Agreed!!! Many times I have asked smokers not to smoke directly in front of my workplace even going so far as to tell them that it is disgusting. I smoked for 25 years and quit cold turkey one year ago (with the help of Alan Carrs book. you should check it out it is a great book) One problem is that there is no shame in smoking. It is socially acceptable.Dont wait for the city to enforce or deal with this issue. Tell people to keep moving if they light up. You would be surprised how well it works.

It looks like other communities in Ontario are seeking to Ban Public Smoking near children. I can only hope that London will do the same: http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/2011/06/23/18324006.html

AGREED!!! I am so glad there are people like me who think that smoking in the core is a horrible thing. I am FED UP with trying to wait for a bus, and having to go half a block down from the stop so I can actually BREATHE. Smokers CHOOSE to kill themselves, I'm tired of not having an option of whether or not I actually want to inhale second hand smoke. Give us back our CLEAN AIR!!!

just make sure that the designated areas don't include victoria park. we all know what happens to smokers when they go there!!

w.g.,

Per Wikipedia:
"...The rationale for smoke-free laws is based on the fact that smoking is optional and breathing is not. Therefore, smoking bans exist to protect breathing people from the effects of second-hand smoke, which include an increased risk of heart disease, cancer, emphysema, and other diseases.[2][3] Laws implementing bans on indoor smoking have been introduced by many countries in various forms over the years, with some legislators citing scientific evidence that shows tobacco smoking is harmful to the smokers themselves and to those inhaling second-hand smoke.
In addition, such laws may lower health care costs in the short term (but may actually increase them in the long term, since smokers who die sooner no longer use health care),[4] improve work productivity, and lower the overall cost of labor in a community, thus making a community more attractive for employers. In Indiana, the state's economic development agency wrote into its 2006 plan for acceleration of economic growth an encouragement to cities and towns to adopt local smoke-free workplace laws as a means of promoting job growth in communities.
Additional rationales for smoking restrictions include reduced risk of fire in areas with explosive hazards; cleanliness in places where food, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, or precision instruments and machinery are produced; decreased legal liability; potentially reduced energy use via decreased ventilation needs; reduced quantities of litter; healthier environments; and giving smokers incentive to quit.[5]
The World Health Organization considers smoke-free laws to have an influence to reduce demand for tobacco by creating an environment where smoking becomes increasingly more difficult and to help shift social norms away from the acceptance of smoking in everyday life. Along with tax measures, cessation measures, and education, smoking ban policy is currently viewed as an important element in lowering smoking rates and promoting public health. When correctly and strictly implemented it is seen as one important policy agenda goal to change human behavior away from unhealthy behavior and towards a healthy lifestyle...."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoking_ban

Jack Tripper,

It's called being considerate to others who could be negatively impacted by your actions, and protecting children who do not have a voice. We live in a community not individual bubbles, so certain behaviors and habits should be kept private, period.

So you also think that busting a bunch of peaceful weed smokers on 4/20 was also a wise use of police time and resources? I myself am not a smoker of cigarettes (I find it repulsive) but could care less if someone smokes outside at a bus stop.

Oddly enough, in Sudbury they have a by-law (or maybe it's just on the Cambrian College property) that you can't smoke anywhere near a bus stop. Not just in the shelters, but you have to be away entirely from the bus stop.

Jack Tripper,

You would enforce it just like any other violation with a fine/ticket. I do not consider protecting the public from deadly second hand smoke a waste of police resources.

Mike Annable,

Is your statement a fact (based on a scientific study) or your opinion?

And how do you propose we enforce this? Just more waste of police resources that could be better spent elsewhere.

I have found you are more likely to inhale second smoke walking into the mall than downtown. Without a city wide ban you would only be marginally better off.

I believe I should have the right to walk down the street without having to inhale second hand smoke.

What is this, Salt Lake City?

I hate exposing my children to second hand smoke when we are walking downtown.