Two Calif. cities to vote on banning smoking in apartments

thats the point. its in my own home i should be aloud to smoke. As a parent I should be responsible not to smoke in front of them or around them. just as i wouldn't do other in appropriate or dangerous things to my kids.

Additionally. i should be able to smoke pot in my house so long as its not endangering anybody else and im being responsible.
 
Pot is unfortuantely illegal to buy, posess and consume....

Yep I could smoke in my home if I wanted to since I live alone.
Butt I just don't like a stinky house.
 
Not my finest argument earlier, I agree.

But I am a smoker trying hard to quit, and I oppose smoking infringment on principles of freedom.
 
Warren I figure they will cause me to quit with taxes and many like me then who will pay the taxes they lose ?
 
Warren I figure they will cause me to quit with taxes and many like me then who will pay the taxes they lose ?

Well the taxes sure as fuck would get me if I didn't live in Alabama. The cost of cigarettes and tax here is less than the cost of the tax in most states.

It's 2.50-3.50 for a pack of Camels here. When I was in Cali this summer it was 6.50 and I didn't buy a pack the whole time.
 
well i can see the reasoning in apartments, but not bars and such, the owner of that bar should be able to make a choice weather or not thay want to allow it, if you dont want to go to a bar that has smoking then dont, if you dont want to be a watris in a smokey place the go somewhere else, why make every one do what you want em to do... that is borderline scosialolisim
 
id be more then happy to give up smoking if the gov will give up the tax's the get from it... dont make these ban's.. just make it illeagle.

i love smoking, ya maybe dumb, but i do enjoy it.
 
Two Calif. cities to vote on banning smoking in apartments
By Wendy Koch, USA TODAY
Lawmakers in two California cities are casting votes this month on unprecedented legislation that would widen a growing voluntary movement by landlords and resident associations to ban smoking inside apartments and condos.

Today in Calabasas, the City Council plans to vote on expanding its anti-smoking law to bar renters from lighting up inside existing apartments. It would exempt current resident smokers until they moved but would require all new buildings with at least 15 units, including condos, to be smoke-free.

YOUR VIEW: What do you think of the Calif. proposals? If you smoke, where do you light up?
TENANTS TANGLE: Neighbors take sides on tobacco

Next Tuesday, the City Council of Belmont is scheduled to cast a final vote on a similar measure that won initial approval last week. The ordinance, which applies to apartments and condos, would allow fines and evictions if neighbors complained and smokers didn't heed warnings.

The legislative push, which has triggered death threats against council members, is a controversial part of a mostly voluntary effort to prod landlords and condo associations to adopt smoke-free policies.

Health officials in about 30 states promote the health and economic benefits, including reduced fire risk and lower cleanup costs for multiunit housing, says Jim Bergman, director of the Smoke-Free Environments Law Project, a Michigan group funded partly by the state.

Tens of thousands of apartments and condos have gone smoke-free in the past five years, management companies and health activists say. Last month, Guardian Management began phasing in a smoke-free policy at 8,000 of its rental units, mostly in Oregon and Washington.

"We've proven the voluntary approach can work very well," Bergman says. He doesn't think legislative bans will work because of a "my home is my castle" philosophy.

"The time has come. The evils of smoking have been known for decades," says Barry Groveman, a Calabasas councilman who co-wrote the proposal.

Still, he knows he's struck a nerve. "I've gotten threats like you wouldn't believe," Groveman says.

"Fresh air should be breathed by everybody," Belmont Mayor Coralin Feierbach says. She cites a 2006 surgeon general's report that says no level of secondhand smoke is risk-free.

Critics say the bans violate civil and personal property rights. "You should be able to do as you wish in your own home," says Michon Coleman of the San Mateo County Association of Realtors.

Belmont's ordinance is "way over the top," because a smoker can be evicted simply for lighting up, says Warren Lieberman, one of two council members who oppose it.

Such criticism prompted Oakland last month to remove a ban on smoking in new apartments and condos from an ordinance that barred lighting up in public places.

Feierbach says she never intended to create a stir, but she expects other cities to follow Belmont. "We really broke ground," she says.

Pretty soon they will ban farting. These morons on the City Councils should be handed their walking papers immediately. And that is from a Non-smoker.

Immie
 
Isn't flatulence illegal already ?

How much of this anti smoking thing is just not liking the smell and such and how much is genuine health concerns.
 
Isn't flatulence illegal already ?

How much of this anti smoking thing is just not liking the smell and such and how much is genuine health concerns.

i think it more of a smell thing. i think that 90% of people who have complained to me about it were vary overweight, and second hand smoke is the lest of their worries.. or it should be.
 
:clink:

"Next Tuesday, the City Council of Belmont is scheduled to cast a final vote on a similar measure that won initial approval last week. The ordinance, which applies to apartments and condos, would allow fines and evictions if neighbors complained and smokers didn't heed warnings."

Nice!
I hope Belmont is voted 2007 nicest place to live!

Good job council - fight the good fight.
 
i think it more of a smell thing. i think that 90% of people who have complained to me about it were vary overweight, and second hand smoke is the lest of their worries.. or it should be.

I tyried bringing up the overweight being close on smokings heels as the cause of preventable death. BAC got all over me for that.

Anyway preventable death seems to be strange phrase. Premature death would be more accurate.

Everyone dies. Death is not preventable, just delayable.
 
I tyried bringing up the overweight being close on smokings heels as the cause of preventable death. BAC got all over me for that.

Anyway preventable death seems to be strange phrase. Premature death would be more accurate.

Everyone dies. Death is not preventable, just delayable.

all that stuff affects people diffrently. but yes i agree its going to be the next bandwagon, baning fat people from fastfood or somthing stupid, you know they wouldnt bad fastfood
 
Lol all I can say is that you fatasses better remember us smokers when they come for your burgers and grease.
 
Back
Top