Sonoma County CA bans smoking INSIDE apartments and condos.Seems they found a study that shows second hand smoke can travel thru walls. Stuff liberals want to ban somehow always manages to acquire magical destructive abilities that can only be dealt with by total elimination. Up next: Fox News causes cancer! You can bet your worthless Solyndra stock on it.
View Comments (68)
Fascism pure and simple. NO ONE has the right to tell me I cannot perform a LEGAL activity in the privacy of my home. Not the government, not the anti-whateveridontlike nannies, NO ONE. Fight, protest, disobey until they repeal.
California? 'Nuff said.
They recently banned smoking inside in government housing here. The smoke was drifting between apartments due to their poor design, and wehn the smokers moved, they couldn't get the smoke stains and smell out of the apartments. They they couldn't put non smokers in those apartments. Besides, some of the smokers were trying to burn the places down, and there were cigarette butts everywhere. Lord knows the government wasn't going to clean that up, so they just banned it.
HEY!!! I was simply reporting fact. Why'd I get thumbed down?
Thanks everybody! I feel better now!
Seems crazy but 3 down makes no sense. This kinda thing shows up here once in a while. Probably the same way erik and mitch get 3 up.
Thumbs up, Rose.
Thanks!
I calls 'em like I see 'em.
OK this is the thing. There are ways to absorb those smokes with machines and things so it won't be a health hazard. It is an investment on one's part, but I think worth it. Overall it is perhaps true that a person right's end when another person's right begins, but we need to of course realize that this is the reason why need to form good ties to our neighbors and TALK to our neighbors. Regulations and government expansion are very rarely the answers to issues like this. One day they will say that children arent allowed to eat a doughnut in their homes and take the parent and place them in prison. It sounds outrageous but what stops government from doing it?
Does this mean they(Indians) can't smoke their peace pipe in their own home now? Where the hell is the ACLU? That's discriminating against their religeon. This is BS! Next will be the color of toilet paper.
Colored tp went out in the 70's. The dye polluted waterways. LOL
There was colored toilet paper? How racist can you get?
Very- it came in all the colors of the rainbow to match the room. Facial tissue (Kleenex and such) used to be colored as well. You are old enough to remember, I know!
And they raise their kids to be,.....assholes.
Once, in a fast food restaurant that had a nice salad bar, I settled down to relax, eat dinner, and read a book after work. The place was pretty much empty, and had a huge dining room. Here comes a family with MANY children, (would I be racist to mention that they were Hispanic?), and of course they sat right behind me. The kids, of course, were completely out of control, with the 2 year old boy climbing over the back of their booth to investigate what I was doing. The noise was unbearable. I thought of picking up my stuff and moving, when a better idea struck me.
The seats were, as usual in fast food places, fiberglass. A perfect sounding board. So I would up and let one rip. For a moment, you could have heard a pin drop, as I imagined the entire family staring at me from behind, surprised that I would do such a thing. Then they went back to making noise and jumping all over the place. When I did it again, they decided it was time to move to the other side of the dining room. Problem solved. I still get a good chuckle thinking about it.
....so you, in essence, fumigated them. Interesting. Seems to me, we've answered Nefario's question:
Gru: No, no, no. I said dart gun, not- [stops and starts fanning the scent away]
Dr. Nefario: Oh! Yes. 'Cause I was wondering... under what circumstances would we use this?
Well, now we just need to duplicate them and get them in the hands of the border patrol.
I think it was the noise generated on those fiberglass seats. They reverberate quite nicely. They didn't even hang around to see if it smelled as bad as it sounded. The hardest part was to keep from laughing out loud.
ROFLMAO!!!!!!! Genius!
I can't believe how far from the post I'm responding to my responses are ending up this morning. The post above was in response to Rose talking about the hellion children in restaurants.
Now, in response to the colored toilet paper question, yes, I am old enough, but probably just don't remember well enough. I still think the idea of colored toilet paper is racist, though. That's probably the real reason it's gone.
There's some good ol' fashioned humor in them parts right thar...
I like 'at. Yessiree.
Don't smoke but have to agree (can't walk thru the perfume section of a store with feeling strangled). I believe the anti-smoking nazis are just a bunch of wannabe napoleons that have latched onto something they can impose on others without fear of criticism. They have been so emboldened by their success that now they have taken up the cry of obsesity, child corporal punishment (spanking), junk food in schools, etc.
The really sad part is that the msm, lsm, (however you label the "consensus" media) bites everytime as if the latest whine is the dominant problem facing society.
[aside] In my opinion the two most devasting products introduced to western society in the last 3 hundred years are sugar and coffee, and yet despite scientific papers running 100-200 to one against these products hardly a day goes by without a "news" story about how a new study deems a common additictive, carcinogenic, stimulant (coffee) is discovered to be a deterrent to everything that ails you.
If you believe the recent junk science about coffee and alzheimers I am very sorry but it is total crap, look it up and read.
Pretty sure overweight pateints with cardiac problems, who are needing to loose weight fast, are given strict diet orders and it includes drinking black coffee or tea. Not to guzzle, but in moderation daily. Its called "40 lbs in 30 days diet" or something........
I would like to read the data on the carcinogenic properties of coffee. Would you provide a link, please? Not something like lab rats fed the equivalent of 50 pounds of caffeine per week caused some kind of cancer in them, more human intake level type.
I understand that JW, and would make an effort to keep my smoke away from her.
Of course thats assuming you ask nicely.
But on the other hand, I am allergic to most perfumes and I don't demand people stop using perfume. I avoid places where I'm likely to encounter perfume.
Why should all restaurants and bars be smoke free under law, why can't "non smokers" simply go to a voluntarily smoke free Establishment.
For decades it worked just fine without liberal foolishness. Some bars allowed smoking while others did not.
Why must "non smokers" have their "rights" at the cost of the rights of smokers?
Go to a smoke free establisment if you don't like, and i'll do the same.
To answer your question, does your wife consider me when she dabs on the perfume?
But the bottom line, all the nicety's aside. I do as I please and if you don't like it tough shit.
I won't blow smoke in her face, but I won't put my cigar out either. I'm a grown man and don't allow other people to tell me what to do or not to do.
I don't do these things to others and ecpect the same from them
I'd like to be able to go to a kid-free restaurant. But every time somebody tries it, they get slapped with so many lawsuits they can't keep up with it.
AMEN!!!! I raised my children already (and they were NOT hellions) so I resent not being able to get a quiet meal somewhere. It doesn't matter where I go, when I go, nothing. THe restaurant could be empty, or nearly so, and as soon as my beverage arrives, a family with children (generally already screaming) comes in and is invariably seated next to me. I have requested moves a number of times to protect my eardrums and my blood pressure.
Yeah, that's the problem with assholes. They're, well, assholes.
My wife has severe breathing problems, and let me inform you the jackasses smoking 2 feet from the door to a building "because they can" make her suffer in the most cruel ways. Its really bad seeing someone you love suffering because someone cannot walk 15 feet away from a door and have their daily intake of cancer.
So remember in your efforts to enjoy yourself to ask" is it perhaps hurting someone else"?
You know, the problem is that while I do feel sorry for your wife's situation, we do all have to find a way to live together in peace.
Those people smoking outside the door used to smoke inside the building, and if you think this small amount of smoke is bad, you should have seen what offices were like then. I do feel that they have already made a major concession, and a reasonable attitude will go a long way. Now, if this is the *only* entrance to the building, a word to someone in charge can make them move away -- but usually, there are several entrances, and one of them should be smoke free.
Think about it -- how would someone with peanut allergies handle a crowd of people standing around the building entrance, eating peanuts? They'd find a safer way in, because they are the one with the allergy, they are the ones suffering, and the act of eating peanuts isn't something that is viewed as illegal. Yet.
You're fixating on the "they've already banned smoking in the workplace" bit, and thinking that more banning is good (in the perfectly understandable concern for your wife's health), without also thinking about the fact that it *is* legal activity. At some point, people will rebel at all this nanny state abuse, and cigarettes will come back into style.
While I understand your reasoning for smokers outside, I don't think cigarettes will come back in style until cures for lung cancer, emphysema, chronic bronchitis and asthma are found. Some will likely always smoke or chew. But fewer and fewer are as long time smokers with Oxygen tanks and only one lung are telling them its not worth it. The address their oral fixation with food instead-why do you think obesity is on the rise? Junk food?, yes, sodas? yes simpleovereating? yes. But the why for the overeating is less well publicized.
Well, I'd agree with you on that, but for one thing. There's no accounting for stupid. We have people do all kinds of stupid, unhealthy stuff, and if we banned them, they'd perversely think these things were 'subversive', 'cool', and 'edgy', and double down.
Sun bathers, drinkers, bacon eaters and smokers must all be stopped! Only the government should be able to tell people what they must stop doing! If after serving their first sentence the violators be not re-educated they must be terminated. Oh, wait. Only the government can pronounce such things, I should not have an opinion or desire to do anything the government has not approved.
Don't forget, wear your seat belt!
One difference there, FDH. If I sunbathe, or eat bacon, I am impacting only myself. Alcohol and smoke kill people other than the one using them, against their will. If you don't believe that second hand smoke is dangerous, that's ok. I'm not so sure it has been proven myself. But when a drunk falls asleep in his apartment and drops his cigarette on the carpet, burning the building down, how often does an innocent person die in the fire? When I see smokers and drinkers being responsible, I appreciate it. When I see the majority of them being irrresponsible, I don't appreciate it.
Perhaps this 'majority of them' you witness being irresponsible might disclose that you are surrounding yourself with the wrong bunch of em, because the majority of the people tend to be responsible, whether smoking and drinking or not. Granted, the fulcrum has been moving for years to change that, mostly due to our media mushing the brain of youth, but I digress...
Drunks on the road are of course dangerous, but the .08% limit to blanket ALL people is ludicrous at least, utterly unfounded at best. House and apartment fires happen for many other reasons besides some dick dropping his cigarette. Microwave set too long to reheat pizza started my friend's apartment on fire which killed him. Overloaded wiring is probably the most common house fire starter.
Second hand smoke is another thing. Having been a smoking bar fly for several extended periods of my life I might have developed a certain capacity to overlook it for the most part. Recently, with 3 years of no cigarettes and most of the bars now smoke free as well as my reduced patronage, I definitely found it to be disconcerting to have to stay for several hours in what could easily be called a second hand smoke mill. The same place Sidekick and PoppaJoe met up with me, one of the few area bars that has not been forced to ban smoking. Second hand smoke, like alcohol, bacon and solar exposure affect different people differently.
Your point that it boils down to responsible behavior is exact and it applies to so many different aspects of life. It is an individual's choice to inflict upon himself and responsibility should dictate that he not inflict on others, unless they want some, too.
And responsibility is what I expect, but so rarely see these days. When I see a car door open in a parking lot, and the contents of the ashtray hit the pavement, or have burning objects tossed out of car windows into my face while riding a motorcycle, I tend to get a little upset.
When friends die because somebody had to get drunk to enjoy themselves, I get a LOT upset. The new generations are not taught any responsibility for anything, at least most of them.
Yes, I do know some responsible smokers and drinkers, and I even know some responsible, respectful, and intelligent young people. It's just getting more and more rare all the time. I'm glad I'm old. I don't want to see this place in 50 years.
By the way, I'm heading for Tijuana this morning, my lady has a dentist's appointment. Y'all keep your fingers crossed for me, and if I don't return, you know why.
Take your passport and stay on the main drag!
Be safe!!!!!!!
Egad man! Going to ol' TJ. Your proximity to that cesspool might have something to do with the large amount of disrespect for responsibility you witness. When I live in Tiawaukee... I mean Milwaukee, the area that once had the one good Mexican restaurant in the 60s and 70s became the barrio and drove out everything else. As it spread all the neat German, Irish, Polish and every other ethnic bar and restaurant basically shut down. Changed the whole city.
Talks about something horrible as if it's good advice.
The last statement is actually good advise. (meme ftw)
Good job Mr. Stranger Danger!
Uhhh. What are you trying to say?
HAHA! Yep missed the sarcasm in Dean's post...
Talk about something horrible (government intrusion into our lives) as if it's good.
last sentence...good advice (Wear your seat belt)
Then he threw in his own brand of sarcasm by using the "Mr. Stranger Danger" to indicate the s/he thinks Dean is over reacting.
(I get a lot of practice in reading jibberish)
You rock, Doc!
Wow! A lot of territory got covered between FDH's sarcastic post, and where my reply to it actually ended up, just below. I too missed the sarcasm, but not all of it, since I know FDH to be good at sarcasm. I love my bacon, too. And laying near the pool reading. I even got a lump on my back that had to be removed recently, and there's some who would say it's because I never use sunscreen. But it's MY lump, and MY back, and if I want to scorch my skin, it's MY business. I would never do it if it harmed the skin of others.
Why thank you, Dean. And from what I hear,(uhm well read) you rock too!
I believe yep is speaking to the dangers of blogging while intoxicated. Call it a hunch.
In an effort to check the theory of intoxicated bloggadoccia, I waited a while to respond to 'yep'. I didn't start knocking em back until about 6pm eastern, a few hours ago. My opinion regarding yep's post is that it is confusing. I tried employing a certain level of sarcasm, something entirely new to me, in the post yep responded to.
It is my belief that, while some of those things mentioned may be 'bad' for a person, the government has NO business dictating any level of control over a legal citizen's desire to indulge in any of the activities mentioned, outside of the interference some of these behaviors might have in regard to another legal citizen's immediate well-being. Mandatory seat belts included.
Sun-bathing is dangerous. That has nothing to do with my rarely ever doing it. Even when I was a sveltoid it was always uncomfortable enough to stop me. I love bacon and will thwart all efforts to stop my partaking in my kitchen with whatever force is required. I have beer and whiskey at hand and will likely maintain a certain bit of both until I die. Smoking is another silly indulgence that I enjoyed.
Occasionally smoking a cigar is nothing. I quit cigarettes just before Florida added another dollar per pack tax, a few years ago. The taxation circumstance had virtually nothing to do with my decision to stop. Having smoked cigarettes for probably 28 of the previous 40 years and having quit for various non-committal reasons several times in that span, it was really just a timing thing. It was a Sunday, the nearest ATM was empty and the nearest cigarette seller charged too much more than the next, who happened to be beyond my acceptable walking distance and I was not about to drive that far for smokes. So I quit. Again.
I've had one cigarette since June 2008. Last April I think it was. It was less pleasant than any other time I sparked one up.
Enjoy yourself as long as you realize no one else is responsible for your indulgences. Do nothing that harms another. These two lines sum up the extent to which the government has a legal right to impose itself on you. That is not my opinion. That is about how it reads in the Constitution based on the most fundamental interpretation.
He is our fan...follows us where-ever we go.
Indeed, we have! The realization that this thread was months old had only just come to me. Prolly our old trolly troll. Fun times. Sigh...
HAHA we've been trolled!
My pleasure!
Thank you for throwing yourself upon the sword of research in the exciting field of BWI (Blogging While Intoxicated). We salute your efforts to improve knowledge upon this important (at least, it's a hell of a lot more important than AGW) area.
I raise my glass of scotch and salute you.
For SCIENCE!!
and you're still more easily understood than Yep.
For the record, I am most certainly intoxicated now. I was well beyond legal driving BAC while writing the long blather at 9pm-ish. Bunch of beers and a few whiskeys. I have at least another 2 hours running time. Life is too short to fail trying to enjoy it. I've cooked bacon and put some in the tater au gratin that is now cooling for tomorrow. The oven is baking a loaf of bread that will be done in another half hour or so. These items will be devoured mañana. I won't finish the twelve pack or the bottle of whusky. I will be done bloggating in an hour or so. Driving while hammered is stupid. Haven't done that in quite a while. Cigars are safe in the humidor. Sun is way down. Perhaps I'll go moontan.
I believe you are correct. Certainly the post makes no sense.
So move. If someone exercising their rights bothers you, simply go somewhere else. Also, try looking up the WHO(world health organization) study on the effects of second-hand smoke. The ONLY measurable effect is a 22% DECREASE in lung cancer in the children of smokers.
Someone exercising his rights stops the minute that the exercising of those rights infringes upon the rights of another. That said, it is stupid to invade someone's home and tell him he may not do something that is actually legal. The doorway thing I agree with though. I feel like I run a gauntlet in some places. Other non-smoking co-workers complain because they do not get the equivalent smoke-break(s), which causes unnecessary management issues. Disgusting habit but the legislative side of it is getting way out if hand.
Yeah, I have complained to the management of such places from time to time. Sometimes they listen, and sometimes the manager grinds his cigarette out with his heel and tells me he'll get right on it.
Many of the signs I see near the main entrances of business specifically state that there is no smoking within 20 feet of the entrance. I have no problem with people smoking inside their homes, or inside their cars, as long as they keep the place sealed so it doesn't get out.
A landlord, renting apartments, houses, condos, whatever, should be able to prohibit smoking on HIS property, and seek damages from anyone who can't abide by the rules on HIS property. But if the landlord doesn't care about the damage done by smoking to the property, then he should also be able to allow it. As long as it doesn't encroach on the rights of non-smokers to breathe air free of unnecessary contaminants.
Having a statist totalitarian creep like Obama as president must be giving like-minded jackasses all over the country the idea that this is their time to go for every control-freak wet dream they ever masturbated to. Here in NJ where I live, his Highness the Mayor of Nitwitville has decided we now need PERMITS to have trees cut down on OUR OWN property and a town inspector has to come around and look at any trees before you can cut them down. They will NOT let you cut down more than 25% of the trees on YOUR OWN property. We have a tree that is impacting the foundation of our home and I mistakenly told the town storm-trooper/clerk that it was the only tree on our property (there are others around but I wasn't sure if they were on our property or a neighbor's) and she said the inspector would NOT permit us to cut down the only tree on OUR PROPERTY, EVEN THOUGH IT IS IMPACTING THE FOUNDATION OF OUR HOUSE. The stupid fucking town is already encountering lawsuits over this as several trees the assholes refused to let people cut down were KNOCKED down by the recent hurricane here and damaged people's homes.
California sucks big time but New Jersey is right behind it.
Get about 5 seedlings in around the place -- tell them you have 6 trees, and you need to get rid of the nuisance. Then after the approval, cut it down, and next week, mow over the seedlings. Accidentally, of course.
These people are not only control freaks -- they're idiots. Most of my home improvements are done after 4:00 pm on friday for exactly that reason. I know many people who get around the ban on tearing down/building new by replacing 3 walls at a time. It's asinine, but they aren't smart enough do come up with a way to stop it.
Try cutting down a joshua tree in Joshua Tree, CA. Yes, they're endangered. There's only about eleventy billion left.
Im sitting here smoking a nice Habano Cigar right now...
And Im NOT going to stop!
;)