Smoking Ban: Candidates Talk Health, Liabilities and Civil Liberties
All four Gulfport City Council Candidates discuss smoking ban, Clam Bayou, red light cameras and more at City of Gulfport and League of Women Voters "Meet the Candidates" forum Monday night.
The smoking ban applies to the entire beach and parking lot from the Gulfport Casino Ballroom to the Gulfport Recreation Center.
Photos (4)
Photos
On Tuesday, March 13, voters will decide who should represent the city for the Ward 1 and Ward 3 council seats. On Monday night, residents and supporters packed the Catherine Hickman Theater in Gulfport for the annual "Meet the Candidates" Forum moderated by the League of Women Voters.
Dwight Lawton with the League of Women Voters asked the questions and candidates were given one minute each to answer each question. The event finished at the end of one hour with a two-minute closing from each candidate.
Gulfport Patch put together the responses from each candidate about the smoking ban on the beach.
Smoking Ban on the Gulfport Beach
"I'm ok with that and I'm especially ok with that around playgrounds. But, what concerns me is there's a state law that supersedes the city ordinance that was passed. So, what you have is people who want to challenge that. Now we've created a liability for the city. They had a 'smoke in' a couple weeks ago about 20 people showed up, they all wanted to get a ticket. And the police wouldn't write a ticket because the signs weren't up to what he considered readable or wasn't up to the city's standards. We need to be aware of our state law and not create liabilities on the city."
"There's probably nobody in here that despises smoking anymore than me. It killed my mother at a young age. But, I think that everyone in this country has the right to be able to smoke as long as they're not jeopardizing someone else's health. Definitely not around the playgrounds, there should be areas designated for people to smoke. If you look at any historical papers back in the day, you'll see the Model T's and you see the elderly men . . .there was nothing like going down to Gulfport Beach and sitting out in the afternoons and smoking a stogie . . . that's part of Gulfport's heritage and I don't want to take it away from anybody. As long as they put their butts in the container . . .and they're not hurting anyone else, I don't see a problem with it. . . it's their right to smoke."
Ward 3 Candidate Jennifer Salmon
"My initial opinion was that we have the Indoor Clean Air Act and that forced people who smoke to go outside. We passed an ordinance, which I voted in favor of eventually. I raised these same concerns about civil liberties. The reason why I passed it is because I really did want to protect our playgrounds. I have a son and there's nothing more frustrating than to be sitting at the beach playground and having a bunch of people smoking around the children. We will review it in one year's time and that was one thing that gave me hope. If there aren't major problems that is brought up in terms of court cases or anything and it's actually working . . . . . it is an infringement on civil liberties when we've already moved people out of buildings and into the fresh air."
Ward 1 Candidate David Hastings
"I was the city council person that originally brought this issue forward. And city council eventually passed it 5 - 0 in favor of the smoking ban, tobacco ban on our beaches, little league field, playgrounds and our parks throughout the city. 83% of Floridians do not smoke. We have first hand smoke issues, which certainly causes a tremendous amount of death in the United States, we have second hand smoke and now there's even something called third hand smoke. We did set aside a part of the beach east of the Casino down to the Pier that smoking, tobacco use is allowed so we didn't eliminate it all. As far as the state law, there is no state law that prohibits the localities from enforcing this. That is an Attorney General opinion that the clean indoor act applies to the outdoor."
annie
7:25 am on Tuesday, February 7, 2012
this smoking ban is just a waster of time,we go to the beach everyday,there are smokers and people with dogs on the beach,you do not have code cop,these people don,t care and will tell you,we love and pick up litter,we love gulfport and will volunteer to give people tickets like a citizens,arrest,this small,quaint,safe,beautiful,filled with birds,chased by dogs also,we need to keep it safe from trash and people that do not deserve to be there if you can,t respect it annie and joe sturges
CJ
9:30 am on Tuesday, February 7, 2012
You did fine after your first sentence. After that, everything you mentioned was right on. The ban may seem like a waste of time , but please don't give up supporting the bans. The bans will gain ground and strength. Having the laws in place are certainly better than not having the bans at all. Remember...speed limit signs don't eliminate speeders, but imagine the highways if we did not have speed limits. They really do make a difference. The smoking bans work the same way. People who respect laws and bans will not violate those bans in full view of others. We are just starting out with these bans. Keep supporting them. It is the right thing to do.
CJ
9:15 am on Tuesday, February 7, 2012
Thank you David Hastings for taking the most solid positon on this matter. It is clear to see how you feel about it, and to know I agree with you. The others? I'm not sure, but it sure sounds like the other candidates have one foot in and one foot out on this. The smoking bans ''are'' succeeding in the rest of the entire country, and obsticles like the state law issues are only temporary. It only makes sense to be ''all-in'' on smoking bans. You have lots of support.
Teddy Kehoe
11:26 am on Tuesday, February 7, 2012
I call BS on D Liedtke...He has threatened to sue our town over a City Ordinance which has nothing to do with his complaint. Yet he states that he would have done something different and more homework to keep Gulfport out of Lawsuits pertaining to the smoking ban? I guess he is ok with monies that have to be spent on cleaning up after these disrespectful people who willingly break the ordinances. He stated there were 20 people at this protest. Maybe some live here in Gulfport, but most did not. Way to stand up and protect your City the as the majorities want Dan…
CJ
12:52 pm on Tuesday, February 7, 2012
Good comment. The poiice did the right thing that day not arresting anyone. They , nor anyone else wants to turn the smoking ban into a big issue that has citizens and government officials at each others throats. All anyone is trying to do is clean up the beaches and everywhere else the smokers foul up..along with the litterbugs. The ban is new. The police are giving things time for self regulation to kick in...but it is silly to believe the police are afraid to write tickets. They will be , sooner or later. They will just pick a better time than at a protest with 26 protestors. That's smart of them, I think. The police are on our side..not the side of people who violate posted bans. Even if the person who gets the ticket or arrested wins his court case, he will have spent some (much) money doing it..plus a lot of his time. That makes the bans a great deterrant, regardless unresolved state issues. At the same time..the courts will make money whether the person wins or loses his case. Either way..as far as the police are concerned..it's revenue and they are doing thier job.
Rick Boze
10:15 pm on Thursday, February 9, 2012
Do you know the difference between Organized Crime and any Government? The Governments have an endless supply of other people's money, just check out the statement above, doesn't matter it is the proper thing to do. Just pass the laws and let some one else sue to stop us, so lets pay a lawyer for the city's defense of this law. its only more dollars from the city coffers(and next year's tax increase), which could be used for something else.
CJ
11:39 pm on Thursday, February 9, 2012
I can see your argument. consider this:
You wrote:''doesn't matter it is the proper thing to do''... and think if someone gets a ticket that's thrown out..that it is a waste if the city hires a lawyer, and that money ''could be used for something else''.
The city already has a lawyer...the prosecutor that's being paid anyway.
However, the charge is going to stick. True..the person can hire a lawyer and appeals. Then, the charges might be thrown out, ''but'' that lawyer is going to cost the person who got the ticket..not the city.
My argument is the city ''never loses'' (ie: you can't fight city hall). They are going to make sure they make money. In court costs, in lawyers fees to the courts. etc. Keep focus that we are only talking about this one example..the smoking bans. For ''now'' there ''may'' be a way if a person wants to pay for the appeals, etc..to get a charge dismissed...but ''soon'' that State issue over the ban is going to be settled..and the smoking bans will be 100% legal no matter ''how'' out look at it. These bans ''are'' the right thing to do..and time will prove that more people believe that, than don't.
I just know every single time I have ''ever'' got a ticket for ''anything''..if I ''won''..it somehow still cost me a bundle...and it left me wondering if I had really won at all. The fight is sometimes worth it. You win the battle, but lose the war. I think that is why some laws are considered deterrants. That's what these bans are.
Mr. Fish
1:48 pm on Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Citizens have the right to contest laws that are unjust, unreasonable or unconstitutional. Without that right we would still be living with Jim Crow laws, school discrimination and many other wrongs that have been righted in the past. Unfortunately in Gulfport, citizens that exercise that right are persecuted by the political and governmental powers.
CJ
11:53 pm on Thursday, February 9, 2012
This has been a great thread..at least we are being civil and not trying to ruin each others lives and reputations. When blogs are done this way, the polititians that read them can draw from them ''what they individually want to'' in order to help them determine how best to serve the people. They may read points of views they never considered. A good polititians will be willing to bend and flow with his ideas to better serve. I feel Mr Hastings has shown he is willing to fight for things he feels the people want..not just what he may personally want. It must be difficult for him to so strongly support the bans, knowing he may have many friends (or himself..I don't know if he smoes or not..he might) who smokes. I have been very impressed with the dignified way he has supported the ban. He has doen it without speaking badly about smokers, but focuses on the bad thing about tobbaco ..and of course..the inevitible litter that goes along with it.
Cherlene Willis
10:23 am on Friday, February 10, 2012
As the Editor of Gulfport Patch, I greatly appreciate the arguments that are being presented on the site. Thank you all for stating your opinions in a professional manner.
Mark L Grantham
4:16 pm on Sunday, February 12, 2012
personally, I find the ban on smoking that the city of Gulfport has, is a wonderful and long overdue idea. An individual does not have the right to light up while in the presence of others, it is a privilege not a right. if an individual desires to smoke, a few paces to a designated area is not a problem, to me.
I find it a tad bit arrogant on the part of a smoker to feel that blowing smoke in the face of others a Personal right, a Civil Liberty. There are already bans on alcoholic beverages, dogs and fires, these are not only nuisances they are public safety issues.
one is hopefully also considerate of others, part of this consideration is "doing the next best thing", and to me, this is definitely not ignoring a ban, in most cases, these are there for our safety.
Jonik
3:28 pm on Tuesday, February 14, 2012
This No Tobacco law could be used to expose the fraud of the anti-smoking crusade. Any number of cigarettes may not contain a shred of tobacco. They may be made entirely in US Patented ways from many kinds of industrial waste cellulose with flavorings, colors, scents and uniform shots of nicotine added. Patents cover the use of wood chips, paper, corn cobs, coffee bean hulls, etc. Patents are under the heading, "tobacco substitute material". One cannot get dreaded Tobacco Smoke from that.
Since the laws are based on "harms of tobacco smoke", there is no health justification for banning the fake tobacco products. No law requires labeling of this stuff. Officials even collect "tobacco taxes" on non-tobacco concoctions, shops that sell them are called "tobacco shops" and manufacturers are called "Big Tobacco".
Even if a cigarette is based on actual tobacco, generally it's not nice golden leaves but, instead, a form of paper (reconstituted tobacco) made from pesticide-contaminated, possibly radiation-contaminated, tobacco roots, stems, twigs, veins, dust and sweepings, with any selection of untested often toxic additives. To call that "tobacco" is a stretch, possibly perjury if said under oath.
Once this cigarette ingredients scandal is raised, the whole anti-tobacco deal may collapse. Worth a try.
Jonik
3:39 pm on Tuesday, February 14, 2012
Search up "Fauxbacco" for ample references about what a cigarette really is. It's Required Reading in order to discuss the issue properly.
The "anti smoking" (anti the behavior of the victims) campaign is about protecting the cigarette industry (incl ingredients suppliers) from massive PR damage, liability suits and even criminal charges. The campaign is not as wholesome as it is disguised. It cannot be wholesome and healthy if it allows the continued use of some of the worst industrial substances in the products, denies consumers information and specific warnings, and denies harmed, defrauded consumers their rights to compensation.
The laws are based on health claims about tobacco, but, apparently, no studies have yet been presented about the harms of plain, uncontaminated, tobacco. The word "tobacco" is never qualified, a necessity in matters of medicine, science, and law. Mother Nature's tobacco plant is being convicted without a trial.
CJ
3:55 pm on Tuesday, February 14, 2012
I think Cheech and Chong would say that is really far out, man...
I get the impression you have tobbaco leaves ground up and use it on your food like pepper. I am impressed by how much you believe in what you say. It's hard to fault what you say when it is obviouse you beleive all you say. I wouldn't know where to end and begin replying back, other than to say that it's a free world and you can believe what you want. I suppose in some cultures tobacco is even an important part of religion. Here in Flordia and St Pete/Gulfport..most keep it less dramatic than all that. I think most people, despite these fantastics ''facts'' of yours, still despise how much litter and nastiness is caused by tobacco...although..I remember few replies on this topic ove the last few months, more interesting than yours.