French minister wants tobacco-free parks, beaches

Let's all sing a chorus of "Nanny-State Authoritarianism" together.

Oh, I forgot, that song has yet to be written but we can say that "Kumbaya" would be inappropriate in a Nanny-State Authoritarian society.  How about we all take up chewing tobacco and spitting on the streets of Paris when we visit France. 

What I find more interesting is that all of the "secondhand" smoke illness statistics I've every read, when we follow the linkages for the statistical studies, have been based upon a 1991 study on smoking that was discredited by the scientific community based upon peer review. Basically the statistics are an extrapolation of a lie. 

If we really address the issue of secondhand smoke it's because some people don't like the smell and not because there's scientific evidence that secondhand smoke actually causes illness. Now I can understand people not liking the smell of secondhand smoke but it would be nice if people were actually honest about it.   

So let me get this right, you support a smoking ban because it is smelly and there are butts on the floor .. ok

I know lets ban fast-food places as well, they stink and the litter is all over the place, they also cause obesity which can lead to diabetes, and heart disease .. that would include your Chili's as well.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23515135

The problem is that smokers gradually become more and more publicly vilified, but the activity is not (yet!) illegal, so they should be free to do it. The pub smoking ban in the UK was far more draconian than was ever necessary - there could have been provision for indoor smoking areas or smoking rooms allowed, with enforced ventilation and air quality standards, and so on. Now French ministers are talking about “general mobilisation against tobacco” and banning people from smoking outside as well, and it's only a matter of time before more countries follow the same line - it's getting ridiculous.

Now I certainly take the point about mess around doorways and so on, but the reason for that is that people can't smoke anywhere once they go through the doors, and remedies for it can be as simple as decent provision of ashtrays and covered outside areas where smokers can go in the rain. It's as if persecution against smoking and smokers is acceptable, though - all they are doing is exercising their legal right to choose to smoke. what's next - banning eating of food containing garlic indoors (and in French parks) in case someone finds the smell 'offensive'?!

I'm from the UK and drive a dual fuel car (Petrol (gasoline)  and electric), and as the other comment points out smoking in the open air has no effect on anyone but the person doing it. There is also the cost application, I don't know the figures for the US but in the UK smoking achieves something around £9 billion pounds income for the government in taxes etc, smokers cost our National Health Service around £8 Billion a year, add to that-that smokers tend to live shorter lives and you also have the savings on pensions etc. Obesity costs the NHS around £4 Billion a year with little to no income gained by the government because of it.

I understand, though do not agree, with the ban on smoking in clubs, bars etc there are ample ways to remove smoke from the area concerned and if the workforce have objections then perhaps they should seek employment in an area that would not bring them into contact with smokers in the first place.

Alcohol is another item that seems to be basically ignored, it has a far greater impact than any other substance, in fact alcohol is the third leading cause of disease burden in developed countries.