CA City Bans Smoking Inside Multi-Family Homes, Condos & Apartments
New York City’s sugary drinks ban has created a multitude of controversy, as small government enthusiasts charge that the policy, which places a 16-ounce restriction on cups and bottles of non-diet soda, sweet teas and other related beverages, is an example of nanny-state overreach. With the debate surrounding that ban raging on, there’s a new restriction — this time on the West Coast — that may soon have people chattering: A ban on smoking cigarettes inside multi-family homes.
San Rafael, a suburb of San Francisco, decided earlier this month to implement the ban for people living in condominiums, duplexes and multi-family houses, Reuters reports. The city council made the decision with a unanimous vote that will outlaw smoking in these localities, placing the regulation on a seemingly health-conscience community comprised of 57,000 residents. In addition to restricting private homes, smoking will also be banned on the city’s downtown streets.
Photo Credit: AFP/Getty Images
Experts are claiming that the controversial move could end up igniting a series of similar actions in other towns and cities across America. The city’s mayor, Gary Phillips, is apparently well-aware of the leadership role San Rafael may have given itself with the decision. He said that the city is “happy to blaze a trail” before the vote took place.
“We’re most happy to be in the forefront of the issue because we think it will greatly benefit our residents and those visiting San Rafael, and we think it will set the tone for other cities as well,” the mayor proclaimed.
While many in the community support the move, two smokers turned up at the city council meeting to decry the government’s actions. One of those individuals, Thomas Ruppenthal, told the council that he believes the action being taken to restrict activity in citizens’ private homes is “tyranny.”
Smoking bans, of course, are nothing new. In NYC, where sugary drinks are also deemed culprits, enjoying a cigarette outdoors – at least on public property — has been forbidden since 2011. In California, too, smoking in most workplaces and restaurants has been banned since 1995; bars followed suit in 1998, Reuters reports.
San Rafael’s ban includes all homes, new or old, rented or purchased, and may be among the most restrictive in the nation. So far, California is the only state that has banned smoking in homes — but there’s no telling when others will follow. Of course, the crack-down only counts for those individuals and families sharing walls with other residential units — but angst is still likely to commence.
There’s no doubt that second-hand smoke is dangerous and that, depending on how housing is constructed, the potential for it to seep into other units is concerning. On the flip side, opponents who cannot afford to live in unattached condos and apartments will certainly claim that the government is infringing upon their rights. What do you think? Let us know in the comments section, below.
(H/T: Reuters)
In CONTROL, Glenn Beck presents a passionate, fact-based case for guns that reveals why gun control isn’t really about controlling guns at all; it’s about controlling us. Find out more HERE.
Popular Stories
‘Bigoted, Religious [Zealots]‘: High School Senior Allegedly Expelled, Charged With Felonies Over Gay Relationship With ‘Consenting’ Fellow Student 820 Comments
White House: ‘Irrelevant Fact’ Where Obama Was During Benghazi 348 Comments
Washington Times Writer: Fox News Scandal Goes ‘Much Deeper,’ W.H. Sitting on Something Top Obama Aides ‘Terrified’ About 261 Comments
CNN Poll: Obama’s Approval Rating Unchanged Since Scandals Hit 241 Comments
Report: Obama Administration Apologizes for Another National Security Leak 214 Comments
Faith
-
Beck and Mercury One Head to Oklahoma to Launch Tornado Relief Effort
Read More
-
University Will Investigate Christian Professor’s Intelligent Design Class Following Atheist Furor
160 Comments
-
‘Bigoted, Religious [Zealots]‘: High School Senior Allegedly Expelled, Charged With Felonies Over Gay Relationship With ‘Consenting’ Fellow Student
820 Comments
-
Israeli Motorists Shocked When Nazi Flag Seen Flying Near Palestinian Mosque
Read More
- Did Christian Prayers at Gov’t Meetings in This NY Town Violate the Constitution? 175 Comments
Business
-
‘In the End, Everything Will Be Claimed’: Creator of First 3D-Printed Gun Highlights Creeping Gov’t Control of Technology
Read More
-
Sebelius’ Controversial Fundraising Efforts Raise Concerns, Allegedly Chase Away Potential Donors
Read More
-
See All the Viral Backlash Abercrombie & Fitch Has Received for Its CEO’s Comments From Years Ago That Resurfaced Again
Read More
-
Is This the ‘Smoking Gun’ That Ties the IRS Scandal to the White House?
181 Comments
-
Monday Morning Market Roundup: Not Off to Such a Great Start
Read More
Technology
-
This Teen’s Invention Means You Could Charge Your Cellphone in Less Than 30 Seconds
Read More
-
One of the Most Unlikely Animals Being Trained to Hunt Land Mines
Read More
-
Woman Who Lost All Limbs to Flesh-Eating Bacteria Gets $200K Bionic Arms
Read More
-
Why Are These Zoo Keepers Baffled by This Anteater’s Babies?
Read More
-
Largest Lunar Explosion in NASA History Caught on Video
139 Comments
The Blog
Who Has More Viewers…President Obama’s Weekly Address Or The Daily Blazecast?- Most people don’t think the DOJ was trying to bully the media by secretly taking reporters’ phone records
Greta Van Susteren says DOJ ‘lucky’ they didn’t hack her emails- Media Matters has no idea what to do with itself right now
Caption that photo!: the winner
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (116)
AmericanStrega
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 1:25pmSo, The first smoking ban was so people would stop smoking. Then it was, tax the smokers so we can give those taxes back to the children for their healthcare. Then it was for the adults that work in places that allow smoking (i.e. bars, bingo, and bowling alleys). Now, you cannot smoke in your own home (whether you rent or own (( shouldn’t the home owner decided, if he’s rentng to you, if you’re allowed to smoke in his home?)). So now the government, local, state, and/or federal, wants the big nasty smokers to pay more in taxes or be regulated into non-existance (therefore, lowering the taxes brought in to the government by those who pay the taxes by purchasing cigerattes, cigars, etc.)? What happens to all that tax revenue when no one smokes? The government cannot lose that revenue because they’ve already spent it. What about all those jobs that come from growing, processing, making tobacco smoking products, selling tobacco…? If people cannot afford tobacco or cannot use it in their homes, what becomes of all the taxes that are then reduced? I’ll tell you, the government will just tax something else to fill the void. Look now people. What’s next? Maybe something you enjoy doing and the government disagrees with? Smokers will be no more..but so will be the coffee drinkers. sugar users, and toilet paper wasters. My point? We all use/do something that others think is bad for others. When will it be your turn to have your “fix” taken from you? And who wil
Report this comment
Ben__Franklin
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 1:39pmBut Heyyyy, Smoking Weed in CA without the Feds hassle is up for a vote. No second hand smoke issues with that stuff, nope, no sir-ey, its Child friendly and only those puffing on the end can get high….
Report this comment
txmike
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 1:50pmthere three things people will spend money on no matter how much it cost…food, drinking and smoking. if needed they will spend less on food to drink and smoke.
Report this comment
Obama Snake Oil Co
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 2:36pmI have seen this precedent coming for years in NC. We have the smoking nazis here too. The point is this was a freedom for them that they voted away. I have never complained about second hand nor cared as I know it is not harmfull. I know for fact as it was a political move by the surgeon general and the EPA. But I know if this happens to them, it will happen to me in some other capacity. One mans freedom taken is another mans loss. I do not know how they would enfoce this…police busting down the front door with smoke sampling devices? Seems a bit stupid law. Seems that they tried this with alcohol……
Report this comment
HKS
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 2:39pmAny wonder why California will be a ghost town soon, Only a few commie tree hungers left. That 25.000 people leaving every month will increase I suspect.
Report this comment
Jenny Lind
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 3:12pmRush called it, and again he was 100% correct.
Report this comment
rose-ellen
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 3:20pmThis -like banning the drinks over 16 onces-is the new puritianism;health obsessed tyrany.As much as i’m left wing when it comes to believing in universal free college education[for qualified citizens], universal government sponsored health care, minimum wage and even a guaranteed job or living wage type nanny state,this kind of curtailing of one’s freedom is over the line tyrany.I hope people refuse to put up with this form of control! Outrageous!Why are people voting in these kind of controlling annoying “do gooders” who are really mean spirited -if you don’t have my healthy life style you should not even exist!
Report this comment
Shasta
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 4:34pmLooks like one of the progressive’s new regulations hit rosie-elena where it hurts. So if a new regulation doesn’t affect a given liberal, said liberal is fine with an obtrusive goverment.
Report this comment
Jaycen
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 4:49pmTo every idiot who supported smoking bans in restraunts – you’re watching the first step to banning something you like to do in your own home.
Private property rights trump your convenience and annoyance, you jerks.
Report this comment
Jaycen
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 4:57pm@rose-ellen
Your problem, Rose, is that the personal tyranny you decry is the natural extension of the other beliefs you espouse. If healthcare is “universal”, then you have placed the burden for your health on my shoulders. Thus, I now have a direct say in how you live your life, because your choices affect me.
The fact that you can’t understand this basic logic makes my head explode.
Report this comment
BSdetector
Posted on October 17, 2012 at 7:31amSuddenly Rose-ellen has a problem with tyrannical, Totalitarian government???
Don’t tell me you’ve seen the light, because I won’t believe it.
Lemme guess, it’s only bad when they strip away freedoms that you or YOUR loved ones currently enjoy?
Report this comment
Dismayed Veteran
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 1:24pmFirst they came for smokers. I did nothing because I don’t smoke.
Next they came for fat people. I did nothing because I am not fat.
Next they came for people who don’t recycle. I did nothing because I recycle.
Next they came for people who didn’t water their yard on the approved day. I did nothing because I water on the approved day.
Next they came for the people who stoled their P38 from the Army. I did and now I am on the run.
Report this comment
Watermain
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 1:42pmNice. Welcome home brother.
Report this comment
Glenn_S
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 1:53pmHey Dismayed -
P-38. Which one did you keep? The can opener, the Walther, or the plane? :)
Report this comment
Dismayed Veteran
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 2:26pmThe can opener. I have carried it on my key chain for 44 years. It falls into the category of “you don’t need a P38 until you really need a P38.”
WaterMain: My bother-in-law’s best friend from the Navy goes by the handle of WaterTight. These guys were on the last of the diesel boats in the early 60′s.
Report this comment
rose-ellen
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 7:55pmI don’t smoke but I have a body and sooner or later I’ll need health care and so too everyone.. Hence health care coverage should be available regardless of income to all citizens. That’s part of an advanced society. As is a right to a living wage job or income.As is higher education for qualified citizensThis business of starting life out in debt to pay for an education is obscene. Why do profs have to make so much money that students have to go into debt to get educated? Why do docs have to make so much money which drives up health care costs? Certain basics-healthcare, education, a living wage job, housing ,ARE needed to pursue happiness and basic well being. An advanced society should recognize that and make those “rights” and the role of government should be to ensure all citizens partake of those rights. That’s what civilized 21stc governments should be doing.
Report this comment
rose-ellen
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 8:03pmThose recycling laws really bother me too.More obsessed people in power [the new misers are the you have to “cut back on your carbon footprint” anti human neurotic fanatical environmentalists..Are there ways to undermine their annoying recyling laws?!
Report this comment
starchy
Posted on October 17, 2012 at 12:50pmRose-Ellen – you are insane. We have rights that are given to us by God, not the government. If government can give us rights they can also take them away. Profs make too much $ because the federal government keeps increasing financial aid to students – the colleges would be stupid not to take the money and run. Cut back on student aid and tuition’s will fall – they will have to or the colleges will go out of business. Doctors make as much as they do because of all of the time they have to put in for training, not to mention it is a highly skilled profession that not everyone is capable of doing. How would you guarantee a living wage to someone? What should it be? $10/hour? $15/hour? $100/hour? Who determines it? The government cannot get anything else right, what makes you think they are smart enough to figure out what employers can afford to pay? If you are offered a job, you either accept the salary or move on to another opportunity. If the employer is not offering a wage that is acceptable to employees they will not get employees. The free market actually does work, assuming the government stays out of the way.
Report this comment
Notarichboy
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 1:20pmHow about a farting ban? Don’t want toxic gas seeping into the unit next door!
Report this comment
Eastinfection
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 1:58pmHey NOTARICHBOY..
Done… and Done!
http://digitaljournal.com/article/310782
Report this comment
smokie
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 2:17pmAlong the same lines, I had to leave a football game early because I could not breathe and my eyes were burning because the woman next to me showered herself in perfume.
When will there be an obnoxious cheap vile cologne ban?
Report this comment
Joss
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 1:20pmYou know, if the tobacco settlement money had been used for research into a cure for smoking, it probably would have been successful. Instead, communities like this one used it (and the wealth of tobacco tax money) to buy luxury items for the citizens and themselves.
Report this comment
scuba13
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 2:48pmIf you “cure”smoking, how are you going to fund all of the childrens health programs that depend on the taxes from smoking? How do you cure smoking anyway?
Report this comment
Yogurt
Posted on October 18, 2012 at 8:52amIt was suppose to be used to help smokers quit but hmmm… I remember the few pamphlets they put out years ago and bam money vanished. I called about the 1 dollar tax Obama signed in no one on state or federal level I spoke to knows how to insure my daughter or how I go about doing it. Soon as smokers no longer bring in the taxes like they did. Fast food or alcohol will be next. Also, I love how big pharm puts it to the people by charging more for the self help quit smoking items then cigarettes cost.
Report this comment
Marinefire33
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 1:13pmAtlas Shrugged Realized! More to come, thank God I moved to Texas!
Report this comment
aragona
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 1:24pmHow do they enforce this ban? There is still the 4th Amendment. Unless invited, without a warrant the enforcers can’t get in to see whether an occupant was smoking or not. Would the smell of smoke be enough to charge and convict an occupant?
I see a huge waste of taxpayer money in their futures….
Report this comment
Spyderco
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 1:41pmThe first thing that was taken away in Germany before Hitler took over was smoking. Next they will take away our guns. The Constitution means nothing to these people.
Report this comment
KangarooJack
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 2:28pmHere’s how…it’s called “Annual Apartment Inspections”. Only thing is…”annual” is subjective to 24hrs. notice. Maybe a note taped on the backside of the hallway door. {so you don’t see it when you come home.}
So….would the presence of an ashtray be enough to convict?? In this day and age- Yes.
This is nothing new. Bill Clinton tried to enlist the help of Gov’t Housing to enforce stricter Gun Control laws. i.e. If you live in a gov’t assisted housing complex you are not allowed to own/posses a gun. NRA took Clinton to task on that one.
So WHO will speak up for the smokers??? I say the ACLU should!!!!!
Report this comment
Fubared
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 3:11pmJust lit a Fuente. Mmm.
Report this comment
lexpd1995
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 8:35pmAragona, unfortunately yes the smell of smoke would give an Officer probable cause. It would be like getting pulled over and the Officer smells what he believes to be pot, that then would give him probable cause to ask to search the vehicle, or to call for a drug dog. It has been held in the Supreme Court that what an Officer sees in plain sight, or smells constitutes probable cause. Of course the Officer would have to either get the home owners consent to search the property or get a search warrant.
Report this comment
Wolf
Posted on October 17, 2012 at 7:38am@ Spyderco… and last night Romney announced his approval of gun control and negating the Constitution. Of course, ‘anyone but Oblabla…’
This country deserves the crapstorm coming.
Report this comment
rose-ellen
Posted on October 17, 2012 at 1:03pmYou can say our rights are given by God all you want-but the government has the power to arrest you and throw you in prison and deprive you of your “God given rights’.Your philosophical/religious beliefs notwithstanding -it is men[governments] that decide what “God given rights” it recognizes and which they can take away!One day the right to a living wage will seem as natural as the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.Mores evolve-all mores!
Report this comment
AmericaMustBeFree
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 1:08pmTyranny is right! Who the hell do these people think they are.. and do they forget who votes for them?? If I lived in CA I would be looking for a way out ASAP!! This state like NYC is an embarrassment to the rest of America! Shame on you CA to be more specific San Rafael! I am sure the rest of the state will follow suit they are that weird!
Report this comment
getmeoutofcalifornia
Posted on October 17, 2012 at 1:10amUnfortunately, I’m stuck here, at least for the next few years. And I hate it here. I write to my congress people frequently to complain but they don’t really care about me because I’m a true minority (white and conservative) and the only minorities they want to help are the ones who are actually in the majority. I’m not free to say who they are without being labeled racist.
Report this comment
floridareader
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 12:58pmWhat’s next? Chewing gum ban… white bread ban… ice cream ban…
Why do people in those states allow their government to tell them how to live even in their own houses?!
In the long run all of us will be affected.
Report this comment
SoiledDove
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 1:35pmWell, chewing gum in your house doesn’t hurt the family in the apartment above you. Smoke goes through the ventilation system.
Second, the government isn’t tell you how to live in your own home. It is telling you that you are not allowed to hurt other people in THEIR own homes.
Report this comment
Eastinfection
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 2:06pm@ SOIL…
Many of these places already prohibit smoking in the lease. It should be up to the owner.
There should be housing for both smokers and non-smokers.
Report this comment
woodyee
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 2:10pmSoiledDove – You make a good point, but then, if it’s the governments business to protect you from harm, then they must ban the substance. Otherwise, they should but out of my life, YOUR life, and leave it to the HOA’s to decide what practices will and won’t be allowed that affect the lives of others.
Case in point – Here (in Kaliphonya) many apartment and condo “projects” will not allow a barbecue grill on the patios. Owners/renters must use the “communal” bbq pit.
Report this comment
Rajabear1
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 2:23pmSoileddove, how appropriate, but allow me to make a slight adjustment–soileddiaper, I do believe most condos and apartments have separate ventilation systems, unless of course, CA doesn’t believe in building codes. It is rare that the systems cross over and even it it does on those rare occasions, I remember hearing something about CA, specifically around the san fran area, having extremely lib views towards pot smoking. How the he!! do you even separate the two smokes under this ‘ban’? What? Pot smoke is a ‘good’ smoke? Hardly. And I have personally seen pot be more destructive to a persons day to day life than cigarettes. I would be throwing down a law suit to the city council the first second I smelled pot smoke from a neighbor for discrimination.
This is about control-nothing more, nothing less. You are a weak minded fool if you believe that it is about safety or health.
The good thing is? This is America (for now) and if you really can’t stand the way your city or local gov is working you can change it or you can take your tax money, business and family elsewhere to a place where your values and ideals are more aligned with you. Things that are most difficult, are the most rewarding. Let CA drowned in their own cesspool and don’t extend a dime of fed money.
He!!, I’d have been out of that nastiness the first time I saw their educational agenda. I couldn’t imagine trying to reprogram my kids every night with that crap.
I feel bad for those who can’t esca
Report this comment
merchantsailor
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 5:24pmWhen I was in Singapore chewing gum was illegal. Yes it was. Cleanest
city I have ever been in.
Report this comment
Jaycen
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 5:36pm@SoiledDove
Through the ventilation system? Really? My apartment has its own ventilation system. Do apartments exist with “shared” ventilation systems?
Report this comment
mom4times
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 12:58pmi’m in ny and am just waiting for things like that to filter up state……i have been to the city enough times to know i never want to have to go back
Report this comment
Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 12:55pmStep by step our freedoms go away.
Report this comment
lwoot
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 1:01pmWondering if they will include pot smoking for medical use.
Report this comment
Shasta
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 4:38pmanother word for ‘step-by-step’ is nudge, and that IS what is happening.
Report this comment
thegreatcarnac
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 12:53pmBoth coasts of the US are filled with moronic liberals. NYC on the east (and others) and the whole of California. They both have nothing but disdain for what they call ‘fly-over’ country but the midsection of the nation is where the morals and the belief in the constitution resides. If it were not for the midsection (South, northwest, Midwest etc) this nation would have fallen apart years ago. It is time the center quit taking direction in anything from east and west coast idiots.
Report this comment
woodyee
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 12:53pmNow the only ones with any freedom to do whatever they want to do inside their own homes, are folks who live in single-family dwellings? Next step will be to pit the multi-family dwellers against the single-family dwellers using the ballot box; the voter mentality will be “If I can’t do it, neither can you!”, whereas the voter mentality SHOULD BE –
“Who the f#$% do you think you are telling me what I can and can’t do in my own home!!”
Report this comment
getmeoutofcalifornia
Posted on October 17, 2012 at 1:15amAfter all, the same people want the govt out of their bedrooms. Except when handing out free contraceptives, that is.
Report this comment
UNALIEN
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 12:53pmHHMMM, how will this square with “legalize pot” crowd…
Report this comment
MrKnowItAll
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 12:52pmMy Dad ran a veterans club for 40 years. My Mom worked there. Opened at 7A.M. Closed whenever, usually way later then 2 a.m. If I had to miss school i had to stay with my Mom at the bar all day. I spent tons of my life in that veterans club. Clouds of Cigarette, Pipe and Cigar smoke. No such thing as a smoke eater.
When will people Realize that the day you are born your destiny is set. I knew SO SO Many very elderly folks who smoked their entire life and still were in their 70′s 80′s and 90′s. People You Will Die One Day. Wake Up and accept that Fact. It’s stupid to….You can buy Booze and Tobacco, pay our enormous Tax we put on them. But don’t you dare Drink or Smoke those products. It’s so stupid I can’t believe I’m writing the Truth.
Report this comment
RJJinGadsden
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 12:50pmI have never smoked, cannot stand the odor, and it severely effects my allergies. But, I certainly do not believe in power grabs like this to tell others how to live their lives. If I find myself surrounded by smokers, I can get up and move. I do not have a special power or right to force others to bend to my will. And, that is the way it should be. Damned if I don’t sound tolerant of other people’s rights. The Dem-wits will hate that.
Report this comment
The Jewish Avenger
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 12:50pmI cant wait for the self righteous to be dragged away in cuffs going “but its mediciinal!”
Oh wait, no they wont, they’ll ask for some. I keep thinking that all states have a USA mentality, sorry for the momentary lapse of reason.
Report this comment
woodyee
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 12:49pmWell, what a coinkidink…just this morning I posted something about this (follows). Just go to show you that opinion based on truth is not the folly most Leftists/Liberal make it out to seem –
[With regards to gun ownership] – Felons and addicts are not eligible. I believe in Arizona(?), if you’re behind on your child-support payments, you’re ineligible. Pretty soon, if you’re registered a this or that, or if you’re over-weight, or if you post on The Blaze, you’ll be ineligible.
“This all started because decent folks sat on their arses when the gobblement got on the case of smokers; first it was assigned seating, then it was a ban on public transportation – you know where it’s ending up.”
“We” sat on our arses when they “disqualified” felons. Now they’ve added addicts and child support scoflaws. Where will it end? A felon DOES NOT surrender Constitutional Rights for life WITHOUT surrendering CITIZENSHIP. Ergo, if they want to PREVENT crime, the State/Federal gobblements must make the punishment fit the crime, because what they’re telling us by releasing a felon and then telling that felon that he can no longer own a gun, is that they’re releasing a non-citizen who is still a menace to society!
Cannot felons never commit a crime again? Cannot an addict break his addiction? Cannot a c/s scoflaw make up the payments? Of course! Life-time ban? Ridiculous and unConstitutional! “F!” the gobblement!
Report this comment
taxpro4u03
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 2:04pmNow the thing ya gotta ask yourself, is — are you allowing yourself to be treated (condoning a CONTRACT to which you are NOT party to – without your knowledge/consent) as an Agent for the ‘privilege’ of living, or are you the flesh and blood human being with ‘certain unalienable rights…’ codified in the suspended Republic Constitution? Once you accept WHO you are — the rest is remedied in the Federal Jurisdiction — States don’t have the ‘right’ to trespass against the People. Neither do the People have the ‘right’ to trespass against the State — Hale v Henkle settled the matter back in 1906, and to the best of my knowledge, the SCOTUS is still the ‘law of the land…’ Once we accept that the two constitutions co-exist and how they apply — we can go about the business of ‘pursuit of happiness.’ For some, that means ‘keeping up with the Jones’; — for others — it means something entirely different. Group-think can be a CANCER, and will eat us all if we live long enuff :-) YOU are the cure. $16Trillion federal debt and climbing – towns and cities are declaring bankruptcy — Corporations can do what they want… that OUGHT to tell you something…. :-0 You are “Charlie Bucket,” and hold the Golden Ticket – play by God’s rule’s — he done sed the Chocolate Factory is yours ;-) Dems and Repubs alike KNOW this — do YOU? Bone up on Civics and reverse engineer this country all the way to Geo Washington — with the FACTS. A lamb’s tail isn’t a leg – it’s
Report this comment
SquidVetOhio
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 12:49pmWelcome to Kalifornia comrades. You can check out anytime you like, but you can never leave…..
Report this comment
SCREW-WINDOWS
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 12:47pmDon’t worry pot heads you will be exempt.
Report this comment
The Jewish Avenger
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 12:47pm“Remember, they first came for your cigarettes”
- Glenn Beck
This sucks on so many levels but most wont even know why before, during or after. As long as that shinny box on the wall says its wrong, then its wrong.
Report this comment
redhotmomma
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 12:46pmWhile I am a non-smoker, I feel that this stuff has really gotten out of hand. And you other non-smokers out there who feel that this doesn’t concern you, you need to think again. The more control given to the government over its people, the more control it will take..What next???mandatory weigh-ins??Will they tell us we are not allowed to buy oreos..?Will they tell us we have to excercise and be monitored by government hacks to make sure we are doing it??Where does it stop??I for one was competely appalled about the soda law of New York. Don’t you dare think they won’t infringe on YOUR rights just because you don’t smoke…
Report this comment
SCREW-WINDOWS
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 12:51pmPole smokers and **** pirates have a large drain on medical services but they are exempt and costing taxpayers money for their ill decision.
Report this comment
afishfarted
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 1:02pmThanks redhotmomma. You get it.
And you may find this hard to believe, but second had smoke is not a carcigen. When Carol Browner was head of the EPA under Clinton, she commissioned 10 universities to study second hand smoke. She didn’t like the results, so she tinkered with the numbers. She was sued in federal court, and the court found her guilty of manipulating the test results to meet her agenda–government control of personal behavior.
EVERY study said second hand smoke is not a carcigen and falls well below the threshold. Six of the studies went as far to say that exposure to second hand smoke actually acts to build up the immune system.
Too much information to pass on here, but I have a copy of the court ruling from 1997 and anyone can get it. That’s not to say second hand smoke doesn’t stink, because it does. But it is not a health risk. Just the opposite.
THAT oughta get things goin’ here
But back to your statement, what I just wrote is an example of the govt ignoring the facts in order to control the populus. A review of history will show Hitler outlawed smoking in Nazi Germany because he thought it was a healt risk and would hamper the advancement of the Arrion race. Just a titbit there
Report this comment
just my opinion maybe not yours
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 1:29pmSCREW-WINDOWS – Medical Costs are much higher for those with Diabetes then it is for smokers so maybe it would be best if the government out lawed sugar, wheat/flour, potato’s, pasta, bread or anything that COULD turn to sugar in your system after you eat it. Sounds silly doesn’t it, well so does this law!!
This law is wrong, it’s legal to buy smokes but it’s not legal in that city to smoke! It’s against my rights for the government to outlaw me from doing something legal in my home! I don’t smoke but I would never want someone to loose their rights from doing something legal!!
Coming soon to your city, unless you have the wear-with-all to fight it! I will, will you?
Report this comment
SCREW-WINDOWS
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 2:13pm@ just my opinion maybe not yours
How about banning HFCS and GMF’s I gave up HFCS lost weight and feel much more active.
Report this comment
rose-ellen
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 8:15pmMy co-workers mother died of diabetes.But the doctor put on the death certificate that she died from smoking. He refused to put she died of diabetes because he was part of the medical establishments propaganda machine regarding smoking-You can’t trust the statistics coming from the CDC or any medical organization.
Report this comment
Sharon Rose
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 12:44pmCalifornia is sooooooooooo messed up in so many ways.
Report this comment
diversity
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 12:44pmit’s ridiculous…….i’m getting pretty fed up with people telling me what to do, how to behave, blah, blah, blah…..leave me alone! geez
Report this comment
momrules
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 12:43pmWhat do I think? I think that government is overstepping it’s bounds one more time and self righteous, self important people are welcoming it.
Report this comment
piecolorado
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 12:40pmAnd how is such a law enforced? Does everybody remember the Stamp Act?
Report this comment
KangarooJack
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 5:15pmA little spot of tea with my stamp by the way…
Report this comment
huey6367
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 12:37pmCalifornia is out of control on many levels. I say we sell it back to Mexico, let them fix it up and when they default on the loan, we foreclose and get back free and clear and updated.
Report this comment
2MINUTESTOMIDNIGHT
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 12:47pmWhy would Mexico want it?
Report this comment
The Jewish Avenger
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 12:53pmLonger border…
Report this comment
huey6367
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 12:59pm@2minutes
More beach front property for vacationing Americans
Report this comment
Eastinfection
Posted on October 16, 2012 at 2:02pm“…sell it back to Mexico”
They can keep their 30 pesos…..
As far as i’m concerned they can HAVE Cali if they just “take over payments”.
Report this comment
getmeoutofcalifornia
Posted on October 17, 2012 at 1:21amThey won’t buy it, they’ll just take it through immigration. They’re mad because they think we stole it from them. I guess a legitimate purchase and a treaty doesn’t mean anything.
Report this comment