Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-28-2013, 08:23 PM
 
Location: Soldotna
2,256 posts, read 2,130,563 times
Reputation: 1078

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Senno View Post
You are wrong.

Flat wrong.

Sorry...

You don't have the right to harm anyone even if you are on private property, beyond self-defense when in danger of imminent harm. WTF kind of argument is that anyway? Anyone can harm anyone on private property? What a silly idea.
Are you stupid? Owners control private property. You go on their property then you must deal with it. Get a clue...

The property owner wants a smoking building then perhaps you can beat your feet and rent elsewhere?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-28-2013, 08:25 PM
 
6,802 posts, read 6,714,500 times
Reputation: 1911
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnonymouseX View Post
Are you stupid? Owners control private property. You go on their property then you must deal with it. Get a clue...

The property owner wants a smoking building then perhaps you can beat your feet and rent elsewhere?
I seem to be dealing with a person uneducated in California laws... Do you realize we are arguing about smokers in an apartment building that's damaging other residents with their smoke?

Owners control private property subject to laws, they aren't a fiefdom unto themselves.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2013, 08:32 PM
 
Location: Soldotna
2,256 posts, read 2,130,563 times
Reputation: 1078
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senno View Post
Seem to be dealing with a person uneducated in California laws... Do you realize we are arguing about smokers in an apartment building that's damaging other residents with their smoke?

Owners control private property subject to laws...
Unconstitutional laws...

And yea, I know what the thread is about...

California once again cementing it's nanny state status...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2013, 08:40 PM
 
6,802 posts, read 6,714,500 times
Reputation: 1911
Constitutional. I can just say that as easily.

And they seem to be intact, and have survived challenge in various court throughout the country

Which is my evidence that they are in fact constitutional.

Legal Challenges to Smokefree Indoor Air Ordinances - no-smoke.org

http://changelabsolutions.org/sites/...ke_CA_4_05.pdf

Quote:
To the contrary, every court that has considered the issue has declared that no
fundamental “right to smoke” exists. So long as a smoking regulation is rationally related to a
legitimate government objective such as protecting public health or the environment, the
regulation will be upheld as constitutional.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2013, 08:49 PM
 
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,852 posts, read 10,456,964 times
Reputation: 6670
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnonymouseX View Post
That's all I need.

Every news source, left and right, acknowledges your state is failing. Economically, constitutionally, hell even your police are failing...

Denial is not a river in Egypt...

But you drink your kool aid. It is your right..
Total B.S.

California leads nation in job creation - CBS News
California's Job Growth Outpaces Texas's - Businessweek
California has high taxes, but rich not leaving

Nah, all those ''facts'' about California's impending ''demise'' are just the standard ultra-conservative ''dogma'' endlessly parroted as 'gospel' by every RWNJ. Mostly because there really are no competing examples of successful Red states, and it just chaps their hides that a ''lib-rul'' state carries so much electoral clout and succeeds... let alone that it's gorgeous, has a terrific climate, and sets the trends for the rest of the country! But it must be especially annoying whenever they look over here and see our growing success in living color, while their own future looms on the horizon in dull black & white!!

California GOP ponders life in the irrelevant lane - Elections - The Sacramento Bee
GOP's state losses hint at national fate - SFGate
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2013, 09:01 PM
 
Location: Declezville, CA
16,806 posts, read 39,945,786 times
Reputation: 17694
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnonymouseX View Post
leaving in droves?
Almost nailed it:

//www.city-data.com/forum/28676385-post163.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2013, 09:23 PM
 
Location: in a galaxy far far away
19,208 posts, read 16,693,063 times
Reputation: 33346
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senno View Post
Can you explain why many states are moving to legalize marijuana and gay marriage for starters? Those kinda started off here didn't they? And there's a reason why ideas move from west to east in this country, despite your denial. Lots of new ideas originate here. And other states pick up the ideas and so it goes.
You give California too much credit. It was Oregon who first initiated legalization of marijuana in the early 70's. California jumped on the bandwagon a few years later along with Colorado, Ohio and Alaska. To date, nearly half the states in the U.S. have some sort of law on the books that allows either possession, recreational or medical use. Lots of innovations come from CA but this wasn't one of them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2013, 09:33 PM
 
6,802 posts, read 6,714,500 times
Reputation: 1911
Why those crazy Oregonians. Forgive me, I was under 5 or so.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2013, 10:26 PM
 
Location: On the water.
21,737 posts, read 16,346,385 times
Reputation: 19830
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senno View Post
You are wrong.

Flat wrong.

Sorry...

You don't have the right to harm anyone even if you are on private property, beyond self-defense when in danger of imminent harm. WTF kind of argument is that anyway? Anyone can harm anyone on private property? What a silly idea.

Is you is a strict constitutionalist?
Correct. But your buddy below doesn't get it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnonymouseX View Post
Are you stupid? Owners control private property. You go on their property then you must deal with it. Get a clue...

The property owner wants a smoking building then perhaps you can beat your feet and rent elsewhere?
You are an interesting individual. No matter how many times and ways you are shown in this thread that personal opinion is not actually law, you continue to protest. Here, try reading the legal definitions of "public" and "private nuisance". These are applied regularly all over America.
Quote:
The two types of nuisance are private nuisance and public nuisance. A private nuisance is a civil wrong; it is the unreasonable, unwarranted, or unlawful use of one's property in a manner that substantially interferes with the enjoyment or use of another individual's property, without an actual Trespass or physical invasion to the land. A public nuisance is a criminal wrong; it is an act or omission that obstructs, damages, or inconveniences the rights of the community.

Public Nuisance
The term public nuisance covers a wide variety of minor crimes that threaten the health, morals, safety, comfort, convenience, or welfare of a community. Violators may be punished by a criminal sentence, a fine, or both.

-- For example, if dynamiting has thrown a large boulder onto a public highway, those who use the highway cannot maintain a nuisance action for the inconvenience. However, a motorist who is injured from colliding with the boulder may bring a tort action for personal injuries.

Private Nuisance
A private nuisance is an interference with a person's enjoyment and use of his land. The law recognizes that landowners, or those in rightful possession of land, have the right to the unimpaired condition of the property and to reasonable comfort and convenience in its occupation.
Examples of private nuisances abound. Nuisances that interfere with the physical condition of the land include vibration or blasting that damages a house; destruction of crops; raising of a water table; or the pollution of soil, a stream, or an underground water supply. Examples of nuisances interfering with the comfort, convenience, or health of an occupant are foul odors, noxious gases, smoke, dust, loud noises, excessive light, or high temperatures. Moreover, a nuisance may also disturb an occupant's mental tranquility,

Legal Responsibility
A private nuisance is a tort, that is, a civil wrong. To determine accountability for an alleged nuisance, a court will examine three factors: the defendant's fault, whether there has been a substantial interference with the plaintiff's interest, and the reasonableness of the defendant's conduct.



public nuisance n. a nuisance which affects numerous members of the public or the public at large, as distinguished from a nuisance which only does harm to a neighbor or a few private individuals. Example: a factory which spews out clouds of noxious fumes is a public nuisance (how many people it takes to make a public is unknown), but playing drums at three in the morning is a private nuisance bothering only the neighbors.
Public Nuisance legal definition of Public Nuisance. Public Nuisance synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-28-2013, 10:59 PM
 
6,802 posts, read 6,714,500 times
Reputation: 1911
Correct Tulemutt. And we are in a state that considers a backyard pool a constructive nuisance for liability purposes. What does anyone think that second hand smoke, which causes cancer is? Civil remedies are fine, but the state can and does regulate them. Quite legally.

IF I can hook ya for jumping over your fence and drowning in your pool (well, my survivors anyway), do you think you can smoke me out of my own home?

Four backyard dangers that could leave homeowners liable
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:57 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top