Quantcast

Santa Monica Proposes to Ban Smoking in Apartment Rentals: Do You Agree With the City's Proposal?

mrosen814 2012/07/25 22:00:00
Related Topics: smoking, Health, Santa Monica
You!
Add Photos & Videos
The city of Santa Monica recently proposed to ban smoking for new apartment and condo renters. Under the proposed ordinance, both new and existing multi-unit buildings would be subject to the ban.

Smokers already renting could continue to light up in their apartments, but the units would be covered by the ban as soon as they became vacant. According to the Los Angeles Times article, "Tenants who break the rules could be fined up to $500 if a landlord or a neighbor takes them to small claims court."

LATIMES.COM reports:
The Santa Monica City Council is scheduled to vote on a plan to bar new renters from smoking inside their apartments and condos. The council should demonstrate restraint and vote no.
plan bar renters smoking apartments condos council demonstrate restraint vote

Read More: http://www.latimes.com/health/la-ed-smoking-renter...

Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • dalevic 2012/07/27 14:53:04
    No
    dalevic
    +8
    I am a non smoker and even I am sick of the government sticking their noses where they don't belong. They had no right banning smoking in private businesses and they have no right banning smoking in private property. If We the people do not stand up to these politicians at some point, and that would be NOW they will just keep STOMPING all over our rights. Today it may be smokers tomorrow it will be you "yes people"!!!

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Prime T... Koma 2012/07/28 02:08:45
    Prime Time Lime
    +1
    As I said in my post,maybe the majority of the Santa Monica public wants it.The whole story is not told and much is left out.I was not saying I agreed with the decision,just noted that the story is very incomplete.
  • Debi.smith Prime T... 2012/07/28 02:33:04
    Debi.smith
    +1
    Doesn't matter what the majority of Santa Monicans want. We are a representative republic at every level. We elect them, they vote their conscience. However when they start plowing through our Constitutionally guaranteed rights they are wrong
  • Prime T... Debi.smith 2012/07/28 03:30:08
    Prime Time Lime
    Your right,they do not take a consensus of how people feel.Once they are elected they make the decision on thier own.I do not think smoking or non smoking is a constitutional right.Maybe I missed it in the preamble of the constitution.
  • Windy Prime T... 2012/07/28 09:30:10 (edited)
    Windy
    +1
    What the Constitution guarantees is the individual right of every person to live the way they want, to ingest whatever they want, and to use their own property in whatever way they want without interference, regulation, or restriction by government.
  • Prime T... Windy 2012/07/28 13:42:34
    Prime Time Lime
    I thought it was life ,liberty and the pursuit of happiness that was part of the constitution..
  • Windy Prime T... 2012/07/28 18:19:05 (edited)
    Windy
    +1
    No; life, liberty and pursuit of happiness are part of the Declaration of Independence, the Constituton was written, passed, ratified and enacted to preserve these unalienable rights:
    life = self determination = living the way you want
    liberty = self ownership = ingesting whatever you want
    "pursuit of happiness" was originally "property" in T. Jefferson's draft, he should have kept it in the final version, it would have made the property rights issues (especially the right to self ownership) far more clear and far less able to be restricted in any way.
  • Debi.smith Prime T... 2012/07/30 20:49:17
    Debi.smith
    +1
    Smoking in and of itself is not a RIGHT. However the basis of our government is that it cannot prohibit one from doing something in the privacy of his own home that affects no one else. In fact until 1914 you could buy morphine and other drugs out of the Sears catalog. Then they started regulating drugs like they do liquor. (Victimless crime - except for the idiot who is doing it to himself.) It wasn't until 1970 that drugs actually became criminal. The government has no business in my house.
  • Prime T... Debi.smith 2012/07/31 00:42:52
    Prime Time Lime
    +1
    I agree that a person should be able to smoke in their own premises and the government should not be telling a person they cannot do so.
  • Debi.smith Koma 2012/07/28 02:27:29
    Debi.smith
    +1
    No such word as irregardless. Proper word to use in this situation I'd regardless. The prefix "IR" and the suffix "less" mean exactly the same thing. By that token your statement then means "with regard" rather than "without regard." Just sayin' - one of my pet peeves. :-)
  • Windy Prime T... 2012/07/28 09:27:02
    Windy
    +1
    NO ONE and NO GROUP has the legitimate authority to restrict or remove the unalienable rights of others just because they don't like what those others do. The only legitimate reason to restrict or remove a person's unalienable rights is when they have violated those rights of others (by committing murder, assault, theft, fraud, unlawful imprisonment, or destruction of another's property).
  • donnaga27 2012/07/27 17:12:39
    No
    donnaga27
    +3
    Are you serious, is there no limit to sucking the money out of the American people, what's next?
  • Bill 2012/07/27 16:24:11
    No
    Bill
    +6
    It wasn't the city .This was ONE horses ass politician with an agenda. Out that bastard and hold them up to public ridicule and scorn. Make their life so miserable that they will curse their mother for giving them birth. This constant intrusion into peoples private life has got to end and end NOW !!!! BTW I quit smoking 10 yrs ago.
  • Barb Bill 2012/07/28 12:24:40
    Barb
    +2
    A few years ago in California there was a politician who wanted to ban toys in Happy Meals because they encourage obesity. Is this one of the same ilk? Funny how these guys never want a law to stop themselves from doing something -- it's always somebody else's terrible problem they're trying to "fix".
  • Bill Barb 2012/07/28 15:16:37
    Bill
    +1
    It's also usually smoke and mirrors to divert attention from the 17 other ways they are trying to screw us. It's long past the time for the people to take back control
  • Larsa Solidor 2012/07/27 16:15:04
    Yes
    Larsa Solidor
    +1
    I have horrible asthma and had to move my brother into an apartment in Wilmore,KY. You could smell the smoke from outside. It was the worst. He also has asthma.
    It's more of a "they should make smoke free apartments" but that would hike up costs. People are going to smoke in rented apartments, bill or not.
    But it might also help someone struggling to kick a smoking habit by telling them "you can't smoke here now."
    My vote is yes. For medical reasons.
  • NathanS... Larsa S... 2012/07/28 03:34:42
    NathanStewart
    +3
    You can always choose to live somewhere that caters more to your needs. Why would you expect people who pay to live there and choose to smoke a legal product to stop on an account of you.In this case it is your choice to live there or not.
  • Bill Larsa S... 2012/07/28 15:25:21
    Bill
    +1
    You are asking too much, sorry. Where does the invasion end? Will people not be able to use perfume because one person is allergic? Will people not be allowed to prepare meat dishes because someone is vegan and gets offended at the smell? You are right about the smoke free apartments though. BTW I'm an ex smoke,r 10 yrs ago
  • Its Me,... Larsa S... 2012/07/29 07:01:41
    Its Me, Joel
    Peanuts make me so sick I can not breath, but I do not tell the store I shop in YOU CAN NOT HAVE PEANUTS IN HERE!!!
  • Kronan_1 2012/07/27 15:44:36
    No
    Kronan_1
    +6
    People are paying for a home. Maybe it is a temporary home but, it is still home. Thus they should be allowed to be comfortable in their living space. Apartment dwellers already deal with enough rules. This is their place to come home to and relax,unwind. If smoking is part of this ,then they should be able. I am a non-smoker myself but, believe a person should be free in their own home. Rental or not.
  • stevegtexas@aol.com 2012/07/27 15:21:53 (edited)
  • Blunder... stevegt... 2012/07/27 16:41:15
    BlunderWoman ~ FTGOP~ BN 0
    +2
    I agree. It seems like having smoking and nonsmoking units would be the sensible thing to do...much like hotel rooms.
  • Jean 2012/07/27 14:57:06
  • toti Jean 2012/08/12 23:53:20
  • Jean toti 2012/08/13 15:56:35
    Jean
    You really need to quit calling yourself bad name retard
  • toti Jean 2012/08/16 17:12:22
    toti
    LOL! Again, you're the douchebag.
  • Jean toti 2012/08/20 22:55:32
    Jean
    moron lol lol
  • Reikyrr 2012/07/27 14:54:55
    No
    Reikyrr
    +2
    if smoking damages the paint, or whatever. Let them just pay for that.
  • Kronan_1 Reikyrr 2012/07/27 15:47:05
    Kronan_1
    +1
    That's why they pay security deposits.
  • fuzzy K... Reikyrr 2012/07/27 16:00:08
    fuzzy Ken "In G*d We Trust"
    +3
    ...doesn't cooking also do that?
  • Reikyrr fuzzy K... 2012/07/27 18:13:53
    Reikyrr
    +1
    That's why there are those sucktion devices (no idea what its called in English.)
  • fuzzy K... Reikyrr 2012/07/30 13:40:25
    fuzzy Ken "In G*d We Trust"
    Are you referring to range hoods? Not every apartment has one. I've never had one.
    (wouldn't they also be effective for sucking up cigarette smoke?)
    range hood
  • Reikyrr fuzzy K... 2012/08/05 16:02:02
    Reikyrr
    +1
    Yeah, thats what I was referring to. Thank you. And yeah they would but they are noisy and people like to smoke wherever.
  • dalevic 2012/07/27 14:53:04
    No
    dalevic
    +8
    I am a non smoker and even I am sick of the government sticking their noses where they don't belong. They had no right banning smoking in private businesses and they have no right banning smoking in private property. If We the people do not stand up to these politicians at some point, and that would be NOW they will just keep STOMPING all over our rights. Today it may be smokers tomorrow it will be you "yes people"!!!
  • Its Me,... dalevic 2012/07/29 06:56:14
    Its Me, Joel
    The way it was, If a business owner felt that smoking hurt there business...they could ban it. If smoking did Not hurt the business, the owner would allow it. YOU SEE...THIS IS CALLED FREEDOM!!! Now it is just banned...This is called our current government in need of repair.
  • Pookie dalevic 2012/07/30 15:08:47
    Pookie
    The PRIVATE property doesn't belong to the RENTER/LEASER..it belongs to the owner. The owner should be able to make the choice WITHOUT interference from anyone, e it he overnment or the renter/leaser.
  • Debi.smith Pookie 2012/08/25 17:26:23
    Debi.smith
    Actually, by virtue of his rental/lease agreement, the renter/leaser is afforded all the rights and responsibilities, BOTH GOOD AND BAD, as the owner. He may be sued for someone sffering an injury in his home (though this rarely happens - people usually go after the money). He has a right to privacy and the right to EVERY SINGLR RIGHT A PERSON WHO OWNS HAS. If he lives in a complex where the owner states restrictions beforehand or in the lease and he agrees, then he signed with informed consent to those restrictions.
  • Pookie Debi.smith 2012/09/17 13:21:51
    Pookie
    It sound to me as though you ALL belong to the OCCUPY movement..you want it all and you want it YOUR way.
  • JudyInc... dalevic 2012/08/01 13:58:39
    JudyIncarnato
    Look, if you don't like the no smoking ban, then live somewhere where you can kill yourself sucking on those cancer sticks!!!!!! I live in a complex that is non smoking and I wouldn't have it any other way
  • darmyman 2012/07/27 14:33:56
    Yes
    darmyman
    +5
    Sure they should. They should also ban all: firearms, knives (yes even butter knives - these can be used as weapons also), stun guns, automobile (these are very dangerous), junk food (cant have people feeding this to children), all animals (huge source of dander and make affect others with allergies and cause consternation to any people that have animal phobias), foul language - (cant have that), I'm a bit torn on ethnic cooking as people may find the smell of this undesirable. Naturally I'm being Facetious. What you have in Santa Monica is the best description of the Nanny State one could provide. Asses.
  • Debi.smith darmyman 2012/08/25 17:28:49
    Debi.smith
    LMAO. Perfect description.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

Living

2014/04/20 13:41:26

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals