Laws restricting your freedoms can be good.
You are not allowed to burn down your home if it’ll spread to my home and burn it down as well.
You are not allowed to play music at 110 decibels at midnight, since that noise would affect me.
You are not allowed to do things in your home that directly affect me, such as pour smoke into my home.
There are limits to free expression. Let’s be reasonable: You can’t shout “fire” in a crowded theater. You have limits to what you can do within your property. You have the right to swing your fist. But it STOPS when it reaches my face. When it does, you’re in trouble.
Seriously, isn’t blowing smoke in someone’s face an insult? And if that someone is pregnant, isn’t that adding injury to insult? Is that not uncaring, unloving?
Yes, we conservatives care about freedom. But we also care about our neighbors, not simply about our freedoms and bank accounts.
Look how long I’ve been a FReeper before responding in anger ...
You’re no conservative. I don’t care how long you’ve been on this site. This lady is living in her apartment, minding her own business, all of a sudden YOU (the grand YOU) move in, and her behavior is atrocious all of a sudden.
Everything is right you say except for the fact that as a RENTER you didn’t own the place you lived. You pay for the right to stay there, and because of that, your lack of ownership, you don’t have a RIGHT to set the rules.
If you really can’t stand the smell of smoke, rent from a smoke free apartment complex...they do exist.
Every apartment I’ve heard of has its own independent ventilation system too—so I can assure you that, in spite of the smell, the measurable parts-per-million smoke rate in your apartment, was no health threat to your wife. However she and you didn’t like the smell (and probably was pondering how unhealthy it is....), and she was ill, so you were right to move. That’s what freedom is all about: YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR YOURSELF.
The smoker didn’t swing his fist at you...as you VOLUNTARILY choose to move near to where the smoker lived. Oh, you didn’t check to find out if smoking was allowed there before you moved in? Sorry, that’s your problem—not the owner’s—who is the Landlord.
In a land of liberty, property rights should mean something—and not prohibiting legal activities on your own property (that is the landlord’s NOT the tenant’s) is one of those things. Smoking is, and always has been, fully legal to do—and its a FREE COUNTRY (so far), so if you don’t like the smell, then move on...
It’s true, that if the smoker was a decent person, maybe they would have (or should have) refrained from smoking on behalf of your wife. However, in looking to law enforcement—that is ultimately fines and guns—you are taking your own preferences and demands for common courtesy—to the level of violence (or the threat thereof) and force. Not one person forced you to live in that apartment...but, you are asking the law to force someone to stop a perfectly legal activity—for your own preferences.
You see, as someone who values liberty, I look to find out who is relying on force...which is what any law really is...and those who do, better have a reason which directly benefits everyone. Your not having smelly clothes, or, not feeling bad (when one is ill from something else) is not a “right” guaranteed everyone in the Constitution. A right to live where you choose (that you can afford) is....and a right of an owner—the landlord—to set the regulations in his apartment is also guaranteed by our system.
The science behind the terrible harmfulness of 2nd hand smoke (NOT 1st hand—that’s definitely harmful) is extremely sketchy too....as the amount and content varies literally infinitely and the exposure rate and time just cannot be measured reliably. (The original landmark EPA study on 2nd hand smoke was, actually, proven to be fraudulent too) If it could, than restaurants and businesses could just be told to keep their air-quality at a certain level—and places could allow smoking.
As it is however, the social-engineers who are working to ban smoking everywhere have another goal: Namely to change the behavior of free people, to that which they prefer. There’s is the same KIND of goal as the prohibitionists of the 1920s...to totally prevent a particular activity.
When I hear of “conservatives” going along with banning legal activities on private property....I know they don’t really understand or agree with the concept of PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS. Rights are not the same thing as “doing what is right” after all, as a right is just the maximum thing people can do without directly harming others. So your neighbor CAN play loud music...in the middle of the day. So they can cook smelly food....as your right NOT to smell garlic (or, dare I say cigarette smoke) is not a part of your contract when you agreed to rent.
“Laws restricting your freedoms can be good.”
Disgusting
So that rude woman walked into your home and blew smoke directly into your pregnant wifes face? How horrible! I bet you are like most nonsmokers. You just hated the idea of people smoking so you blew it all out of proportion.
What??????????