Outdoor Smoking Ban in Atlanta Under Consideration

The City of Atlanta is expected to vote next week on an outdoor ban on smoking. What do you think? Is this the right thing to do or an infringement on personal liberties?

The Atlanta City Council's Community Development and Human Resources Committee voted Tuesday to send the wide-ranging in Atlanta parks and other recreation areas to the full City Council for consideration as soon as next Monday.

If passed by the full City Council, the ban will have an impact on Atlanta's parks, playgrounds, athletic fields, aquatic areas, tennis courts, golf courses and walking trails.

An exception was approved by the committee for the , Aaron's Amphitheater at Lakewood and Park Tavern at Piedmont Park. Atlantic Station began enforcing the ban on July 14, just in time for the BB&T Open. Several local jurisdictions already have similar bans in place, but the city of

What do you think about the move toward a total ban on smoking, both indoors as well as outside? Is it necessary for the health of the general public or an infringement on the individual liberty of those in the community who smoke?

Kevin Fxr July 15, 2012 at 10:45 PM
While we heard for years all they wanted was a separate non smoking seating area and no one objected. Then short haul flights, then all flights, Then smoking was banned in restaurants entirely. Then they wanted separately ventilated areas in bars, where everyone goes to protect their health, then even that wasn't enough and they demanded all of the indoor spaces with no exceptions, Then it progressed to patios and doorways, to peoples homes and cars in parking lots and on the highways, And now we see the last frontier, we need bans in parks? There is absolutely no evidence that anyone could possibly be harmed by cigarette smoke in a park to any degree close to the damage, those who are demanding protection, would be harmed by the aroma from a rotting animal, animal feces or pollen in the air. It is only a fanatical lobby with few things left to demand that even brings these nonsensical bans to the table. With nothing to cry for they loose their government funding and will be forced to do something productive in place of stealing the earnings of others. Of course most have taken advantage of their training and are busy today making fat people feel ashamed of themselves. Keep following this and standing silent because it doesn't affect you, eventually they will get around to something you enjoy and deny you the right to that freedom. Or your right to be left alone.
DaculaHood July 17, 2012 at 12:14 AM
@Fxr I personally think it's both unfortunate and silly that laws like this have to be considered (and implemented) for personal-choice decisions like smoking. Unfortunately, many smokers (apparently yourself included) attach arguments and defenses to the heath and legality debates while avoiding entirely simple courtesy and respect for your neighbors. You fail to acknowledge (and based on your response to Dave, apparently don't care), that for many of us cigarette smoke is annoying, cough-inducing, aggrevates allergies, uncomfortable, or downright disgusting.
Tammy Osier July 17, 2012 at 03:01 AM
I heard this discussed on the radio on the way home and heard a really good point of view. The guy said that if a personal business wants to ban it, they have every right. But if a personal business DOESN'T, then they have that right too. He didn't think the government should ban in that instance (where people have a choice in whether they do business or not). However, public places such as subways and enclosed spaces where people have to cohabitate for things outside of business, maybe some leeway or regulation there where it might affect safety of others (allergies). I thought it was an interesting point of view.
DaculaHood July 17, 2012 at 01:32 PM
Looks like this passed: http://www.ajc.com/news/atlanta/atlanta-passes-smoking-ban-1479016.html
Jonik July 21, 2012 at 11:12 PM
Doesn't anyone see problems in banning this and that use of so-called "tobacco" products, while not a word is said about banning the contamination of typical cigarettes with some of the worst of the worst industrial toxins and carcinogens? That's about severe imbalance..."imbalance" being a synonym for insanity. NOT banned are residues of any of 450 or so registered tobacco pesticides, carcinogenic radiation from PO-210-contaminated phosphate tobacco fertilizers, burn accelerants and other fire causing techniques, kid-attracting sweets and flavors galore, dioxin-creating chlorine pesticide residues and chlorine-bleached paper, addiction-enhancing additives, fake tobacco "helper" made from non-organic industrial waste cellulose, or any of the 1400 or so untested, non-tobacco additives that manufacturers select from to concoct their secret recipes. None of that's banned. But the unwitting, unprotected, secretly-poisoned, sickened, defrauded and even killed victims are blamed and prosecuted. The injustice is significant....whether or not one smokes or likes the smell of tobacco or cigarettes or not. Check out http://fauxbacco.blogspot.com for ample references to use to become informed on this topic. By the way, a REAL "nanny" would protect "her" children from those non-tobacco cigarette toxins and carcinogens and the rest. This govt is no more a "nanny", by blaming the victims of big time corporate crime, than the man in the moon.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »