I can only wonder who will 'police' the smoking ban on the beach. I certainly don't expect the police department to do it; they have larger issues to deal with. I've seen many people with dogs walk right past the signs that state no dogs are allowed on the beach. If the public tries to self-enforce the ordinance, the police might end up on the beach breaking up fights between smokers and non-smokers.

I don't understand why you fel that if you call the police, that they will not come. You are right...we can't go out and enforce the law ourselves...nor would the police want us to do that. I realize there are always going to be people who will still get away with violations, but the ordinance will still help. At least it is stating that it is illegal. The law abiding among us will honor the ordinance, and that alone will make a big improvement. Those of us who wish to, will still need to continue to do our part and be willing to help pick up trash and litter whether we put it there or not. Even a little help is a big help.

We already have a "no littering" ordinance at the beach. If that isn't enforcible, and people ignore it, how will a new ordinance be any different?

Don't forget, the public is allowed to address the council at workshops now. The workshop will be on Thursday, Sept. 22 at 3:30 p.m. at Gulfport City Hall. People are encouraged to share their concerns with city leaders about the proposed ordinance.

I doubt "everyone" will adhere to the smoking ban but I'm sure most smokers that use Gulfport Beach will refrain from smoking on the beach as long as there are clearly marked signs. This is one of those honor system things that those without honor will not follow. And I think it would be HILARIOUS if someone calls 911 to report someone smoking on the beach! Unfortunately this would be difficult to enforce without someone constantly patrolling the beach.

Naples tried to get bill 211 passed to remove the states preemeption law on smoking.It was D.O.A. in comittee! yet the NAZIS are still pushing it!

2011 HB 211 Florida Clean Indoor Air Act Died in Health & Human Services Quality Subcommittee

http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/sections/representatives/sponsoredbills.aspx?MemberId=4514&SessionId=66

Cuurent state law:

This legislation expressly preempts regulation of smoking to the state and supersedes any municipal or county ordinance on the subject".:

Sarasota is in clear violation of state law

Smoking already is banned at area beaches, so restrictions at city parks would be a logical extension of those rules.

Smokers go to the beach and lite up demand a ticket then sue the city for everything theyve got!

THE PURPOSE OF THE WORLD HEALTH ORGINIZATIONS SECOND HAND SMOKE SCAM

Passive smoke is portrayed as a public health hazard for one single purpose: to create a hostile environment to smokers, so that they are induced to quit by social pressures. In conjunction with disinformation on the consequences of health from primary smoking, smokers are told they are addicted to nicotine, and here is where the sale of the pharmaceutically produced smoking cessation "therapies" comes into play.

Although public consciousness is rapidly developing about the pharmaceutical connections of the global antitobacco establishment, the large majority of the population, media, and politicians is still tragically unaware of the extent of that connection. For this dissertation, let us consider the investment in antismoking activities by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, philanthropic arm of Johnson & Johnson, between 1992 and 2000 in one nation alone, the United States: well over 300 million dollars have been invested by just one multinational in financing antitobacco activities and "grass root" antismoking groups. [38] Yach and Bialous state: " As discussed by Ong and Glantz, the use of front groups and consultants is a well established tobacco industry practice to avoid dealing with its lack of public credibility." Interestingly enough, one of the people mentioned by Yach and Bialous is an indirect recipient of pharmaceutical funding.

[39] Even more interesting is that the antismoking activists never bother to report their pharmaceutical funding, and the most basic common sense shows that multinationals such as J&J do not invest hundreds of millions of dollars solely on humanitarian grounds. All that is compelling proof that the use of front groups and consultants is a well established pharmaceutical industry practice to diffuse its marketing policies of smoking cessation products. Unfortunately, the words of Yach and Bialous apply equally well to "public health’s" current masters.

ETS is, in reality, one of the most powerful marketing tools for smoking cessation products of the antitobacco enterprise, for it supplies a pseudo-scientific justification for the intolerance that is steadily stimulated by state, and pharmaceutically-funded propaganda through "public health." The WHO’s function in this marketing scheme is to globalise the process, with the help of the World Bank, [40] [41] and the International Monetary Fund, [42] which provide the necessary arm-twisting for those financially vulnerable countries that do not want to embrace the "health revolution." Anyone who has closely observed the phenomenon of antitobacco "education" as it has developed in recent years will have noted how often the promotion of smoking cessation pharmaceutical "therapies" is now a key part of the message.

That my friends is whats been going on for 2 decades!

You're right Stacy I will benefit in a "grey area", as the Senior Patient Advocate for the Oral Cancer Foundation www.oralcancerfoundation.org perhaps I won't have to talk to as many newly diagnosed oral cancer patients in the future knowing that 50% of those who I am talking to will be dead within 12 months.

And regarding that slipping this Ordinance through without discussion acqusation...the question the Council members took up was whether to discuss that issue that night with an already busy agenda or discuss it at a future workshop which they all wanted to do. I was prepared, as I should have been, to discuss it when the agenda item came up.

Mr hastings since your an anti-smoking advocate perhaps you should take your paid advocacy status and recuse yourself due to conflict of interest in this apparent hoax of a beach ban you are attempting to push thru thats against state law!

As far as oral cancers you speak of can you prove smoking or chew causes as much?

Of course you cant as the p53 gene is activated by HPV infection the main cause of oral cancers and even lung cancers!

Not 1 Death or Sickness Etiologically Assigned to Tobacco. . All the diseases attributed to smoking are also present in non smokers. It means, in other words, that they are multifactorial, that is, the result of the interaction of tens, hundreds, sometimes thousands of factors, either known or suspected contributors - of which smoking can be one.

The anti-smokers commit flagrant scientific fraud by ignoring more than 50 studies which show that human papillomaviruses cause at least 1/4 of non-small cell lung cancers. Smokers and passive smokers are more likely to have been exposed to this virus for socioeconomic reasons. And the anti-smokers' studies are all based on lifestyle questionnaires, so they're cynically DESIGNED to blame tobacco for all those extra lung cancers that are really caused by HPV. And they commit the same type of fraud with every disease they blame on tobacco.
http://www.smokershistory.com/hpvlungc.htm
http://www.smokershistory.com/SGHDlies.html

And, all their so-called "independent" reports were ring-led by the same guy, Jonathan M. Samet, including the Surgeon General Reports, the EPA report, the IARC report, and the ASHRAE report, and he's now the chairman of the FDA Committee on Tobacco. He and his politically privileged clique exclude all the REAL scientists from their echo chamber. That's how they make their reports "unanimous!"

http://www.smokershistory.com/SGlies.html

For the government to commit fraud to deprive us of our liberties is automatically a violation of our Constitutional rights to the equal protection of the laws, just as much as if it purposely threw innocent people in prison. And for the government to spread lies about phony smoking dangers is terrorism, no different from calling in phony bomb threats.

My thought is there is no hidden agenda or conspiracies at work here in Gulfport on this issue. I think it is more of a litter issue for many folks. Many, certainly not all, smokers still find it acceptable to throw their butts on the ground, out of their car window - and of course, onto the beach. Going back to my first post, I think any reasonable person can see that I was asking 1) who will 'police' the ban and 2) will it cause more problems than it's worth? For the record, I don't smoke nor do I litter. I happen to believe second hand smoke is a health issue, as of course, is smoking. I am not anti-smoker. Some of my best friends smoke. They are still my friends. I am very much anti-smoking. I don't care if people smoke while at the beach. I don't care for anyone littering the beach with any type of trash.

I think Mr. Hastings is claiming he will be saving some people from cancer by banning smoking on the beach and poor little Jennifer S. doesn't like the smell. Huh?
A city wide ban on smoking would just solve everybodys problems.
Freedom is overrated.

First of all, people that focus on decreasing the number of smokers by either encouraging smokers to quit or discouraging non-smokers from starting, will most likely decrease smokers and perhaps the number of people that get cancer as a result of smoking. Secondly, I think it is funny when people use the term "freedom" so broadly. Believe it or not, you do not have the "freedom" to smoke on a public beach. Sadly, poor little Stacy doesn't seem to quite understand that. If you read the Constitution, you can have a list of your freedoms. I do not like the smell of cigarette smoke and quite frankly it irritates me when people smoke in public places near non-smokers. I am not going to complain at a bar about smokers but when I am enjoying the beach and people bring their stinky offensive cigarette smoke near me, it is upsetting. Does poor little Stacy understand that or should I explain myself in more detail to poor little Stacy?

JohnE,

I am a non paid volunteer for the Oral Cancer Foundation. I even pay my own travel expenses when I travel to speak on their behalf. Not only have I never been pay one penny in my 5 + years of association I donate my own money so please do not speak about things you are totally unaware of.

Tobacco is still the leading cause of oral cancer and by far smoking is the number one cause within tobacco.

Talking of rights and freedom, when only 17% of over 18 year olds in Florida smoke, meaning 83% of us don't, then whose freedoms and rights are we talking about?

People that don't smoke obviously don't litter with cigarette butts meaning that people that do smoke do litter with cigarette butts contrary to every smoker you talk to that says they don't.

Educating smokers about littering doesn't work; putting Don't Litter signs out doesn't work; placing Butt Cans everywhere doesn't work. The only thing that other cities have found that does curb the butt litter is to ban smoking.

Very well-said, Vice-Mayor Hastings. Thanks for taking a stand on this issue.

I agree with Douglas...and you too Phillip. Good job in that reply, David. Even though we have different ways to express it, there are several people here that are on the same side. I have noticed that nobody has mentioned the part of the proposal that said it was going to include a designated smoking area. Many communities that have banned smoking have done this. It makes it easier for more people to agree with it. Those same communities have also later regretted allowing the designated smoking areas..because it soon become apparant the the designated smoking area is a real big, nasty mess. The trend on this subject is inevitable...and smoking is being controlled more and more all over the world. This trend is not going to reverse. Gulfport should jump right in on this and let's get our smoking laws up to the standards that appeal to the mass public. Not only the local mass public, but also the visitors. The Gulfport Beach area is a real ''gem'' and it needs this. As a former smoker, I appreciate the joy of a cig while relaxing anywhere....and these laws and ordinances are not going to stop a smoker who is down there by himself and he wants to light up. Good for him...I (and the police) can overlook that...and they will. Just take your butts with you. But these laws will allow something to be done if someone is ignoring the law and flagrantly smoking around others, despite the law. If the police are called in such a case, I am sure the smoker will regret it.

cigarettes are a ''heated'' topic

There are so many websites one can go to about cigarette litter - this is one: http://www.longwood.edu/cleanva/cigarettelitterhome.html

Hastings didn't object so much to smoking when he was making money off of it just a couple of months ago when he owned the Habana Cigar Factory.

Well...let's see...we know: (1) JohnE will likely die of lung disese or cancer. (2)Jennifer does not seem to like Stacy. (3) Phillip P, David H, Douglas H, Frank V, Cherlene W, Stacy R, all seem to be very involved in helping make Gulfport a better place, and we should all be glad that Gulfport has them....(4) but Frank also may be the one who tells us things to be amused about.

disease...not disese...I spell bad and type worse

I mark the box on many stories that indicate whether you want to ''follow'' a story or not. A couple weeks ago, I read the story about when the volunteers did the most recent litter clean-up project. I ''followed'' that story and think that is why I got this email on this story. I think I also remember the ''litter pick-up story'' mentioned that the litter from cigarettes was possibly the worse thing the volunteers saw in abundance and some of the volunteers wanted the matter discussed. It is worth noting that this idea of banning smoking at Gulfport Beach did not just sprout up because of just one person who wanted to try to initiate this ordinance. It was brought up because it is a legetimate issue that some citizens wanted addressed and it has been put into the agenda at the meetings because it would be Vice Mayor David Hastings duty to try and represent this issue (for the citizens) as sincerely as possile ..''even if'' he does or does not own a cigar business. But it is still very interesting to find out that he may.

1. It seems insensitive to say someone will die from lung cancer. 2. I do not know Stacy and have no feelings for or against her. I was just responding to her comment calling me "poor little Jennifer," because I said I didn't like cigarette smoke in public areas amongst a larger group of non-smokers. 3. I think anyone that takes a strong interest in making their town a better place is a positive thing whether I agree with them or not.

A quote for CJ, "I had nothing to offer anybody except my own confusion. "

I did not respond to JohnE. I knew it would be a waste of time. I have lost all people dear to me to cancer and lung desease...including my parents who both died before my two boys were ever old enough to remember them. That was 28 years ago. My little brother died 20 years ago of cancer at age 28 and had a wife and children. I could go on and on with how cancer has stricken more of my family and all who have died. We moved from our lifelong home in Kansas to the Gulfport area because..quite simply..we had nobody in our lives up there left..and had not had anyone for a very long time due to the fact everyone died of cancer. I can live with myself for being insenstive to someone like JohdE and the ''facts'' he was talking. I did not like Stacy's comment about you, either. I did like all your comments. I was joking around...maybe you should have seen that. From other things I have written I would think you might know that I would support your comments. I also thought it was real cute the way you gave it to Stacy and I did not even think it was insensitive. That said, I stand by what I said about JohnE, and I also doubt that you would want to go to the beach where Stacy is sitting.

Well..I do feel bad a little now ...about what I said to JohnE. It pushed my button a little with the enormous amount of argument he had in support of smoking. I, too, hope he will find better health. I would not wish lung cancer or cancer on my worst enemy. Thanks for the reply.

This Vice Mayor has never owned a cigar or tobacco business in this state or any other state.

As I write this there are 42 comments on this article. I wonder if Cherlene can tell us if this is a new high for responses. We're not changing the world - but we can at least set a record on The Patch. ;)

Sorry if the shop was technically owned by Mrs. Hastings, but communal property laws and all that what's hers is his. Councilman Hastings doesn't tednically own the restauraunt either, but doesn't correct anyone when they call that his

Geez Frank no communal property laws exist in the U.S. unless I guess you live on a commune. You probably meant to "technically" say community property laws but Florida is not a community property state so "technically" or not I never owned that cigar shop.

Speaking of butts, this am a group of Gulfport residents met at the skate park area to clean it up (missed you again Frank). At first I was pleasantly surprised not to find any butts but when we made it to the skate park itself we found tons of butts both inside and outside the actual fenced in skate area. Most of the butts were close to both sides of the fence but there were some even on the ramps. While we were inside the fence a teenager was walking by on the sidewalk and he stopped and yelled to me "Are you cleaning the park?" I replied yes and just as I was about to tell him where he could get a bag and gloves if he wanted to help he yells back "Don't forget to clean under the ramps, that's where we throw our empty bottles" and he continued on walking. We all kinda got a kick out of that at first but then we started looking under the ramps and sure enough we had to get a rake to reach far under those ramps to get all those bottles. What a mess.

Philip, This just may be an all time high for comments on a story. I greatly appreciate everyone having a "conversation" about the issue on Gulfport Patch. We not only want to provide information, but provide a space for people to exchange information, ideas, opinions, ect. We want people to "talk" about what they care about and why. Again, thank you all for sharing your thoughts. Gulfport Patch is working on a follow up story to preview the workshop on Sept. 22 at Gulfport City Hall at 3:30 p.m.

David,
Thanks for helping at the Tangerine Pond cleanup! Patch Reporter Melissa Lattman snapped a few photos at the event and we'll post them on Gulfport Patch tomorrow morning. That's a shame that those who use the park and pond area don't think to use the trash cans? Or stop to help?

Make money Frank? Funny you should say that because I had an employee in there that was stealing and selling my cigars to others out on the beach and gave lots of free cigars to his friends. Receiving stolen property is against the law and I was also told that the people taking the stolen cigars were well aware that they were stolen and they thought it was great because they were stealing from my husband. "NO FRANK, THEY WERE STEALING FROM ME!"

"AMUSING STORIES" Yeah, the ones that are "REAL AMUSING" seem to never be told.I love the web certain people are weaving.

There are things I want to say here, but my humor would not be appreciated. I already have my foot in my mouth anyway. Frank makes many of my favorite comments in lots of the Gulfport Patch blogs. This one would have not be the same without him. To make this fit in with litter and smoking...print my reply and burn it....and be sure you clean up the ashes. I hear Moe's Mo Bigger Cigar Shop and Hooka Tent Emporium is for sale

Mr.Verdino, I am not the previous owner of the cigar loft, i have no idea who that was. Your post is the prime example on why people should not talk so much,what you think is fact is not true. I will no longer respond to any of your post for the simple reason that you are not an authority on me or anyone else.

Heres a time line starting in 1900,dont be surprised to see the same thing playing out today nearly 100 years later.

1901: REGULATION: Strong anti-cigarette activity in 43 of the 45 states. "Only Wyoming and Louisiana had paid no attention to the cigarette controversy, while the other forty-three states either already had anti-cigarette laws on the books or were considering new or tougher anti-cigarette laws, or were the scenes of heavy anti- cigarette activity" (Dillow, 1981:10).

1904: New York: A judge sends a woman is sent to jail for 30 days for smoking in front of her children.

1904: New York City. A woman is arrested for smoking a cigarette in an automobile. "You can't do that on Fifth Avenue," the arresting officer says.

1907: Business owners are refusing to hire smokers. On August 8, the New York Times writes: "Business … is doing what all the anti-cigarette specialists could not do."

1917: SMOKEFREE: Tobacco control laws have fallen, including smoking bans in numerous cities, and the states of Arkansas, Iowa, Idaho and Tennessee.

1937: hitler institutes laws against smoking.

Trace Taylor
12:42am on Sunday, September 11, 2011

Now wait a minute. Second hand smoke might not be as bad as they say but it's at least as bad as the first hand stuff. And I don't want any of it.

Oh really!

Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, Vol. 14, No. 1. (August 1991), pp. 88-105.

Abstract
Environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) is derived from cigarette smoldering and active smoker exhalation. Its composition displays broad quantitative differences and redistributions between gas and respirable suspended particulate (RSP) phases when compared with the mainstream smoke (MSS) that smokers puff. This is because of different generation conditions and because ETS is diluted and ages vastly more than MSS. Such differences prevent a direct comparison of MSS and ETS and their biologic activities.

However, even assuming similarities on an equal mass basis, ETS-RSP inhaled doses are estimated to be between 10,000- and 100,000-fold less than estimated average MSS-RSP doses for active smokers. Differences in effective gas phase doses are expected to be of similar magnitude. Thus the average person exposed to ETS would retain an annual dose analogous to the active MSS smoking of considerably less than one cigarette dispersed over a 1-year period. By contrast, consistent epidemiologic data indicate that active smoking of some 4–5 cigarettes per day may not be associated with a significantly increased risk of lung cancer. Similar indications also obtain for cardiovascular and respiratory diseases. Since average doses of ETS to nonsmoking subjects in epidemiologic studies are several thousand times less than this reported intake level, the marginal relative risks of lung cancer and other diseases attributed to ETS in some epidemiologic studies are likely to be statistical artifacts, derived from unaccounted confounders and unavoidable bias

http://www.citeulike.org/user/vmarthia/article/7458828

My own thoughts are based upon the factual evidence not the prescribed psuedo-science thats been invented by the surgeon general and other non-profit groups that are funded by Big pharma in a push to sell nico-derm and othe NRT products.

Then you have to look at what PROHIBITIONAL movements have caused society in the past. Loss of freedom,loss of private property rights,black markets,gang land warfare over territory for distributution of those blackmarket products that prohibitional advocates pushed for. High taxation on products is the same as prohibition of a comodity ie tobacco,alcohol!

You want all this to happen again in this 2nd progressive movement which is what created the first alcohol prohibition and all its social injustice on everyone!

You can dream of a perfect world,but human instinct makes that a glass house and its the one thing that never changes,human behavior no matter what contribed majic science or religion you try and abuse to make your magical world a reality!

Lets get back to common sence and common respect! We are better than criminalizing the simple act of smoking or drinking or even being obese!

Here is what I mean:

Mississippi Legislature
2008 Regular Session
House Bill 282
House Calendar | Senate Calendar | Main Menu
Additional Information | All Versions

Current Bill Text: |

Description: Food establishments; prohibit from serving food to any person who is obese.

Title: AN ACT TO PROHIBIT CERTAIN FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS FROM SERVING FOOD TO ANY PERSON WHO IS OBESE, BASED ON CRITERIA PRESCRIBED BY THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH; TO DIRECT THE DEPARTMENT TO PREPARE WRITTEN MATERIALS THAT DESCRIBE AND EXPLAIN THE CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING WHETHER A PERSON IS OBESE AND TO PROVIDE THOSE MATERIALS TO THE FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS; TO DIRECT THE DEPARTMENT TO MONITOR THE FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT; AND FOR RELATED PURPOSES.

JohnE is either just bored and trying to "get our goat" by being completely ridiculous, is a tabacco lobbyist who is fighting for the rights of the tabacco industry or is a complete and total moran with strong anti-government feelings and is trying to convince people to switch to his side by being dishonest and unreasonable. Anyone with half a brain knows that inhaling smoke filled with tar, arsenic, Formaldehyde, lead, Chloroform etc is not going to be good for them.

Oh the pundits may bring up benzene in tobacco smoke. The average cigarette produces roughly 300 micrograms of benzene (1986 report of the surgeon general. p.130) 0.3 micrograms - 300 nanograms.

Benzene is normally found in fruits, fish, vegetables, nuts, dairy products, beverages and eggs. The National Cancer Institute estimates that an individual may safely ingest up to 250 micrograms in their food per day, every single day of the year.

Thus, the “safe” exposure to benzene from one day of a normal diet is roughly equal to the exposure experienced by a nonsmoker sharing an airspace with smokers for over 750 hours.

It’s a political movement and it was never about health.

You wanna bring up any component in tobacco smoke say ARSENIC for instance!

You really want to go there! I didnt think you did.

Your PSYCHOSIS has been studied and found non-harmful and you can seek treatment!

"Idiopathic environmental intolerance: A causation analysis applying Bradford Hill's criteria to the toxicogenic theory."

ABSTRACT: Idiopathic environmental intolerance (IEI) is a descriptor for a phenomenon that has many names including environmental illness, multiple chemical sensitivity and chemical intolerance. Toxicogenic and psychogenic theories have been proposed to explain IEI. ... the toxicogenic theory fails all of these criteria. There is no convincing evidence to support the fundamental postulate that IEI has a toxic aetiology
Ref: Toxicol Rev. 2003;22(4):235-46

So actual research shows your psychosis is "psychogenic" i.e. it's all in your head!

Scientific Evidence Shows Secondhand Smoke Is No Danger

Written By: Jerome Arnett, Jr., M.D.
Published In: Environment & Climate News
Publication Date: July 1, 2008
Publisher:

http://www.heartland.org/policybot/results/23399/Scientific_Evidence_Sho...

myth-of-second-hand-smoke

http://yourdoctorsorders.com/2009/01/the-myth-of-second-hand-smoke

BS Alert: The 'third-hand smoke' hoax

http://www.examiner.com/public-policy-in-louisville/bs-alert-the-third-h...

The thirdhand smoke scam

http://velvetgloveironfist.blogspot.com/2010/02/thirdhand-smoke-scam.html

Heart attacks Frauds and Myths..

http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/7451/

The Heart Attack Fraud

http://cantiloper.tripod.com/canti11.html

Do Smoking Bans Reduce Heart Attacks?

“In contrast with smaller regional studies,” says a RAND Corporation study, “we find that smoking bans are not associated with statistically significant short-term declines in mortality or hospital admissions for myocardial infarction [heart attack] or other diseases.”
In fact, “An analysis simulating smaller studies using subsamples reveals that large short-term increases in myocardial infarction incidence following a smoking ban are as common as the large decreases reported in the published literature.”

You guys can have all the fun you want with your bigoted agenda. The fact remains its all a sham! Whats even more important is your beach ban proposal is not only ILLEGAL and against state law. You also set the city up for lawsuits if you write one ticket to anyone smoking on the beach!

ta!

Philip Penrose
11:19am on Monday, September 12, 2011

And you are actually concerned that this bill will pass? There are probably hundreds of ridiculous bills in limbo as we speak - in all states. This is one of them. I think one should be concerned with past history...but not paranoid about it.

The smoking bans that came down are just as rediculous and became law. This bill is from 2008 had you read it completely. Today the war on obesity is run by the same radicals that pushed the anti-smoking campaigns and to this day they have stolen 6 billion dollars from the food stamp program to promote Michele Obamas anti-obesity war, using that money to pay the same anti-tobacco researchers to create junk anit-obesity studies the same as they did with second ahnd smoke junk studies that still keep comming out everyday!

I can see your not very well versed in whats going on I will be happy to enlighten you and others just ask!

Cigarette Butt Litter is 100% Biodegradable!

Another Anti-Smoking Hoax Debunked. Those cigarette filters are 100% biodegradable.

The cigarette butt menace was created to support outdoor smoking bans because many non-smokers will accept that secondhand smoke is not harmful in an outdoor setting.

The anti-smoking zealots admit that the tobacco and paper in cigarette butts are biodegradable, but claim that the cellulose acetate cigarette filters are a plastic, like styrofoam and polystyrene, and will contaminate the earth forever. This is not true. Cellulose acetate is a wood product. It is completely degradable through biological, chemical, and photo chemical degradation mechanisms.

Sorry, I don't have a nice, easy to read MSM news article to give you. I have research papers from cellulose acetate manufacturers. Ann W., a commentor to a Dick Puddlecote article, put me onto this. http://dickpuddlecote.blogspot.com/2011/04/junk-scientists-found.html

http://www.acetateweb.com/pdf/EnvironmentalDegradationOfCigaretteFilters.pdf
"STUDY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION OF CIGARETTE FILTERS: A simulation of the Roadside or Parking Lot Environment." Stephen K. Haynes, et al,\., Research Laboratories, Eastman Chemical Company, Kingsport Tenn.

"In recent years there has been increasing public awareness of items which may be discarded as litter with particular attention being given to cigarette filters. Some studies have concluded that when cigarette filters are introduced into the environment, they either do not degrade or degrade very slowly. Previous work in our laboratories has demonstrated that cigarette filters biodegrade readily in environments where mixed microbial populations can thrive. The purpose of this study was to examine the changes occurring in cigarette filters over time in an environment similar to that of a parking lot or roadside area. In this environment, exposure to sunlight, moisture and wind occur, but there is limited exposure to microbial attack ... "

"CONCLUSIONS: Previous work has demonstrated that cigarette filters biodegrade readily in environments where mixed microbial populations can thrive. This work demonstrates that current commercial cigarette filters also degrade when exposed to an environment which is not optimal for microbial biodegradation."

I am always amused that the people making the most outrageous / far flung comments are those that never put their full identity.

JohnE, Could you identiify yourself? Are you a Gulfport resident? How about a Florida resident? Do you have a hidden agenda that you would like to share?

It is quite apparent that your comments are simply cut-and-pasted for them to appear in such fast succession. It appears that you have made this argument many times.

Are you a lobbyist? Employee of the tobacco industry? Come on...you can level with us.

The only leveling that needs to be made is the fact tobacco control has used fraudulent means to obtain their bans across the world. I do not work for a tobacco company nor do I work for anybody.I am RETIRED NAVY CHIEF!

I smoke and so do my friends,tobacco control should have skipped my state in their ban movement as it would surely have spared them such embarassment from myself exposing their frauds and lies around the world! BTW I own a home in st pete! I will be the first smoker to DARE you to ticket me!

The only authority the city has is to enforce the litter laws! no more and no less!

John tell your story about biodegradible filters to the sea gulls, pelicans, cormorants, and fish that ingest them. Not sure if Kools cigarettes are still around, they had fiberglass in their filters. Mass. General Hospital had a sign up in their emergency room back in the 70's it said "If you smoke Kools we can't help you". Good luck with your B.S. Johnnie.

Johnnie please reenlist.

Mtober, based on some of these comments, one should be concerned, very concerned...
Also, some of us are wanna-be Tolstoys, so we have to spread our enlightment around under various disguises for fear we may be ignored. LOL
http://ash.org/outdoors.pdf
REASONS FOR BANNING SMOKING IN CERTAIN PUBLIC OUTDOOR AREAS*

Regarding proposed Beach Smoking Ban: The Oral Cancer Foundation says the high risk population for oral cancer used to be 50 to 70 year old black male tobacco users. But the Human Papilloma Virus (HPV16) changed that. The OCF says the Number One Cause of Oral Cancer is HVP16 (60%). Smoking has been relegated to "important risk factor." The OCF says the "at risk population" is young adults, evidenced by the OCF's "Guerilla Marketing" campaign at the Surfing Open in CA. The OCF hired young girls to hand out cool "bar code" patches beach goers would stick on their bodies. When scanned with a smart phone, the bar code would direct the user to a web site advising the number one cause of oral cancer is the sexually transmitted HPV#16. They should get a check-up. While anti-smoking advocates still tout them, studies attesting to the dangers of 2nd hand smoke have long been proven invalid. People really object because it is "stinky," & they don't like butts left behind. Following Mr. Hastings' logic, instead of a smoking ban, post signs warning of the dangers of oral sex and hand out those nifty little bar code patches to young people on the beach. Instead of passing a new City law banning smoking on the beach because it is "stinky," and some don't like smokers lighting up around them and leaving their butts behind, we just politely ask the smoker (only 17% of pop.) to put it out or move? Polite smokers would understand and comply. Wouldn't that be nice?
Lou Miliano

It's quite apparent you guys can't fight facts so as good little trained smokefree advocates you stoop to character association. To bad !

http://www.smokersclubinc.com/index.php

If Person #1 reads something claimed to be a fact and believes it is a fact, then it must be a fact - according to this person #1. If person #2 reads something claimed to be a fact and believes it is a fact, then it must be a fact - according to this person #2.
If these two supposed facts oppose one another (as would, no doubt person #1 and person #2) the question is who is right, who is wrong and what is the truth. And that, in fact, is my thought on the fact.

Philip, in reference to the link you posted above: great research.

Now it begins to get a little clearer. It seems you have found the source of all the cutting-and-pasting that was going in some of the earlier posts... I suspected this might be the case.

Also, take a few words from the posts above, and google them to see what you find. Appears that many almost identical posts keep appearing over and over again on different threads. MY OPINION is that our dear John has an agenda that he is not sharing.

Here is an example: http://m.commercialappeal.com/comments/list/news/stories/246009/0/

It appears that JohnE is also a "harleyrider" (or at least they attend the same meetings.)

Oh, and maybe JohnE also lives in Reistertown, Maryland, where he also posts:

http://reisterstown.patch.com/articles/thank-you-for-not-smoking-2

Also appears he may use the name Confederate1989 who posts almost identical thoughts:

http://www.topix.com/forum/health/smoking/TJVOJBIN6F60MQ87L

http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/CancerCauses/TobaccoCancer/index

Appears here: http://www.independentmail.com/news/2011/jun/06/proposed-smoking-ban-pendleton-draws-passion-both/ he has added "1778" to the end of his name, and is now known as "harleyrider1778 "

Good old JohnE even posts in Edinburgh, Scotland: http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/features/Smoke-signals-How-the-rest.6819996.jp

John, Do you really own a home in St Pete, as you stated? How about Reistertown, Maryland or Olive Branch, Mississippi, or Scotland? Or, do you simply troll the internet, googling "smoking bans", looking for opportunities to repeat your rhetoric?

Our JohnE is in actuality JOHN ERKLE. Google his name and you can see for yourself. he is also one of the moderators of the site SMOKERSCLUB INTERNATIONAL.

Now you know THE REST OF THE STORY.

Good work, Doug.

Ok - now that the dust has settled a bit...a poll:

Are you for or against a smoking ban on Gulfport beach?

I am against.

For. I want to enjoy the beach without stinky smoke and gross butts

Philip, I've added a poll on the Gulfport Patch Facebook Page. Thanks for the suggestion!

Ealier...when I said to JohnE; ''They found butts in The Planet of the Apes movie also; next to the hand of the Statue of Liberty hand sticking up out of the sand. How old do you think they were?''....well...uh....I sort of made that up :)

Stacey Roberts, there is no agenda in our home with the "SMOKING THING" We simply think that people who smoke, for the most part, find our streets, grounds and beaches to be giant ash trays. That is not cool to use our enviroment like that. There is nothing worse than me seeing someone at a red light and instead of putting the butt in the ashtray, they flick it out the window of the car. WHY??? Thats what cars have ashtrays for! As far as your statement goes about Dave,he is not the "BENIFICIARY" of anything except getting beat up by people who know nothing about us and why we do things, and "UNDER THE COVERS" over here you will only find maybe 4 or 5 cats and 1 or 2 Pitbulls at any given time.That all my friend, sorry!!!

I guess the Hastings would have us ban cars next ecause people speed and crash into things. You can't ban smoking because some smokers litter any more than you can ban cars because some people speed. or ban McDonald's because I pickup bags and cups from there almost everyday. Unless the ban is about smoking and not litter?

I really like how relevant your analogies are! They fit this particular scenario so well! Next thing you know, the Hastings will want to ban puppies because they bark or kids because they are messy! Before you know it, we will have TVs on the wall that watch us and we will have jobs assigned to us and have curfews. You have really opened my eyes guys. I'm glad no one is over reacting to this smoking ban. It seems like just the right amount of paranoia.

INTERESTING comments. Full disclosure. I am a 30+ year Florida resident. I do own my own home in St Petersburg. The first six years in Florida, I lived in Gulfport on Beach Blvd. I smoke, I am related to smokers, non-smokers and quitters. Frankly, I have had family members - smokers - live into their 90's. I FIRMLY believe the anti-smoking ban everywhere is political and for profit. It is also about control. Honestly, I don't believe any of the 'modern day' smokers will live as long as my elders did. Now, think about that for a minute... The cigarettes mass produced today have been altered greatly from what once was. They are FULL of chemicals - which could be the cause of the stink. They do stink. I roll my own, clean chemical free. BTW - even the paper used today in cigarette making is full of chemicals. I believe it is the CHEMICAL killing folks, not the tobacco. Even most non-smokers can think back to the old days, when your grand or great-grandparents would have a smoke of a 'fag' or a pipe. They had a different aroma!
There IS an adgenda - there always is. It happens will many different life choices. Example - "I don't eat meat, so I don't think anyone else should". Then come the movement. Personally, I do eat meat - lots of it. Even Julia Child said "We need animal fat".

Mr. Penrose, I was being sarcastic.

Litter laws ''are'' enforced. If you see someone littering , especially if you have someone with you as a second witness, when the police show up (it may take a while, so sitck around) there is a ''high'' probability that a ticket will be written. If you are willing to go to court, you can bring up the charges yourself to the policeman. He will most likely save you the trouble and do it himself. Especially if JohnE is the offener...and DARING (his words) the cops to ticket him. I think many of us would like to see that situation. I have the feeling this JohnE has met an MP a time or two while serving. Cilvillian police will grant him little slack, either, if the reporting citzens press the issue and stick around to identify themselves as the people who called in the complaint. You need to be willing to help nail these people who litter or disreguard a posted ordinance. How many times have you been driving along...or in a parking lot...and saw where someone had either dumped an ''entire'' ashtray full of butts on the ground...or left some hugh McDonalds trash right on the ground??? Isn't this one of the most disgusting things we see??!! Don't you wish you were right there when they did that? I think there are ''very few'' of us that would not call the police or even follow the people to help the cops nail them. Cops love calls like this. Easy ticket, low risk of violence they can't handle. You have to take some time out of your day for causes every once in while.

Yes JohnE...it would be hard for anyone to stand up against you here considering we don't have all the prepared copy and paste stuff, links, etc already lined up like you. Considering you are blogging under false pretenses, you have others at an unfair advantage. You are a cheat and a fraud and dishonor the Navy. We are glad you have been exposed...and it seems like you might have a partner here that you are tag teaming us with. Hard to stand up to you or not...you ''have'' been shot down here...and you are looking to be a real fool by now and you are not helping ''any'' cause...especially not you own. Most of us here are responding with heartfelt remarks, but you have been toying with us for laughs and pretending. You remind me of the homeless man on the corner who at the end of the day, walks to a car he has parked nearby and drives home to his house.

Jo. It sounded like Phillip just said something really nice about your husband and now you jump down his neck. Read what he said gain...he supports your husband. It seeems like most all of us here, at least basically, do back him. Most politicians would be delighted with the amount of support he has received here. You can never please everyone. Why don't you see that? Don't be so quick to determine who does and does not support him on our comments here. The curious thing about you is that it now seems as if you have become a suppoter of smoking bans and litter, when the two are connected. That's pretty interesting from a recent Cigar Shop owner. If so, then that is good. there are many of us that are former smokers and are not necessarially ''anti-smoking'' 100%...but are willing to draw ''some'' lines. As I said...it is hard to tell if you are truly onboard ...or have ben willing to jump on the bandwagon now that you lost your cigar business to shoplifting...which I am sorry to hear about. Is your support of the ban sincere, as a former enabler?

Sorry, Jo...I also thought you had directed that comment to Plillip. Phillip is right...this post is getting old. We have set a high enough record here...lol! I would suggest people visit the Gulfport Patch article on the clean up at Tangerine Pond and the Skatepark to see the pictures and ''another '' job well done by the volunteers. It is incredible just how many wonderful things there are in Gulfport alone. When you add the additional areas to ''pond''er...such as all of St Petersburg, Tampa itself, all the Gulf Beach areas...across the Skyway Bridge to Bradenten, Sarasota..the close proximity to orlando, Sanibel..(the list is quiste endless, isn't it?)...you see why the efforts we put forth here in Gulfport are important. I honestly think too many people here are spoiled ( in a good way) and forget this is the best part of Florida we live in. The Gulfport Beach area is an especially rare pleasure.

Gulfport Patch article: Tangerine Pond and Skatepork Cleanup Project. Check out the guy doing clean-up work from a Kayak!! Uh....aren't there alligators in that pond? I bet that seems like a funny comment to you guys...but we are new here. No gators in Kansas...just munchkins and tornado's.

CJ, it's "I HOPE I HAVE CLEARED THE AIR WITH YOU" forgot the "AIR" in that line.

Jo, in all seriousness, I am in favor of the ban. I think people have been overly dramatic about the effects of a smoking ban and in trashing you and I believe it is your husband. I was trying to express my frustrations by being sarcastic and obviously it didn't translate well.

Ps: I am also not under the impression you guys want to ban puppie.

I'm with you Jennifer S. I think we should ban all puppies and children. They are always getting in the way. I also think people are being too harsh to JohnE. In the last hour, I began doing my own research and discovered that not only are cigarettes good for you, they also cure baldness and the ashes will turn into unicorns if you water them. We may want to encourage smoking everywhere from now on. And in the possibility that someone takes me seriously (as appeared to be the case with Miss S), I am completely and utterly joking. Except for the banning kids thing, of course.

Jennifer, Dave is my husband and he is much better taking the cheap shots, me, not so much. And you are right, i didn't take your comment to well, every morning i wake up thinking, "NOW WHAT?" No matter what we do or what we say someone always yells "AGENDA". That just isn't the case.We do things to help, if someone comes to us for something we are there! It realy is that simple. I am not your typical politicians wife, just ask anyone who knows us, i speak up, my husband flips out that i opened my mouth and then we're good, that goes on about 100 times a day, he ignores, i react, it seems to work for us.I just don't like when people think they know something when in fact you haven't spent 5 minutes with us.This issue is important to all of us for many reasons, trashing someone's position does what? Nothing! After more than a year of politics as usual, im a little sensitive towards words and their translation, after all they can mean just about anything. I am sorry for my remark towards you. Dave took my mouse away from me not to long ago for this same reason, then i got it back but i then lost my first amendmant rights,i just got those back about 2 weeks ago, now i have a feeling that i will be loosing the both of them pretty soon. I hope we can start over, friends? And that doesn't mean you have to agree with everything i say------but it would be nice!!! I am sorry.

No worries. I assumed you probably had your guard up after several days of people saying nasty things about you and your husband. My life is not out there for others to judge and I cannot relate to that type of scrutiny. So, I should have been more sensitive. It has been so amazing to me to read some of these people's comments. I have no idea why bringing you into the smoking ban argument is in anyway productive. I also completely understand wanting to defend your husband. Fight the good fight! I've got your backs!

This is the funniest...Ole Black Lung JohnE and his agenda. He and his friends are laughing all the way to the grave.
As far as the claim that the butts are biodegradable, sure everything is degradable at some point . You just have a better chance of seeing GOD in the Mall next Sunday before that happens in our lifetime...
You are hanging on to frivolous studies to keep your disgusting habit (addiction) and imposing your laziness to not police yourself OR the people who agree (?) with you.
If fact is what you want fly into St Pete for the next scheduled cleanup and see the evidence for yourself.
I am for the ban. Only because I have a right, to not have smoking affect me. To not see the litter caused by smoking. End of subject.
I suggest you read the book “ OUR ICEBURG IS MELTING” This might be the time ole dog to look at the change that will happen.
Teddy Kehoe
...

Kinda funny how butcherboy shut his keyboard up after we have learned about the thefts at the cigar bar...

Teddy, i am glad of all the people out there, that you know the truth. We value not only your support but above all your friendship. You are one of the things that is right with Gulfport.

Jennifer, thanks for that!

teddy,
Thanks for your posts...
Doug

Good morning, all. Cherlene put a poll on Facebook about the proposed ban on the beach. As I'm not a 'Facebooker' if anyone wants to post some results here now and then - I would appreciate it. Thanks!

The poll on Facebook only allows each user to vote once. So far, there are 16 votes. Check out our Facebook page to vote! http://www.facebook.com/GulfportPatch (Thanks for voting!)

ERKLE, I have been meaning to ask you where you got the "INFO" that David Hastings is a "PAID ADVOCATE" I have no idea where you got that info but you are WRONG!!! That was on your post of Sept.8

OMG Jo please don't encourage that guy/gal! ;-)

OH no! This forum is poking it's head out of the grave and coming alive again...a zombie forum - it'll never die.....................it just keeps coming back...

Hi all. I can't get to the meeting today.
Recap:
*Non-smoker here
*Against smoking ban on beach
Anyone who goes to the meeting and speaks may quote me.

The proposed ban is up for discussion at today's City Council Workshop at 3:30 p.m. at Gulfport City Hall. Gulfport Patch Reporter Dale Hutchings put together an updated story with more information here: http://patch.com/A-mfNZ