Austin has become such a nanny state...well city.

[TexasHorseLady]

Originally Posted by petro

I think it's safe to say, some people do need nannies after all.

It all comes down to choices. I could whine about not getting my free bags at the grocery store, or I could be a grown-up man and bring my own bags. I choose the latter. Regarding smoking, yes, you have the right to kill yourself with cigarettes, but as a business owner, you do not have the right to kill your employees with second-hand smoke. That's just the world we live in.

Petro, were you here when the smoking compromise I mention upthread was in existence briefly and then because of all the very loud whining was ended? Do you know that one of the delightful things about it was that EMPLOYEES who smoked had a choice to work in a smoking establishment? And those who didn't could work in the hundreds of smoking banned establishments in the city.

Excuses, excuses, excuses - what it's really about is control over others, always has been, always will be. Otherwise, that compromise would still be in place.

[petro]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

Petro, were you here when the smoking compromise I mention upthread was in existence briefly and then because of all the very loud whining was ended? Do you know that one of the delightful things about it was that EMPLOYEES who smoked had a choice to work in a smoking establishment? And those who didn't could work in the hundreds of smoking banned establishments in the city.

Excuses, excuses, excuses - what it's really about is control over others, always has been, always will be. Otherwise, that compromise would still be in place.

Smokers represent exactly 9.9% of the Austin population. If they want to dominate public policy, they may want to work harder to recruit more smokers. In the meantime, the 90.1% of Austinites who aren't killing themselves with cigarettes can enjoy a meal or cocktail, smoke-free.

[Austin97]

Originally Posted by cBach

Basically what I'm saying is that the school zone cell phone restrictions are "nanny laws" to begin with, and most support this, so there should be no complaints when it is extended. The minute the laws were applied to school zones we were already on that slippery slope.

Yes you are making exactly my point. One useless law which (probably) doesnt have any benefit, but which doesnt impact us that much because school zones are so small, being extended to a law which does impact many of us (not me) significantly because now it covers everything else but still having no benefit.

[Austin97]

Originally Posted by hoffdano

This is not the answer. It will cause water to be a substance available primarily to the wealthy. As a substance required to sustain life, like air, it is reasonable to manage the use of water to protect its most essential use. Lawn use, golf courses, etc. are way down the list for water.

Let's start with Texas weakening the power of HOAs to require turf lawns in so many areas.

well Im not getting into a full policy discussion. But obviously the high rate would be on a tiered basis. They could even count the people living in the household to account for larger families. There is a standard tier and then you can apply for more exemptions or whatever based on the # of people in the family.

[TexasHorseLady]

Originally Posted by petro

Smokers represent exactly 9.9% of the Austin population. If they want to dominate public policy, they may want to work harder to recruit more smokers. In the meantime, the 90.1% of Austinites who aren't killing themselves with cigarettes can enjoy a meal or cocktail, smoke-free.

And with that compromise, they could, and smoking customers and employees (and those who don't care if someone else enjoys a cigarette in their presence) could enjoy a meal or cocktail with a cigarette if they so chose.

So, is it that you don't want to be exposed to cigarette smoke, or is it that you can't stand the idea of someone enjoying something that you don't approve of?

The excuses keep changing. Apparently your most recent one is "there's not as many of them, they're a minority, so they don't count".