Aside from a chivalrous moment, no one is forced to smoke cigarettes. Similarly, no one is forced to be around smokers. But a lawmaker in New York City seeks to outlaw cigarette puffers whose smoke he feels invades the sidewalk flow (and lungs) of non-smoking pedestrians.
Democrat NYC Councilman Peter Koo wrote legislation seeking to curb pedestrians “smoking while walking” in public. Michael Bloomberg, NYC’s former Democratic mayor, outlawed smoking in the city’s public venues in 2011. As is mostly the case nationwide, smoking in bars and restaurants is unlawful.
If New York City Council passes Koo’s legislation, violation penalties equate to a criminal misdemeanor charge and a $50. fine for each offense. As written, Mr. Koo feels his city ordinance does not infringe on the civil rights of folks (smokers) since it is not banning smoking entirely, only in public.
The gist of the legislation‘s language is as follows:
Section 1. Section 17-503 of the administrative code of the city of New York is amended by adding new subdivision “e” to read as follows:
e. Smoking is prohibited while walking on all sidewalks under the jurisdiction of the department of transportation and any of the following locations under the jurisdiction of the department of parks and recreation:
1. The sidewalks immediately adjoining parks, squares and public places;
2. Any pedestrian route through any park strip, median or mall that is adjacent to vehicular traffic;
3. Parking lots.
§ 2. This local law takes effect 120 days after it becomes law, except that the commissioner may take such actions as are necessary to implement this local law, including the promulgation of rules, before such date.
In a Fox5 News interview, Councilman Koo summed-up his law in one line, saying, “My bill is very simple, no smoking and walking on New York City sidewalks.” Deviators who smoke may simply walk in the streets, but that implies violating jaywalking laws. And, if smoking while walking legally between the painted street-crossing demarcation lines, would that be a future amendment to Koo’s law?
Using CountyHealthRankings.org tabulations that approximately 1-in-5 Americans is a smoker, we can say that roughly 1.7 million of New York City’s 8.5 million population burns a tobacco stick during their day. Assuming none are hermits, that places 1.7 million freely-walking cigarette smokers among the roughly 35,000 sworn NYPD police officers whose enforcement rigors are already stretched tautly. Anti-terrorism strategies consume plenty of resources and require acute attention. Personal responsibility and self-governance with regards to both smokers and non-puffers would go a long way, preserving police resources for more immediately-threatening problems.
In a written statement by Koo, he explained his position this way: “In a perfect world, every smoker would have the self-awareness to realize that smoking and walking down a crowded sidewalk subjects everyone behind you to breathing in the fumes. Unfortunately, we’ve all had the experience of getting stuck behind a smoker while walking down a crowded city sidewalk. If you want to smoke, stand off to the side. People can easily walk past you. But if you’re smoking and walking down the sidewalk, you’re forcing the people behind you to breathe it in.”
Cop Optics
In every automobile, there’s a thing called an ashtray. It is not a coin-box. It is not a Tic-Tac dispenser. It is an ashtray designed for ashes and cigarette butts. Conversely, asphalt roadways are paved for the motor vehicles in which those ashtrays can be easily found. That equates to disposing of cigarettes in the car’s ashtray and not carelessly on the roadway.
In Florida, it is a littering violation if any motorist tosses an extinguished cigarette out the window, even though the ashtray is situated for easy disposal. However, if that cigarette tossed out of a car window is lit (“flammable” as per the state statute), it is classified as a misdemeanor and a mandatory court appearance. It gets extremely hot in Florida. Therefore, the sunshine state endures dry temps and drought. The law was expressly written to address the highly-flammable tinder along roadways which will surely ignite from a lit cig flicked by a driver/passenger. You get the point.
Did I enforce such a law? Yes. It was a matter threatening nature and potential peril to humans, should dry grass engulf from an otherwise preventable ignition source: cigarettes. I learned that cops who enforce these traffic-oriented statutes are called “tar guards.” I assume that as a badge of honor. Although I am not Smokey the Bear, my job dictated public safety. And if I could also keep brothers/sisters at the firehouse safe and sound, that is all the more reason.
With the aforementioned example for comparison’s sake, is banning smoking while walking a public safety issue or a public health concern which must be outlawed? Is enforcement by police realistic or just blowing smoke (resources) whereby other measures are more suited?
Fox5 News reporters spoke to New Yorkers traversing city streets, polling their feelings about Koo’s bill. One man’s point is, “Well, it would be incredibly difficult to enforce and it would tie-up police time for something that I think is probably better spent elsewhere.” Keep in mind, a few years ago, NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio launched legal maneuvers to ban smoking in homes, namely apartment buildings scattered throughout the Big Apple’s five boroughs (counties). Naturally, it didn’t fly…but if it did, how would the NYPD possibly address those violations?
De Blasio’s overreach perhaps stemmed from his successful ban of smoking in NYC’s public parks, in his mind the impetus for banning cig-toking in residences. World-renowned Central Park is an enormous and beautiful plot of public parkland, and smoking is prohibited within its periphery walls/fences. If Koo’s legislation gets the thumbs-up, the sidewalks would be a no-go zone for cigarette smokers, too.
“Marco,” another man who happened to be smoking while walking as Fox News reporters approached him, said “No, I don’t mind the idea. I think walking…who’s behind me is getting my second-hand smoke without being able to do anything about it because you’re walking behind a smoker. But if I’m in a corner smoking my cigarette and you wanna stand by me…then [he shrugs] it’s up to you.”
Piggybacking on Marco’s perspective, Councilman Koo explained his reasoning from a personal nature: “It has happened to me many times—I’m walking behind someone who’s smoking, and I’m suffering for five or ten minutes.” As a non-smoking cancer patient, I’m annoyed by it too but, like anyone else, I can see/smell cigarette smoke and employ evasive maneuvers. If you can’t move because there are too many people congesting the area, I certainly wonder where you are. No one has to stand/walk there and inhale, thereafter “suffering for five or ten minutes.”
Further, Mr. Koo’s legislation defines “walking” versus a pedestrian smoking while standing still. Thus he pared it down to mobility and the cigarette smoke wafting backward in the airspace of other pedestrians in a public place. Although I have no intention to argue the travails of smoking and non-smokers being around cigarette consumers, what is next? Outlawing standing still (blocking) sidewalks in public places so puffers can comply with Koo’s ordinance? In effect, Mr. Koo’s law would potentially create such a woeful bottleneck.
It would also seem a seasonal law: NYC’s cold climate and windy months make Koo’s No Smoking While Walking law a moot point, since Mother Nature breezes by pretty heavily. The recent series of nor’ easters are prime examples. No cigarette smoke swirls are ever permitted by nature.
Councilman Koo elucidated his sentiments about any suggestion of civil rights violations, saying subtly, “This bill is not against smoking, just don’t do both together.”
There are plenty of laws on the books in cities and states, defaulting myriad responsibilities to law enforcement hands. If this comes to pass, so be it. But even a little personal responsibility and consideration for others can alleviate health hazards for those who opt for fresh air and carcinogen-free lungs, and not lump another law on the thick justice books.
Can you get your lung’s behind such a law in your area? If it passes, wouldn’t a civil infraction suffice over a criminal charge for violating such a law? Can we respect public meanderings without statutes to govern/punish others’ choices?
