Life Take It Outside…Your Own Home
posted by October 10 at 14:16 PM
onSmokers in Belmont, California have 30 days to fire up inside their apartments:
Thought to be the first of its kind in California, the ordinance declares secondhand smoke a public nuisance and extends the city’s current smoking ban to include multi-unit, multi-story residences.Though Belmont and some other California cities already restrict smoking in multi-unit common areas, Belmont is the first city to extend secondhand smoke regulation to the inside of individual apartment units.
The ordinance doesn’t affect everyone, however:
Smoking will still be allowed in single-family homes and their yards, and units and yards in apartment buildings, condominiums and townhouses that do not share any common floors or ceilings with other units.
Comments
That's idiotic. How do they enforce it? I can just see the SWAT teams knocking down the door and storming into my apartment.
*affect
good. i'd like to see the nasty things outlawed entirely. ciggy butts make up a huge portion of the waste stream into waterways, where they poison wildlife.
Well, at least people won't look at me askance anymore,
When they see my "Sorry, No Fags Allowed" sign on my door.
2) Ugh. I'll fix it. Thanks.
I'm not sure how I feel about this. On the one hand, it's your home and you have a right to do what you want in it, whether it's smoke or have anal sex.
On the other hand, it would be awesome if we could leave our sliding door open without dealing with the downstairs neighbor's cigarette smoke all summer long. Bonus points: we're pretty sure he smokes in the bathroom, because all our towels smell like ashtrays.
You win this round, Grammar police, but in the future, watch out for this guy:
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/effect_an_effect.png
Actually, in my old apartment my bedroom window was right over my downstairs neighbor's balcony and in the summer with all the windows open their smoke would come right into my bedroom. It was annoying. They were loud and stupid too.
I guess I'll further repress my fetish for sexy smokers. Or move to Europe.
i don't smoke, hate the smell, blahblahblah but COME THE FUCK ON, PEOPLE. this is beyond nanny state. THIS IS FASCISM. cigarettes may be gross, tobacco corporations may be evil incarnate, but that should not infringe on people's fundamental right to do whatever the fuck they want in the privacy of their own home - and yes, that right includes committing slow suicide.
and don't feed me the 2nd hand smoke junk science BS that has been the anti-smoking fascist's escape hatch throughout all of this. if you honestly believe you can "catch" cancer by trace amounts of cigarette smoke seeping through the cracks in your walls, you are either willfully delusional or just plain fucking stupid.
They'll be coming for your booze next.
Not to mention your pot.
Sweet!
FYI, it's illegal to smoke in most places in France.
It's just that the French don't care.
I kind of hate smoking but I also think this law is kinda stupid so it's a toss up.
Because the regulations don't affect everyone, it seems like this could be challenged on equal protection grounds.
It's pretty hilarious that there's an ad in the sidebar advertising "sexy Halloween costumes" after all the discussion of such things here on Slog.
Apartments? Okay.
Condos/Homes: No.
I'm going as Sexy Louis Pasteur!
bring it on!!!! one less place u asshole smokers are allowed to poison the rest of us
First they came for the smokes and I did nothing because I hated cigarettes, then they came for my booze and pot and I was bummed about having to be a criminal, then they implemented a State Sanctioned Diet and I crashed a fucking hi-jacked plane into Mount Rushmore because nobody gets between me and my Pizza!
Suck it, Nannystaters.
I'm not all that crazy about smoking myself (although I do admit to occasionally cadging cigs off people when I've been drinking a bit), but seriously, if we as a society were really that worried about noxious gasses going into our lungs there are literally scores of other products - starting with carbon-monoxide spewing automobilies - that would seem to pose far greater health risks than second-hand cigarette smoke.
Yet, I don't hear anyone calling for a ban on automobile exhaust fumes, and the like.
Not to mention that no one will try to enforce this unless your neighbors complain, so you will depend on your neighbor's good will to not turn you in. So enforcement and reporting will be uneven and completely on a whim. Great law.
I'm all for a nanny state as long as she's cute. Eat it smokers!
@21 - of course we're not calling for a ban or decrease of noxious gasses spewing from automobiles ... we have RTID/ST2 to increase them.
First they came for the smokes and I did nothing because I hated cigarettes, then they came for my booze and pot and I was bummed about having to be a criminal, then they implemented a State Sanctioned Diet and I crashed a fucking hi-jacked plane into Mount Rushmore because nobody gets between me and my Pizza!
Suck it, Nannystaters.
the only place to smoke pot is inside your apartment or 6 miles up a trail in the mountains.
this ain't right.
Ever wonder how liberals got the name of "Big Government Liberals"? Well here is a great example.
I've long considered myself to be virulently anti-smoking. I was all for the restaurant smoking ban. But this is stupid. Smoking is a disgusting habit, and one that will probably kill you eventually. But if you want to smoke you your own goddamned apartment, then I think you have every right to do so.
here's the reality folks: smoking is on its way out. As long as smokers affect nonsmokers, they will continue to be pushed to the margins. If you want to avoid being burdened by the inevitable, my suggestion is to quit.
All this talk about the naughty smoking is making me really want a cig.
173,770 new cases of lung cancer (2004)
452,327 deaths in the United States in 2004 (heart attacks and angina)
Looks like fast food, no exercise, overweight condition, trans-fats, and tons of other items are much more deadly than first-hand or second-hand smoke.
But, smoking is "bad" and therefore we can drill down and spend tons of money and bend society's rules anyway we like it to reduce a threat which is one-third of a much greater health risk.
Gotta love America - true example of a bell curve population.
The number one and number two things that kill women - heart attacks and stroke.
Risk ratio of heart attack/stroke compared to terrorism: 500,000:1
Likelihood women think they will die from terrorist attack compared to other causes 1:1.
Hmmm.
Time to realize living in FEAR does not work ... NOW.
Good God. I hate smoking with a passion, and even I can't support this. Mind you, it's rare that I've found any rental unit that even allows smoking, but that's a voluntary contractual agreement.
...next it'll be noisy masturbation!
The second hand smoke argument is so specious - growing up my sibs and I rode in the back seat of our '41 Dodge while my dad smoked like an industrial chimney. Sometimes the windows were closed. He smoked in the house throughout our childhood and teenagery. At 76, he died of colon cancer. Mom - who never smoked - is still breathing with uncluttered lungs at 94 as are the rest of us.
But the banning of smoking in the privacy of one's home may be moot as the ridiculous taxation of cigarettes will soon make it necessary for true tobacco fiends to start robbing old ladies in the park just to support their habit.
We're not a nation of sheep but a nation of 'fraidy cats. Jesus Christ in a Soup Dish!
Next week: Ban on butter in the home, because it causes heart attacks (think of the children!).
Ban pollution and overpopulation.
Noble intent, bad bad bad bad bad BAD precedent set.
Now civic government can tell you what you can and can't do in your own home. Privacy no longer exists under the law.
Nice work, Belmont. And nice work, America, not calling Belmont out on this.
Just rip up the fucking constitution.
Everyone can carry a gun, but nobody can have a cigarette. If you're 18-20, you can get shot in Iraq, but you can't get a shot and a chaser.
What a weird age in which we live.
#38: Precedent? Where the hell have you been living? The government has been able to tell people what they can and can't do in their homes for EVER.
You can't play your music too loud past a certain hour in YOUR OWN HOME!!! People get over yourselves.
The rule of thumb is this: you can do what you want in your home as long as it doesn't prevent others from the enjoyment of their own home. If your smoke gets into my apartment, then you are preventing me from being able to enjoy my space.
That shouldn't be allowed. Just as a neighbor should not be able to play music all night long as loud as he wants to the detriment of his neighbors.
By that logic, BBQs should be banned as well, as well as cooking anything that someone next door might find disgusting, among other things.
The problem: how do you monitor smoking? Some people actually seal off their living spaces, close the windows and such, or the air out an open window isn't accessible to others. Do you raid people's apartments? Therein lies the problem.
I say green light on the raids. let the flash-bangs fly!
Gomez, you must be intentionally dense. The enforcement will be brought on only where a neighbor complains. Obviously, if the smoke stays in the unit and doesn't drift over to other units, there will be no one complaining.
I am guessing you live in a house anyway, so none of this even affects you. It sucks to be in a year long lease, and have to smell cigarette smoke in your unit all day, every single day in your home.
To me, it made less sense to ban smoking in bars, as people can choose to go in them or not. In an apartment, you can't pick your neighbor. I have been in a place for over a year with no problems and then had a chain smoker move in which ultimately forced me to move to get away from the smoke.
In your mind, Gomez, is that the way things should work?
I smoked a pack a day, since I was a teenager until I was about 30. I've got no irrational hatred for smokers, or cigarettes; I even like the smell in the right time or place. Even when I smoked, my bedroom wasn't one of those places.
I don't think this law is fascist or even particularly over the top, (have you ever had neighbors that smoke in a old building? It's not about second hand smoke vs. cancer, it's about quality of life) but I am surprised it's being handled at the city council level. This is probably going drag them down in lawsuits for some time.
What would make more sense, is for the state to allow insurance providers to drop smoking-allowed building from homeowners liability coverage, which should be mandatory - basically making it impossible for multi-unit buildings to allow smoking on their premises.
@44
yeah, so when Grandpa Joe falls asleep with a cig in his hand, burns down the whole building, and finds his ass on the wrong side of a multi-million dollar lawsuit that he can't ever dream of being able to pay for... that benefits who?
Comments Closed
In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).