Assembly Bill 746 - Proposal to Prohibit Smoking in All Multi-Family Residential Units (Glendale: rental, condo)

[Senno]

If everyone made perfectly rational decisions alot of insurance adjusters would be out of a job.

[nullgeo]

Originally Posted by MB8abovetherim

You'd have to be a serious smoker for it to seep through walls and cracks enough to bother those around you. That said, I don't see anything wrong with burning one every once in a while while indoors, you are - afterall- in your own apartment.

This is going a little too far though. People forget that smoking is a choice. Taking away somebody's right to do something just because YOU don't like it isn't the right answer. I'm a curteous person, I smoke from time to time and when I do I'm aware of others around me and little kids and things like that. I don't blow smoke in peoples faces, or in a crowd. But as another poster said: that curteousy is a two-way street. I'm going out of my way to not bother non-smokers (something I don't need to do). Yet there are many anti-smoking people outthere who feel it's their right to treat smokers like crap. We already have to stand outside in a tiny little corner, huddle around coffee cans or go accross the street. That for the most part is fine, we are okay with that (nice people aren't we?) But you guys STILL ***** about second-hand smoke? Sure second hand smoke sucks, but so does life...smokers have done enough at this point to appease anti-smoking interests.

The absence of smoke does not infringe on anyone's quality of life. The presence of smoke does. It's that simple. You can't play your music too loud in a residential setting or drive an unmuffled motor vehicle either. You can't do lots of things that are an imposition on others.

[AnonymouseX]

Originally Posted by nullgeo

The absence of smoke does not infringe on anyone's quality of life. The presence of smoke does. It's that simple. You can't play your music too loud in a residential setting or drive an unmuffled motor vehicle either. You can't do lots of things that are an imposition on others.

Not precisely. Smoking in a closed environment does impose on you.

Smoking outside doesn't. For one, smoke is too diffuse to present danger to your health outside as long as you aren't having it blown in your face. Much like what comes from a car.

Two, you can move.

You desire to to have a quality of life can't infringe on my right to smoke.

[Senno]

Originally Posted by AnonymouseX

Not precisely. Smoking in a closed environment does impose on you.

Smoking outside doesn't. For one, smoke is too diffuse to present danger to your health outside as long as you aren't having it blown in your face. Much like what comes from a car.

Two, you can move.

You desire to to have a quality of life can't infringe on my right to smoke.

Jesus, with all that is known about the risks of second hand insurance I recommend you buy some smokers insurance if you want to smoke in the presence of other people...

There certainly are laws now in CA that infringe on smokers rights. No smoking in bars for one.

Effective January 1, 2004, California bill AB846 bans smoking within 20 feet (6.1 m) of the entrance or operable window of a public building ("public building" means a building owned and occupied, or leased and occupied, by the state, a county, a city, a city and county, or a California Community College district.) The law also prohibits smoking in state owned vehicles.[

ttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_smoking_bans_in_the_United_States#.C2.A0Ca lifornia

[AnonymouseX]

Originally Posted by Senno

Jesus, with all that is known about the risks of second hand insurance I recommend you buy some smokers insurance if you want to smoke in the presence of other people...

There certainly are laws now in CA that infringe on smokers rights. No smoking in bars for one.

Smoking on private property is not a right... Bars and restaurants have always been able to ban smoking. CA just made them. More of an imposition on them.

However, as to smoking outside of my apartment, no law has been able to squash it nor will they be able to...

No one is talking about smoking in a bar.

As to the smoking in public laws... I was in Cali in December on vacation. I smoked everywhere with nary a dirty look. Shrug...

[nullgeo]

Originally Posted by Senno

If everyone made perfectly rational decisions alot of insurance adjusters would be out of a job.

Good news for you guys: accidents still happen ...

[Senno]

Originally Posted by AnonymouseX

Smoking on private property is not a right... Bars and restaurants have always been able to ban smoking. CA just made them. More of an imposition on them.

However, as to smoking outside of my apartment, no law has been able to squash it nor will they be able to...

No one is talking about smoking in a bar.

As to the smoking in public laws... I was in Cali in December on vacation. I smoked everywhere with nary a dirty look. Shrug...

I don't doubt it. Lots of smoking still goes on in bars as the owners won't enforce it and law enforcement doesn't have the resources to enforce the law.

CA has chipped away at smoking outside with the law I stuck in up above. No smoking within 20 feet of a public building.

And many cities have gone further:

Belmont, October 9, 2007, banned in parks and other public places, as well as inside apartments and condominiums.[42]
Berkeley, March 26, 2008, banned on all commercially zoned sidewalks, and within 20 feet (6.1 m) of a bus stop[43][44]
Beverly Hills, October 1, 2007, banned in all outdoor dining areas.[45]
Burbank, April, 2007, banned in most public places including Downtown Burbank, outdoor dining & shopping areas, parks, service lines, and within 20 feet (6.1 m) of all building entrances/exits.[46]
Calabasas, 2006, banned in all indoor and outdoor public places, except for a handful of scattered, designated outdoor smoking areas in town. Believed to be the strictest ban in the United States.[47]
Davis, In 2008, the Davis County Board of Health banned smoking in privately and publicly owned outdoor places.[48] The Davis City Code prohibits smoking in a wide variety of locations open to the public. http://daviswiki.org/Davis_Municipal_Code/34.02.010
El Cajon, August 14, 2007, banned on city streets, in outdoor patios in restaurants, and outside of the local shopping mall. Anyone caught smoking in public areas will faces a fine of up to $500. The city previously outlawed smoking in parks, and also requires businesses that sell tobacco products to obtain a city license.[49]
Escondido, in 2005, increased the state prohibition on smoking within 20 feet (6.1 m) of an entrance to a public place to 80 feet (24 m) outside city-owned buildings.[50][51] In 2009, the city, at the urging of local students, banned smoking in parks, city open spaces, and trails, including the parking areas for these city properties.[50][52]
Glendale, October 7, 2008, banned smoking[53] in/on and within 20 feet (6.1 m) from: all city property (except streets and sidewalks); city vehicles and public transportation vehicles; city public transit stations; places of employment; enclosed public places; non-enclosed public places; and common areas of multi-unit rental housing. Some of the areas where smoking is prohibited are authorized to have smoking-permitted areas, subject to regulations. Also, landlords in Glendale are required to provide disclosure to a prospective renter, prior to signing a lease, as to the location of possible sources of second-hand smoke, relative to the unit that they are renting.[citation needed]
Loma Linda, July 25, 2008 banned on all sidewalks, streets, common areas in shopping centers, bus stops, parks, restaurant patios, theaters, City Hall, and 80% of motel rooms and apartment units. Exempts the federally-controlled VA hospital grounds, and smoking in cars traveling in the city.[54]
Los Angeles, 2007, banned in all city parks.[55]
Marin County, May 23, 2012 banned in all condos and apartments, as well as all patios within residential units. Anyone caught smoking will face a $100 fine and will be sentenced to five community day services. A second offense warrants a $300 fine and ten community day services, and a third offense being $700 fine and fifteen community day services. Landlords may opt out of smoking restrictions by designating 20 percent of their units reserved for smoking and may permit e-cigarettes to be used inside apartments and condos. All other outdoor areas, including bar and restaurant patios, and private homes that are not of multi-unit residences and smoking in cars are exempt from the ban.[56]
Pasadena, October 27, 2008, banned smoking in certain outdoor areas, including shopping malls, unenclosed areas of bars and restaurants, service waiting lines (e.g. ATMs, bus stops, etc.) and within 20 feet (6.1 m) from them, and within 20 feet (6.1 m) of doorways, windows, or ventilation areas of enclosed places where smoking is banned.[57]
San Diego, July 11, 2006, banned smoking at all City of San Diego beaches and parks, including all beaches from La Jolla to Sunset Cliffs.[citation needed]
San Jose, October 2007, banned in all city parks.[58]
San Luis Obispo, August 2, 1990, became the first city in the world to ban smoking in all public buildings.[59] On January 15, 2010, the City's municipal code amendment included city parks and outdoor recreational facilities as smoke-free areas.[60] In April 2010, City Council adopted an ordinance that bans smoking in all areas frequented by the public, with limited exceptions, including unenclosed areas at certain drinking establishments.[61]
Santa Barbara & Goleta, Local laws in Santa Barbara County and in the City of Goleta prohibit smoking within 20 feet of any building or area where smoking is prohibited. Ashtrays are also banned within a 20-foot smoke-free area.[62]
Santa Monica, 2006, banned smoking within 20 feet (6.1 m) of entrances, exits, or operable windows of a public building (such as City Hall and the courthouse); in local parks (including parking lots); on the Third Street Promenade; on local beaches; and on the Santa Monica Pier (except within designated zones).[63] City Council passed a law that prohibits smoking in ALL common areas of a multi-family residential building including condominiums[citation needed], which went into effect February 26, 2009

[EscapeCalifornia]

Originally Posted by AnonymouseX

Not precisely. Smoking in a closed environment does impose on you.

Sure, if that environment is hermetically sealed and no smoke is allowed out.

Originally Posted by AnonymouseX

Smoking outside doesn't. For one, smoke is too diffuse to present danger to your health outside as long as you aren't having it blown in your face. Much like what comes from a car.

It does when it rises into my apartment and fills it with the stench.

[Senno]

If we can regulate asbestos strictly we can regulate tobacco the same way. /shrug

[AnonymouseX]

Originally Posted by EscapeCalifornia

It does when it rises into my apartment and fills it with the stench.

And that's where your argument fails...

You have a right to be free from harmful smoke. I agree completely.

You do NOT have the right to be free from stench.