Smoking ban in Rock Hill parks is a reasonable idea

A ban on smoking in most areas of Rock Hill city parks strikes as a good idea that serves the needs of most people. But we hope that if the city adopts such a ban, it will include a few designated smoking areas in places that would not affect non-smokers.

The City Council took a stab at enacting a smoking ban in city-run parks last year, but ended up with a split vote. Mayor Doug Echols voted with Kathy Pender and Jim Reno in favor of hearing the staff proposal for a non-smoking ordinance, while John Black, Kevin Sutton and Ann Williamson voted against the measure.

The votes of those six council members would align the same way if the issue is resurrected. But this time, Councilwoman Sandra Oborokumo, who was not present at the meeting last year, could provide the deciding vote – and she has indicated she is likely to support a ban.

As the anti-smoking movement has evolved over the years, the emphasis has been on protecting non-smokers from second-hand smoke. The argument is that smokers can enjoy their habit in the privacy of their homes or in their cars, but they have no right to inflict it on others.

That general principal has led to widespread smoking bans in nearly all public buildings, restaurants, stores – even bars, which had been an exception in some cities. In many places, smoking is forbidden on public beaches, where cigarette butts had constituted much of the beach litter.

Rock Hill would not be the first city to bar smoking in public parks and sports arenas. Such bans are common in cities nationwide.

We realize that the threat of second-hand smoke is not as severe outside, where the smoke dissipates much more quickly than in an enclosed space. Nonetheless, smoke can be both a hazard and a nuisance if it’s coming from a smoker sitting next to you on the bleachers at your children’s soccer match.

We think that any smoking in Rock Hill parks should take place in confined spaces designated for that purpose well away from crowds. But it is reasonable to forbid smoking anywhere else in the parks.

During the debate last year on this issue, the Parks and Recreation Commission, which proposed the ban in the first place, recommended against placing any designated smoking areas in the park. Members worried that smokers wouldn’t stay in the designated areas and that an exception would weaken the ban.

We think people would be more reasonable than that, adhering to the rules without having to be forced to do so. By and large, smoking restrictions of all kinds are respected by the public without much policing, and the smoking ban in parks no doubt would be much the same.

That also speaks to concerns by council members who worry that the ban might hinder tourism. Sutton noted that some visitors come here from nations that have more lax smoking restrictions, and they could be put off by a ban.

“At the BMX course, we have people coming in from all over the world, and smoking is not as taboo in other places as it is in the U.S.,” he said at Monday’s council meeting.

But those same visitors must abide by smoking restrictions just about wherever they go in this country. A smoking ban in public parks should be no surprise to them.

Smoking has declined significantly in the United States over the past decade, and smoking bans have played a role in that decline. But about 17 percent of Americans over 18, or an estimated 40 million adults, still smoke.

We have to find ways to coexist peacefully while prohibiting smokers from inflicting their dangerous habit on others. A smoking ban in local parks seems like a sensible way to do that.

This story was originally published May 28, 2016 at 2:12 PM with the headline "Smoking ban in Rock Hill parks is a reasonable idea."