Anti Smoking Laws and the Reality of the Totalitarian Police State

It wasn't like 'Prohibition' [the Constitutional Amendment that outlawed drinking alcolhol and gave rise to the modern underworld].

It was subtle, supposedly for 'your' benefit - an attempt to demonize first tobacco and tobacco smoking, and then the smoker him or
herself.

The first laws sounded innocuous enough - no smoking in public places like restaurants and places of work because, 'they', without
really solid evidence, decided that the slightest exposure to tobacco smoke was a major healh hazard - Just like Prohibition when the
'totalitarian health nuts' had decided that the slightest exposure to alcohol was a major health threat.

But give the modern 'Liberal' [ie. a fascist control freak] an inch and they will take a mile.

Flash forward to 2018 and let's see how far we have gone down the rabbit hole of Totalitarianism.

As of 2018 all HUD [assisted government housing] apartments, which include millions of low income people, who in fact they consider subhuman anyway are barred from smoking in their own apartment uder penalty of eviction.

Guess what - they mean it.

I know someone who told me the reality of the nightmare.

He got a nice apartment [apparently a new age jail cell] where he had to sign a lease where he agreed to never smoke in his own apartment
under penalty of eviction.

And you don't believe they can enforce such a rule? - Here is what these anti tobacco nazis do - They knock on your door and if you don't
open immediately they just come in. If they suspect you've been smoking they put a big sign on your door warning you that you
face eviction [remember when they made all Jews in Nazi Germany post a Star of David on their door - I remember]

And guess what? - If you don't obey the apartment management [or should I say warden] he she or it will actually proceed to evict you.

Want to know why there are still so many people living on the streets when there are so many cheap government assisted places available?
- Most homeless people would still rather live on the street
than reside in a cheap to almost free HUD financed jail cell.


"GIVE ME LIBERY OT GIVE ME DEATH'
- Patrick Henry

a reply to: AlienView

I think this is all PC bull crap.


If you don't like cigarette smoke, then tough.

I don't like perfumes or aftershaves or bad breath.

After 30 years I quit.

I didn’t want to the last smoker in California.

The pressure to not smoke involves teaching kids to shame.

You have the choice to sign that lease and if the State, Gov, Big Bro decides to boot ya for not following the rules you agreed to. That's on you. They are fitting most of the bill anyway. They didn't say you couldn't find a place to smoke outside. If you want to smoke in your home, find one that doesn't have that clause in the lease. Pretty cut and dry.

Oh and I'm a former smoker myself who could care less if you smoke or not.

a reply to: AlienView

I smoke.
I'm a social smoker and rarely smoke if I'm not in a pub having a drink....which to be fair is most nights.

The best thing they did was ban smoking in pubs - it stinks and other people have to breathe it in.
Smoking is extremely unhealthy, why should other people suffer because of my bad habit?

Don't like the rules? Don't live there, find somewhere else to live. It's as simple as that. It's not "nazi- like" to enforce no smoking rules. You have two choices, find somewhere else to live or quit smoking.

a reply to: whyamIhere

Funny you should mention California, which, in spite of all the Liberal dick heads, is currently going up in smoke
- Maybe they should have thought more about the forest and what's growing out of control so as to be a fire hazared
then demonizing tobacco - Maybe they were too stoned on marijuana to give a damn!

But marijuana is in, and legal in the state of California and tobacco is out - And Califonia continues to burn
while its stoned politicians do nothing but think of how to stop the tobacco menace.

Quote me on this:

"Hell has no fury like a stoned politcian trying to save the world from tobacco while the ground is burning
under his feet"

a reply to: AlienView

If my tax dollars are subsidizing you, where in the hell are you getting the disposable income to afford smoking?** I have no problem, whatsoever with this. I also have no problem with a property owner including "no smoking" in their lease or with eviction of anyone who refuses to abide by the lease they signed.

Comparing it to the plight of the Jews in Nazi Germany is a goddamned stretch so ridiculous it actually made me burst into laughter, so I thank you for that moment of induced levity.

Tell ya what, you wanna smoke, do it in property you actually own and leave everyone else out of it. Hotbox your car, smoke like a chimney if you own your own house, or go buy yourself a spacesuit and chain smoke with the air seals activated... but nobody has a right to violate lease terms purely to feed their own addictions.

**Same goes for drugs, alcohol, extravagant food, and various frivolous purchases. If you're on the dole, you should be subject to on-demand drug, alcohol, and possession tests/searches to ensure you're not just a free loader using the tax payer to subsidize your vices and your inability to prioritize budgets.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Of course it's "PC bullcrap" to you. Literally anything you disagree with is "PC bullcrap" whether it is or isn't in reality.

It reminds me of an old guy screaming "get off my lawn"! Funny but harmless.

a reply to: AlienView

Smoking is hell on a property. The tar and smell is difficult to remove if at all. Be it a home, or a vehicle. If you can't afford to pay rent, you shouldn't complain about how to treat the home you're allowed to live in, let alone smoke.


Now, granted as a renter, you certainly still have rights. However if you violate the terms of renting, there aren't many.


Sincerely,

-a smoker.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: DBCowboy

Of course it's "PC bullcrap" to you. Literally anything you disagree with is "PC bullcrap" whether it is or isn't in reality.

It reminds me of an old guy screaming "get off my lawn"! Funny but harmless.

Get off my lawn.


Don't like my smoke?

Go somewhere else.

a reply to: JinMI

People shouldn't sauté onions or garlic they smell, they should never have peanuts or peanut products (because allergies).


Slippery slope!

a reply to: DBCowboy

Within the context of a owner/renter situation, if that's what you choose to put into your lease.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: DBCowboy

Within the context of a owner/renter situation, if that's what you choose to put into your lease.

Fine.

I suppose.

Is not renting to "them colored folks" okay, because rental agreement?

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: JinMI

People shouldn't sauté onions or garlic they smell, they should never have peanuts or peanut products (because allergies).


Slippery slope!

Secondhand onion and garlic smell doesn't cause folks to develop health problems that kill them through no choice of their own. Similarly, only a raging asshole busts out peanut butter when they've been told someone near them has a peanut allergy and, coincidentally enough, they then become liable civilly if their choice to consume or use peanut butter is found to have been done with full knowledge of it's potential effects on someone near them. The potential effects of passive smoke are well known to everyone who lights up at this point. You're comparing apples to oranges because the smoker's apple orchard is a one trick pony that doesn't produce enough apples for a straight comparison that benefits them.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: DBCowboy

Within the context of a owner/renter situation, if that's what you choose to put into your lease.

Fine.

I suppose.

Is not renting to "them colored folks" okay, because rental agreement?

Did "them colored folks" wake up one day when they were in their young teens and decide to shove a burning bundle of # in their face that magically turned them into a particular race? No? Their race isn't their choice, you say? Oh, well then...

apples do not equal oranges

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: DBCowboy

Within the context of a owner/renter situation, if that's what you choose to put into your lease.

Fine.

I suppose.

Is not renting to "them colored folks" okay, because rental agreement?

Of course not. In fact there are anti-discrimination laws for race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. I know you know this.

So you rent me your property. I smoke inside and out and after a year or 3, I leave. Should you be responsible for the damages?

a reply to: JinMI

You're responsible for all damages.

Tarring the walls would be damage.

Clean them.

I'm a smoker.

I know what smoke does and I own it where ever I live.

People should do the same.

But banning smoking?

Sounds authoritarian.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Don't like the rules? Don't live there, find somewhere else to live. It's as simple as that. It's not "nazi- like" to enforce no smoking rules. You have two choices, find somewhere else to live or quit smoking.

Try China. I understand that smoking is pretty much mandatory there for everyone.