A Portland Press Herald story about a proposal to ban smoking in certain outdoor public areas in Westbrook got the comments rolling at MaineToday.com and once the smoke cleared, one thing was evident: Smoking gets fingers pointing and defenses up like nothing else.

A number of you, including smokers, non-smokers and former smokers, saw the proposal as overreaching. First, no smoking at restaurants, then bars and now this? What's next, communism? (In case you think I'm being hyperbolic, someone actually did ask when the Iron Curtain would go up.)

Kevin was one user calling for an end to the meddling:

"Give them some rights for God's sake. It isn't illegal so why make it seem illegal by banning outside smoking in certain areas. Smoking can kill but so can drinking and overeating. Are you going to ban alcohol and junk food?"

True, smoking isn't illegal, but it is harmful ‚ not just to those engaging in it, but to those who happen to be near them. And sure, a Big Mac might pack on the pounds, but if someone eats one next to you, it's unlikely you'll encounter secondhand high cholesterol. (And if that's proven false someday, you'll never see me at a state fair again. Just think of the potential hazards of walking by those fried dough stands.)

Robert was one of a few users tired of hearing the "smokers' rights" mantra from those opposed to tightening restrictions:

"I am pretty tired of this 'smoker's rights' garbage. It has never been the right of anyone to infringe on the health and well being of others. Secondhand smoke is dangerous and carcinogenic. We have many laws that protect us from pollutants and banning smoking in public places should be one of them.

"If one person chooses to smoke and another chooses not to, whose choice deserves more protection? If the overall goal is protecting the health of the public, the answer is simple: You err on the side of protecting the non-smokers."

Another user, Joan, thought support for the proposed ban was sour grapes (or is it lungs?) on the part of so-called "reformed smokers." They're the folks who quit and then go around evangelizing about the wonders of clean air and strong lungs and look down their noses at those foolish enough to keep paying and puffing:

"The fact is a lot of you who chose to give it up are jealous of those who continue to smoke (remember that feeling of satisfaction off the first drag mmm I know you do)."

Could it be that some people pushing for more restrictions on smoking in public are just punishing others for the vice they wished they could still partake in? While that's probably a little far-fetched, there might be some truth to it. A user named Charlie said the ban would help those trying to quit succeed and help those who already have stay off the sticks:

"Sorry smokers, but as a former/quitting smoker, I know that it is easier for me to quit smoking, and stay non-smoking, without catching the aromatic wisps of tobacco anywhere in the air. The tobacco war in today's society is not with the smokers who are resigned to smoking. The tobacco war is with the NON-Smokers and the QUITTING smokers."

No one argues that smoking is a healthy habit (unlike red wine, for example, I'm unaware that having one cigarette with a meal might lower your risk of heart disease), so how can anyone argue against measures that might help people quit? Good question.

Health issues aside, a lot of you found another reason to support the ban: The other byproduct of smoking. The butts, that is. DP was one of a few users tired of spotting the telltale white and brown remnants everywhere:

"My problem with smokers is the world is THEIR ASHTRAY! I have a problem with smokers blowing their smoke in my face and the fact that my tax dollars have to be used for picking up their butts."

Seeing cigarette butts on beaches, sidewalks and all the other public places they turn up doesn't win smokers any points; if smokers can't be considerate enough to dispose of them properly, why should anyone feel bad that they have fewer places to smoke ‚ and in turn, toss their butts?

Others shot back that the reason butts often aren't disposed of properly is that there aren't enough receptacles for them and that more education about proper disposal is needed, not fewer places to smoke. Does this mean we'll see ashtrays planted at 10-foot intervals throughout the state, maybe tastefully disguised as little lighthouses?

Don't hold your breath.

Colleen Stone can be reached by e-mail, but if you have a comment about this piece, please post it below.