Smoking ban in part of So Cal

[Rod]

Calabasas, CA which is very close to Los Angeles, just made it illegal to smoke in the city. If you see someone smoking OUTSIDE on the sidewalk, you can call the police on them and yes, the police will get involved. Smoking indoors and outdoors is now illegal Calabasas.

Normally I don't allow political discussion, however this affects all of us as a community. It's important we stand up for our rights and stop allowing the tobacco nazis to have their way. This pathetic law will only spread across the country.

Here's the news article:
http://www.theacorn.com/news/2006/0126/Front_page/003.html

 

[Mrepp]

That is ridiculous that you cant even smoke out side your own home now. They have a public smoking ban in Madison too and I hate it. Thankfully I like by the beer capitol of the us, drinking is synonymous with smoking.

 

[lucasbuck]

Damn! :0 This is not good.

 

[Strayvector]

That's insane.

 

[smokelaw1]

Thankfully I like by the beer capitol of the us, drinking is synonymous with smoking.

[snapback]281479[/snapback]​

I had to read this three times to figure out what you meant! Did those activities start a little early? :laugh:

 

[loanshark]

A hell of a lot of freedoms are being taken away in our Free Country! Let the book burning start!!! :angry:

 

[SamClemmons]

From the article, "the right of citizens to breathe clean air." What? In California? California hasn't seen anything resembling clean air in over 200 years. Shoot, the non smokers there smoke a pack a day. Puhleeease.

NA

 

[smokelaw1]

If smoking ont he sidewalk is worthy of a fine because of the effect it has on clean air, shoudln't (heaven forbid) driving on the freeways (I know, no one in So Cal leads a car-centric life) spewing out exhaust be an arrestable offense? I think we shoudl start puching for an outright ban on driving cars in CA! Won't SOMEONE think of the CHILDREN, their poor little lungs, black and soot-filled from the vile, evil car-fumes.....

 

[gandolf565]

I heard this on the news earlier today. It was stated that they have deemed second hand smoke second only to diesel exhaust for the worst pollutant in the air.

Seems like a couple years ago it was barbeques, and a couple years before that lawn mowers...

I sure am glad I live in Kansas. Nebraska gets all of our polluted air :sign:

 

[Mr Peat]

Ahhh..The joys of having freedoms stripped away by a bunch of ass clowns. If Cali has clean air, then I am a Saint. Here is a story when Salt Lake City put the non-smoking ban in public places many years ago. My uncle drives 1000 miles one way to see up which we hadnt seen him in 20 years. Family feuds....So anyways...

We goto the local Arby's like 6 blocks from our house and if you know anything about SLC in the winter time, its not a pretty sight for air. We had one of the worst inversions aka pollution in many years. So my uncle goes to light up a cigarette in Arby's and at the time, didnt know the ban was put in place. This manager comes up and tells my uncle he has to put it out. My uncle then responds with something like "ya got to be sh*tting me. have you looked outside?" You couldnt see more than 6 inches in front of your face. Also, this is one of the few cities in the US that has a Green, Yellow, Red light on the news whether ya should go outside if you have lung and breathing problems. :laugh: This all took place over 15 years ago. Yet, we continue to have our rights and freedoms stripped away.

One day we will wake up..You cant drive, smoke, eat, drink, use public vacilities, walk your dog, goto the park...eat out..Hell eating out is just as bad for ya. Causes heart disease, diabetes, etc etc etc...Yet, the masses are getting happy. Finally when smoking is illegal period, I would hate to be a Home owner cuz someone will have to make up the lost tax revenus. :whistling:

Stepping off soap box now. :0

 

[ML237]

What is the next prohibition going to look like? Slowly, but surely our personal freedom and our own rights are being striped away. :angry2:

 

[Treamayne]

AVB, this is the kind of stuff I meant when we talked of "safety laws" the other night.

Anyway, you gotta love how they skew facts in the media:

"exposure to secondhand smoke is the third leading cause of preventable death "

uh, no...

Causes of preventable death:

(3) Cerebrovascular disease stroke 6.7% (2002)

From Ben Best Research Article

"kills over 52,000 nonsmokers each year, including 3,000 deaths from lung cancer"

And the other 49,000 are what, precisely? And I'm sure there were no other contributing factors in any of the deaths, cancer or not. Ever hear of Genetics?

"Experts also say secondary smoke causes as many as 300,000 children in the U.S. ..."

What experts? Where? Can't find this bogus stat anywhere but this crappy article.





God I wish media had to present all articles in MLA documented format. I despise stat twisting in all forms. Maybe the city council should read Crichton's "State of Fear."

-K-

 

[atuck]

That's BS!! I would rather see them ban chewing gum! :angry2:

 

[Blue Dragon]

What experts? Where? Can't find this bogus stat anywhere but this crappy article.

God I wish media had to present all articles in MLA documented format. I despise stat twisting in all forms. Maybe the city council should read Crichton's "State of Fear."

-K-

[snapback]281706[/snapback]​

I'm with you on that one brother!! It is really annoying that people think just because someone took the time to print some inane statement that it must be fact. I really hope some people stand up for their rights and get this turned around. I know Seatlle had a similar stupid law passed.

However, it appears that they may have taken the information from a paper sponsored by the "Tobacco Control Legal Consortium" written in July 2005. http://talc.phlaw.org/pdf_files/0074.pdf That paper cites this as their source for those statistics:

4 See S.A. Glantz & W. Parmley, Passive Smoking and Heart Disease: Epidemiology, Physiology, and Biochemistry, 83(1) Circulation 1 (1991);

And apparently it is also similarly stated in the Environmental Protection Agency's report on second hand smoke:
http://no-smoke.org/getthefacts.php?id=13

I'm just telling you where I found similar statements of fact. However, I am highly sceptical and would like to do some more research on this from an unbiased or non-predisposed source. I'm just guessing here, but an organization that has thier website as "no-smoke.org" wants the research to support their position. ....

I have to make wings now .. but I would really be interested to see if other people can find some differing facts from unbiased sources that dispute these claims. Then maybe we could combine our efforts into some sort of action to get this reversed. ????? thoughts?

Thanks,
- C

*edit for a spelling error

 

[IgwanaRob]

My boss just sent me this link:

California Becomes First State to Declare Secondhand Smoke a Pollutant

I just don't understand where they get this, when every single scientific study proves otherwise. I think it's time to nuke that commie state... :whistling:

 

[NullSmurf]

Like I posted a few days back, the Colorado legislature is considering a similar bill, though not quite as insane. That a city passed this doesn't bother me much - look at Boulder Colorado. Most of the drivel having passed the gavel there in the last decade makes no sense to me.

However, I would LOVE to visit that city, smoking a cigar in my truck, or better, in a private residence and get cited for breaking the law. Now THAT would be fun! Should a BOTL get such a citation, mine will be the first check in the mail to his defense fund.

 

[mingkou]

"According to the ordinance, exposure to secondhand smoke is the third leading cause of preventable death in the United States and kills over 52,000 nonsmokers each year, including 3,000 deaths from lung cancer. Statistics show that between 4,200 and 7,440 nonsmokers in California die from heart disease each year due to exposure to secondhand smoke."

I noticed this too, and it cannot be correct. It is actually ridiculous. Probably what happened is they included deaths of those exposed to second-hand smoke in with actual second-hand smoke death causes. So, if someone dies of a brain tumor and were exposed to second-hand smoke, they are listed in both. If the 52,000 is actually from second-smoke, then I would have to support the ban. However, private businesses and private homes should be off-limits. But that is like one out of every 50 deaths is from second hand smoke.

 

[Lopaka]

I'm waiting for every state to ban fast food because obesity is slowly becoming one of the major health problems in this country. Or let’s bring back prohibition because of all the drinking and driving problems. Lets ban all firearms because of the all the violent crimes that happen. /sigh

 

[junkman_56]

What's next, reinstate the prohibition on alcohol?
Here is a link to an article on a new study on alcohol and cancer.

 

[IgwanaRob]

What's next, reinstate the prohibition on alcohol?
Here is a link to an article on a new study on alcohol and cancer.

[snapback]282532[/snapback]​

"Total avoidance of alcohol, although optimum for cancer control, cannot be recommended in terms of broad perspective of public health"

So it's bad to drink, and it's just as bad not to? LOL - sounds like it was tailored for some of my friends!