Comments on: Smoke in Belmont, Calif.? Only in single-family detached houses

By: Amy Alkon

Amy Alkon — Sat, 18 Nov 2006 19:24:29 +0000

I’m generally a big fan and supporter of Reason, but where they get irrational, especially Jacob Sullum, whom I’m otherwise a big fan of, is on the smoking issue. There’s this pretense that all the studies showing that secondhand smoke is a carcinogen are just crap, and oh, it’s sooo hard to measure. The fact is, they just want to willfully and babyishly continue to do what they want to do, forgetting the principle of “One’s right to punch another in the nose ends where the other’s nose begins.”

I lived in New York City before I lived in Los Angeles, and I had to move out of an apartment after a smoker moved in below me. My apartment smelled like smoke, the air was smoky, my clothes smelled like smoke…it was really unpleasant.

I have a friend who has lung cancer. Go with somebody who does to chemo. You’ll understand what an utter moron you are for smoking and what a rude idiot anyone is who insists on smoking anywhere anyone else will breathe it in.

My notion: One should not smoke anywhere it would be impolite to cast out a big smelly fart. And if the farts are so smelly that they invade the neighbor’s house…is it the neighbor’s duty to put in new walls and a new ventilation system? Or should you stop acting like a science-denying total idiot who’s a bad neighbor to boot?

By: J.T. Wenting

J.T. Wenting — Sat, 18 Nov 2006 08:20:53 +0000

hmm, I wonder how they can ban smoking in closed vehicles under these laws.
It’s not as if there’s any more smoke going into the environment than there is from smoking in your own home…

Smoking in open topped vehicles is of course no different from a pedestrian smoking on the sidewalk.

And what about people living in appartment complexes or duos?
They’d no longer be allowed to smoke even at home because it’s not a “single family detached residence”.

However much I am opposed to smoking and support smoking bans in public (where after all others can and will receive doses of second hand smoke), this ban goes too far even for me.
I’d support maybe a total ban on tobacco and tobacco products, but not a half baked measure like this which treats some smokers differently from others (which will likely be the best way to challenge it).

By: Ryan Frank

Ryan Frank — Thu, 16 Nov 2006 13:51:47 +0000

Duh, they still want to collect the taxes on the smokes.

By: Deoxy

Deoxy — Thu, 16 Nov 2006 13:15:28 +0000

I think indivudal cities would likely have this power (basically, it’s a form of zoning laws)… but, by the same token, all current owners would b “grandfathered” in (allwd to smoke), or should be compensated, as restriction on one’s use of one’s own property is a TAKING by the state.

By: Jetgirl

Jetgirl — Thu, 16 Nov 2006 11:51:40 +0000

This is getting ridiculous, if folks want to make smoking illegal, why just not ban the sell of cigarettes and keep out of other’s personal property.