Proposed beach smoking ban has no place in L.A.

Alluding to your own columns is cheesy but, honestly, when did
California become as strict as Singapore (see my Oct. 2 column
“Return of bar-top dancing not worth armed guards in
schools)?

As many know, the Los Angeles City Council wishes to extend its
moral crusade by banning smoking on beaches ““ maintaining
that cigarette butts account for a substantial portion of beach
litter. I’m no smoker, but in light of pre-existing
anti-smoking measures and the recent banning of lap dances,
it’s time to call an end to this puritanical madness.

“There is absolutely no excuse for leaving cigarette butts
on the beach. If it takes a law to stop it, then so be it,”
said Jack Weiss, the city councilman who is spearheading the
campaign.

Weiss doesn’t seem to realize that such laws are already
in place. It’s never been legal to discard one’s butts
on the beach. Even if city council approves the no-smoking ban,
what about the tons of other trash on L.A. beaches? Would Weiss
have us ban eating and drinking at the beach as well? As an Oct. 20
editorial in the L.A. Times points out, it has never been legal to
discard dirty diapers, empty soda cans and potato chip bags.

It makes me wonder how Councilman Weiss thinks we can possibly
enforce a beach-wide smoking ban. The city has a difficult enough
time enforcing existing litter laws. Outlawing smoking won’t
make it any easier for law enforcement agents to do their jobs.

In a letter to the Times, Weiss attempts to refute this
argument, citing the proposals to ban smoking in restaurants, bars
and clubs. He claims that these laws successfully avoided
“enforcement headaches.”

Weiss is comparing apples and oranges. The restaurant smoking
ban was successful because proprietors abidingly followed the rules
for fear of violating fire and health codes, which could result in
heavy fines or even having their licenses revoked. The bottom line
is that every restaurant wants to stay open for business.
Additionally, the dangers of second-hand smoke to restaurant
employees was a real concern.

The beach is a different story. It is public land, it is open
air, and it is expansive. Nobody at the beach will tell you
“no shirt, no shoes, no service.”

Whereas previous smoking ordinances worked because they forced a
multitude of business-owners to abide for their own self-interest,
a beach-wide smoking ban would have no such advantage. Further,
there is no legitimate argument regarding the danger of occasional
wafts of second-hand smoke on a beach.

Ultimately, despite any given rationale, Weiss has beef with
smoking. I don’t know if he merely finds it a public nuisance
or if he is interested in public health. If it is the first, then
call it what it is. Don’t try and achieve your ends using
misdirected means.

If Weiss is attempting, however, to legislate behavior and save
all the poor smokers from themselves, then give it up. While a
noble cause, I don’t think there’s anyone out there who
isn’t already fully aware of the dangers of smoking. Yet,
millions of adults continue to smoke anyway. This is their right as
adults in a free country and it should continue to be. Weiss has no
place dictating attitudes and morality.

This goes for the city-council’s lap dance ban as well.
The council shouldn’t waste time and resources regulating
behavior when there are budgets to balance, schools to repair, and
felons to deter. Why hassle lonely men, tax-paying strippers and
future cancer patients then?

Probably because it’s a lot easier.

Dang is a third-year business student. E-mail him at
[email protected].