As those of you living in New York City are aware, there is a sweeping, across-the-board ban on smoking in indoors or other “enclosed” spaces, thanks to Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg. He has spoken in high-minded tones about his supposed concern for non-smokers who would otherwise be in mortal danger from second-hand smoke. People have already been busted for such “serious” offenses as lighting up in bars. Restaurants and other similar establishments have suffered major, and potentially fatal, drops in business because of the ban, but Mayor Mike couldn’t care less. The (purported) health benefits, this anti-smoking holy warrior keeps saying, will outweigh their loss of business . . . down the road (emphasis on those last three words).

Now comes word that a major elite club – the Players’ Club, founded in 1888 by Edwin Booth (brother of President Lincoln’s assassin John Wilkes Booth) and bearing many theatrical and some non-theatrical figures as members – was recently raided for (get this) possession of ashtrays. No warrant, no due process, no nothing. Just bust open the door and lock ’em up. This is what the anti-smoking jihad has deteriorated into. This, as reported in recent articles in the New York Post, the link to which is in the first three words of this paragraph.

Now, this writer is no smoker, nor does he necessarily condone same, but at the same time knows what can happen when some kind of radical ideology is allowed to progress to the level it has. Mr. Bloomberg, with his arrogant, imperious manner on that issue, has absolutely no regard for the real-world consequences of his agenda and is determined to continually shove his way down everybody’s throats.

It is things like this that enter my mind when thinking about the radical ideologues and social engineers who comprise the RIAA so-called “brain trust,” vowing to continue pressing forward with their extortion/shakedown–via–litigation racket with similar regard (or lack thereof) for the real-world consequences of their politics of personal destruction, the destruction of poor and working families, the ruination of livelihoods, and so forth, never mind the massive criticism that has emanated therefrom. And all because they consider copyright to be akin to a god (the Golden Calf?) to which we should all be “sacrificed.” And plot to usurp all our rights because of that kind of ideology.

“You Should Talk . . . ”

As reported in a recent article in NewsMax.com, the U.S. is now demanding that Cuba release one Dr. Oscar Elias Biscet, a dissident imprisoned since last December for teaching on human rights in a country which has a long history of violating same – the most infamous example of recent times being in March when 75 dissidents, independent journalists, pro-democracy activists and other opponents of the regime were put away for a long time (this, at the same time the RIAA first announced they would sue everybody in sight).

While Cuba’s record in this regard is indeed atrocious, we as a nation, in this writer’s humble opinion, are in no position whatsoever to lecture Fidel Castro’s island gulag on this issue — precisely because, with the RIAA’s counterproductive, reactionary “sue-’em-all” strategy and our elected officials’ (and unelected judges’) condoning of same, we have essentially stooped down to Castro’s level here. It is a surprise to this writer that neither Castro nor any of his representatives in the Cuban Embassy (or Consulate) have used (or cited) the P2P crackdowns, RIAA lawsuits, persecutions of I.S.P.’s et al., as reasons to thumb their noses at the U.S. and effectively tell us to go screw ourselves (“How dare you lecture us on human rights, when you people do the same to those who listen to music on their computers”). In short, we are even more of a laughingstock than would otherwise be the case.

But then, if you think of it . . . it’s only a matter of time before the pertinent alphabet-soup lobbies for the multinational entertainment-media complex start demanding the death penalty for “illegal” downloading of music or movies — which would even further plunge us down the road to totalitarianism (as if we aren’t as it is!).

Ashtrays are illegal!?! Just a tad repressive, eh?

You can't legislate morality. Not successfully, anyway. Just ask the hookers.

No more (or less) repressive than the RIAA's own closed, exclusivist agenda. Different cases, I'll admit, but still . . .

Well the theory is sound. If they have ashtrays they must have cigerettes to flick in them. Which are illegal to smoke indoors now. Which I find to be a bit overkill. There isn't even any clause for good ventalation. Say a bar wants to invest in a ventalation system that would suck the smoke at the bar out of the room before it can even travel anywhere. Sure sounds expensive, but it would become profitable if it were the only way for people to socialize and smoke at the same time. But the laws do not even consider this type of situation. For that reason it is obsured. It's like saying lets ban skydiving because people can die. If people want to do it they should be allowed. As long as people know what they are doing there should be no question. It is very obsured.

i live in new york and its really crazy, i really dont know why people voted for this bastard, he only won because former mayor Giuliani told people to vote for him. fucking idiots

But smoking is in fact bad, unlike downloading. Unlike downloading, smoking causes dying. Who want that? However, I do think this is a little nuts.

Purfus, not very sound. People do collect all sorts of goodies just as a collection. So it can't always be right.

So let me get this straight: in New York, you can't smoke indoors... even in your own home?! Either way, I'm glad I don't live there. I don't smoke, myself, but I know when a right is violated, and that's one hell of a right that is being violated. I'm surprised he hasn't banned smoking altogether.

It's gonna be the prohibition all over again, man. People wanna smoke, but the government tells you "no". Again, smoking is bad, I don't like it. But fuck, dude, to each their own. They wanna die from raping their lungs with nicotine, so be it. Their choice.

You gotta be stupid to let second hand smoke bother you. One: don't go into a bar, where you'll obviously find that thing everywhere. Two: go to the non-smoking section in a restaurant. Most restuarants have that. Three: if you're standing next to someone, either move, ask him or her politely to put it out, (if he doesn't leave, oh well, you leave), or put up and shut up and deal with it. It's your problem if you're too much of a pussy to ask or just MOVE away. Don't rape someone's life because of it.

There's only one way to stop oppression of our basic rights as human beings. Want a hint? This website has the name in its URL.... Boycott. If a very large majority of people boycotted everything the government needs to be as evil as it is (music, oil, public transportation to name a few) then it would lose so much money so fast, it would have no other choice than to do what We The People want.

It'll never happen though, too many people are cowards and are afraid to do something because they might be "punished", boo hoo... I still hold onto the dream though.

This article is so extremely slanted against anti-smoking that it's hard to take seriously.

Both second hand smoke and treating smokers as outcasts of society are serious issues.

This article is wasted effort. It's biased garbage. Who wants to make a decision based on this crap?

rorac, I think what we should do is VOICE our oppinions. Think of how long you would survive without the government in this country?

In the town I live, the town council is doing a study on whether banning smoking indoors and outdoors is feasible or not. The town council has proposed to ban smoking in all indoor places and ban smoking in outdoor places like the public park.

As for the ban on smoking in NYC, the restaraunts and bar owners are up in arms. They say there buisnesses has fallen up to 30% since the ban went into effect. Some resteraunts and bars had to layoff some workers due to the fall in revenue. One NYC councilman is listening and has proposed a bill to dissolve the smoking ban. The only problem is not only is there a city wide ban, there is also a state ban

This fucking goverment is another example of what goes on in third world countries. What's next? If you have sex without being married you will locked up? It's all about control. Every last one of them fools in the White House, and Capital are scare shitless especially after 9/11 wake up call. Now they just want to sign every fucking Bill using thousands of innocent victims who lost their lives to make their crusade more convincing to why they want to have us on lock down.

Next thing you know the White House would be called Le'Talliban Kingdom. With headmaster Little Georgey

As viper points out; there is a statewide(NY) ban on smoking inside all public places. All bars and restaurants except private clubs. If memory serves, on July 24/03, this became law.

This bill was proposed and enacted upon in near secrecy. The state legislature didn't want organized public opposition to derail their agenda. So much for serving the people.

A co-worker said to me "I like this. I don't smoke... so it doesn't affect me". I called him an idiot. He said "why do you care, you don't smoke either". I told him that i don't appreciate big brother making these kinds of decisions for me without public forum.
He just doesn't get it.

A buddy of mine owns a small tavern and his business has dropped at least 40% since August. His taxes have remained the same. His liquor license, utilities and all the other costs associated with running a business have not been reduced. Where is the justice in that!

Sorry for ranting but this crap really ticks me off.

The point of all this was to show that one issue is a yardstick / barometer to measure how the other is or will be going, that if the proverbial 'Big Brother' is making the decisions with regard to smoking and non-smoking as they are, they certainly will be doing it on the P2P / music downloading / etc. issue. (And vice versa.) Or to put it another way, the smoking issue in New York is a (but not the only) barometer to indicate that before long, the RIAA's vindictive crusade will really snowball out of control. I can just imagine, down the road, Cash-and-Cary Sherman and company having police burst into people's homes and drag them away just for listening to music (whether RIAA-label or not) on their computers. We're just a few steps from that.

And the part about 'near secrecy' (per 'TechnoPuppet): Yup, sounds almost like how the latest rash of bills before Congress that have "RIAA" written all over them, have been rammed through of late.

But I'm rather surprised no-one commented on the point about the hypocrisy of the U.S.'s latest lecturing towards Cuba on human rights whilst supporting the same or similar tacticology as perpetrated by the RIAA for their own selfish (albeit differing) aims, as found in the bottom of the article. In that context, we have some nerve . . .

Can anyone say Prohibition of smoking?

I hate smoking, but even I wouldn't go so far as this. What I think everybody should adopt is a smoking and non-smoking rooms. I don't want somebody to be killing my lungs, but if they want to do that to themselves(or at least they want to get nicotine), then just do it away from me.You do whatever the hell you want to do to yourself, just stay the hell away from me when your doing it.

That's just ridiculous. I despise smoking, but going after ASHTRAYS??? Wouldn't you rather have the cigarettes in there versus on the ground or somewhere else-because people WILL defy the ban.

Plain stupid. Completely uncalled for.

TechnoPuppet- I respect your opinion, but you need to study secondhand smoke. Smoking is the number one cause of air pollution affecting human health in the U.S. It can lead to all kinds of cancers, defects, and disorders.

I don't want that crap hurting me. A ban on smoking is the way to go, and it has just been imposed in our state now- in Pierce County.

:-:~ Phantom

i find this interesting debate. i smoke. is it good for me? no. in fact its bad, very expensive as well.
but whats next? a fat tax? obesity is very damaging to our natl health. i read one report that stated obesity was just behind smoking as a preventable cause of death. smokers pay incredibly high taxes, do fat ppl?
if i dont already know the person-i will ask before lighting up in their home or car. i will butt it out if im requested to do so. but tell me i cant smoke in my own home? i pay taxes for city parks too...
huge double standard here.
a non smoker should not be forced to suffer from my habit-i agree. but its gotten out of hand, even self righteous.
my two cents...

~time flies~

Zeitgheist, the difference between smoking and obesity is obesity is just unsightly(I don't like seeing fat people) but smoking hurts others. Everytime you smoke you hurt yourself and OTHERS around you.

Remember when spitoons were de rigeur? And you saw No Spitting signs on public transportation?

I hope smoking and its accoutrements become obsolete also.

Here in Ontario, Canada, we just adopted a province-wide ban of smoking in public buildings... restaurants, bars, workplaces, etc., along with a $2/pack tax hike.

It's already been suggested that smokers actually subsidize the non-smokers... this is because, first off, smokers are taxed out the ass. Smokers also typically die younger, thus there's less pension required to be paid out, and less long-term healthcare.

(See The Economics of Smoking) - http://www.econlib.org/library/Features/feature5.html

It does hurt businesses -- I rarely go out to the bars anymore... drink half a beer, go out in the cold for a smoke, back in, drink the other half, smoke, etc.. We've got "smoking police" that run around and fine any businesses with ashtrays, empty or not.

Either way, I feel that as a smoker, I've been singled out and gouged for my hard-earned dollars and places to enjoy myself...

On a side note, cigarettes are C$9/pack here, soon to be $10. The government gets most of this.

I would like to see smokers only be able to smoke if they are inside a container with air cleaning capability. Think Cone of Silence. I hate walking down the street where people are outside smoking. I hate being at the beach and someone lights up upwind from me. One whiff makes me sneezy and itchy (eyes). Any pronlonged contact with second hand smoke and I get a sore throat and if I'm unlucky, I develop a cold.

Polluting my air is not anyone's right.

You know what's really bad? When stupid people in Nebraska vote Tom Osborne, who says he is against alcohol and porno, governor because he's a good football coach. Damn it, I need my beer and porn.

"Zeitgheist, the difference between smoking and obesity is obesity is just unsightly(I don't like seeing fat people) but smoking hurts others."

I don't know...you ever had sex with a fat chick?

Even if second hand smoke doesn't kill you, I still don't like the smell of it, and the way it makes my eyes feel. I shouldn't have to put up with it in a public place like a bar, or restraint, or a park.

Anyone with that much disregard for the health of others around them should be punished.

I can solve the budget problem in CA, raise the price of cigarettes. Double, triple, or even quadruple the price. Smokers wont quit, they will keep buying at whatever the price. Some may even go hungry having to choose between smokes and food, and soon our world will be free of their ilk.

We get a ton of money for the state, and smokers are punished.

It's win win.

oops, IeSpell chocked on the word restaurant. That should be the word restaurant not restraint.

The big picture here is individual property rights, which are the foundation of our republic. The government has no business telling an individual what he/she can do with their PRIVATE property. A law that a smoking establishment must have a sign on the door advising such is sufficient warning to those about to enter. All prohibition does is create a flourishing black market. Now you don't have to run smokes all the way to Canada, NYC is good enough. That $10 a pack is tempting, though, I'm paying $20 a carton, taxes included. May have to get back into bootlegging (aaaargh!!!)

If it affects interstate commerce, the feds can regulate it. It's in the constitution. It's the basis of the Civil Rights Act.

For every smoker willing to risk being caught buying cheap untaxed cigarettes, there are scores that are not. Most people will just buy them from the same stores at the higher price. After a few years people wont think anything of paying 10-15 dollars per pack.

After this stage cuts down the sales on cigarettes. (especially among teenagers since they don't have a lot of money anyway) then we move to make them illegal outright.

This will all have to be done over many years, maybe 2 decades. We need to slowly bring in laws and regulations so that people don't see anything going wrong. They will get used to the new laws slowly.

The end result is a better America.