Anti-smoking zealots score one for the squirrels

I read this and immediately thought of Zag. This should make his head explode.

Town moves to ban smoking from beaches, parks and walking trails.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/03/08/anti-smoking-zealots-score-one-for-the-squirrels/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

And then after reading this I thought, "Hell, Zag could have WRITTEN it"

There are several reasons for their zeal: hardly anyone ever complains about tougher smoking laws, other than the dwindling ban of determined smokers, and nobody cares about them. A ban isn’t expensive (especially if you don’t really do much to enforce it), it lets elected officials feel good about themselves, and enables town bodies to give the appearance of taking action when they aren’t really accomplishing much of substance.

My sons' university, Acadia, bans smoking ANYWHERE on their property, including parking lots.

Me, I don't have a problem with it.

 

What you need to ban are sparrows.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1172603/The-sparrow-turned-village-shop-ashtray-taking-lit-cigarette-nest.html

 

It's like the law against talking on the cell phone while driving. You can choose to ignore the law and 99 times out of 100 you won't get caught.

 

Now that I know this, I am going to take a pack of my cigarettes and the fattest Cuban cigar I can find with me to New York City next time I go - and I am going to sit on a bench in the middle of Central Park and smoke.

And this excerpt from the original article says it all about just about every silly new law or ordinance that is passed and why I find it hilarious that some people think most government regulations exist to protect us from ourselves.......

There are several reasons for their zeal: hardly anyone ever complains about tougher smoking laws, other than the dwindling ban of determined smokers, and nobody cares about them. A ban isn’t expensive (especially if you don’t really do much to enforce it), it lets elected officials feel good about themselves, and enables town bodies to give the appearance of taking action when they aren’t really accomplishing much of substance.

 

I should be protected from smelling other's cigarette smoke. No one has a right to smoke in my prescence.

 

Now you're highlighting how INexpensive such bans are. On the cellphone thread you were trying to convince us how very effortful and expensive they are.

The value in these laws - such as it might be - is almost entirely as a psychological deterrent.

 

I remember an episode of All In the Family where Archie said the whole anti-smoking thing is a product of big business.
Meathead asked which big business.
Archie said the companies that make the "No Smoking" signs.