Now They're Banning What You Do INSIDE Your Home!

The few in this country do have a voice against the many. But it's not a perfect world, and you don't always get what you want if, even when you do speak up. You can't win 'em all, especially for rights that can be detrimental to other citizens.

 

Only TWO smokers came to voice their opposition. Certainly there are more smokers that didn't care enough about it to come oppose it. Would your opinion honestly been any different had there been a referendum and the citizens voted to pass it? I'd like to hear any realistic activities you think they could ban because no one has provided an equivalent "liberty"that could be taken next. There aren't many things that will have a negative impact on others like smoking does. You can't say drinking because if you're sitting in your living room drinking a beer there's no way a neighbor will know this the way you will always smell someone smoking nearby. Until they tell you what you can't do in a single family dwelling its a non issue for me.

At the end of the day whose side of the coin is right? You either allow smoking and tell the non smoker to deal with it or move. Or you ban smoking and tell the smoker to deal with it or move.

 

..there's been a war on smokers for a number of decades now... the way "they" go after them is by attrition (imposing high taxes, don't-smoke ads, lawsuits against tobacco companies, etc), and by "legislating" the activity out of existence - first they mandate no smoking in bars, ...then in restaurants, then in public parks, then in public streets, ...and now,... one's own home! this isn't tinfoil, this is fact...

 

Because I've changed one thing, ONE THING. a tire for a cigarette, it's bizarre now? They both do the same thing when burnt. Emit harmful, cancer, and asthma causing smoke, one just emits a bit more.

Here is an article for you wiley http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-204_162-57525298/family-new-homes-meth-lab-past-made-us-sick/

The former owners did what they wanted in their house, and now the new owners are paying the price. Sounds good right?

 

Yes, but for every case where the system failed, I could show you another where it worked fine. And we could be here all day going that way

We don't agree on the issue, and that's okay. The great thing is we both have the freedom to debate and defend our positions. The US is not a perfect place, nor will it ever be, but it's a hell of a lot better than many other places.

 

you are right in that this is not totally black-white issue... however, i believe it's the encroachment into what goes on inside one's domicile that is an "egregious" act (i hope i spelled it right this time )

 

* rented multiple-unit housing
And we, the healthy non-smokers, LOVE IT!

Next on the public nuisance list: leaf-blowers. Somehow we survived millennia without them. I think we can do it again.

 

...meth is an illegal substance, right?... cigarettes, ...legal right - apples and oranges...

burning tires inside your home would cause a fire - it's absurd to compare that to smoking a cigarette... what about cigars, ...who wouldn't like to have the freedom to sit back a smoke a cigar in front of the fireplace - well, i guess not if the "city council" says you can't!!!

 

did your read the article, and the definition of "multi-family dwelling"... ...condo's aren't individually owned? not sure where you derive the basis for your position at all...

 

yes, ...and from ovens, toasters, dryers, candles, fireplaces, ...maybe we should ban all of this?

 

Maybe is smokers were considerate these laws wouldn't have to be passed. You DO know smoking and second hand smoke causes cancer right? why should 10, 20, 30 children and their parents have to stay home because you're an inconsiderate ass that you have to smoke at the PARK, you know the area built for families to enjoy? This is not a harmless activity, and you're not the only one you're harming. What is the difference between me shooting everyone I see and smoking around everyone? The only real difference is shooting would be a quick death and the shooter is there, where as the smoker left years ago...

 

...yes, but you are now denying them the freedom to smoke in their own home... so, you've effectively erradicated them by closing the noose completely... if they are in their own home, how are they doing harm... same as if they are sitting on a park bench 20 ft away - any harm?...

 

Who says it would cause a fire? I can come up with a 1000's of ways to burn a tire indoors and not allow anything to burn but the tire. And yes meth is illegal, but maybe I feel they are encroaching there. I mean it's my right to do what I want in my own home right? At least meth addicts take their bad habbits where i don't have to deal with them.

I'm starting to think you don't know what a multifamily home is... A multi family home is an apartment building in which multiple apartments are in one building, a condo, which is essentially two houses built into one building, a hotel in which multiple rooms are attached in one building.

 

good, cigarettes should be banned everywhere, they are disgusting and it has been proven over and over and over that it makes people sick and kills, not just the people smoking them. there should be more of those disgusting as fawk smoke rooms that i've seen in the occasional airport, i've seen smokers go in and come out saying the hell with that, way too gross.

 

if each "unit" has it's own HVAC, how is the smoker next door harming anyone?..

 

Ok obviously nobody can change your point of view, so why do you keep trying to change everyone else's? You have said the same thing over and over, we get it, you don't agree with the law

 

If they are smoking inside their own home and it affects nobody then they are fine. This law is for when they are smoking in their own home and the smoke is traveling to neighbor's homes. The police are not going to randomly bust down your door to check if you are smoking. The smoke is going to go through a vent, the attic, an open window, etc and into your neighbor's nursery where you just gave their baby asthma. Should they be allowed to sue you now? They could sue you if you shot through the wall and shot the baby's hand off. Whats the difference? This law is for when your decision is affecting other people. and the meth story was an example. Cigarette smoke clings to surfaces, and stay for a very long time. The smoke does not discriminate between which lungs are yours, or which surfaces are yours. Your smoke enters your neighbor's house and clings to their walls the same as yours. It builds up over time and causes a multitude of health issues.

If you're going to be a smoker, and smoke within your own home, this law forces you to do what you should have been doing, but obviously weren't which is, being aware and considerate of how your actions affect others.

 

well, i've had a few rebuttals to make...

the crux of the issue is this: if it's (a) legal substance/activity, (b) not directly harming others, and (c) inside one's only place of refuge, the home - then, what right does a gov't have to criminalize it?

 

maybe the short answer is to make tobacco illegal.