Boundaries or Bans, No Smoking Means No Smoking

In Utah, Stacy Basinger is making the rounds to Price, Helper, and Wellington City Councils requesting that a boundary be included in city ordinances preventing smoking within 25 or 50 feet of ballparks. Ms. Basinger stated, "There's no constitutional right to smoke anywhere you want." She is steadfast in believing that the right to smoke ends when other lives might be at risk as a result of second-hand smoke.

Under fire is the health and well-being of those participating in sports activities. Those youngsters don't have the same choice to decide what they are inhaling as their smoking spectators. Smoking is currently discouraged at the ballparks in the three communities, but that doesn't stop some smokers from lighting up anyway.

The Little League association is able to set rules and standards for the players, but those regulations cannot extend beyond those playing on the team. Ms. Basinger is taking it upon herself as an anti-smoking advocate to fight for those rules to extend beyond the players to cover the entire sporting fields.

According to an article published in the Sun Advocate, Basinger polled 665 about their preferences when it came to smoking in the stadium. Of the 665 who participated in the questionnaire survey, 655 signed a petition in favor of creating an ordinance that restricts smokers from lighting up within a minimum of 25 feet around the parks.

Basinger has done thorough research to similar ordinances around the state. The city of Tooele has imposed an ordinance that prevents tobacco use in many city areas including parks, playgrounds, and sports fields. Leaving no rock unturned, she has presented the city council members with potential ways in which the prohibition could be enforced, including the posting of no-smoking signs and an area designated outside of that boundary that reflects where smokers are allowed to light up.

In Price, UT, there are city-placed signs that state that the community supports a smoke-free environment. But the support of a smoke-free area isn't enough to prevent people from lighting up. Basinger has reported seeing individuals a few feet away from those signs, leaning against a tree, puffing away. An ordinance is the only solution Basinger sees to the potential hazards of second-hand smoke exposure.

What do you think? Do advocates have the right to protect children from breathing in hazardous chemicals and carcinogens as a result of second hand smoke?