Assembly Bill 746 - Proposal to Prohibit Smoking in All Multi-Family Residential Units (renter, hotel)

[AnonymouseX]

Originally Posted by nullgeo

reasonable public policy

Reasonable would include both sides.

Such as all buildings and patios must be smoke free.

However, apartment complex must provide so many designated areas for smoking per every x number of residents.


That's actually good because it'll stop people from smoking inside anyways.

See... Not so hard to solve. Give us a spot and we'll go there. But it can't be 2 miles away...

[nullgeo]

Originally Posted by Zelva

Well, then, how about alcohol vs smoking? Doesn't alcohol cause a lot more damage, danger, death?

Alcohol certainly causes a lot of damage ... but more than smoking? I kinda doubt it. About a 135,000 people die of lung cancer every year in the US alone. Now add other smoking related mortalities such as heart disease and other cancers caused by tobacco.

Drinking is held responsible for about 75,000 annual deaths in the US.

[Senno]

Originally Posted by Zelva

Well, then, how about alcohol vs smoking? Doesn't alcohol cause a lot more damage, danger, death?

I'm not sure on the stats. Both are currently legally generally. But some counties are dry, or restricted sales days, etc across the nation. There is room to regulate as no right is absolute.

I never said smoking should be totally illegal in any case...

[chessgeek]

Yes, this is best left up to the property management firms/landlords. I have supported all the anti-smoking legislation to date. It would really be getting "Big Brother" to tell people they can't smoke in their own residence. Are you going to fine them? Don't see that as probable as there won't be a police officer posted in their home (can barely afford to put enough on the streets today).

None of the neighbors will know if they are smoking. Furthermore, we will probably mess it up more by allowing those needing medical marijuana to get an exemption! We do not need more people calling us the "land of fruits and nuts". Let's concentrate on economic, educational and criminal justice issues.

[nullgeo]

Originally Posted by AnonymouseX

Reasonable would include both sides.

Sorry, but "reasonable" would NOT necessarily include both sides. Reasonable public policy would by definition address public safety in all cases.

[Senno]

Originally Posted by chessgeek

Yes, this is best left up to the property management firms/landlords. I have supported all the anti-smoking legislation to date. It would really be getting "Big Brother" to tell people they can't smoke in their own residence. Are you going to fine them? Don't see that as probable as there won't be a police officer posted in their home (can barely afford to put enough on the streets today).

None of the neighbors will know if they are smoking. Furthermore, we will probably mess it up more by allowing those needing medical marijuana to get an exemption! We do not need more people calling us the "land of fruits and nuts". Let's concentrate on economic, educational and criminal justice issues.

My first comment in the thread:

Originally Posted by Senno

That's going to be unenforceable even if it actually passes.

We don't have the law enforcement available to actually enforce. It would be primarily voluntary by the renter. And if the owner detects smoking they might evict I guess. But I can't see a criminal penalty ever resulting really due to resources not being available.

[nullgeo]

Originally Posted by chessgeek

Yes, this is best left up to the property management firms/landlords. I have supported all the anti-smoking legislation to date. It would really be getting "Big Brother" to tell people they can't smoke in their own residence. Are you going to fine them? Don't see that as probable as there won't be a police officer posted in their home (can barely afford to put enough on the streets today).

None of the neighbors will know if they are smoking. Furthermore, we will probably mess it up more by allowing those needing medical marijuana to get an exemption! We do not need more people calling us the "land of fruits and nuts". Let's concentrate on economic, educational and criminal justice issues.

Have you been reading the posts in this thread? Seems not.

[nullgeo]

Originally Posted by Senno

My first comment in the thread:



We don't have the law enforcement available to actually enforce. It would be primarily voluntary by the renter. And if the owner detects smoking they might evict I guess. But I can't see a criminal penalty ever resulting really due to resources not being available.

While true generally, the law would support litigation. Therein lies great leverage.

[AnonymouseX]

Originally Posted by nullgeo

While true generally, the law would support litigation. Therein lies great leverage.

This law does nothing to further litigation.

The property owner could always ban smoking via the lease with penalties added on. Collectible via security deposits or in court.

What further litigation can they bring with it?

[Senno]

Originally Posted by nullgeo

While true generally, the law would support litigation. Therein lies great leverage.

Oh I know about the civil remedies. /shrug

Originally Posted by AnonymouseX

What further litigation can they bring with it?

Well, it's always nice for the case to be able to point at a law the adverse party broke. Makes establishing negligence a little easier and clearer for a jury to understand if it goes to trial.