Augusta Commission panel to reconsider tougher smoking ban

  • Follow Government

An Augusta Commission committee is ready to get back to work on a proposed smoking ordinance that would ban lighting up in virtually every public space and some outdoor areas.

The Public Services Committee will meet at 10 a.m. Jan. 18 in the commission chamber at the municipal building for a special work session. The proposed ordinance has been on hold since late October, when the committee voted to send it back to general counsel Andrew MacKenzie to add feedback from two public hearings and suggestions from commissioners.

Commissioner Corey Johnson, who heads the committee, wanted to see whether the ordinance could ban smoking in cars where children are present. Mayor Pro Tem Joe Bowles questioned the ban’s inclusion of electronic cigarettes, or e-cigarettes.

Advocates have been pushing for a more comprehensive ban like one that was toughened in Savannah, Ga., in 2010. Augusta is under a statewide law that bans smoking in most public places where children could be present, such as most restaurants, but allows exemptions for bars and restaurants where no one younger than 18 is admitted.

The tougher proposal provoked a passionate response at public hearings, with health advocates saying it is needed to protect workers in those businesses where it is now allowed, and bar and business owners predicting it would hurt them.

Staff Writer Susan McCord contributed to this article.

Comments (7) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
david jennings
571
Points
david jennings 01/10/12 - 07:34 am
0
0
Now this is Ordinary

Now this is Ordinary Business.

Techfan
6461
Points
Techfan 01/10/12 - 08:00 am
0
0
Ah, the anti smoking Nazis

Ah, the anti smoking Nazis are back.

InChristLove
22452
Points
InChristLove 01/10/12 - 09:17 am
0
0
Although I understand the

Although I understand the concern with smoking in cars with children, what about in the home? Next will they ban smoking in your home because you have small children? When will they start controling what we feed our children for lunch and cook for supper.....fatty food is just as harmful. What about sugary drinks like koolaid and sodas? And let's not forget all the candy we allow our children to eat, especially around the holidays.

May sound absurd, but you never know.

stillamazed
1488
Points
stillamazed 01/10/12 - 09:54 am
0
0
InChristLove, you are

InChristLove, you are correct! Exactly my fear, government is getting to involved in peoples lives and slowly trying to strip away rights. If a business owner who works and pays taxes on his/her business wants to allow smoking then that should be their right. You don't have to work there or spend your money there if you don't like it. There will be places who may not want smoking. If you don't like smoke then stay away from smokers. What kills me is what I stated yesterday, how government wants to ban this and that and tell us what is healthy and unhealthy yet the FDA allows things like preservatives, hormones and high fructose corn syrup and pesticides that I believe are making people sick to be put in our food. They took cigarette and liquor commercials off TV years ago and what has replaced them is Fast Food (how healthy is that) and drug commercials (yeah keep us all drugged up, we want know any better). Take a look at this, I found it interesting. http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=123983&page=1

dichotomy
31657
Points
dichotomy 01/10/12 - 10:53 am
0
0
I wish they would be honest

I wish they would be honest and just admit this is a social acceptability issue. When I was a child over half of the country smoked. Everyone in my family smoked. People smoked in their homes, in their cars, in restaurants and bars, in their offices, and in government buildings. My high school even had a smoking area for students who were over 16. Look around people. See all of these 90, 80, 70 year old people walking around? Heck, I don't know how we all lived this long with all of that smoke. Now I am not saying all of that smoking was a good thing. What I am saying is that it is nothing but unadulterated bull pucky when they tell you that you are going to keel over and die, or have any health issues, from having a drink in a bar where people are smoking....unless you happen to have an allergy to cigarette smoke in which case I would recommend you seek out a non-smoking bar. You might get the smell of cigarette smoke in your clothing or your hair, but that is about it. So let the bars decide if they want to be smoking or non-smoking. I am sure there are some bars that would chose to be non-smoking and all of you like minded crusaders could congregate there and watch some "Save the Snaildarter" videos on the TV and dance to some Bach or Brahms.

bjphysics
36
Points
bjphysics 01/10/12 - 11:11 am
0
0
It’s not about smoke free

It’s not about smoke free air, it’s about the tobacco temperance movement.

Here’s a peer reviewed study from The Journal of Psychology:

“THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE ANTISMOKING AND NONSMOKERS' RIGHTS MOVEMENTS”

“SUMMARY

In a recent article Markle and Troyer analyze the cigarette controversy as a status battle between pro and antismoking vested interests. They argue that the purpose of the antismoking movement is to lower the status of smokers, symbolically to label smoking as undesirable, unacceptable, and socially deviant behavior, and, hence, to stigmatize and denigrate smokers as social misfits.”

“A. INTRODUCTION

In a recent article Markle and Troyer provide a sociology of deviance interpretation of the long-standing, but recently intensified controversy over cigarette smoking. Markle and Troyer point out that in the late 1960s and the 1970s a variety of laws and regulations were implemented to regulate smoking and the smoker. Drawing an analogy to Gusfield's analysis of the American temperance movement, the authors argue that these strictures were initially assimilative--in the sense of sympathetically trying to aid the repentant smoker to give up his harmful and deviant behavior--but more recently have become coercive--in the sense of angrily engaging the unrepentant smoker as an enemy in a political and legal battle.”

http://www.questia.com/googleScholar.qst?docId=77539715

wondersnevercease
9218
Points
wondersnevercease 01/10/12 - 11:25 am
0
0
Yeah..all those bad
Unpublished

Yeah..all those bad smokers....do not try to clean up the filthy criminal elements on the streets...just those dadgum smokers!

aintryt
189
Points
aintryt 01/10/12 - 08:03 pm
0
0
People that are against the

People that are against the ban really need to contact their commissioners and show up at the meetings to let them know how they feel. You can find that information at http://www.augustaga.gov/index.aspx?nid=652 --- There is no law on the books mandating smoking at a business. The establishments that welcome the ban can become non-smoking anytime they wish. They just want to be able to tell the customers that the county made them do it. Let the free market decide whether to go to smoking or non-smoking establishments. The ban doesn't stop there. It pretty much limits smoking to your private residence. What bothers me more about this is half the commissioners didn't even know what an e-cigarette was and were prepared to vote on that issue as well. Can they not take the time to google about a subject before they attempt to vote on a matter? How many other things have they voted on without doing any research?

Back to Top

Top headlines

Weekly crime map, database

Violent crimes for the past week included 102 assaults, four of which was classified as aggravated assaults. The most assaults in a single day, 22, occurred on Aug. 17.
Search Augusta jobs