Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The gestapo (EPA) will be knocking on doors one day and for all you people who think this idea of big govt. is a good thing...remember one day they WILL do something you don't like.
How could this be enforced? Have camera's watching people?
(Reuters) - A San Francisco suburb on Monday banned smoking in duplexes, condominiums and other multi-family homes, with city leaders saying they hoped to lead a wave of such regulations across California and ultimately the country.
The City Council in San Rafael, a community of 57,000 people about 15 miles north of San Francisco, voted unanimously for the ban, following a handful of other California municipalities that have outlawed smoking in buildings with as few as two units.
[URL="http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/16/us-usa-california-smoking-idUSBRE89F05W20121016"]California city bans smoking in multi-family homes | Reuters[/URL]
It is sad that it has come to this, but tobacco-addicts are a recalicitrant lot who don't tpically give a damn about anyone or anything above stocking their nicotine addiction. It was made inevitable by their own actions.
Actually, that is a long-standing tennant of law. You can scream at the top of your lungs that Obama is great, but don't think that includes the rights to scream into somebody's ear.
You can walk down a sidewalk all you wish, but you can't barge into other people. Their right NOT to be barged into mdifies your right, slightly.
You're on the wrong side of long-standing law on this one.
laws will not change people from circumventing rules. If a landlord wont enforce their own policies and neighbors are not sympethetic to your cause, its time to move.
Calling the police to enforce a smoking ban and clogging the courts is a tragic waste of taxpayer dollars.
I hardly describe protecting innocent peole from toxic tobacco-effluent they wish, and havea right not to be forcibly exposed to "waste(ful)". But then, I am not a slave to tobacco.
you are partially correct. if the substance he is smoking is illegal you would have a case, but since it is not you dont.
goverments, states and communities need to stop acting like nanny's and start doing the job they were elected to do or get out of the office.
Protecting the rights of the "innocent" is a legitmate function of government, and just because something is legal, doesn't mean lawful and reasonable restriction on its use aren't or shouldn't be implemented.
For example, trying walking down the street with a bottle of Jack Daniels at the swill.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
