Just elected to Student Senate: Smoking Ban: Yes, limited, or no?

[Guitarzan]

lol @ busybodies

 

[AGRP]

Would the creation of attractive smoking areas work? Gazebos?

 

[specsaregood]

As I was reading the op, I was also wondering what was so wrong with smoking areas.

Yup, seems like an acceptable solution to me as well.

 

[tremendoustie]

It's not really a libertarian issue -- since a college is generally a voluntary association on legitimately acquired property, they have a right to make the rules they want (although I guess you could make an argument that state funding compromises the situation).

I'd say just vote for whichever option you think would generally benefit members of the student body the most.

 

[VIDEODROME]

Allow it but install smoke alarms everywhere.

 

[virgil47]

The creation of "smoking areas" is akin to establishing areas for different classes or religions of people. If smoking in the great outdoors is of such major health importance then there should be respirators available when ever someone leaves a building. Forest fires, automobiles, jet aircraft, burning leaves and perfumes contribute at least as much to polution and health issues as second hand smoke does. By the way I am an exsmoker who smoker for over 35 years and yes I do indeed enjoy a whiff of smoke on occasion.

 

[tangent4ronpaul]

I'd be inclined to try to get the science department to prove that secondhand smoke can't stay concentrated enough outdoors to even be the slightest issue.

Bring up Japan and fallout on the US coast in your proposal...

How about just enforcing the rules/law that is already in place. Most colleges derive massive amounts of their budget by having "meter maids" go after expired meters, or students getting ticketed for not having a parking pass displayed the right way or parking in the wrong lot, etc. If the rule is not within 15 feet of a building, redeploy some of these revenue generators. I'm sure the school would be delighted to have a new revenue stream.

 

[tangent4ronpaul]

As I was reading the op, I was also wondering what was so wrong with smoking areas.

What's so wrong with free speech zones? (just to play evils advocate )

yeah, one problem with this is that just outside the doors offers shelter. If you want to push smokers further out, give them some shelter.

 

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

So should they have "perfume only" areas as well? Fuck that shit, the girls wearing the perfume are usually hot. That was the worst part of the irony.

The answer is not establishing smoking only areas, the answer is to concentrate ash trays in certain areas so smokers naturally migrate to those areas, and it allows others to avoid those areas.

I bet the ashtrays were concentrated around building entrances. That's how I often see it implemented, so I wouldn't shocked if the smokers were just hanging around where the ashtrays were in this case too.

 

[AGRP]

The creation of "smoking areas" is akin to establishing areas for different classes or religions of people. If smoking in the great outdoors is of such major health importance then there should be respirators available when ever someone leaves a building. Forest fires, automobiles, jet aircraft, burning leaves and perfumes contribute at least as much to polution and health issues as second hand smoke does. By the way I am an exsmoker who smoker for over 35 years and yes I do indeed enjoy a whiff of smoke on occasion.

Smoking is an offensive act though.

Should we be forced to accept the act of people if they purposely rip new ones in the middle of important meetings?

I'm not advocating we fine/jail/etc people who do violate rules or that rules even be created, but there's nothing wrong with encouraging people use comfortable areas for the courtesy of others who do not appreciate the smell.

 

[Nate-ForLiberty]

No one has touched upon smoke being a pollutant, which brings the idea of property rights into the argument. Designating "smoking areas" is not akin to racial segregation. It is the equivelant to saying "no dumping here". The property owner's right.

 

[RM918]

My college used to have gazebos for smoking (People still smoked wherever they wanted) before outright banning smoking on campus because it looked good. People still smoke wherever they want.

 

[Romulus]

What's so wrong with free speech zones? (just to play evils advocate )

yeah, one problem with this is that just outside the doors offers shelter. If you want to push smokers further out, give them some shelter.

a college campus is private property though... smoking areas should be encouraged, not forced. I think its a better solution that having 10 smokers hang out in front of entrance ways.

Make a gazabo or picnic bench with ash trays and designate an area. Again, dont force them there, just encourage it out of respect for those who do not enjoy second hand smoke when entering and leaving a building.

 

[Carehn]

libertarian/common sense approach - - -

tell the kids on campus who complain to grow some balls.

 

[UtahApocalypse]

Virginia state law says that you can't smoke within 25 feet of any public building, but that law is neither followed nor enforced.


You already have your answer. Just like so many other laws that are already on the books.

 

[AGRP]

libertarian/common sense approach - - -

tell the kids on campus who complain to grow some balls.

The people who complain can start a fund to establish attractive smoking areas; all without the creation of any rules/laws.

Problem solved.

 

[Schmitto2121]

Smoking is healthier than fascism...


Btw, most universities are considered PUBLIC property, not private.

 

[tangent4ronpaul]

a college campus is private property though... smoking areas should be encouraged, not forced. I think its a better solution that having 10 smokers hang out in front of entrance ways.

not if it's a state school, which this ones seems to be.

 

[ChaosControl]

Well you already ruled out the option I'd support, campus wide ban. If they want to smoke, they can go off campus. I'm sick of smokers thinking have the right to pollute the air and cause harm to me through their second hand smoke. If they want to give themselves lung cancer, fine, but they should have to go in an out of the way place to do so and not affect anyone who doesn't want to breath that crap.

So since you ruled out that, I vote for whichever the strictest ban is you'd support.

The right to breath clean air is more important than someone's right to smoke. They aren't directly harmed by being unable to harm others with their smoke, while others are harmed by their smoking.

 

[Dr.3D]

Wow, people sure are getting full of the shit being propagandized by the media about second hand smoke. It's almost like the movie, Reefer Madness.

When I went to college, we could put an ash tray on the desk and smoke. What the heck is happening to society? Who the heck is pushing this anti smoking propaganda?