Skip to comments.
City Where It's Now Illegal to Smoke in Your Own Home
AOL ^
| 11-20-13
| Alan Farnham
Posted on 11/22/2013 10:01:45 AM PST by TurboZamboni
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-62 next last
Years ago, he said, when restrictions on smoking were first introduced, "the spirit of the legislation was supposedly to protect people who did not want to be exposed to smoke." Today, he said, the motivating spirit had changed: People disapprove of the habit, and wish to restrict it whether or not it affects them directly.
To: TurboZamboni
So. The solution here is to step outside on your porch or balcony and smoke away.
Ooops. I’m sure they have laws against that too.
2
posted on
11/22/2013 10:06:13 AM PST
by
Responsibility2nd
(NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
To: TurboZamboni
I guarantee you this will only be enforced on white, middle-class taxpayers. Can you see them trying to enforce it on the illegals living in those types of dwellings?
3
posted on
11/22/2013 10:06:22 AM PST
by
IYAS9YAS
(Has anyone seen my tagline? It was here yesterday. I seem to have misplaced it.)
To: TurboZamboni
If they try to prohibit the smoking of marijuana there will be hell to pay.
To: TurboZamboni
It's much easier in today's world to just be a criminal.
/johnny
To: TurboZamboni
I can’t imagine living in a “house” that shares walls.
To: JRandomFreeper
It’s much easier in today’s world to just be a criminal.
/johnny
It certainly is. You and I are probably breaking several right now.
Wasn’t there a thing about “ex post facto” laws in this country, something like that?
7
posted on
11/22/2013 10:10:24 AM PST
by
The Antiyuppie
("When small men cast long shadows, then it is very late in the day.")
To: Responsibility2nd
The ordinance cites such studies, plus a 2011 study by UCLA that found that California property owners paid up to $18 million a year to clean apartments vacated by tenants who'd smoked. Boo freaking hoo. I'm sure the owners collected twice that amount in forfeited damage deposits when the smokers moved out. If not - then its their own fault.
8
posted on
11/22/2013 10:10:33 AM PST
by
Responsibility2nd
(NO LIBS. This Means Liberals and (L)libertarians! Same Thing. NO LIBS!!)
To: TurboZamboni
Today, he said, the motivating spirit had changed: People disapprove of the habit, and wish to restrict it whether or not it affects them directly. That has ALWAYS been the motive behind the bans.
9
posted on
11/22/2013 10:11:12 AM PST
by
Gabz
(Democrats for Voldemort.)
To: TurboZamboni
The Left's "lifeboat" conception of healthcare will lead to an infinity of such interventions into our private lives. If "everyone" is paying for healthcare then "everyone" has a stake in how you conduct yourself and, thus, has a "right" to tell you what you can and can't ingest, what you can and can't weigh, how much sun you must or must not get, what medications you may or may not have, what surgery you may or may not receive, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera,... Universal healthcare is the key to universal control.
To: Born to Conserve
A a Duplex is shaped like an ordinary house (sometimes converted from a one-family house) and so it does share walls with another tenant.
11
posted on
11/22/2013 10:11:58 AM PST
by
Star Traveler
(Remember to keep the Messiah of Israel in the One-World Government that we look forward to coming)
To: IYAS9YAS
Does San Rafael have any housing projects where we can expect enforcement?
Seriously, while I’m not a smoker, I’d take it up and dare them to come and get me. Yet people will not do anything and simply surrender their Consitutional right and allow the government to encroach on legal activity within their own home.
When do they start cracking down on home Bible studies?
12
posted on
11/22/2013 10:12:54 AM PST
by
Obadiah
(I Like Ted.)
To: Responsibility2nd
You cannot smoke within 15 feet [I think that’s the amount] of a window or door. The smoke blows right in.
13
posted on
11/22/2013 10:16:14 AM PST
by
BunnySlippers
(I LOVE BULL MARKETS . . .)
To: The Antiyuppie
14
posted on
11/22/2013 10:16:41 AM PST
by
listenhillary
(Courts, law enforcement, roads and national defense should be the extent of government)
To: Gabz
Here in MN, leftists are tring to ban e-cigs as well.
They just look like smoking.
15
posted on
11/22/2013 10:17:10 AM PST
by
TurboZamboni
(Marx smelled bad & lived with his parents most his life.)
To: Born to Conserve
Townhouses, condominiums.
16
posted on
11/22/2013 10:17:14 AM PST
by
BunnySlippers
(I LOVE BULL MARKETS . . .)
To: Obadiah
17
posted on
11/22/2013 10:18:56 AM PST
by
TurboZamboni
(Marx smelled bad & lived with his parents most his life.)
To: TurboZamboni
The leftists and their big Pharma backers are trying to get the e-cigs banned in the U.S. period.
18
posted on
11/22/2013 10:21:47 AM PST
by
Gabz
(Democrats for Voldemort.)
To: JRandomFreeper
when govt makes everything illegal, eveyone’s a criminal.
since law-abiding people haven’t voluntarily turned into criminals so govt can come after them,
they have forced govt to make more and more things illegal so they have a pretext to go after them.
law isnt used for justice anymore.
19
posted on
11/22/2013 10:22:28 AM PST
by
Secret Agent Man
(Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
To: Gabz
IIRC, Phizer makes Chantix and a type of e-cig.
They’re probably paying off legislators.
20
posted on
11/22/2013 10:22:51 AM PST
by
TurboZamboni
(Marx smelled bad & lived with his parents most his life.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-62 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson