Mayor Ban-berg now wants your tobacco

[fitnessislife]

First supersized soda, now cigarettes: Under New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's new plan, retailers in the city would have to keep tobacco products out of sight. The goal, he says, is to curb the rate of youth smoking.

The measure would make New York the first city in the nation to keep tobacco products out of sight in stores.

Here's more from Monday's news release announcing the proposal:

"Under the new legislation, sellers would be required to keep tobacco products out of sight, except during a purchase by an adult consumer or during restocking: tobacco products would be required to be kept in cabinets, drawers, under the counter, behind a curtain or in any other concealed location."
"New York City has dramatically lowered our smoking rate, but even one new smoker is one too many � especially when it's a young person," Bloomberg said in a statement. "Young people are targets of marketing and the availability of cigarettes and this legislation will help prevent another generation from the ill health and shorter life expectancy that comes with smoking."

The measure will now go to the City Council.

Bloomberg's plan was unveiled a week after a judge blocked the mayor's effort to limit large sugary drinks, calling the measure "arbitrary and capricious." The city is appealing that decision.

Here's more from The New York Times about the possible opposition to the latest proposal:

"While cracking down on smoking may seem like a no-brainer given the clear link with cancer, Mr. Bloomberg's latest proposal could meet with stiff resistance from the operators of bodegas and other small stores, where cigarettes, like bottled water and lottery tickets, account for a large percentage of sales.

"In many of these stores, cigarettes are like wallpaper, the backdrop that every customer sees when going to the register to pay, and the stores could take a significant financial hit by putting them out of sight. Stores would still be able to advertise that they sell cigarettes, and could display prices."

Similar measures are in place in countries such as Iceland Canada, England, Iceland and Ireland, Bloomberg said.

lol this guy just loves hearing his own voice.

[YUL]

dont see what the big deal is. they already do it in Canada and the UK (as far as I know about it). You can still buy cigarettes

it's not like cigarettes provide any benefit anyway

what's next? speed limits are encroaching on your rights?

[Tamorlane]

dont see what the big deal is. they already do it in Canada and the UK (as far as I know about it)

it's not like cigarettes provide any benefit

what's next? speed limits are encroaching on your rights?

lol came in to post this exactly

[Renegade83]

I think the soft drinks thing was stupid, but this kinda makes sense. Tobacco is ****ing terrible, former smoker here.

[slowteg]

brb i cannot see the cigarettes
brb stopping smoking













brb goverment knows what is best for you

[BadMonkeyFunker]

Hmm.. I don't see the problem. He is not banning tobacco. You can still buy it freely. It'll just be out of sight. Why is it such a bad thing ?

[HumptyBrah]

If they're gonna keep tobacco legal then this is madness

[Tamorlane]

If they're gonna keep tobacco legal then this is madness

Really because it's pretty effective and accepted in Canada.

[anonymous]

Hmm.. I don't see the problem. He is not banning tobacco. You can still buy it freely. It'll just be out of sight. Why is it such a bad thing ?

Because you're infringing on the rights of law-abiding citizens. I don't smoke but he makes me want to go around wearing a Marlboro shirt.

[HumptyBrah]

Really because it's pretty effective and accepted in Canada.

Effective at what?

Also, close your eyes. That should allow you to see how many fuks I give about Canada.

[tnel00]

dont see what the big deal is. they already do it in Canada and the UK (as far as I know about it). You can still buy cigarettes

it's not like cigarettes provide any benefit anyway

what's next? speed limits are encroaching on your rights?

So it's ok for Government to dictate to businesses how to display products now? This isn't even advertising. This is simply physical display inside a store.

Bloomburg is a dumbass

[fitnessislife]

Hmm.. I don't see the problem. He is not banning tobacco. You can still buy it freely. It'll just be out of sight. Why is it such a bad thing ?

How about we hide all soda in the back warehouse instead of on store shelves?

[amtharin]

dont see what the big deal is. they already do it in Canada and the UK (as far as I know about it). You can still buy cigarettes

it's not like cigarettes provide any benefit anyway

what's next? speed limits are encroaching on your rights?

They provide a tremendous benefit to those who smoke.

[MentalAssasin]

Bloomburg is a dumbass

He's worth $27 billion and is one of the best mayors in the history of the U.S.

[lasher]

He's worth $27 billion and is one of the best mayors in the history of the U.S.

He's a totalitarian jackass hellbent on making NYC more of a nanny city than it already is. gtfo with the best mayors bullshyt.

Some of us are adults and don't need our hands held by the gubmint.

[HumptyBrah]

He's worth $27 billion and is one of the best mayors in the history of the U.S.

Do liberals get mad that he's worth so much?

[MentalAssasin]

He's a totalitarian jackass hellbent on making NYC more of a nanny city than it already is.

NYC is the best city in the world. U mad you aren't rich enough to live in Manhattan? Yeah, u mad.

[goody1]

What's funny is many politicians rant and rave about how large sodas and cigarettes are terrible for everyone (not sure I'd disagree) but none of them want to outright ban them due to all of the tax revenue they create. They may all say they would like to ban them but when push comes to shove I don't believe any of them would actually sign the bill to ban them. Too many tax dollars at stake. If Bloomberg is so appalled by large sodas and cigarettes then he should put his money where his mouth is and donate every last cent of tax revenue created by said products to cancer and obesity research or some sort of health organization.

[MentalAssasin]

Do liberals get mad that he's worth so much?

I don't, and I'm fairly liberal.

[lasher]

NYC is the best city in the world. U mad you aren't rich enough to live in Manhattan? Yeah, u mad.

No, I am not mad that I don't live in a city where the government thinks it can dictate the size of my soda containers. Not in the slightest.

[HumptyBrah]

NYC is the best city in the world. U mad you aren't rich enough to live in Manhattan? Yeah, u mad.

What percentage of people living in Manhattan are bartenders with 8 roommates?

[amtharin]

NYC is the best city in the world. U mad you aren't rich enough to live in Manhattan? Yeah, u mad.

That's despite Bloomberg, not because of him.

[YUL]

So it's ok for Government to dictate to businesses how to display products now? This isn't even advertising. This is simply physical display inside a store.

Bloomburg is a dumbass

if it's deemed to public nuisance of course. just like bars closing @ 2 or not displaying pr0n mags where kids can see them.

but yea, displaying a commercial logo is promotion. companies pay big $$ slot fees to be at eye level on shelves

What's funny is many politicians rant and rave about how large sodas and cigarettes are terrible for everyone (not sure I'd disagree) but none of them want to outright ban them due to all of the tax revenue they create.

sorry, medicaid/medicare is a federal thing. the cost of dealing with smoking related illness far outweighs any tax benefit. We're talking about chronic, worsening diseases

[MentalAssasin]

That's despite Bloomberg, not because of him.

Negative. A lot of Bloomberg's best policies will not bear fruit for a long time, anyway. Hudson Yards, rezoning of most of the city, the Cornell/Technion campus, etc.

[lasher]

if it's deemed to public nuisance of course. just like bars closing @ 2 or not displaying pr0n mags where kids can see them.

Well then alcohol should be hidden from the innocent virginal eyes of american consumers as well lest they are tempted by some evil display of 4 packs of steel reserve and maddog 2020 bottles.

Think of the children.




Fuark, you hyper government nanny supporters fluster my jammies to no end.

[Tamorlane]

Effective at what?

Also, close your eyes. That should allow you to see how many fuks I give about Canada.

It's effective because it places the cigarettes out of view. "Out of sight, out of mind". This way people are less likely to think about it, and children are less likely to be influenced by staring at the packages when they're checking out their candy or whatever. Children are actually a main reason why these laws are put into place.

Policies don't just come into effect like these, they are researched and found to be effective.

from one:

Immediately following implementation of the POS display ban, compliance was 97% for cigarettes and rolling tobacco and 98% for snus. Preimplementation, young people were tempted by tobacco products when seeing them in the shop more often than older people. Postimplementation, young people also more often found it difficult to choose brand. The POS tobacco display ban was supported by a majority of the population, and by one out of three daily smokers. The removal of POS tobacco displays was perceived as a barrier for young people's access to tobacco products, as affecting attachment to cigarette brands and as contributing to tobacco denormalisation.

http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/conten...11-050341.full

[fitnessislife]

NYC is the best city in the world. U mad you aren't rich enough to live in Manhattan? Yeah, u mad.

show us your millions

[GregariousWolf]

if it's deemed to public nuisance of course. just like bars closing @ 2 or not displaying pr0n mags where kids can see them.

Can the mayor pass an ordinance to get fat people to stay inside where I can't see them?

[YUL]

Well then alcohol should be hidden from the innocent virginal eyes of american consumers a.

alcohol is not evil. it has the potential to be, but also has a benefit.

smoking=no positives what so ever

Can the mayor pass an ordinance to get fat people to stay inside where I can't see them?

that would seem to be a logical next step if the fatties refuse education and eat-well initiatives

[fitnessislife]

Can the mayor pass an ordinance to get fat people to stay inside where I can't see them?

How about unattractive women?