Latest Breaking News

penultimate

(1,110 posts)

60. All indoor smoking? Even if you own your home?

Reply to truthisfreedom (Reply #2)

Sun Nov 24, 2013, 09:42 AM

Nov 2013

As for the tax, I'll agree with that if we can also add ridiculous taxes to thing I do not like.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

145 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

San Rafael Smoking Ban, Strictest In The Nation, Goes Into Effect [View all] onehandle Nov 2013 OP

One of the reasons I moved to Tucson. OffWithTheirHeads Nov 2013 #1

And Arizona isn't? olddad56 Nov 2013 #3

I'm sick of cigarette smoke seeping into my home from adjoining residences. JimDandy Nov 2013 #41

I don't think it's ridiculous at all. Arugula Latte Nov 2013 #46

At least the jack-booted thugs won't have to breathe secondhand smoke Android3.14 Nov 2013 #52

Right, because not poisoning someone's air in their own home is exactly like nazism. Arugula Latte Nov 2013 #78

No, but telling people what they can do in their own homes is like Nazism Android3.14 Nov 2013 #87

Can you shoot heroin in your own home, or torture some child? Bandit Nov 2013 #113

So your argument is, if it is harmful to yourself or to a child... Android3.14 Nov 2013 #117

"as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of others." Bandit Nov 2013 #118

So outside smoking should be banned as well? bunnies Nov 2013 #127

What about cats and those allergic to cat dander? Android3.14 Nov 2013 #130

What about the rights of non-smokers? Arugula Latte Nov 2013 #120

They can leave Android3.14 Nov 2013 #129

Why should they leave? They're not the ones contaminating someone else's space and air. Arugula Latte Nov 2013 #132

That is a thoughtless thing to say. Android3.14 Nov 2013 #137

You are intolerant of people who just want to be able to breathe freely in their own homes. Arugula Latte Nov 2013 #138

My tolerance isn't the question Android3.14 Nov 2013 #139

Not strict enough. Ban smoking within 100 ft of any business. truthisfreedom Nov 2013 #2

After we ban trucks and cars maybe.. pipoman Nov 2013 #4

Do you have statistics to back up your claim? JDPriestly Nov 2013 #15

I don't need stats to pipoman Nov 2013 #17

Pump the cabin full of water for an hour. Hassin Bin Sober Nov 2013 #24

LOL pipoman Nov 2013 #30

Come to think of it. Water is more poisonous because it will kill you in three minutes. Hassin Bin Sober Nov 2013 #34

Not following how any of this pipoman Nov 2013 #35

you were the one to steer the conversation down this.... Hassin Bin Sober Nov 2013 #43

about those stats azurnoir Nov 2013 #75

That's very interesting ... Fantastic Anarchist Nov 2013 #119

Here are the stats that I found on estimated deaths from auto pollution. JDPriestly Nov 2013 #116

Whoa, does he really need statistics to prove .99center Nov 2013 #23

Poor people who smoke die just as young as rich people who smoke. JDPriestly Nov 2013 #25

Smoking rates much higher for the less educated and for the poor progree Nov 2013 #39

It is interesting and tragic. JDPriestly Nov 2013 #44

By the way, California which is the state in which this ordinance was passed, JDPriestly Nov 2013 #115

Not stats but, a new study found pollution to be worse than passive smoking. bunnies Nov 2013 #108

"More so than passive smoking," but not more than smoking. JDPriestly Nov 2013 #114

I dont smoke. bunnies Nov 2013 #123

What if the family next door has an asthmatic child? JDPriestly Nov 2013 #128

Banning smoking in apartments wont make it easier to quit smoking... bunnies Nov 2013 #131

the CIG smoke weissmam Nov 2013 #51

I'd love to ban all of the stinky vehicles - they encroach on my freedom to breath air without stink PassingFancy Nov 2013 #103

See my post #108 bunnies Nov 2013 #109

It really is a no-brainer pipoman Nov 2013 #110

Ive always thought so too. bunnies Nov 2013 #111

Personally, I think Treant Nov 2013 #5

Must suck to be you. nt beaglelover Nov 2013 #7

Freedom of peech wreck my personal enjoyment of life. . .especially when Nanjing to Seoul Nov 2013 #11

why "all indoor smoking"? alp227 Nov 2013 #13

If you read it carefully, it isn't all indoor smoking. It is only smoking in apartments and JDPriestly Nov 2013 #26

They tired prohibition with booze iandhr Nov 2013 #14

It's not prohibition of item. It's restriction within place. onehandle Nov 2013 #18

That's what people said about the smoking ban in bars and restaurants alcibiades_mystery Nov 2013 #55

I agree with those 100% iandhr Nov 2013 #107

Banning outdoor smoking is inevitable. Including the chemical spewing 'e-cigs.' nt onehandle Nov 2013 #20

Quite possibly Treant Nov 2013 #21

Well, ok, I suppose water vapor IS two chemicals. AtheistCrusader Nov 2013 #47

Technically, no... Treant Nov 2013 #58

Oh, wait... The substance in e-cigs is just water? onehandle Nov 2013 #61

Obviously it changes the equation if someone is vaping something other than e-juice ... brett_jv Nov 2013 #76

Hence my air freshener comment Treant Nov 2013 #83

When you say 'ooga booga chemicals' one should point out, everything is a chemical. AtheistCrusader Nov 2013 #77

'Global warming is a hoax and carbon dioxide is harmless' onehandle Nov 2013 #82

What's the matter, pissed you cited Fox News in your hurry there? AtheistCrusader Nov 2013 #86

Gosh. So many DUers don't smoke, but know so much about it. onehandle Nov 2013 #95

My father died from it. AtheistCrusader Nov 2013 #96

I changed the one out of four links to one of the hundreds of other sites that reported that story. onehandle Nov 2013 #97

Assumes facts not in evidence. AtheistCrusader Nov 2013 #98

In your totalitarian dreams, perhaps. Comrade Grumpy Nov 2013 #74

"chemical spewing 'e-cigs" <-------------- what a load of shite Snowfield Nov 2013 #89

I looked at a bottle of vanilla extract in my pantry today. Ingredient #2: propylene glycol AtheistCrusader Nov 2013 #99

All indoor smoking? Even if you own your home? penultimate Nov 2013 #60

It's unenforceable Warpy Nov 2013 #6

+1 and I don't think it will hold up in court when challenged. beaglelover Nov 2013 #8

I like the bans on indoor public spaces. Warpy Nov 2013 #9

I'm fine with those bans too..... beaglelover Nov 2013 #10

But what if the person lives in a condo or apartment alp227 Nov 2013 #12

I've lived in lots of apartments.. EX500rider Nov 2013 #112

If you don't own the property SoCalNative Nov 2013 #16

Usually limited by the owner, not the government.. pipoman Nov 2013 #19

Smokers are in the minority in many parts of California. JDPriestly Nov 2013 #29

Smokers are probably the minority just about everywhere as the nationwide smoking rate is about 18% progree Nov 2013 #33

I think it is a stupid law. But... eallen Nov 2013 #31

The interesting aspect is ..banning the use of a legal substance. dixiegrrrrl Nov 2013 #22

There is plenty of precedent regulating legal substances. Hassin Bin Sober Nov 2013 #32

They are not banning the use of a legal substance. JDPriestly Nov 2013 #37

It's regulated, not banned Warpy Nov 2013 #42

They are even trying to ban people from smoking on their front porch or in their yards PassingFancy Nov 2013 #105

Balconies won't help LTG Nov 2013 #49

"...but if you’re a smoker, it might not be the place for you." Deep13 Nov 2013 #27

You know the worst place to go in and out of is Walmart and grocery stores. YOHABLO Nov 2013 #28

Smoking is an addiction, and the failure to acknowledge the damage inflicted by an addiction JDPriestly Nov 2013 #38

I admit I'm a smoker SnakeEyes Nov 2013 #140

To say nothing of the formaldehyde emanating from the clothes, furniture and other AtheistCrusader Nov 2013 #100

does not mention whether medical marijuana is exempt pothos Nov 2013 #36

Modern codified laws usually have a definitional section. Deep13 Nov 2013 #48

Not exempted LTG Nov 2013 #50

The cost alone mimi85 Nov 2013 #40

People can still smoke outside if they want to. darkangel218 Nov 2013 #45

Ban Assholes as well KentuckyMark Nov 2013 #53

How did we ever survive childhood in the 50? HockeyMom Nov 2013 #54

Every time I had to be in the car with my smoking mom I was nauseous diane in sf Nov 2013 #56

60,000 people die each year in the U.S. from Second Hand Smoke related deaths. (600,000 worldwide) onehandle Nov 2013 #57

How many Boomers survived their childhood? HockeyMom Nov 2013 #59

At 74, I am far older than a boomer. RebelOne Nov 2013 #124

Truly terrible argument. Union Scribe Nov 2013 #135

I have scar tissue in my lungs, visible on an X ray. Manifestor_of_Light Nov 2013 #145

How about Third Hand Somking? HockeyMom Nov 2013 #63

Funny you should mention it. It is a thing. onehandle Nov 2013 #65

Mandatory Committment HockeyMom Nov 2013 #67

3rd hand smoke!!! What a bunch of BS! beaglelover Nov 2013 #80

Just because you don't care about its effects on other people, animals and the environment Arugula Latte Nov 2013 #122

I had to wash down my paneling and cabinets in my house when I moved in. Manifestor_of_Light Nov 2013 #144

That number seems to grow despite the decline in smokers. SnakeEyes Nov 2013 #141

+1 that's why I don't buy into all this nanny state bullshit! beaglelover Nov 2013 #79

Your home is not entirely your home SnakeEyes Nov 2013 #142

Don't light a candle in the house HockeyMom Nov 2013 #90

Lame. Arugula Latte Nov 2013 #121

Over the years, people stopped smoking not because of illness or the price of valerief Nov 2013 #62

Nope, just like Prohibition HockeyMom Nov 2013 #85

There is no science behind this. None. former9thward Nov 2013 #64

Impeach The U.S. Surgeon General! onehandle Nov 2013 #66

Please link to a study. former9thward Nov 2013 #68

Try reading the article. There's a link there. onehandle Nov 2013 #69

Maybe you should read the article. former9thward Nov 2013 #70

There is no study. This is all manufactured nanny state BS! beaglelover Nov 2013 #81

Hey onehandle, that report is pretty big though so it would help support you cstanleytech Nov 2013 #104

Message auto-removed Name removed Nov 2013 #93

Of course theres no study. bunnies Nov 2013 #126

But it can get people to stop smoking, and you know what they get with that? valerief Nov 2013 #134

Perhaps we should just make smoking a crime RoccoR5955 Nov 2013 #71

In the laid back California town of sunny San Rafael Lived a girl named Pearly Sweetcake... Brother Buzz Nov 2013 #72

As a non smoker, I still find this to be excessive over reach I can't support on point Nov 2013 #73

I don't think this will work out well NutmegYankee Nov 2013 #84

If the walls are not shared (independent) then this won't apply. n/t JimDandy Nov 2013 #101

I will not only smoke in my house Titonwan Nov 2013 #88

Message auto-removed Name removed Nov 2013 #92

From the city that brought you 420! Egnever Nov 2013 #106

Message auto-removed Name removed Nov 2013 #91

Outdoor smoking banned salimbag Nov 2013 #94

Setting aside the common pro and anti smoking arguments whats everyones thoughts on what SCOTUS will cstanleytech Nov 2013 #102

They implemented this with public housing in Fort Wayne unrepentant progress Nov 2013 #125

Damn this thread is getting long, I need to step outside snooper2 Nov 2013 #133

GOOD! At least now there is a way to kick the marijuana smokers out of town - good reddens to them!! Douglas Carpenter Nov 2013 #136

Finished the entire thread SnakeEyes Nov 2013 #143