Thursday, November 18, 2010

L.A. City Council Votes to Draft Ordinance Banning Smoking Everywhere

Well, well, well...Three things are now official:

1) Our officials in L.A. loathe their smoking constituents.
2) They don't resemble anything remotely close to being liberty loving Americans.
3) You can't trust them.


Funny how earlier in the year our lovely council-members voted to ban smoking at all outdoor venues/establishments, while exempting venues for those 18 and over. That was supposed to be a "compromise". You can never compromise with tyrants, which is what they are. Case in point: Here they are, less than a year later, implementing even more draconian measures, when clearly they tried to fool us into believing that their intention was to be "fair". Bullshit.

How many more jobs will we lose now? How many more restaurants and clubs will shut their doors? If people do not rebel against this illegal infringement upon smokers' right to assemble, then I am afraid that we're all in trouble in this country.

As I always say, this is about a lot more than smoking.

http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local-beat/L-A-Council-Considers-Banning-Smoking-in-all-Public-Areas-107032718.html

8 comments:

  1. It was a dark and stormy night on the streets of Los Angeles. The pushers and hookers were hard at work, honestly plying their trades while the muggers relieved their potential customers of excess cash and the bikers tossed beer bottles at passersby in between dodging drive-by shootings.

    Suddenly the calm was broken. Sirens screeched through the night and the flashing red and blue lights and black vans filled with SWAT police swooped into the neighborhood. An anonymous caller had rung in a rat snitch on a tobacco smoker lighting up in an alleyway where children normally congregated to shoot medicinal heroin with government sterilized-and-approved syringes. The smoker tried to run but some decent public spirited muggers pulled out their pieces and laid down a withering line of automatic dum dum fire in his path.

    The SWAT team surrounded him but was limited by their inability to approach close enough for a clear line of fire: he still held his burning murder between his nicotine stained fingers and poison gasses swirled around him. They called for backup and cleared the civilian population from the surrounding area. A borrowed military helicopter swooped in, dropped a low grade nuke, and the smoker was history.

    Within hours, life as normal had returned to the peacefully bucolic street scene of a healthy Los Angeles.

    Reported by:
    Michael J. McFadden
    Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"

    ReplyDelete
  2. On a somewhat more serious note, it's worth reading the quotes from supposedly responsible officials who should obviously be relieved of their jobs.

    Councilman Parks: "wherever people congregate or there is an expectation of people being present, (then) smoking should be prohibited."

    "an expectation of people being present"? I.E. *anywhere* outside of a locked room!

    and

    "Monty Messex, deputy director of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health's Tobacco Control and Prevention Program, said second-hand smoke is particularly dangerous. '...it is worse for you because the second hand smoke that people breathe is from the end of the cigarette, and also being exhaled ... Second-hand smoke that's breathed by a person who's not smoking has been cooled and sometimes will be breathed deeper into their lungs.' "

    This claim was debunked back in the 1970s when it was first made: that "deadly" smoke from the tip of a cigarette gets diluted 1000x, the smoke temperature is irrelevant to depth of inhalation because the lungs don't have nerve endings to sense it, and smokers and nonsmokers BOTH breathe about the same way other than when a smoker is actually inhaling a puff. Heh... I remember confounding some early Antis years ago with the argument that they should take up smoking when out partying in order to filter some of that deadly secondhand smoke through a cigarette and protect themselves from it! LOL!

    And finally, from the mayor himself, leading right into my SWAT story above, "It's no different than stopping people from firing weapons, or having bullets land on people. We have a right to use police power to protect people."

    Truly incredible. The crazies have not only escaped the asylum to dance in the daisy fields, they've managed to pull so-called normal people in to dance with them.

    :/
    MJM

    ReplyDelete
  3. Whoops... three comments in a row. :/ Ahhh welll... anyone reading this blog should check out Councilman John Duran's attack on the proposal at YouTube at:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htTqD_hHmX0&feature=player_embedded

    - MJM

    ReplyDelete
  4. Wow, that's a whole heap o' bullshit.

    "but we can protect people who have no desire to SMELL smoke," Parks said.

    Er, really? I smell bonfires and barbeques and car exhausts and rotten deodorant and perfume seemingly every day. Where's my protection? And don't even get me started on my old flatmate's inability to cook without turning the house into a smoke chamber.

    "Parks said smoking is a voluntary addiction and not a right protected by the Constitution, "yet secondhand smoke harms an involuntary population which has a right to clean air and a clean environment and which is protected by many public health laws.""

    Is getting trashed on a Friday protected in the Constitution?? A string of one-night stands? How about sandwiches? Right to clean air? Sure, that'd explain all those chem-trails blasting harmless fresh air over LA right? The most basic human right we can ever have, and pray not to lose, is the right to choose what to put into our bodies. Idiots. Tobacco is legal, smoking is legal, so there's a 'right' to do it. That's half our trouble these days though, everyone is so concerned with 'rights'

    "Calabasas Mayor Barry Groveman testified Wednesday that his city's ordinance is "nothing that stops people from smoking -- it's only designed to stop the second-hand smoke exposure to people who don't want to face the consequences of second-hand smoke.""

    Right, you can't smoke in your apartment, outside your apartment, on the beach, in your car, in the park, well, seemingly, anywhere at all, but hey, smoking isn't banned, honest!

    ""It's no different than stopping people from firing weapons, or having bullets land on people," Groveman added. "We have a right to use police power to protect people.""

    Seriously? My wisp of smoke that causes a 1.17RR increase over many years of heavy exposure is as deadly as some nutjob firing off their Magnum .357 in the park?

    ReplyDelete
  5. I'm truly scared to be living in Los Angeles now.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Sorry, made some mistakes in the last comment and didn't check it before posting.

    Smokers apparently aren't even people now.

    I wonder if there's any way to require labels on cig packets that explain under which conditions the government permits use? Surely they can't carry on allowing sales (for extortionate taxes) when the product can't be used for it's intended purpose?

    If the right to be protected from alleged contamination is enshrined in law then anything more dangerous for non users than ETS MUST be banned. Mobile phones, electric power lines, traffic fumes, etc. If there are legal grounds for preventing smoking then those must be the same arguments that can be used to prevent second hand everything.

    ReplyDelete
  8. It's about hate not health. We just have to keep shouting and hope someone listens.

    ReplyDelete

Gadget

This content is not yet available over encrypted connections.