The nanny-staters of Carolina Beach have banned smoking on the beach — that’s right — smoking outside will be illegal. No matter that since the beach is open space, the council just might have a teeny, tiny legal problem.
Councilman Lonnie Lashley made the motion and included the provision about the effective date in response to legal advice that suggests the beach does not fall under the state’s definition of public grounds. The beach is not enclosed and therefore cannot be subject to local enforcement of such a law without enabling legislation from the General Assembly. He stressed the need to pursue this issue with the local state delegation next year.
I prefer a litter-free beach just as much as anybody, but a ban isn’t the way to address a litter problem. So what’s next? Will they take a page from NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg and ban large sugary sodas too? Once the nanny-staters succeed at one ban, it’s a safe bet others are coming.
........As you post your comment, please conform to Right Angles's simple comment policy: we welcome all perspectives, but require that comments be both civil and respectful. If you wouldn't say it to a co-worker in front of your boss, it probably is not civil and respectful. We will delete any comment that fails this test and issue a warning to the poster. A second offense will result in a ban on commenting on this site. In sum, disagreements, arguments even, are welcome; abusive behavior is not. Thanks.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
15
2012 At 1:28 pm, greenpad Said:
I don’t see this as nanny state. Banning sugary drinks is supposedly “for their own good”. Banning smoking is so the rest of us don’t have to smell it/breathe it/get cancer from it. All of the various smoking bans are there to prevent non-smokers from having to walk through clouds of smoke. They aren’t there “for their own good”.
If it were possible for people to smoke on the beach without affecting anyone else, this would be a non-issue.
15
2012 At 5:41 pm, geek49203 Said:
Greenpad –
Last I checked, there is zero health effect when you’re talking about 1-2 smokers on a beach, where the wind is usually blowing. Please don’t stoop to pop science here.
No, this law is all about being a nanny state. Those of us who allow these laws to be passed are simply exacting revenge against the rude smokers in our lives, the ones that blew smoke in our face, that smoked in our non-smoking car, that smoked in our college classrooms when we had asthma and couldn’t leave. And, of course, the rude smokers who throw butts in the pristine sand, and into clean water, who set the grass and woods on fire, and insist on declaring their “G** D***** Constitutional Rights” when we ask the not to smoke near a gas pump.
16
2012 At 2:01 pm, Skyler the Weird Said:
If you’ve every read any of Hank George’s work on second hand smoke at LABONE you’d see the effects are minimal. Many people who get denied non smoker rates cleaim to be victims of second hand smoke. George’s research showed that was implausible.