang out with smokers – just as you wouldn't hang out & play next to a highway.
    It's just common sense - start thinking & stop expecting the law to do it all for you.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  209. Mary Battle

    Yes, Yes, Yes and should be banned in their yards, because smoke travels. Smokers do not smoke in their homes because of second hand smoke and pass it off to their neighbors.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  210. Fairooz Adams

    Of course it should. Smoking with all it's health hazards for the individual and the public makes it an inherently repulsive practice. Why not go further and ban smoking completely? I wish we could, but more than likely that would fail like prohibition did.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  211. Ken in NC

    Don’t give Congress any ideas on more things to ban. Democrats will want to ban smoking. Republicans will fight it. They will compromise and ban smoking in public by people that do not smoke.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  212. Jeffrey Higgins

    There should indeed be a cigarette ban inside and outside, no good for anyone, while I detest witnessing anyone light up a cigarette, seeing kids and pregnant mothers smoke really sends a shiver through my spine.

    I do, however think marijuana isn't as terrible as cigarettes

    July 19, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  213. mike

    smoking should be banned in public,I have grandchildren and i dont want them suggested to the harmful efforts because of someone elses deadly habit!!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  214. Jack

    In most states, the government has already banned smoking in privately owned businesses! What's this talk about "public?".

    Of course, we should also ban fat people. Fat people pose a major health hazard to myself and other skinny people as they are slow, and block access to exits of public buildings during a fire or bomb threat. Fat people MUST BE PROHIBITED FROM ALL PUBLIC BUILDINGS. We must do it for "the children."

    Then, ugly people. Ugly people are a major distraction, and in addition a small child subjected to looking at ugly people can suffer horrible trauma, with consequences extending into adult life- Studies show that children subjected to looking at ugly people in public are 4 times more likely to smoke or become obese.

    Poor people. They should not be allowed in public. This causes all kinds of emotional stress, and is again a major health hazard. Studies confirm stress is a #1 killer.

    Women who wear too much (or too little purfume). The government has not only the right, but the DUTY to generate some regulations concerning this.

    What about barbeque? Talk about carcinogens! Throw the public meat cookers in jail I say!

    I have a long list that many of my fellow Americans support. If they don't want to do what I like- well, by God we'll force 'em!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  215. Ryan -Mo.

    NO WAY it should be banned. If you do not enjoy my smoke then go somewhere else, i live in the United States of America , you know ... that one place with freedoms and stuff. You have the FREEDOM to go somewhere else so do that or keep your mouth shut.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  216. Bob

    Outside, no, and there should be more ashtrays like there used to be. Inside restaurants and bars? What was wrong with the old smoking section? Besides, people who smoke are generally nicer than people who don't, especially in public.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  217. Political Correctness

    I will quit smoking in public the moment I am not subjected to obscene public obesity by Americans that will not exercise or reduce their caloric intake. My habit costs the tax payers less and is currently taxed heavily to cover what burden our potential ailment will create. Should we tax uninsured fatties for the medical burden they will create?

    July 19, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  218. dave in nashville

    You may pray, I don't. I smoke, you don't. BUT, I pay tax to smoke while the church blows smoke up your...nevermind Jack, I won't go there.
    The point is, as long as the government taxes an activity, it should be free to do so anywhere you want.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  219. Jean, San Francisco

    Absolutely should NOT be banned and I'm not a smoker.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  220. Sylvia Cooke

    No, this is still a free country and smoking should not be banned, but regulated as to certain places and times. P.S. I am not a smoker, but my husband of 60 years was, and his smoking NEVER bothered me. I believe in Freedom!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:24 pm |
  221. Ted

    No. As soon as society saves smokers from themselves, they can outlaw overweight people in restaurants since they also tax the healthcare system.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  222. LW

    Absolutely Yes! Smoking should be banned in public places. It's bad enough that it's smelly & unhealthy but for some unknown reason smokers seem to believe it's their right to drop or flick their butts onto the ground or anywhere that is convenient to them whether the butts are a burning fire hazard or not. We could do away with gum and especially chewing tobacco – yuck. Also add a $3 health tax on tobacco products to help cover the overage that it costs everyone for health care.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  223. Steve C

    Where is this madness going to end. Stop smoking due to second hand smoke- kills people. Stop driving cars- exhaust causes global warming – kills people. Stop any religious display in public- may cause someone to think about death. Stop eating fast food in public- may cause someone to desire a big mack- causes obesity and kills people. Stop talking in public- might say something offensive and tick someone off- get there gun- kill people. Oooops...guns are probably banned in the US at this point. Everyone gets a medal for participation- all A+ students as we don't another Columbine- Dogs and Cats...living together.... where does this end? I don't know but it could end with allowing smoking in public places and let's be done with it.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  224. BD70 - Webster NY

    I will support ban on smoking when those who feel they need cologne and or perfume are banned from wearing that in public. Smoke stinks but so does other smells. What one deems smells pretty or masculine another is taken to their knees.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  225. Martina C.

    Definitely! Smoking should be banned everywhere in public because non-smokers do not deserve to have their health, and the health of their children, affected by another person's decision to contaminate their body. Second-hand smoke has been proven to cause many health problems in those who are exposed. Why should anyone have to suffer so people can have the freedom to smoke where they want? It's their addiction- let them bake in it in their own homes or on their own property.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  226. donald baker

    i don't know , jack.. let me have a cigarette & think about it. don, rexford, ny

    July 19, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  227. Rose

    I am a non-smoker but I see the government slowly taking over everything. Stop them now from becoming totally in charge of our lives. I am more likely to die at the hands of a drunk driver than second hand smoke and no one plans to outlaw alcohol.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  228. Dave

    Simply, yes the time has come. Second hand smoke is a danger and it really irks me when I see a smoker dump their ashtray out of their car/truck window, flick the butt out the window or drop it on the ground....it's just plain disgusting.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  229. Jason

    Last time I knew this land was known as the land of the FREE!!! Us smokers know the dangers and while most of us try to quit and realize it's much tougher than said, there is some who enjoy it. I can understand about banning it in public places but there has been some places in Michigan that also ban it while they are outside. If it goes that route country wide...then we will be no better than some of these countries in the Middle East where none of there people can do anything without consequences.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  230. Chobufo

    Smoking is a bad as consuming any other illegal drugs like cocaine. Why should others be pronounced illegal and not tobacco??? All boils down to politics. I think more efforts should be tailored towards a complete ban on tobacco consumption!!!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  231. Robert

    Yes, smoking should be banned in all public places. And in private cars with children riding in them! Smoking is the most preventable cause of death and disease and the costs of smoking to all of us, smokers and non-smokers alike, are tremendous. That we don't have stronger laws in some states already is testimony to how many of our lawmakers are still beholden to the tobacco giants.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  232. Anonymous

    Alcohol does more damage to the public than secondhand smoke. People fail to realize the toxins we inhale on a daily basis, in urban and rural areas. This dispute is trivial and should be put to rest. Smokers have been forced outside and, in most cases, sent far distances to adhere to workplace rules accomodating non-smokers. They pay more taxes, so why not let them have a corner? If they're not blowing it in your face, hold your breath as you walk past.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  233. Connor Langer

    The U.S. tried to ban substances once before on a federal level, it was called the 18th amendment. Needless to say, that amendment didn't go so well with the public, and is considered by many to be the worst U.S. amendment ever created.

    Many smokers are already persecuted by the non-smoker majority, and it seems pointless to persecute them further. Just because smokers are unpopular in the eye of the majority, doesn't make, and should not make, their smoking in public illegal.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  234. Ken in NC

    Congress can't raise the debt ceiling. Don't give them something else not to do.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  235. Jean in Arizona

    The enactment of more and more laws banning smoking was the primary reason I quit after 44 years. Perhaps a total ban on smoking in public will help others to stop, for their own health and to reduce the costs of illness due to smoking.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  236. Bernard

    Yes, It is really unfair for a non-smoker to be subject to the pollution that cannot be escaped. Especailly it is unavoidable for anyone who works in an urban environment to walk outside and breath fresh air due to the number of smokers outside of the building. To make matters worse, there are many daycare centers within these urban environments where staff members take the children out for fresh air, but it is anything but fresh, and the children don't know that they should hold their breath as adults do when they have to walk thorugh clouds of smoke.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  237. Newberry

    Cigarette prices have soared due to a tax increases for "negative public externalities." I pay that tax to smoke in public. So if smoking is banned in public places, then is it right to assume taxes on cigarettes will decrease?


    July 19, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  238. Martin H.

    No, if it's public property and outdoors then it's my property. If I'm alone on a beach or patio and decide to light up, it shouldn't be a crime.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  239. Layne in Texas

    Smoking in public should be banned because children are most likely to be out in the public. Children will be exposed to secondhand smoking and they might develop something from it. Not to mention they might even emulate adults smoking in public which will lead to even more problems.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  240. Kenneth from California

    The consequences of smoking, boose, and other drugs, is for many, a shortcut to death. Suicide is a personal thing, like going to the toilet, do it in private, not in front of the public.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  241. Vic in Chicago

    Heck yeah! Why not charge $20 a pack for cigarettes!! I'm sick of it...I can't jog or walk down the street without walking into a cloud of smoke from some idiot who has no respect for his/her health or others! With it being 95+ degrees outside, how can anyone smoke a cigarette? If you want to die, smoke in your home and do not infect what clean air we have left...

    July 19, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  242. Bill Oreily

    This is AMERICA, land of freedom and the government is seemingly taking away all forms of freedom, should we ban cars because of the ozone issues.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  243. Don

    It doesn't make sense to ban what is legal to sell. If you ban tobacco products then the smokers have no other choice but to hide in their own space. Of course the price will go up on the black market but maybe that will force more to quit.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  244. Kal

    Lighten up! Or is that light them up! Your smokes that is. Be respectful. Do not be shy; ask the crowd around you before you torch that cancer stick. If you get booed and hissed at like a debt limit ceiling discussion: RUN!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  245. Larry

    I am a smoker and have never been to the doctor for any resion for smoking but i have to ask why do fat people get to drive up my health care cost just asking, lots of health care cost from fat people that i have to pay for but dont let me smoke and pay taxes on them smokes
    guess were the taxes will go when none of us can smoke anymore your property taxes

    July 19, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  246. Craig Stans

    all these upity snobs who want to take away smokers rights will be the first to complain about having to pay more taxes as states will need more revenue to make up for the loss of cigarette taxes.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  247. paul

    While I don't touch cigarettes, I've been known to light up a good cigar every now and then. I don't support inside smoking but outside it should be a choice. People can make choices still and we don't live in a dictatorship. There is plenty of space and those that get offended should just move. Enough with the smoke Nazis.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  248. Anne

    YES, YES, YES! Not only banned but enforced as smokers routinely ignore laws and the choice of others like me to not smoke and invade our healthy space with acrid smoke, even when kids are around. Let's face it, the laws are not for those who are considerate but for those smokers who just don't care, in which case I would love to see good strong enforcement until they understand how to be considerate.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:27 pm |
  249. Lorene Wood

    Yes, smoking in public should be banned. My mother died from second hand smoke, and she never smoked a day in her life. At the time she worked in an environment that permitted smoking, before the NY law changes on smoking. She retired in 1999 at age 65, and was dead two years later at age 67. Lung cancer...go figure. Second hand smoke kills!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:27 pm |
  250. Trevor

    Typical american thinking, we think that a single wisp of cigarette smoke from across a park will give our entire family cancer but don't give a second thought to the pollution spewing cars that surround us or the horrible processed "food" we shove down our throats.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:27 pm |
  251. Peter

    No smoke outside? First, waste in public places will decrease. Second, less people will be smoking-based on both the available venues for smoking going down, and the price of cigarettes going up to cover lost sales-this in turn will increase general population health. But I have one issue here: without there being a smoking designated area specifically positioned inside of buildings, both public and private, won't we run into complaints such as, "Well, if there's a wheelchair ramp for handicapped, why isn't there a smoking room for smokers." They'd claim discrimination. Ouch.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:27 pm |
  252. LS

    No, especially if its outside. I doubt someone's cigarette smoke outside is going to give you cancer from second hand smoke. Walk a few steps away and you won't have to be "exposed." If they ban cigarette smoking I really think we shouldn't stop there – let's ban burgers, steaks, fries, desserts and all those other yummy things that cause people to be obese. Seriously – we do have bigger fish to fry – oh wait – that might be banned too – ok bigger fish to grill.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:27 pm |
  253. Phil

    The reality is Jack, that light exposure to second hand smoke in situations such as outdoor plazas or beaches where there is sufficient open space in which the smoke may dissipate, poses no real threat of detriment to a person's health. The only legitimate threat public smoking causes is brief discomfort to other people who happen to be nearby. But we cannot create legislation that protects people from such trivial discomforts. Does this mean we will also ban overly smelly cheese that causes others discomfort? Or perhaps unsightly clothing that may cause discomfort in the more conservative people. The reality is that smoking in public only truly harms the person smoking. We can not create legislation to protect people from themselves. It is unamerican and just plain wrong. Smoking must not be banned in public.

    Phil, Napa Valley

    July 19, 2011 at 6:27 pm |
  254. Shelley

    All smoking in public should be banned. Non smokers should not be subject to the smell, smoke and carcinogens. Smoking should also be banned in the presence of children.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:27 pm |
  255. andyz Lynn, MA

    Being a former smoker (3-5 packs/day) we should outlaw cigarettes, cigars and pipes. Why does any rational, educated person ever want to slowly kill themselves? How much would we save in health care costs? How many lives would we save?

    July 19, 2011 at 6:28 pm |
  256. Smoke'Em

    Only a moronic, pathetic, disgrace of a human being, would ban smoking in all public places.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:28 pm |
  257. Brandon S.

    Being a former smoker, I have noticed the steep decline of smokers in public, specifically those who are college aged. Insofar as smoking in public goes, the ban should only apply where there is an occurrence of people within a certain distance of the smoker. Nearly everyone can estimate distance, so if there is someone say, within 50ft of a smoker, then that person cannot light up. Such a rule already applies to businesses here in VA (no smoking within 50ft of the door). So, the appropriate compromise would be "No smoking within 50ft of non-smokers".This will allow those who wish to continue to smoke the freedom to do so. It is never a good idea for one group to tell another group how to live their lives. This is America the Free, after all.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:28 pm |
  258. Andrew Ramirez

    Yes, it's a terrible habit. Maybe this will help them live a few more years before they self impose lung cancer. And l also do not appreciate inadvertently harming my lungs or my family's while I am at the park trying to enjoy the day.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:28 pm |
  259. Survivor3306

    We have evolved into such an intolerant society in the US that I am not surprised that nonsmokers want to ban all smoking in public places. But they are wrong. The secondhand smoking danger is completely bogus because you are not in a closed environment where you are forced to breathe this smoke continuously. You might smell it and have move a little bit to avoid the smell. Compare that to what you are asking the smoker to do. If he cannot smoke indoors or outdoors, then what? To say “Well, he will just have to quit when he is away from home” is not a reasonable compromise. As a former smoker, I know how frustrating these attitudes are to a smoker. If Americans can learn again to be tolerant of our differences, we will be a better society.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:28 pm |
  260. F. Nardo Cape Coral FL

    as a non smoker, i sympathize with people that smoke, the freedoms we once had in America are being taxed by special interest groups, they will inflict their will and belief's on the rest, Smokers are taxpayers and deserve all that comes with that, banning smoking in public outdoor places is ridiculous.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:28 pm |
  261. Mel

    Yes! My father happens to be on oxygen because he smoked for 50 years. It's heart breaking to watch him struggle to breath. If smoking were banned in public places maybe enough people would give up the habit forcing the cigarette companies out of business. Which would also help the health care system. a win win for all.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:28 pm |
  262. Jared

    Whatever happened to freedom? Since when do people have the right to dictate every aspect of another person's life? If you don't want to smoke then don't. We're talking about outdoors, where there's TONs of air and a little bit of smoke.

    Smoking doesn't even come close to touching automobiles or industry when it comes to dirtying up the air. Ban the other two first and then we'll talk.

    I'm a non-smoker. I just happen to value freedom above my own personal desires to live in a smoke-free world. I'm sure I have annoying habits others would like to see banned. Since when did this country become all about me me me me me me me?

    July 19, 2011 at 6:28 pm |
  263. Andrea in Raleigh


    When I am in a public area, I feel like shouldn't have to be subjected to second-hand smoke, not to mention the disgusting smell that cigarettes leave behind. I will be celebrating two years Tobacco-free on the 21st, and because I don't smoke anymore, I am extra sensitive to the smell. Being exposed to it is unpleasant, but it actually reaffirms my commitment to "stay clean". I would never want to smell like that again, or force others to smell that way. I would definitely support a ban on smoking in public places!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:28 pm |
  264. Toni

    Yes, it should be banned. I smoked for 20 years and quit 10 years ago because i (mistakenly) thought i had a smoking related issue. Thankfully i was wrong but it scared me enough to keep me off the cigarettes and now i realize how inconsiderate I myself was as a smoker. I forced my children and others to breathe in my smoke with no regard for their well being. I am glad the addiction is over. My grandchildren do not have the same inconsideration that my children were forced to live with.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:28 pm |
  265. Mike

    I am a reformed smoker and NO I do not think it should be banned in public. Smokers have rights too.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:28 pm |
  266. Dan

    I am a nonsmoker, but I say no. This would be just another right taken away from us. What's next? The beauty of living in this country is if you don't like it you have the right to walk away from it.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:29 pm |
  267. Hamlin

    Smoking should be banned in public, only if people are not allowed to run internal combustion engines,
    Car exhaust contains H2S and Lead both lethal as well as other toxic chemicals over 200! But 1 Cigarette is more harmful on a sidewalk than the exhaust from the 200 cars in the street, I don't think so!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:29 pm |
  268. Carl in San Diego

    No. Once you open Pandora's box, what else is next? Second hand smoke from barbeques, fireplaces, or firework displays? In some areas, you have to be 50 yards away a business to smoke, yet there is a stop sign or stop light within 15 feet, and you are breathing in exhaust fumes from a vehicle. While I agree with banning of smoking inside business, I disagree with an exterior ban. Too much regulation!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:29 pm |
  269. Jeff

    When smokers start paying for their ENTIRE healthcare, premium and the cost to treat their smoking related diseases, then they can light up all they'd like. They litter and think them tossing their butts on the ground isn't littering. Why should we 80%+ put up with this minority?

    Where's my right to breathe polluted smog without cigarette smoke in my lungs? They think their rights are more important than mine!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:29 pm |
  270. Helen

    I am a non-smokers, but I don't think second hand smoke in public places is any worse than car/truck pollution. I am sick and tired of diminishing peoples' civil rights. Smokers pay taxes too and smoking, after all, is a legal drug.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:29 pm |
  271. Ben Doublett

    No, Jack. Smoking should be allowed in establishments like bars and pool halls, but only if those establishments pay for a license to allow smoking. The revenues from this license could then be used to fund public health initiatives to compensate for the external cost smokers impose on nonsmokers through second hand smoke. Individuals will then have a choice between smoking and nonsmoking venues, and if there really is enough opposition to smoking, those places that allow it will go out of business or change their polices. There is no need to get the government involved in a problem that the market can solve.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:29 pm |
  272. Ed Hoffman

    No, when will the nanny governments get out of our lives.

    They stop smoking in public, what follows? I can be offended by strong smelling cologne or perfume, can we stop that in public? I can be offended by over the top public displays of affection, can we stop that in public also?

    Where does it stop. Maybe stop eating in public in case we offend anorexics! How about that one ?

    July 19, 2011 at 6:31 pm |
  273. mikeiver37

    As a smoker, I totally respect other peoples space, and do not want to intrude. That said, I believe that my right as a free American is to smoke in any place, provided it does not directly affect anyone near. Even though I choose to smoke, and I am definitely a taxpayer, I do get to maintain a level of freedom and rights.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:31 pm |
  274. Chuck H. in Jasper, Ga.

    Sure it should just as soon as they ban obese people from walking around in public places. I find obese people extremely offensive and the sight of them makes me physically ill. Not to mention the largest medical issue facing this country in the not too distant future, is medical care for these fat slobs. High blood pressure, heart disease, not to mention diabetes. Second hand smoke is no more dangerous to people in the open than all the fat they carry around. Who are we kidding here?

    July 19, 2011 at 6:32 pm |
  275. Bob Macklin

    Jack, you got to be kidding with this question. Thats the least of what we need, another unenforceable law. We can't even enforce the laws we have now without adding government protection from smokers. This is getting to be a joke, protecting people from themselves and each other. What ever happened to peoples obligation to protect themselves. If I don't like you smoking around me believe me Ill ask you to move or Ill move and I won't be calling the smoking police. For God sake where does the insanity end?

    July 19, 2011 at 6:32 pm |
  276. Martin

    No, people have the right to smoke outside and not to fined or harrassed by others. I'm not a smoker and never have and it dosent bother me. They've been forced out of everwhere else and they cant go outside thats outragous

    July 19, 2011 at 6:32 pm |
  277. Rahms Salapuddin

    YES! Smoking sould be banned from public places because of the danger of second hand smoke. My Aunt is down with stage 3 breast cancer due to 2nd hand smoke, she never smoked a cigarrette in her life. And these smokers, even if they already see you sneezing and coughing as a result inhaling their foul-smelling cigarrette smoke– they still huff and puff and blow the smoke more to spite you or maybe to make sure that you get the fumes. SMOKING is the greatest crime legalized by mankind.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:32 pm |
  278. Jack

    I am a smoker & I have no problem with this ban. My problem is that
    how come they don't tax alcohol like they do with cigarettes. How many of those 59% they polled drink & drive. How many innocent
    people & especially children have to die. The laws on drunk driving doesn't seems to work. Ban cigarette smoking in these places & raise taxes for the good of the community, isn't drinking more dangerous than smoking.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:32 pm |
  279. dave in nashville

    Geez, no wonder why marijuana can't get legalized.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:32 pm |
  280. Abdi

    I agree banning smoking in public,let us save our children. The government should have taken some
    step in place like restaurant, and park area.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:33 pm |
  281. Phil McCunttup

    tired of walking down the street and breathing in second hand smoke.

    ban IT!!!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:33 pm |
  282. Tom

    It seems the anti-smoking laws have already gone too far. Bans call for no smoking in public places, but these include restaurants and bars. Shouldn't an owner of a bar have the right to decide whether or not he wants smoking in his establishment? As for the secondhand smoke debate, you're not likely to inhale second hand smoke in an outdoor area where the smoke quickly dissipates, the damaging second hand smoke is when a person is subjected to smoke in an enclosed area. Politicians have to start really helping people out as opposed to bringing up these popular measures that do nothing more than punish a few people. If you don't like smoke, don't smoke. Stop complaining about every little smell you encounter on a busy street.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:33 pm |
  283. Renee Peoria,Ill

    I'm a smoker who's been trying to quit for years. You'd think the cost of the damn things would be enough motivation but, alas, the addiction is stronger. But the inability to light up anywhere I like is actually helpful and has helped me to cut down. I'm down to a few cigarettes a day and with any luck I'll be a non-smoker very soon. For the record, when I do light up in public I have no problem extinguishing my cigarette or moving if I'm asked to. It's my filthy habit, I have no right to inflict it on others. Like a lot of smokers today, I wish I had never started. Word to the wise for any kids who still think it's cool. Wrong! It's just really expensive!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:33 pm |
  284. Jim


    Smoking should be banned wherever it puts non-smokers at risk. Second hand smoke is harmful. The statistics are unassailable though many smokers remain in denial on this. It should be treated in a manner analogous to spitting. Spitting in public is rude, disgusting, potentially hazardous, and deserving of a citation and a fine. Spitting in your back yard with nobody around is no problem.

    Reno, Nevada

    July 19, 2011 at 6:33 pm |
  285. harrytubman

    I for banning smoking in a public places, but not privately-owned establishments, including restaurants and bars. The privilege of entering such an establishment should not trump the right of the owner(s). If you don't like it, take the financial risk and build your own establishment.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:33 pm |
  286. Gayle

    Although I have never smoked I have been around smoking all my life and have never had any adverse affects from it. My husband stopped smoking cigarettes many years ago but he does enjoy his pipe and if smoking is banned then this will affect him. He is very careful not to offend anyone he is around when smoking. Most comments are how good his pipe smells. If we keep banning things it will eventually affect everything we do. I am offended by lots of things I see but I don't push to have everything that offends me to be banned. We need to use common sense if this is anybody out there left with any.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:34 pm |

    Smoke stinks, it's unhealthy and it should be banned. Smokers that want to kill themselves need to get into more rooms so they can breathe in not only their smoke but smoke coming out of other people's lungs.. Sounds bad, that's because it is!!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:34 pm |
  288. James

    No ,with all the hell that has been raised in the last two year about government interfering in our lives ,and then they want another law to stop people from killing theirself,don't make since to me.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:34 pm |
  289. C in NY

    While smokers may feel that they have the right to smoke I also feel that I have the right to breath "fresh" air.

    There is nothing worse than having to walk the gauntlet of smokers outside of a store or restaurant to get to the door.

    The smell of the smoke stays in my hair and clothes it is nasty and I am all for banning smoking in public places. I am all for creating vacuum sealed rooms where smokers can go and smoke and marinate in their nasty smoke.

    And throwing your butts on the ground is disrespectful and rude. Smokers can choose to be respectful of others but the majority of them are not.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:34 pm |
  290. Rich Glaser

    No Jack.
    Cigarettes are sold legally in this Country.
    Cigarettes are approved for sale by our Federal Government and everybody gets a piece of the pie.
    However, everybody (75%) and their brother want's to ban smoking in some fashion or another.
    Lobbyists are "loyal" to the tobacco companies and subsequently, the Federal Government is loyal to the tobacco producing States.
    My point is as long as it's legal, leave me alone. I'm dying to have a cigarette.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:34 pm |
  291. alex lucas

    Smoking never bothered anyone untill it started being regulated. Then, people got sensitive to cigarette smoke. I wonder how those people survive in New York or Los Angeles, where the trucks, busses and factories fill the air with smoke. Cigarette smoke never bothered them before.

    I know the answer....everyone, down deep, wants to be a Police Man. They will never interfere in a rape, burglery or mugging,that is too dangerous. Their only outlets for their agressive law enforcement is stopping smokers in no smoking places and commenting if you don't pick up after your dog. The people comitting those crimes are pretty harmless, so they are safe sticking their noses where they don't belong.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:34 pm |
  292. Louis Tash

    When did this country become a bunch of Miss Kravitis. Why can people not mind their own business anymore. First it was planes that was a good idea but bars? That is why so many long standing bars are no more in Austin Texas. You people who voted for that smoking ban did not start hanging out at the bars that are now closed because you did not want some poor sole who stepped into the bar to relax with a drink and a smoke. What did that guy ever do to you. And the owner who is now looking for work because you decided that no one should be able to smoke regardless of the business owners rights. Shame on all of you for jumping into the same pot.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:34 pm |
  293. Roger Beaton

    Of course banpublicsmoking! My neighbors go out tto the back porch to smoke so as not to "stink up' the house. They see nothing wrong in the second hand smoke drifting overe to my back yard where the children are playing. It bogles the mind.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:34 pm |
  294. Cory

    Yes, smoking should be banned. Finally someone will show all the smokers that what they are doing is not wanted. We don't want all the chemicals to be in the air. Maybe this is the first step towards banning smoking all together. I mean smoking cigarettes is worse than smoking marijuana. So why is it legal?

    July 19, 2011 at 6:34 pm |
  295. jay daco

    I smoke, I respect people who is not a smoker, I smoke far away from crowds and in my house... I would love not smokers being as respectful as I am.
    Its legal but you cannot do it... interesting, and I don't think smoking its the worst out there (really bad but not the worst), 20% of americans are obese, should we ban junk food, by by Mcdonals and burger king!!!!

    July 19, 2011 at 6:34 pm |
  296. Heather Lemmon

    I smoke. I can't smoke indoors. If I can't smoke outdoors where smog pollution is worse, then I'm going to go nuts. I don't think that the government should have the right to tell us that we can't smoke outside either.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:34 pm |
  297. AB

    Smoking should be banned in all public places where people congregate. The right to breathe clean fresh air supercedes the right to smoke cigarettes and pollute the environment. While I also favor cigarettes being made illegal, I think the best way to attack the industry and the habit is to not socially accomodate it. This means banning smoking in public and private places. I do not allow people to smoke in my car or my home. Most employers also do not allow smoking in their workplaces and some even ban it from their premises. By making smoking socially and economically inconvenient, smoking will further decline and demand for the product will eventually cease.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:34 pm |
  298. Zack

    I think the point a lot of people are missing here, is that second hand smoke is dangerous, while (examples from idiotic comments) sunscreen, fatty foods and farting do not pose a health risk to OTHER people.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:34 pm |
  299. Kristy Singer

    First, all smokers (and those who chew) need to be required to purchase separate smokers health insurance. Testing should be done for up to a year if they claim to have truly quit before being allowed to return to general insurance.

    Simultaneously, public smoking bans should be legislated by the federal government. Yes, all smoking should be banned in public places. No non-smoker should ever be subjected to this cancerous, dangerous pollution. It's shocking to me that seemingly intelligent people smoke, and then have the nerve to boldly do it at entrances to buildings, near children, etc.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:35 pm |
  300. Babs in California

    I'm so sick of smoke nazi's telling me how to live and where to live it.
    We can ban smoking in public right after we ban perfume and passing gas. Go upwind,

    July 19, 2011 at 6:35 pm |
  301. bill

    I enjoy an occasional cig. I always smoke in private as I realize it is an offensive behavior. I do believe I should have the right to smoke in private somewhere in public. I can't imagine sitting in a remote corner of a park having a smoke should be illegal.

    July 19, 2011 at 6:35 pm |