Posted on 06/13/2008 4:42:41 AM PDT by Invisigoth
Okay.
I will expect you to ask the same question when they ban cheesburgers for your own good. After all, you might infringe on someone’s property if they consider cheesburgers a health hazard. And make no mistake, they will come after something you like sooner or later.
Enjoy the nanny state, and remember those that support it will have a front row seat at the next banning.
You seem upset about my simple question about a specific piece of proposed legislation. I think you should have a Guinness; it will make you feel better.
Thanks, I might just follow that up with a steak & fries before you and your nanny state friends outlaw that for my own good. Who knows, if I rented an apartment from a vegan, I might have to eat tofu and sprouts. Private property, don’t you know...
And I would rather have a Bud Light.
Whatever. Hysterical people bore me.
Have a Nice Day, or not, as you prefer.
I really and truly think you misinterpreted TC’s post.
This legislation is actually a waste of time and money, because as far as I can tell landlords already can prohibit smoking in rental units, just like they can prohibit having pets.
This is not an infringement upon anyone’s rights, although I still don’t understand the supposed need for codification.
Maybe just a nutty legislator, grandstanding. I don't know anything about California lease law, so can't say whether this proposal would give owners more options than they presently have.
Thanks for the ping!
Have a really, really nice day!
Like you, I don’t know anything about CA’s lease laws either. It just seems reasonable to me that this would just automatically be an option for landlords, especially considering how smoker UNfriendly California is.
It does seem reasonable ... but it’s California. There are a plethora of restrictions on landlords throughout the country - some Federal, others state or local. However, something that has an obvious effect on the apartment, such as smoking or pets, should be within the landlord’s control even though not much else is.
It’s funny.......Tenants will mostly complain that landlord/tenant codes unfairly favot the landlords, and landlords will tell you the complete opposite.
I only have indepth knowlege of the Delaware L/T code, but it does tend to lean toward the landlord, especially when it comes land leases for mobile/maufactured homes.
I’ve only dealt with apartment and house rentals.
I’ve only been a tenant, and only in apartments and I haven’t lived in an apartment since 1992!!!!
The mobil home L/T issues have long been hot items in Delaware and I had a client that was in the middle trying to mitigate the 2 sides, so I had little choice but to have to know about it -— knowlege that is completely and totally useless to me now!!!
Oh, you never know when you’ll need a trailer house ...
Generally it is the tenant whose sloppy cleaning is what attracts pests, not the landlord.
Yeah, we ceratinly couldn't get any traction for land owners using eminent domain to pass Prop 98, EVEN THOUGH the rent control elimintation clause in that proposition would have eradicated a form of rent control that is ALREADY ILLEGAL in 44 States in the Union.
But you begin to "get it" when you realize choosing to smoke in one's apartment is considered "my personal business", whereas controlling rent is "for the little guy", and eminent domain is "for the people."
It's not about being rationally consistent from issue to issue, it's about having "the proper position" on each issue separately. Only public education can produce minds with this kind of appetite for cognitive dissonance.
And lots of TV.
The "giving" or "taking" of freedom is not to be left to the legislators.
That would be nice. However, an individual or institution with the power to fine you, take your property, or put you in jail can definitely be said to be practically capable of taking your freedom. The "giving" part is a little more parlous ... stone walls do not a prison make, nor iron bars a cage, and so forth ... and I could have phrased my original post with more philosophical precision.
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.