This ban is long overdue. As a cyclist, and especially a runner, I resent how virtually every time I run along the seawall or at a city park (particularly the former) I am forced to run through clouds of smoke, or behind the trail of wafting smoke from smokers walking ahead of me. But what I find really troubling is the seemingly increased number of people developing rather severe allergies to cigarette smoke who are prohibited from outdoor spaces that may contain cigarette smoke. I know two healthy active children, and another similar adult, (all unrelated) who have such severe reactions that they develop asthma-attack-like symptoms with very little exposure to second hand smoke. Why should they be banned from beaches, parks, and other public places?

I think this is going too far, and I don't even smoke.

I do not smoke cigarettes or marijuana or anything and this law really bothers me.

Either make smoking illegal or don't. This is really too much. We supposedly live in a free country where the minimal amount of restrictions are placed on individuals' behavior.

I do not think that smoking in parks is an action that justifies the enactment of restrictions. In these areas -wide open spaces where it is often windy- how bad can the effects of second-hand smoke be on third parties? Is there a sufficiently-negative effect on others that justifies the restriction of a legal act?

In Canada, smokers are tax-paying, law-abiding citizens. And it is my opinion that this law unjustifiably limits their freedom.

Kendra L, you are not morally superior because you run and bike. It would be unfair for me to stop you from pursuing your reasonable hobbies, as it would be unfair to stop a smoker from smoking in a very open area. It's only too bad our paths cross, but that's the magic of a busy urban environment.

"legal" does not mean you can do whatever you want, whereever you want, affecting whoever you want.
If a smoker's addiction is so bad they can't handle a healthy hour or two on the beach, then they can use a patch or gum for their nicotine hit.

You just watch, they'll ban tobacco at the beach, then a few months later open a beachfront Insite for the junkies.

Please! Ban cigarettes already, so the government will build nice smoking lounges. Also, if we banned smokes outright, the quality would go up, the price would go down, they'd be available for delivery any time of the day, and due to the lack of taxes I wouldn't be funding the war in Afghanistan everytime I light up.

The evidence is also overwhelming against fast food and the mountains of debris it generates. I don't see the Parks board banning fatty unhealthy foods from their licensed concession stands. Then again, if they could generate revenue from smokers, I bet they wouldn't be banning smoking either.

This is a ridiculous ban. Don't get me wrong, I despise smoking and the tobacco industry, but that's my choice, and others may have better things to do than to live a natural lifespan free of cancer. They may prefer looking cool, having no money, being short-winded, and not being able to taste their food. Why not let them have the choice?

The proposed smoking bylaw does not stop people from smoking, but it does limit where they can smoke so that people are not involuntarily exposed to second-hand smoke (SHS). SHS is not a nuisance to be tolerated simply because it is occurring outdoors. Researcher James Repace, an internationally recognized second-hand smoke physicist, has concluded that second-hand smoke in many outdoor situations does not dissipate as quickly or readily as most people believe.

The US Surgeon General’s 2006 report on second-hand smoke, states that there is no safe exposure to cigarette smoke and even brief exposure can cause harm. Further, in 2006, the State of California added second-hand smoke to its toxic air contaminant list, putting it in the same category as the most toxic automotive and industrial air pollutants. Over fifty cancer-causing chemicals have been found in second-hand smoke, including arsenic, cadmium, benzene and vinyl chloride.

Clearly everyone is at risk from being exposed to SHS, but it is especially hazardous for those who suffer from chronic health conditions such as heart disease, asthma, allergies, diabetes, and respiratory illnesses. Children and infants are especially vulnerable to SHS exposure, which is known to increase the risk of health problems including bronchitis, pneumonia, ear infections and can cause children with asthma to suffer more frequent and severe attacks.

While people who smoke choose to accept the risks associated with smoking, they do not have the right to require that others share in those risks, even in indoor environments. That is why we fully support the smoke-free bylaw. www.cleanaircoalitionbc.com

I, for one, welcome the idea of cigarettebutt-free beaches. I've always hated how smokers would litter Kits beach and English bay, making them feel more like landfills than world-class beaches. Although, I doubt how well this will ever be enforced. Still. Smokers, get over yourselves.