Smoking foes bring the fight to apartment buildings -Seattle

The Seattle Times ^ | January 16, 2007 | Sanjay Bhatt

[DakotaRed]

A year after a statewide smoking ban took effect at workplaces, restaurants, bars and other public places, a new battlefield over secondhand smoke is emerging: apartment buildings.

Spurred on by nonsmoking tenants and public-health leaders, more private landlords are considering restricting smoking inside their rental units. And local public-housing agencies are also looking at banning smoking in the units of some buildings.

*snip*

While the state ban prohibits smoking in the common areas of private apartment buildings, such as hallways, community rooms and libraries, residents may smoke inside their units unless the landlord prohibits it.

But smoke from one unit can seep through ventilation shafts and doorways into other units, and the ban has emboldened some nonsmoking tenants to complain about that to their landlords.

"Some landlords are dealing with the issue by banning smoking entirely in their buildings to avoid being stuck in the middle," said Seattle attorney Chris Benis, who advises landlords for the Rental Housing Association of Puget Sound.

[DakotaRed]

This, from the same people who, in 2003, voted down what became known as the "Starbucks Tax," money earmarked for children's programs and at the same time, passed Initiative 75, a measure requiring the Seattle Police Department and the City Attorney's Office to make small-scale marijuana possession -- when for personal use by adults -- their "lowest law-enforcement priority."

Voters scald latte tax; but pot measure passing

The nanny state is alive and well in the Pacific Northwest!

[flashbunny]

ping

[MaxMax]

I smell car exhaust. No driving on the streets!

[kingu]

But smoke from one unit can seep through ventilation shafts and doorways into other units, and the ban has emboldened some nonsmoking tenants to complain about that to their landlords.

I guarantee that the emissions from their rugs, televisions, computers, furniture, etc is far worse than the possible effects of second room smoke from a neighboring apartment. I'd even wager that they get more direct pollutants from someone cooking a steak or burger on the stove, but of course, it's so much easier to blame people's private habits than use a brain.

[mysterio]

Anyone who has an unpopular habit or hobby had better start standing up for smokers. The next two up for grabs are overweight people and gun owners.

[Vigilanteman]

Will farting be outlawed as well?

[mowowie]

I've been wondering how that Condo Seattle built for the Drunken Bums is going along?

[kingu]

Gun owners already got hit - in some jurisdictions, it's against the law to even posses a gun in one's home.

[mysterio]

Just wait.

[ellery]

I don't know -- voting down new taxes and aggressive prosectution of personal marijuana use seem surprisingly anti-nanny-state to me. This anti-tobacco business is nanny-state-times-ten, though. Privately owned detached homes are next.

[DakotaRed]

My point in mentioning that was to show they are fast to impose the nanny state on tobacco smokers, but not on smoking marijuana, which they seem to feel should be freely allowed.

[o_zarkman44]

Government is sure addicted to the tax revenue tobacco products add to the general till. If they take one cent of tax, then they cannot restrict the use because tobacco law is governed by interstate commerce.

At least it seems like there is some recourse for smokers to stop this nazi anti smoker campaign if they could ever find representation.

I don't smoke. But this is a private property rights issue.
This is a taxation withour representation issue.
This is a personal choice issue regarding health.

[boop]

What about second-hand marijuana smoke? That seems like a WAY more important "invasion" of someones private apartment. Or a muslim who is "offended" by the neighbors cooking bacon, or a vegetarian "offended" by steaks being broiled, or.....

[SheLion]

Thanks for the ping. I am playing "ketchup."

[TYVets]

The left coast at work.

[Androcles]

Will farting be outlawed as well?

What do you think the Clean Air act was the first step towards?

[metesky]

Just the way the whole issue is framed by the good little propagandists of the "news" industry aggravates the hell out of me.

Smoking foes bring the fight to apartment buildings

Slavery foes bring fight to rebels

Totalitarian foes bring fight to Nazis

Don't these people have real lives? Jobs? Oh right, this is their job description: Anti-smoking activist. Looks good on a resume, pays very well if you're high enough on the food chain and the best part is, no heavy lifting.

Am I the last dour Yankee that minds his own damn business? I hate them.

[SheLion]

Am I the last dour Yankee that minds his own damn business? I hate them.

Only being illegal in the states today will provide you with everything!

[FLAMING DEATH]

Exactly right. The issue shouldn't be whether or not one likes smoking. The issue should be whether or not we want to give the government a precedent to regulate personal habits. Once they have the law on the books, they won't fail to abuse it to create all manner of restrictive laws, most far more intolerable than cigarette smoke...

[metesky]

The problem, as I see it, is that our local petty despots and tyrants have nothing important to do.

By using issues like smoking they keep their power, divide the people and seem to be doing "something". And the local boobs would rather be seen as doing something rather than nothing, even if they have to gin up a controversy from what used to be called "life".