City to vet smoking rules near busine...

City to vet smoking rules near businesses, in Bidwell Park

There are 16 comments on the Chico Enterprise-Record story from Sep 27, 2011, titled City to vet smoking rules near businesses, in Bidwell Park. In it, Chico Enterprise-Record reports that:

Smokers might have fewer places to light up if the Chico mayor and the American Lung Association have their way.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Chico Enterprise-Record.

Rex Crosley

Chico, CA

#1 Sep 27, 2011
"Women are getting raped in the park and people are getting murdered and in fights all over town. Hey I got an idea! Lets start up a crusade against a harmless minority group." - Mayor Schwab

I don't like cigarette butt liter either that is why I hold onto mine until I pass a trash can or put the butt back inside the pack. It seems to me that littering is the problem, not smoking. It also seems to me that our bored lazy police could easily set up a video camera and then stand around the corner and rake in a bunch of money busting kids for doing it. So how about sending a message and enforcing the laws instead of using it as an excuse to go on a crusade against freedom?
Hugh Jass

Nashville, TN

#2 Sep 27, 2011
Rex Crosley wrote:
It seems to me that littering is the problem, not smoking.
Just because a comment on littering was the item this writer thought would make her piece interesting does not mean that the long litany of reasons for such actions has gone away.

Nicotine addiction is the problem, plain and simple. Without that particular disease there would be no issue here. Littering from smoking would be negligible, point sources of air pollution from smoking would be virtually nonexistent, the destitute would not be spending their money on tobacco products instead of food for their children, and no one would be suggesting that governments spend time and money trying to find a way to curb the public health problems cigarettes cause while simultaneously fighting off the attacks the tobacco companies have orchestrated and directly launched.
Rex Crosley

Chico, CA

#3 Sep 27, 2011
Hugh Jass wrote:
<quoted text>
Just because a comment on littering was the item this writer thought would make her piece interesting does not mean that the long litany of reasons for such actions has gone away.
Nicotine addiction is the problem, plain and simple. Without that particular disease there would be no issue here. Littering from smoking would be negligible, point sources of air pollution from smoking would be virtually nonexistent, the destitute would not be spending their money on tobacco products instead of food for their children, and no one would be suggesting that governments spend time and money trying to find a way to curb the public health problems cigarettes cause while simultaneously fighting off the attacks the tobacco companies have orchestrated and directly launched.
It is people like you that would make our forefathers sick if they could see what the country they fought for has turned into. You can't blame tobacco for the poor decisions of weak minded people. Free will is what makes this country great and people like you trying to regulate and dictate peoples lives are taking away the valuable freedoms that our countries heroes fought for.

“Non smoking freedom loving vet”

Since: Apr 08

Chicago

#4 Sep 27, 2011
The American Lung Assiciation is a tax exempt charity, not a law making authority.

“Non smoking freedom loving vet”

Since: Apr 08

Chicago

#5 Sep 27, 2011
I they get involved in politics, they could have their tax exempt status removed by the IRS
Not having any

Nashville, TN

#6 Sep 27, 2011
Rex Crosley wrote:
<quoted text>
It is people like you that would make our forefathers sick if they could see what the country they fought for has turned into. You can't blame tobacco for the poor decisions of weak minded people. Free will is what makes this country great and people like you trying to regulate and dictate peoples lives are taking away the valuable freedoms that our countries heroes fought for.
Bushlit.

The decades of defrauding the country and people of America while simultaneously cranking up the addictiveness of their product--coupled with the calculated marketing to ensure that children would be drawn in before they developed their decision-making ability--is something the tobacco industry HAS been blamed for, and not just by me.

Free will is the antithesis of what the tobacco industry wants. If there weren't already so many people addicted to their products when they were caught in their crimes, the industry would beyond question have been shut down. Instead, they continue to suck massive profits from the pockets of those whose free will they have deliberately abrogated and use that money to buy influence and PR and to manipulate the government and the people of America for the corporate good.

Tell me the "founding fathers" fought for that scenario, scumbucket.
Village Mystery

Huntsville, AL

#7 Sep 28, 2011
Not having any wrote:
<quoted text>
Bushlit.
The decades of defrauding the country and people of America while simultaneously cranking up the addictiveness of their product--coupled with the calculated marketing to ensure that children would be drawn in before they developed their decision-making ability--is something the tobacco industry HAS been blamed for, and not just by me.
Free will is the antithesis of what the tobacco industry wants. If there weren't already so many people addicted to their products when they were caught in their crimes, the industry would beyond question have been shut down. Instead, they continue to suck massive profits from the pockets of those whose free will they have deliberately abrogated and use that money to buy influence and PR and to manipulate the government and the people of America for the corporate good.
Tell me the "founding fathers" fought for that scenario, scumbucket.
So then you would have no problem with someone growing their own tobacco and rolling it themselves right? When this starts to happen more and more or when Individuals buy it on the black market from some small farmer somewhere then that will be ok too?
Not having any

Nashville, TN

#8 Sep 28, 2011
Village Mystery wrote:
<quoted text>
So then you would have no problem with someone growing their own tobacco and rolling it themselves right? When this starts to happen more and more or when Individuals buy it on the black market from some small farmer somewhere then that will be ok too?
Without the modern tobacco industry's misbehavior, comparatively little attention would be paid to tobacco. I'm not saying it would have gone away, and in fact there would probably have been less regulation because less effort would have been given to finding out how much damage it was doing. Any modern-day version of a black market or a grow-your-own subculture would be part of the effect of the industry.

The major tobacco companies have, for a long time, been implicated in "black market" cigarettes and in cigarette smuggling on an international scale.

So no, it would not be okay by me, and no valid path of reason leads from my comments to your conclusion. You have simply engaged in some propagandizing. Not having any, thank you very much.
Rex Crosley

Chico, CA

#9 Sep 28, 2011
Our city counsel is over paying for land so that they can develop more low budget apartments. Crime is out the roof. Medical marijuana is being withheld from patients. These are issues that City Hall should be dealing with. Not demonizing and stereotyping a minority group.
Not having any

Nashville, TN

#10 Sep 28, 2011
Rex Crosley wrote:
Our city counsel is over paying for land so that they can develop more low budget apartments. Crime is out the roof. Medical marijuana is being withheld from patients. These are issues that City Hall should be dealing with. Not demonizing and stereotyping a minority group.
If life were what it "should" be, the tobacco industry wouldn't have the grip on people that it has and there would be no need for anyone to address the problems their corrupt and parasitic profiteering causes.

The regulation of a behavior that is, at the very least, a public nuisance, is not "demonizing and stereotyping a minority group".
Rex Crosley

Chico, CA

#11 Sep 28, 2011
Your anger is towards corporations but your method of going about it attacks regular people.
Village Mystery

Huntsville, AL

#12 Sep 28, 2011
Not having any wrote:
<quoted text>
Without the modern tobacco industry's misbehavior, comparatively little attention would be paid to tobacco. I'm not saying it would have gone away, and in fact there would probably have been less regulation because less effort would have been given to finding out how much damage it was doing. Any modern-day version of a black market or a grow-your-own subculture would be part of the effect of the industry.
The major tobacco companies have, for a long time, been implicated in "black market" cigarettes and in cigarette smuggling on an international scale.
So no, it would not be okay by me, and no valid path of reason leads from my comments to your conclusion. You have simply engaged in some propagandizing. Not having any, thank you very much.
That's what I thought, thanks.
Not having any

Nashville, TN

#13 Sep 28, 2011
Rex Crosley wrote:
Your anger is towards corporations but your method of going about it attacks regular people.
You're wrong on both counts.
First, I'm not angry. I am simply appalled. AND I recognize that, ultimately, the deplorable excuses for human beings that have orchestrated this decades-long tragedy will not only get away with it, they will just move on to the next way to expand their fortunes and political leverage. Anger does no good.
Second, "my method" is not something you have enough background to evaluate.
The method I support in this instance is to minimize the amount of collateral damage to "regular people" caused by the corporations and by their first line of victims--the addicts themselves, who are also regular people but who have been turned into random point sources of damaging pollution. It is not about ending the problem. It's about damage control and reduction.

If, along the way, reducing the secondary sphere of damage results in some reduction in the front line as well--ie, people smoke less and/or stop smoking--fine. It isn't an attack on anybody. It's defense, not offense.
Village Mystery

Huntsville, AL

#14 Sep 28, 2011
Not having any wrote:
<quoted text>
You're wrong on both counts.
First, I'm not angry. I am simply appalled. AND I recognize that, ultimately, the deplorable excuses for human beings that have orchestrated this decades-long tragedy will not only get away with it, they will just move on to the next way to expand their fortunes and political leverage. Anger does no good.
Second, "my method" is not something you have enough background to evaluate.
The method I support in this instance is to minimize the amount of collateral damage to "regular people" caused by the corporations and by their first line of victims--the addicts themselves, who are also regular people but who have been turned into random point sources of damaging pollution. It is not about ending the problem. It's about damage control and reduction.
If, along the way, reducing the secondary sphere of damage results in some reduction in the front line as well--ie, people smoke less and/or stop smoking--fine. It isn't an attack on anybody. It's defense, not offense.
So you want to 'help people' is that right HJ?

The oldest EXCUSE in the book.
Not having any

Nashville, TN

#15 Sep 28, 2011
Village Mystery wrote:
<quoted text>
So you want to 'help people' is that right HJ?
The oldest EXCUSE in the book.
Your mental incapacity--made obvious by your clear inability to comprehend simple concepts--seems to give you confidence, ironically.

Do you have to run your finger down the list they gave you until you find a "retort" that you think might be something close to a match for what you are "replying" to? You need to work a little more on finding matches, buddy.

I want not to be subjected to tobacco smoke every time I step out of my home--or even IN my home, as neighbors' toxic spew finds its way in all too often.

Enough others want the same thing(s) that increasingly protective smoking regulation is coming soon to a community near you.

I wish that the filth that runs the tobacco industry could reasonably be expected to face punishment appropriate to their crimes, but I know that they simply have too much money and influence for that to ever happen. As a consolation prize, I want their corrupt construct dismantled--though that will be the work of decades rather than weeks.
Village Mystery

Huntsville, AL

#16 Sep 28, 2011
Not having any wrote:
<quoted text>
Your mental incapacity--made obvious by your clear inability to comprehend simple concepts--seems to give you confidence, ironically.
Do you have to run your finger down the list they gave you until you find a "retort" that you think might be something close to a match for what you are "replying" to? You need to work a little more on finding matches, buddy.
I want not to be subjected to tobacco smoke every time I step out of my home--or even IN my home, as neighbors' toxic spew finds its way in all too often.
Enough others want the same thing(s) that increasingly protective smoking regulation is coming soon to a community near you.
I wish that the filth that runs the tobacco industry could reasonably be expected to face punishment appropriate to their crimes, but I know that they simply have too much money and influence for that to ever happen. As a consolation prize, I want their corrupt construct dismantled--though that will be the work of decades rather than weeks.
That's perfect. Refer to someone as an absolute moron and then continue speaking to them. Well which is it?

Nevermind.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

American Lung Association Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Smoking results in staggering costs over a life... (Feb '16) Feb '16 Pete 1
BOOP Pneumonia (Jul '15) Jul '15 Willy1962 1
News 40-cent cigarette tax hike not enough, anti-tob... (Jun '15) Jun '15 LiesBeTold 7
News EMU's smoking ban is a good thing (May '15) May '15 Ohio loves bans 1
News Some expert tips to help smokers finally quit i... (Jan '15) Jan '15 smokers death face 1
News Much More Must Be Done to Lower Smoking Rates, ... (Jan '14) Jan '14 SO GROSS 1
News Anti-smoking groups: Cuomo budget cuts effort (Jan '13) Jan '13 Bernard Continelli 2
More from around the web