"The response we have heard thus far is mostly positive," said Stephanie Warren, chairman of the Calabasas Chamber of Commerce. "Most of our members are for anything that maintains our standard of living."

There is a small smokers' rights grassroots campaign that is boycotting dining or shopping in the town, but no apparent effect has yet been reported by local businesss.

I salute the town for wanting to maintain a quality of life, but I still question the basis upon which they passed the ban.  Smoking outside is stil very questionably a threat to non-smokers.  No hard evidence has been proven to suggest that smoking outside definitely hurts those who don't smoke.

The Wall Street Journal reports: researchers haven't been able to pinpoint at what level a concentration of smoke outdoors increases a person's risk of disease, says Derek Raghavan, director of the Cleveland Clinic/Taussig Cancer Center in Ohio. Studies haven't indicated how many smokers could, during a given time period, accumulate a concentration of smoke that might endanger a nonsmoker's health.

The lack of hard data hasn't stopped lawmakers from banning smoking to accommodate nonsmoker comfort inside public and private places or to reduce litter from cigarette buds on the streets, parks or on beaches.

Thirty-one states ban smoking indoors at work places, and 12 prohibit smoking in public places, including restaurants, bars, clubs and some casinos. California, the first state to ban smoking inside public places, also leads the nation in outdoor restrictions.

Although I don't encourage anyone to start smoking, I am a supporter of civil rights.  Until smoking is proven to be harmful to others outside, I question the need or the legality of such bans.

The link:  http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB114895164405065899-uWH6L1boXvpqm7_fL5AFqYHsI5Q_20070530.html?mod=blogs