City nixes puffing in private clubs

Well, I do seem to slam the Daily News a lot* ... but they do also run some fine stories (I mean that in the superlative sense). This one, for example, about private clubs and smoking. There was also a story in March 2006 on the same issue, in the Boston Globe.

Newburyport is banning smoking in private clubs, unless a specially designated smoking area is provided (in a separate, enclosed area).

A few months ago I was talking with Jack Morris (city health director) and he was working on this issue. Since I was there to talk landfill, I didn't put my 2 cents in about smoking bans.

I think it stinks. If people choose to work at a private club where there is smoking, then they know they are exposing themselves to second-hand smoke. So also with the membership.

Private clubs are allowed to do all kinds of stuff that public entities are not (including discriminate), so what's the deal?

What's that you say, commenter on the DN story? The sun causes skin cancer just as much as smoking does, are we going to become mandated to wear sun screen too?

By the way - I may have mentioned this before - Michigan is only just now moving towards banning smoking in bars, restaurants and casinos. Just 29 states and the District of Columbia have such a law.

Related to this, I was just looking at posts and articles online about lung and other cancers. It's so sad how many things are linked to increased risk of cancer: chemical fertilizers, burning wood, wood dust, radon gas, some forms of silica, asbestos, and the newest scare, plastic bottles (to name just a few).

* The DN is not alone in 'skimping' on in-depth news coverage. I find stories about the so-called 'pregnancy pact' and young girls selling themselves on Craigslist (story on CNN.com) to be woefully short on insight. In most instances, this is not fault of the reporter.