Re: Californian city bans smoking in apartments and condos
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...ed=rss.bayarea

I'm not sure how I feel about this. Well, I guess I am, I'm very much against it.

The issue was being solved privately, condo groups were taking it upon themselves to not allow smoking in their buildings. I don't see the need for the government to step in and say "here is what you can and cannot do in your own home."

Is this unconstitutional? I think it is, but I don't know which provision would relate to it.

On a related note:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071011/ap_o...1l75akjVV7q188F

California bans smoking in a car with minors.

I actually agree with this one, not sure there's a way for the private market to fix this, and its essentially child abuse.

[/ QUOTE ]

I live in CA. If any [censored] Gmen come and try to tell me I can't smoke in my apartment, they're gonna get acquainted with the business end of my fists.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe they just send a big fine over your way. Not 100% sure, it's in the article though.

As for 2nd hand smoke, I'm not sure, try googling it?

Re: Californian city bans smoking in apartments and condos
 

[ QUOTE ]
What about smoking at home, is that different than cars? Should we ban smoking in homes with minors?

Well, it is different. According the article, smoking in cars is 10x more dangerous for children than smoking in homes.

But, to answer your question, I wouldn't object to the discussion and consideration of banning smoking in homes with minors. It's an interesting idea and might have some validity, although it'd be difficult to enforce.

Edit: And by the way, I'm not anti-tobacco or anything like that, I smoke from time to time, cigars, cigarettes, but I do believe in responsibility.

[/ QUOTE ]

Taso, this is another ( [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] ) post of yours with which I agree! BTW, I am a smoker as well.

Re: Californian city bans smoking in apartments and condos
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Second hand smoking is even more dangerous than first hand,

[/ QUOTE ]

how can this be true?

[/ QUOTE ]

More junk science.

Re: Californian city bans smoking in apartments and condos
 

[ QUOTE ]
Is this unconstitutional? I think it is, but I don't know which provision would relate to it.

[/ QUOTE ]

How could you possibly think something was unconstitutional without having an idea of what part of the Constitution it might violate? Is it because "it just seems wrong to me" or is there something more to it?

Re: Californian city bans smoking in apartments and condos
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is this unconstitutional? I think it is, but I don't know which provision would relate to it.

[/ QUOTE ]

How could you possibly think something was unconstitutional without having an idea of what part of the Constitution it might violate? Is it because "it just seems wrong to me" or is there something more to it?

[/ QUOTE ]

the former. It seemed as if it violates some personal rights, or, that the Constitution doesn't grant power to enact such a law, although sort of irrelivant I suppose. I'd need to read the California state constitution to really know if it violates any part of their constitutiion.


As for the second hand smoke thing, is that really "junk science"? I've never claimed to be an expert on the topic.

Re: Californian city bans smoking in apartments and condos
 

[ QUOTE ]
My father smoked when I was growing up--at home, in the car, wherever. Stinky? Yes. Abusive? Give me a break.

[/ QUOTE ]

When I was growing up my mother had remarried to a smoker. I am the only person in my family that has asthma. I remember as a child not being able to breath if he drove me anywhere because the car would be full of smoke. I am against government intervention, but I really wish I didn't have asthma.

Re: Californian city bans smoking in apartments and condos
 

[ QUOTE ]
my personal experience: as a child both parents smoked a lot, and I could literally not run for 10 seconds without getting winded. starting in high school I did my best to remedy it, wasn't home much , had my own bedroom (windows), 1 parent quit and the other cut back, and I joined cross country and stuff to build up my lungs. I can testify that it really does damage children, at least athletically.

btw, in 8th grade a friend offered me a cigarrette (13, time to be "cool"), and I could inhale right away without coughing or anything my lungs were so used to the smoke.

true story.

[/ QUOTE ]

Funny, both my parents were 2-pack-a-dayers, and I was a top athlete in my little town and could run all day if I wanted to.

Personal anecdotes aren't any good when it comes to this stuff.

Re: Californian city bans smoking in apartments and condos
 

[ QUOTE ]

Is this unconstitutional?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. The constitution barely interferes with what local governments can do.

Re: Californian city bans smoking in apartments and condos
 

[ QUOTE ]

As for the second hand smoke thing, is that really "junk science"? I've never claimed to be an expert on the topic.

[/ QUOTE ]

The statement was second hand smoke was more dangerous than smoking. I don't believe it. They better show unbiased proof.

Re: Californian city bans smoking in apartments and condos
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

As for the second hand smoke thing, is that really "junk science"? I've never claimed to be an expert on the topic.

[/ QUOTE ]

The statement was second hand smoke was more dangerous than smoking. I don't believe it. They better show unbiased proof.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wonder, why is this so hard to believe? Normal smoking is filtered, second hand smoke is unfiltered.