Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: So HUD is angling to ban smoking in public housing? What the Fuck?? [View all]pnwmom
(110,176 posts)139. An HUD apartment isn't like a bar that you can choose to go to.
People with means to get a private apartment or house can choose to live in one with clean air. People who are dependent on HUD housing should also be able to breathe clean air.
Anyone who smokes can do so outside. The right of children and other non-smokers to breathe clean air trumps the right of smokers to smoke indoors.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
258 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
So HUD is angling to ban smoking in public housing? What the Fuck?? [View all]
Stinky The Clown
Nov 2015
OP
This isnt why they hate liberals. They hate liberals because liberals dont hate Black people
randys1
Nov 2015
#3
Someone brought up on the call that many people with mental illness smoke to self-medicate.
KamaAina
Nov 2015
#181
And that's why you can never, EVER smell the cooking of your neighbors from your own apartment.
MADem
Nov 2015
#177
People with the means can rent apartments or houses where they can breathe clean air.
pnwmom
Nov 2015
#136
If you had it your way you would ban smoking except in the bottom of the Grand Canyon LOL
snooper2
Nov 2015
#168
If you had your way you'd allow smoking in the maternity wing of a hospital. Especially
pnwmom
Nov 2015
#183
I don't know. As I understand it, different vapors differ in their composition. nt
pnwmom
Nov 2015
#194
I think the guy in the next apartment has a right to a smoke free residence
Travis_0004
Nov 2015
#47
As a landlord I'm perfectly in my rights making no-smoking a condition of the lease
onenote
Nov 2015
#83
They wouldn't need to deny housing to a smoker. But they could legally ban smoking indoors.n/t
pnwmom
Nov 2015
#138
Not allowing processed meats or trans fats would 'encourage healthy behavior', too. Sound good?
X_Digger
Nov 2015
#107
When you eat processed food you're not putting people in the next apartment at risk.
pnwmom
Nov 2015
#205
I am ok with this. Smoking drunks burn down home. The two family members i have who live in
kelliekat44
Nov 2015
#11
It's all about allowing non-smokers, many of whom are children, to breathe clean air.
pnwmom
Nov 2015
#15
Yep. People don't want others doing a 'sin' they don't approve of. It's like a religion to them
The Straight Story
Nov 2015
#85
No. Only in multi-unit buildings where the air pollution can affect other units.
pnwmom
Nov 2015
#22
I don't think anyone, parent or not, should be smoking inside a multi-unit building. nt
pnwmom
Nov 2015
#79
This isn't "their own home". It's owned by all of us and rented to poor people cheaply...
lumberjack_jeff
Nov 2015
#36
Yes, but for very low income tenants it's not a simple choice of moving elsewhere.
Gormy Cuss
Nov 2015
#117
So what do libertarians do when they have a problem with smoke wafting in to their unit?
Hassin Bin Sober
Nov 2015
#53
And poor children need just as clean air to breathe as middle and upper income children. n/t
pnwmom
Nov 2015
#23
"Research has shown that smoke travels through air ducts and seeps through walls..."
beevul
Nov 2015
#130
It would be better if they DID smoke outside but I'd never approve a law forbiding it.
BlueJazz
Nov 2015
#31
What about the children who live in the unit next door and have to breathe that dirty air?
pnwmom
Nov 2015
#34
Yes they do. Actually they deserve a lot more. I'm torn between both sides but I have to ..
BlueJazz
Nov 2015
#67
Keep in mind, I'm just saying how I would rule. What others do is their own right.
BlueJazz
Nov 2015
#71
I am a little torn by this. I don't like the paternalism in telling people what they can or cannot
smirkymonkey
Nov 2015
#41
I own two rentals. Both are non smoking. But my tenants have a choice of where to live
Stinky The Clown
Nov 2015
#46
I don't want you driving on the roads I paid for, but it doesn't work that way.
Gormy Cuss
Nov 2015
#74
So... the fact that the public subsidizes their rent means they should have *fewer* rules? n/t
lumberjack_jeff
Nov 2015
#58
When the landlord is the state, there are fewer restrictions that can be made.
X_Digger
Nov 2015
#109
Again, eating a hot dog puts no one at risk except for the eater. Smoking cigarettes
pnwmom
Nov 2015
#219
"within its rights to make regulations based on health" .. did someone ninja your kb?
X_Digger
Nov 2015
#220
That doesn't mean that EVERY possible regulation can be justified. But it is easy to justify,
pnwmom
Nov 2015
#221
Oh, so children in a smoker's home pale next to the non smokers in another apartment?!?!
X_Digger
Nov 2015
#222
So people in public housing have no right to be free from second-hand smoke.
alphafemale
Nov 2015
#246
Beyond the obvious health risks for non-smokers in public housing, how about taking a look
madinmaryland
Nov 2015
#45
Both the Center for Disease Control and the American Cancer Society say that smoking
pnwmom
Nov 2015
#207
Will this affect the wealthy or just poor people? Why do so many approve of controlling the poor?
The Straight Story
Nov 2015
#77
Agreed. They think nothing of the same concept, when applied to their particular bugabear.
X_Digger
Nov 2015
#110
I'm surprised anyone would think it's okay to force HUD families comprised of non-smokers
pnwmom
Nov 2015
#143
I would find your stance far more righteous if you were consistent in standing up for poor children
Bluenorthwest
Nov 2015
#161
So on that theory, there should be no restrictions on tenant in public housing?
onenote
Nov 2015
#91
Because the landlord is the state, and this is housing of last resort for many.
X_Digger
Nov 2015
#111
I'm disgusted. Homeless smoker? Fuck em, no housing for you and your filthy habit.
X_Digger
Nov 2015
#241
If they don't like it, they can smoke outside. The right of non-smokers in HUD housing
pnwmom
Nov 2015
#144
In the worst-case scenario, all it might take is a bump in turnout on the Southside
KamaAina
Nov 2015
#119
Neither of the things pollutes the air of other apartment renters, as cigarette smoke does. n/t
pnwmom
Nov 2015
#145
Don't poor children and other non-smokers have the same right to breath decent air
pnwmom
Nov 2015
#184
I agree. We should not be obligated to allow renters to deliberately damage public property. nt
Zorra
Nov 2015
#257
In the NPR story on this, they noted that it is already banned in 20% of public housing.
FSogol
Nov 2015
#170
I see the same possibility. And that's just one reason I think this is a terrible idea.
Stinky The Clown
Nov 2015
#215