rss Subscribe to the RSS feed.
What's RSS?

The Conversation

San Francisco v. the Cigarette Companies

By: CHP | Posted on: October 12th, 2008. | 2 comments |
Categories: Air and Water Quality • Policies and Laws • Public Health • Urban Issues

For those of you keeping up with San Francisco’s attempt to ban tobacco sales in all of the cities pharmacies, here’s the latest news from Friday, October 10. According to the San Fransisco Chronicle, Philip Morris’  argument in its lawsuit that the ban violates freedom of speech was slammed by the city’s lawyers, who said the First Amendment doesn’t guarantee the right to sell cigarettes.

In other words, tobacco companies can advertise there, but they can’t sell there.

City Attorney Dennis Herrera’s office said the tobacco company “shows no respect for the Constitution, no respect for the power of cities to protect the health of their citizens, and no respect for the court’s time.”

But U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken of Oakland has scheduled a hearing for Oct. 30 to decide whether to issue an injunction that would halt the ban until the suit went to trial.

The ordinance prohibits sales of tobacco products in San Francisco’s nearly 60 drugstores, while exempting supermarkets and big-box retail stores that also have pharmacies.

Who do you think is right on this - the city or the tobacco companies?

If you side with San Francisco, don’t you wonder why Oregon, or any of its cities, hasn’t taken bold positions such as this on tobacco issues?

After all, at the time of this writing, California and Washington don’t allow smoking in bars, while Oregon still does (until 1/1/09).

What would happen if cigarette sales were banned in Oregon?

Take this short poll feel free to post a comment:



2 Comments:

1  Posted by Vancover on April 29th, 2009 at 03:32 PM

Well I live in Vancover and we don’t allow smoking inside or near any opening like windows or doors… period.

2  Posted by Jake Ostrow on October 29th, 2008 at 02:50 AM

I do not think that cigarettes should be banned in Oregon, if a person wants to smoke they should be able too. The health facts are out there, people know that they are harming themselves with each cigarette, it’s just a choice they choose to make.

I personally do not smoke, but if it was something I enjoyed doing I would be very angry if it was just outlawed. People would be better off if they didn’t smoke, but they have the right to do so if they want to.



Join the conversation. Leave a comment.

Name: (required)

Email: (required) will not be published

Location:

URL:

Remember my personal information

Submit the word you see below:


Next entry: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation President on Public Health's "A-Ha" Moment
Previous entry: Community Health Priorities Sponsors Community Discussions

Back to main