Don't buy a tony condo in Minneapolis

[LilBastage]

See the article here.


These people own the condos they live in. This isn't a landlord telling renters what to do. Why anyone would live anywhere that tried to control them like this is well beyond me.

I suppose it's only a matter of time...

 

[rbbrock]

See the article here.


These people own the condos they live in. This isn't a landlord telling renters what to do. Why anyone would live anywhere that tried to control them like this is well beyond me.

I suppose it's only a matter of time...

Yet another example of home/condo/etc.-owners' associations run amok. :angry:

 

[Infinity]

What I don't get is that there is no scientific proof that second smoke is bad for you. In fact, conversely, there is scientific proof that it is NOT bad for you.
So, why is there this enormous campaign to ban smoking in so many places, someone must be benefiting from this but who?

Brian

 

[KayakinBoy]

What I don't get is that there is no scientific proof that second smoke is bad for you. In fact, conversely, there is scientific proof that it is NOT bad for you.

Say what? ???

Not saying you are wrong, but I find that very hard to believe...

Wiki Entry on Second Hand Smoke

 

[FunkyCold5]

That sucks! If I complain to my HOA that I don't want to live beside ugly neighbors, will they prevent ugly people from buying a place in my building? Too bad the ugly people living there now will be grandfathered in.

 

[Nathan Rahl]

Huh quite a coincidence, my dorm just became smoke free yesterday Not that that will stop me, but just another annoying little thing.

 

[tomthirtysix]

What I don't get is that there is no scientific proof that second smoke is bad for you. In fact, conversely, there is scientific proof that it is NOT bad for you.

Say what? ???

Not saying you are wrong, but I find that very hard to believe...

Wiki Entry on Second Hand Smoke

Wikipedia? :laugh:

You could try here:

http://www.forces.org/evidence/evid/second.htm

 

[Ginseng]

Why would I want to buy tone-ny a condo in Minneapolis? ???

Wilkey

 

[LilBastage]

Why would I want to buy tone-ny a condo in Minneapolis? ???

Wilkey

oops! :blush:

Fixed the title. Thanks for pointing it out, Wilkey.

 

[KeyserSoze]

That's pretty ridiculous IMO. What do you expect moving into a condo complex. Smoke, loud music and no parking. Comes with the territory. Don't like it, buy an f'n house!

 

[grateful1]

What I don't get is that there is no scientific proof that second smoke is bad for you. In fact, conversely, there is scientific proof that it is NOT bad for you.

Say what? ???

Not saying you are wrong, but I find that very hard to believe...

Wiki Entry on Second Hand Smoke

Wikipedia? :laugh:

You could try here:

http://www.forces.org/evidence/evid/second.htm

Puffstuff's linky in another post showed that ETS is not a carnicogen...therefore second hand smoke should not be classified as such...and is not as bad as people say(science tells us so).

 

[KayakinBoy]

Wikipedia? :laugh:

Considering more major universities are considering Wikipedia a creditable source, I think it's trust worthy. Besides, almost every article points to a source or says that an explantion is needed.

 

[Wurm]

Wikipedia? :laugh:

Considering more major universities are considering Wikipedia a creditable source, I think it's trust worthy. Besides, almost every article points to a source or says that an explantion is needed.

Wiki should always be taken with a grain of salt due to the source.

Check out this site http://www.davehitt.com/facts/

And most importantly this part of that site first http://www.davehitt.com/facts/agendas.html

 

[5 O'Clock Somewhere]

Keep in mind guys, that yea Wiki can be a bit biased, but that article has 138 documented sources. I'd say it's legit.

 

[Wurm]

[quote name='5 O'Clock Somewhere' post='614131' date='Feb 14 2008, 10:59 PM']Keep in mind guys, that yea Wiki can be a bit biased, but that article has 138 documented sources. I'd say it's legit.[/quote]

Did you look at the "sources" ? I'm far from convinced.

 

[5 O'Clock Somewhere]

The other sites people are posting aren't really any more convincing in my opinion. They're all biased. I'm not the type of guy to accept something just because I'm told, but I believe second hand smoke has the ability to be harmful. Now, I do not think it's right for them to deny him the right to smoke inside his own property.

 

[Wurm]

Keep in mind guys, that yea Wiki can be a bit biased, but that article has 138 documented sources. I'd say it's legit.

Did you look at the "sources" ? I'm far from convinced.
[/quote]

The other sites people are posting aren't really any more convincing in my opinion. They're all biased. I'm not the type of guy to accept something just because I'm told, but I believe second hand smoke has the ability to be harmful. Now, I do not think it's right for them to deny him the right to smoke inside his own property.
[/quote]

When ALL the sources mentioned on the Wiki are from groups / people with well know anti-smoking agendas it makes the Wikia also very biased.

And I am guessing you didn't read the second link I posted above.

Of course second hand smoke is bad for you. But the way the fanatics talk about it and have the ignorant "Joe and Mary Publics" believing them is that its on terms with nuclear fallout or anthrax in effect. And thats just plain bullshit.

Its also bullshit that some asshole thinks he can tell me what I can and cannot do in my domicile. I paid for my house / condo? I'll damn sure smoke in it if I want.

 

[MoeCizlak]

When will you all realize that our government, whether local or federal, only has our best interests at heart and that we should do as they dictate without question? :whistling:

 

[Wurm]

When will you all realize that our government, whether local or federal, only has our best interests at heart and that we should do as they dictate without question? :whistling:

HA! :sign: