Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

San Francisco supes vote to extend smoking ban ( near doorways and windows of offices, shops, etc)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-15-10 11:13 AM
Original message
San Francisco supes vote to extend smoking ban ( near doorways and windows of offices, shops, etc)
San Francisco supes vote to extend smoking ban


SAN FRANCISCO—San Francisco officials have moved one step closer to expanding the city's smoking ban to include numerous outdoor areas.

The board of supervisors Tuesday unanimously passed a resolution making it illegal to light up at sidewalk cafes, restaurant patios, movie and ATM lines and the common areas of housing complexes. The resolution also bans smoking near doorways and windows of offices, shops and restaurants and at bingo halls.

It is already illegal to smoke in offices and businesses without a designated smoking area.

The board will have to approve the resolution again next week for final passage.

Supervisor Eric Mar, who sponsored the legislation, said it will protect San Francisco residents from secondhand smoke.

http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_14646575
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
paulsby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-15-10 01:15 PM
Response to Original message
1. it most likely will be ignored like the ban in seattle
which si completely absurd and bans smoking within 25 ft of the ENTRANCE of any building, etc. which effectively means almost anywhere on any city sidewalk you are violating the law if you smoke

NOBODY enforces this law (i have yet to talk to a cop who has written a ticket for it), so it becomes the worst sort of law.

the law that stays on the books as a tool of arbitrary harassment/sparse enforcement

brought to you by the geniuses of san francisco.

WA state has a similar law regarding online gambling. they made it a C felony to play a $1 online poker tournament

seriously

when questioned about it, the gambling commission said they didn't intend to ENFORCE it.

perfect example of a nannystate run amok.

and of course they claimed the law was to protect people - in a state where there are casinos all over the place?>

the purpose of the law was to dissuade people from playing on line, so they will go casinos and give the tribes and the state revenue

duh
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 08:36 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC