Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Friday, Feb. 25, 2011 | 11:13 a.m.
Sun Coverage
CARSON CITY – A bill that would ban smoking on all university and community college campuses in Nevada ran into questioning from the Assembly Judiciary Committee today.
The measure, Assembly Bill 128, was sponsored by Assemblyman Paul Aizley, a retired UNLV professor, who told the committee, “I want to walk through a smoke-free campus.”
He was backed by health officials and some faculty members.
Assemblyman William Horne, D-Las Vegas, the chairman of the committee and a non-smoker, said he would “like to see some compromise.” He said most of the students were adults and could make their own decisions on smoking. He said there could be designated smoking areas.
Assemblyman Mark Sherwood, R-Las Vegas, questioned if there was another way the goal could be accomplished.
Aizley’s bill, as amended, would prohibit smoking on any property or campus owned or occupied by the Nevada System of Higher Education. It would be enforced by university police and the penalty would be a misdemeanor.
There were suggestions that smoking be allowed in parking lots or inside vehicles.
Jim Richardson, representing the Nevada Faculty Alliance, said a ban on smoking within 25 feet of a building wasn't being enforced. He told the committee he has had to go through “a cloud of smoke” when entering a building.
Health officials testified there were already 466 smoke-free university campuses in the nation and they cited the dangers of second-hand smoke.
The committee didn't take action.
I'm a student at UNLV and I agree the current regulations aren't being enforced. Almost everyday I walk by someone smoking right outside one of the buildings, or have to breath smoke as I walk across campus to my next class because someone in front of me is smoking.
I don't like the idea of reducing civil liberties, but in the case that a minority of smokers can affect the health or happiness of the majority of students, I think it's justified. Almost every other state or city run area has either no smoking or designated smoking areas (ie the airport, stadiums, etc). I think it's time the college campus follows suit.
Obviously these ancients haven't been on a college campus since before WWI. At CSN the distance is 100 feet from a building. Believe me, security there strictly enforces that. "Hazes of smoke"??? What you are seeing is the pollution in the air in Las Vegas. Aizley needs a stronger eye glass prescrption! It's amazing to me that he has nothing to contribute other than this.
enforce the current rules. how about you do that? If you are outdoors, you should be able to smoke.
That means more security to enforce the non-smoking policy in the parking lots and sidewalks as well the entire proposed arena complex area. Good luck with that!
The state is in a financial meltdown and the legislature will be discussing shutting down universities and colleges and some people are whining that campus police (who are probably on the block to be eliminated despite nationwide campus shootings) should be posted to enforce "no smoking" regulations which most people already observe.
No loss of perpective with these whiny folks at all.
Could the legislature please skip the fluffy nonsense and get to the real business of trying to save the state?
I'm a smoker and I think it's a good idea and sets an example for the students.
@PGelsman
I as a ex-smoker would like to thank you for your comment it is a honorable one I too felt the same way while I still had the habit, Most people have gotten to were they simply cannot disagree with someone with out demonizing the other side, I applaud you.
Why is the LV trip any different then any other outdoor area? Non-Smoking Visitors to the LV Strip should not be subjected to second hand smoke any more than those of the Nevada Educational system.
Get this: Smoking outdoors illegal, Prostitution legal. If Prostitution is legal, why can't they do it outdoors? Why should any legal activity be confined to indoors?
Assemblyman Aizley should get off these trivial matters and get down to the Peoples' business on saving our economy. Jim Richardson's claim that he has to go through a "cloud of smoke" to get indoors is a typical exaggeration by people who want to take rights away from others. Why must Nevada ape the foolishness of California? All the hype about second-hand smoke killing "innocent by-standers" is just fallacious hyperbole by the anti-everything crowd designed to influence the minds of the gullible who can't think and reason for themselves.
The anti-smokers commit scientific fraud by ignoring over 50 studies showing that human papillomaviruses cause at least 1/4 of non-small cell lung cancers. Smokers and passive smokers are more likely to get this virus for socioeconomic reasons. The anti-smokers use studies based on lifestyle questionnaires, so they're cynically DESIGNED to blame tobacco for all those extra lung cancers from HPV. They commit the same fraud with every disease they blame on tobacco.
http://www.smokershistory.com/hpvlungc.h...
http://www.smokershistory.com/SGHDlies.h...
All their so-called "independent" reports were ring-led by the same guy, Jonathan M. Samet, including the Surgeon General Reports, the EPA report, the IARC report, and the ASHRAE report, and he's now the chairman of the FDA Committee on Tobacco. His clique excludes all the REAL scientists from their echo chamber to make them "unanimous!"
http://www.smokershistory.com/SGlies.htm...
When government commits fraud to deprive us of our liberties it violates our rights just as much as purposely throwing innocent people in prison. And government lies about phony smoking dangers are terrorism, just like calling in phony bomb threats.