Assembly Bill 746 - Proposal to Prohibit Smoking in All Multi-Family Residential Units (Los Angeles: rent, condominium)

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by nullgeo

As I read it, the bill is written to address all "multi-family residential units". That would obviously include condos and even duplexes, tri-plexes, etc. Owned or rented. It is designed to address shared and close proximity living spaces ... and anyone living/sharing those spaces ... including anyone who might simply rent a room, sure. For that matter, it places restriction on visitors in multi-family units. Just as you can't go have a smoke in an office where you don't work.

The law is proposed to address harmful imposition into others' personal spaces. There are plenty of other laws that specify the same for other actions. I have mentioned a number along the way. Public nuisance laws, too.

Ok

You cannot smoke in any indoor public place. I agree
You cannot smoke in many outdoor public places. I agree
You cannot smoke within 20 of outdoor public places. I agree.
You cannot smoke with 25 feet of a public transit stop or station. I agree

Now we have this proposed law. Why don't they just make one law that states something to the effect of:

Smoking is prohibited in the state of California unless you're a home owner who resides in a single family home. That's pretty much what's happening. Better than making 20 arbitrary laws which basically lead up to this.

[NewToCA]

Originally Posted by Senno

I have less tolerance for people potentially endangering other people under the "reasonable care" doctrine. YMMV.

Doctrine of a Duty of Care | Law Teacher

It's less fair to renters, but fair to their co-tenants. When rights collide ya gotta weigh it out.

This is theoretical for now, as we don't have the science yet in this thread as to the exposure an upstairs tenant gets to second hand smoke from a downstairs neighbor, for instance...

And to me this is a missing key component, we haven't seen scientific evidence of the exposure between units.

[nullgeo]

Originally Posted by Gentoo

Ok

You cannot smoke in any indoor public place. I agree
You cannot smoke in many outdoor public places. I agree
You cannot smoke within 20 of outdoor public places. I agree.
You cannot smoke with 25 feet of a public transit stop or station. I agree

Now we have this proposed law. Why don't they just make one law that states something to the effect of:

Smoking is prohibited in the state of California unless you're a home owner who resides in a single family home. That's pretty much what's happening. Better than making 20 arbitrary laws which basically lead up to this.

Absolutely agreed.
In fact, I have long held that law in general can be reduced to just 3 - 4 rules, with levels of degree as to violation / enforcement. Start with a law against lying. Covers a lot of ground, don't it? But we risk digression.

[nullgeo]

Originally Posted by NewToCA

And to me this is a missing key component, we haven't seen scientific evidence of the exposure between units.

Not necessary to scientifically measure impositions on quality of life. How would one measure the negative imposition of a barking dog?

Persistent exposure to ANY kind of smoke is scientifically held as carcinogenic. Smoke is carcinogenic. What people are saying more and more is "your filthy, carcinogenic habit is at the very least an imposition on my personal quality of life at any level.". Barking chihuahua or Rottweiler makes no difference. Shut the damn dog up. (This from a passionate dog-lover.)

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by Gentoo

Why don't they just make one law that states something to the effect of: Smoking is prohibited in the state of California unless you're a home owner who resides in a single family home. Better than making 20 arbitrary laws which basically lead up to this.

Exactly! (Can't rep you again.)

[EscapeCalifornia]

Originally Posted by Gentoo

Now we have this proposed law. Why don't they just make one law that states something to the effect of:

Smoking is prohibited in the state of California unless you're a home owner who resides in a single family home. That's pretty much what's happening. Better than making 20 arbitrary laws which basically lead up to this.

Make sure that single family home is on a normal sized lot, not 6' apart like they build them now.

[AnonymouseX]

Originally Posted by nullgeo

Not necessary to scientifically measure impositions on quality of life. How would one measure the negative imposition of a barking dog?

Persistent exposure to ANY kind of smoke is scientifically held as carcinogenic.

So your car is then a public nuisance...

[Fontucky]

As a non-smoker, I occasionally get whiffs of ciggie smoke wafting in from my one and only close-by neighbor when he pops into his backyard for a smoke. This happens only when my back room window is open for ventilation at night in the Summer. This is how I handle it, assuming it's bad enough to annoy me in the first place: I shut the window for a short while. Works every time.

[nullgeo]

Originally Posted by AnonymouseX

So your car is then a public nuisance...

Ah, back to the car analogies again ...
Yes, my vans are certainly public nuisances ... in fact, they are personal nuisances, as well. I would love to live without them. But, as previously shown, multiple times in this thread, they have become necessary evils. Unlike smoking.

[nullgeo]

Originally Posted by Fontucky

As a non-smoker, I occasionally get whiffs of ciggie smoke wafting in from my one and only close-by neighbor when he pops into his backyard for a smoke. This happens only when my back room window is open for ventilation at night in the Summer. This is how I handle it, assuming it's bad enough to annoy me in the first place: I shut the window for a short while. Works every time.

Good news, you don't live close, in near-constant contact. Makes you smarter than the average bear.