I am not a smoker, bit I find this bill not only a waste of legislators time and the states money, but a rediculous and practically unenforceable law. Time is better spent at working towards reducing the tax burden, not creating more bullcrap laws that don't benefit many people.

How much is this going to cost us?

I haven't smoked in years but I think this is stupid. Leave the smokers alone. The only one who believes that is a hazard would also believe in Homeopathic medicine and the Easter Bunny. Let science decide not some attention starved nutcase representative.

You think a smoker may sneek a puff in the woods and start a big fire? I would be more worried about air quality from a big forest fire than a old lady puffing on a park bench.

The only thing I absolutely hate about people that smoke in these places is the filters they leave around everywhere on the ground, in the sand and the grass. I don't think that getting second hand smoke is much of a hazard when people will be smoking outside in a large area...maybe they can just put up more trash receptacles specifically for the cigarette butts?

WHAT- how do you get second hand smoke on a beach what about chimneys gonna ban them next i give up peace

I'm not a smoker but the story quotes Senator Nutting as saying it would "make everyone's beach experience more enjoyable." Not true. The SMOKERS beach experience would not be more enjoyable simply because they can't smoke. We really need to demand that our politicians start working for their constituants best interests instead of simply coming up with idiotic ideas just for the sole purpose of "something to do."

If tobacco doesn't kill the smokers then the taxes will. Give these people a break for crying out loud! Jeepers, the next thing you know, these idiot politicians are going to consider giving gays the ability to marry. Oops, did I say that?

maybe this is about all the cigarette buts you find all over the beaches than the actual smoke.

Clean up your act, deadbeats!

Keep from smoking on the beach! Try being next to a person who is on the beach and smoke is coming right at you. Most smokers have no common sense about where they smoke outside and who they are by. Ban it on beaches.

I don't smoke but this is all a bunch of crap. They can't smoke at work, in a restaurant, IN THEIR CAR, now outside too. Why not just shoot them all, line them up and just blow their smoking butts off the face of the earth

I have been a smoker of a pack a day for 16 years. Recently I have decided to set a "quit date". To all of you thinking "Good!", yeah whatever. I am not quitting because I WANT to, I am quitting because the government and all the non-smokers of the world have FORCED me to. To be an adult and have to be told when and where to smoke has become to much BS for me. Additionally paying as much tax as there is on a pack of cigarettes just to have the money go to programs that teach my 5 year old child that his mom "does drugs" by the school system fuels the fire for my reasons to quit. I agree that it is not very appetizing when you are eating and smoke is swirling around you, I also agree that there are far too many people who throw there cigarette butts on the ground creating excess litter, all of these things are good reasons for bills and laws etc. However, where does the "picking on smokers" stop? Why is it that the government is able to make these choices without a VOTE from the people?

I don't smoke and support the non-smoking laws in stores/restaurants/bars etc but outside? Really? If that smoke from the guy next to you on the beach bothers you so bad....MOVE....upwind...and you'll be fine. That is what I do as a non-smoker. Yes, butts in the sand are gross, but so is all the other trash left on the beach, not to mention what washes up on shore from the water. If they are going to ban it on beacheswhy stop there- they should just ban it in every area of the state parks period. I mean, when you hike behind someone smoking on a trail you can smell it. Post big non-smoking signs at the entrances and call it good. Then bring on more park rangers to enforce it. Don't worry, we can just raise taxes on soda, wine, and beer to pay their salaries. I mean, what the hell is going to be next? I heard the "dark skies" BS bill passed and is awaiting the Gov's signature.........

GET OVER IT.

I smoke and support banning smoking in public. Also, homosexuallity should be banned in public too.

Mattecamp I have never seen homosexuallity in public? Do you mean someone YOU consider to be a homosexual should be banned from walking down the street, shopping etc? Are you a homophobe or just a moron?

Diana22, although we appreciate your constructive criticism , it would be interesting how you would “GET OVER IT” if you were affected by this… Too many people have already been made to just accept bills/laws that have not been decided by the people of America.

I think we should ban gov't officials

I think mattecamp means gays playing tonsel hockey should be banned from public......

This bill if becomes law is totally outrageos. Come on whats next. Plus whom is going to actually enforce the law?

I think mattecamp means gays stuffing their protein poles down one anothers grocery holes should be banned from public......

An emergency measure??? Are you kidding me???? I understand not smoking in enclosed places, but on the beach or other outdoor public places? I am not a smoker, but I think that this is starting to get ridiculous! It's just one more step that the state is trying to take to ban smoking in this state altogether. There comes a time when "protecting the rights of others to not have to be around smoke" steps on the rights of the smoker to take a puff! Where does it end?

Excuse me, but i just blinked and my legislators got stupider - i don't even smoke and i think its time to leave the smokers alone! blink! I am sure that soon we'll be told when and where to eat and what to drink. blink! they wanna tax my bottled water. blink! It won't be long until they tell me how sick i can get and who i can go to get that treated. blink! they are working on owning my bank - they have no problem wasting my honestly earned money. blink! they are OK with new definitions of marriage. blink! and really don't care that don't have a whole lot of money left that i send to them. blink! Perhaps, if we all blink enough, they'll be gone. blink! blink! blink! Cr@p, they're still there!

I suppose one could say that it is gross when young children pick up cigaretter butts on the beach and in the sand, but of course they can pick them up anywhere....all over sidewalks,etc. I wish people would not be so careless with their cigarette butts.....then this would not be the issue it is.

I am not sure about making it a law, though.

All I know is, as a non-smoker and someones who takes care of my health and values life, I do not wish to be exposed to second-hand smoke anymore than possible. I don't want lung cancer. I can't understand anyone smoking and significantly increasing their chances of getting cancer. Just ask actor Patrick Swayze who is dying a horrible death of pancreatic cancer. He has always been a heavy smoker and says he would sure not have smoked if he had it to do over again.

But as for making it a law to not smoke on beaches...it seems like maybe another solution could be found.

the politicians who make up these crazy bills need to be smoked out of office...come on now, what's next...banning sun tan oil because it smells like coconuts! It's getting to the point that you can buy'em, but can't smoke'em, unless your in a closet.

Maine + Democrats = Massachusetts! We are all done for !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Smokers think the world is their ashtray, especially a nice big sandy beach!

Now the state will have to spend money they don't have on signs and enforcement. I am going to smoke on the beach, fine me if you can catch me.

Your odds of being injured or killed in a car accident on your way to the beach are orders of magnitude higher than being harmed by smoke in the air. I've never seen any compelling evidence that outdoor second hand smoke is dangerous, and the evidence about indoor smoke is shaky. Think about it: most smokers happily puff away for 30, 40 or more years before suffering any serious ill effects. Yet a faint whiff of smoke is supposed to be so bad for you. Give me a break!

They spin the numbers to make it sound bad: saying for example that if someone walks into a smoky room their risk of having a heart attack doubles. Sounds scary until you think about how slim the odds are that anyone will have a heart attack in a particular moment in time. Practically nil times two is still practically nil. What they won't do is tell you how many people actually die from walking into a smoky room. The number is so small it wouldn't scare anybody. And, like the 35,000 flu victims who die each year, most of those making up that small number probably have other health issues.

scottcom36:

That is the most delusional "cop-out" I have read on the subject. There is scientific and medical evidence of the ill-effects of smoking and second hand smoke. Boy, what rationalization!! And then to compare the risk of getting lung cancer with the risk of having a heart attack when walking into a smoky room! You are very unconvincing. I will stick with what has been learned about the risks of second hand smoke. I do not obsess about it, but am not going to be unaware and uneducated on the subject either.

Keep your head in the sand, if you wish. I am quite sure you are a smoker and one that sounds very unconcerned about possible consequences to others. If you want to risk your health, that is your right. But I am unwilling to let you risk mine or others.

Give me a break!

Actually I am fascinated by risk, by how people respond to their addictions, and by how statistics can be manipulated. For instance, I assume you'd trust the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center as a reliable source: http://www.mskcc.org/mskcc/html/12463.cfm

They have a lung cancer risk calculator that states that a 70 year old man who smoked two packs a day for 55 years has a 13% chance of developing lung cancer in the next ten years if he doesn't smoke any more, 18% if he keeps puffing away. Now,while that is still a high risk for a mostly preventable illness, the risk is considerably lower than even most smokers would guess. It's hard to believe, but six out of seven men who smoke two packs a day for 65 years WONT get lung cancer. Actually smokers face a greater danger from heart disease than from lung cancer. And of course smoking raises the risk for other cancers, even some outside the mouth/throat areas. This isn't to say that smoking isn't bad for you or that people shouldn't try to quit, only to say that once you become educated and aware of an issue you often find that things aren't exactly as most people think they are, or want you to think they are.

Some seemingly contradictory statistics I've read:

1) Around 85% of lung cancer cases occur in smokers.

2) Around 60% of lung cancer cases occur in people who never smoked or haven't smoked in at least 20 years.

3) At 15 years after becoming smoke-free the risk of death returns to nearly the level of people who have never smoked

I'm not sure if these three can all be true at the same time or if they can be reconciled somehow.

scottcom36:

Thanks for the information. But you still could not pay me any amount of money to smoke. Cigarettes are not called "cancer sticks" for nothing. I think actor Patrick Swayzee is right to speak out against people starting to smoke.

If I was a smoker, I guess I would want to grab onto whatever information "minimizes" any risks as well. I believe it is cold comfort, however.

I should have said I'm fascinated by how people perceive risk. I'm not attracted to risk itself, and I don't go bungee jumping or parachuting out of airplanes...

scottcam36:

There is a lot of information out there, many times conflicting. However, I know of a lot of real people who smoked and suffered from emphysema,etc. and did not have good outcomes.

Yes, I have read more than once that one can almost reverse their risk of contacting cancer if they quit smoking.

That 60% statistic is nothing I have ever read. It was more like 15 to 20%. That 60% statistic is not at all believable from all that I have read. Once again, though... I guess if I were a smoker (never was), I would want to grab onto such a statistic. But I think it is kind of foolhardy, and as I said, very cold comfort. Russian roulette.

scottcom36:

Me neither! re 7:56 PM

Perhaps the Public Health authorities would be more successful in their mission if they strove for accuracy and realism rather than trying to spin the numbers as hard as they can. Unfortunately a certain number of people will sense the spinning that's going on and be turned off by itThey will miss the important point being made, to their detriment.

I'ts certainly possible to be honest about the risks of smoking and make the point that it's dangerous and that people really shouldn't do it.

this is ridiculous-smokers are being punished way too much-cant smoke anyplace basically but your own home-does anyone realize how many taxes smokers in maine pay-approximately $4.00 per pack-most smokers smoke 1-2 packs per day-thats alot of taxes-methodone treatments cost mainers taxes-alcohol cost mainers taxes(road-blocks-awareness, etc) but yet it is the smokers that get picked on

Yes, that makes quite a bit of sense. 8:05 PM.

The 85% statistic is of long standing.

I read the 60% statistic more recently, but I don't know where. I do recall reading in the Wall Street Journal that lung cancer rates among never-smokers and smokers who'd quit more than 20 years earlier are rising.

and you will be jailed if you try to get onto the beach without paying first!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Maine hospitality!!!!!!!!!

scottcom36:

That's interesting...what you read in the Wall Street Journal. I heard something similar to that too. It used to be that the advice was if one quit, they could reverse quite a lot of the damage. Maybe that 60% statistic refers more to the latter than the never-smokers. I will tell you....it bothers me when, for instance, a building (apt, etc.) is designated a no-smoking bldg, and yet some people completely ignore the rule. Not fair!

Kateindfcity is right, ground butts are gross. I smoke, and I do all, (aside from not smoking) that I can do to keep my smoke from non-smokers. But I am grossed out at any litter, butts or otherwise. If you see me in a store, I more than likely reak of tobbacco, (and my wife complains) but ill bet ive got at least 2 cigarrette butts in my pocket!

Im a vegetarian, no more barbeques on the beach....

coldbarnocker:

Good comments.

re 8:36 PM....funny!

I was born and bred in Maine, now every time I visit especially in late fall, during the winter months and/or early spring, I honestly can't wait to leave, the smoke coming out of just about everyone's chimney is enough to kill a horse, yet no one's address that issue!

I now live in the City of Virginia Beach, VA. We get more tourists in a week or two alone than Maine gets ALL summer long...believe it...!!! Smoking is NOT banned here yet we have just about the cleanest beaches around!!!!!!! Tourists come here from all over the world and most can't wait to come back again and again! Some of you say "oh them damn smokers are just about the most inconsiderate people ever" NOT true!! Smokers are considerate and most will move or position themselves down wind when they can.

Maybe...just maybe, Sen. John Nutting needs to start paying attention to the real problems in Maine instead of chasing everyone away with this most stupid law!!! I have faith that your Gov. John Baldacci will NOT sign this ridiculous bill!!

Smoking should be illegal,it's bad for you.

Politians should be illegal, they're bad for me too.

And, I think Baldachi will sign it. Gotta keep them tree huggers happy, don't you know

alces247: So is electing idiots to office, but no one has made that illegal!

scottcom36 says, "Your odds of being injured or killed in a car accident on your way to the beach are orders of magnitude higher than being harmed by smoke in the air. " PLEASE retract this or we will be legislated to stay home - so that we will not be harmed getting to the beach!

I once took my young son to Old Orchard and he was seriously traumatized by all the fat, hirsuite tourists in small bikinis and speedos. Can I get an "Amen" for banning the overweight and hairy from the beach, or maybe just a law dictating what they should be allowed to wear. After all, it is my right as an American not to be inconvenienced by anyone else. That must be so, all of these idiotic laws seem to prove the point.

The funny thing about these laws is that they've done studies showing that for at least some beaches most of the butts are caused by smoking bans in nearby cities. The smokers are thrown out to the sidewalks, drop their butts on the ground, and they get swept into storm sewers and then back up onto the beaches. , - . - .

If you **REALLY** wanted to reduce the butts on the beaches the best way to do it might be to get rid of the government imposed smoking ban. For some strange reason though, the people screaming the loudest for "emergency measures" to ban smoking on beaches aren't at all interested in solving the problem by relaxing the ban in bars. Why? Because the reasons for the bans are based on lies: they have nothing to do with litter or with secondhand smoke and everything to do with their "DeNormalization" campaign to reduce smoking by making it socially unacceptable. Is that what America is supposed to be about? . - . - .

Michael J. McFadden,

Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"

Sen. John NUTting---isn't this the same guy who proposed a bill requiring BICYCLES to stop for a school bus with it's lights flashing?

Why do the people of his district keep electing him? Sheesh! After the other democrat NUT from Winterport proposed a 'butt bill' several years ago requiring a 5 cent deposit per cigarette butt, we rode him out of town on a rail!

What a great place to live. First they tax the smoker's to death to make up for their shortcomings, then they ban them from smoking anywhere. How stupid is that? Maybe soon they can come into your house to make sure you're not sneaking a butt someone in your dwelling that YOU own.

You idiot nannys that are so concerned about butts should be more concerned about kids playing in sand where some mutt urinated or crapped a few hours before you got there...IDIOTS...LOL....

Ridiculous waste of time. The acid rain is gone??

Can ANYBODY even AFFORD to buy cigarettes anymore?!

I never smoked, and I don't like the smell of smoke, but I do find this to be extreme. I was happy to hear that smoking was no longer allowed in restaurants, but come on... on the beaches? It's not about the butts left all over either because there is plenty of NON CIGARETTE trash all over the beach.

Perhaps the authorities should enforce the litter law a bit more. This may help.