No butts about it: St. John's enacts no-smoking housing rule

[scratch]

So do Drunks and Coffee drinkers, but you don't hear me complaining.



And Alcohol can kill your liver and brain cells, not to mention drinking and driving.... yet we have commercials, advertisements and all of it shoved in our faces daily. Cars and Power Plants, as well as the growth hormones in the meat we eat has all been traced to the same stuff.... I see no difference.



I just did.



It doesn't lower the resale value unless the idiots in charge of upkeep arn't doing their jobs. And there's plenty of other things that need rehabilitation more then just smokers..... and yet nothing is done to this extent.



As already explained, their reasons are futile, as they should be cleaning and repainting the place regardless if the previous tenant was a smoker or not. If you are supplying a service, then you should abide by the same rules and laws as every other person of company in that business.



Because life sucks perhaps? Not to mention, no matter who you are, or what your upbringing/background is.... every human has a vice, be that Coffee, Alcohol, Marijuana, Tobacco, Pepsi, Gum, Toothpick Collecting.....

If the landlords or other tenants lived in the exact same apt as yourself, then I could see some justifcation for this. If you're living by yourself, in your own apt, which you are paying for, then by law, whatever you do in your "dwelling" is no one else's business, so long as it doesn't break the law..... and since smoking is still "Legal" They shouldn't have any position to tell people what to do in their own dwelling.

What's next? Your neighbors trying to force you from your own paid house and property, because the apperance of you smoking takes the value down of their own houses?

This is fk'n retarded in a "Touch my Left Elbow with my Left Hand / Bite my own Ear" sort of way.

Makes sense to me.

 

[I think not]

When landlords decide to bring their properties up to descent living conditions after not doing **** for 2 or more decades, then maybe I would entertain the idea of not smoking if I was renting.

 

[Unforgiven]

So do Drunks and Coffee drinkers, but you don't hear me complaining.

Not even in the same ballpark. Drunks aren't even relevant to the discussion. As for coffee drinkers, you must be joking. Coffee smells great!

And Alcohol can kill your liver and brain cells, not to mention drinking and driving.... yet we have commercials, advertisements and all of it shoved in our faces daily. Cars and Power Plants, as well as the growth hormones in the meat we eat has all been traced to the same stuff.... I see no difference.

Weak argument I must say. No one who has a drink now an again has a destroyed liver and/or brain over it. People who don't even smoke but are simply in the same room as a smoker can die of lung Cancer from it. I don't think you're really serious about the comparisons. If you were, then you would first show the correlation between smoking killing people and soft cute cuddly plush toys killing children ( our most valuable asset) when huge crates full of them come crashing into their homes as they fall out of poorly maintained planes passing over head. :roll:

It doesn't lower the resale value unless the idiots in charge of upkeep aren't doing their jobs. And there's plenty of other things that need rehabilitation more then just smokers..... and yet nothing is done to this extent.

If it lowers the value of a car then why are the two different?

As already explained, their reasons are futile, as they should be cleaning and repainting the place regardless if the previous tenant was a smoker or not. If you are supplying a service, then you should abide by the same rules and laws as every other person of company in that business.

Just slapping paint over the walls of a smoke encrusted apartment doesn't remove the smell. At the very least all surfaces would have to be sealed, floor and ceiling included. It's pretty unreasonable to expect a landlord to completely renovate an apartment every time someone moves out.

Because life sucks perhaps? Not to mention, no matter who you are, or what your upbringing/background is.... every human has a vice, be that Coffee, Alcohol, Marijuana, Tobacco, Pepsi, Gum, Toothpick Collecting.....

Sure, but that isn't much of an excuse for your vice infringing on someone else.

If the landlords or other tenants lived in the exact same apt as yourself, then I could see some justification for this. If you're living by yourself, in your own apt, which you are paying for, then by law, whatever you do in your "dwelling" is no one else's business, so long as it doesn't break the law..... and since smoking is still "Legal" They shouldn't have any position to tell people what to do in their own dwelling.

If your apartment is air tight, I can agree but it's not. And so, you have an obligation to make the effort to live up to the terms of the lease. I would say also that should someone make a complaint about it, then the landlord would be within their rights to evict you.

What's next? Your neighbors trying to force you from your own paid house and property, because the apperance of you smoking takes the value down of their own houses?

I suppose they might have a case if your smoking is that bad that it brings down property values in your neighborhood.

This is fk'n retarded in a "Touch my Left Elbow with my Left Hand / Bite my own Ear" sort of way.

Perspective is everything.

 

[Praxius]

Not even in the same ballpark. Drunks aren't even relevant to the discussion. As for coffee drinkers, you must be joking. Coffee smells great!

As you state at the bottom of this post of yours "Perspective is everything" and since perspective is subjective, no one perspective should rule.

Coffee breath is horrible, as well as the smell of cold coffee sitting around.... absolutely putrid. Sure fresh, hot coffee smells good, but so does the first light of a cigg.

And Some stinky drunk isn't in the same ballpark? Try sitting on an hour long bus next to a drunk in the middle of the day and tell me otherwise.

Weak argument I must say. No one who has a drink now an again has a destroyed liver and/or brain over it.

And someone who has the occasional smoke, say one or two a day, doesn't destroy their lungs or heart to the level of a chain smoker..... is no different from someone who has a glass of wine a day compared to an alcoholic.

People who don't even smoke but are simply in the same room as a smoker can die of lung Cancer from it.

But in the same room as them can die from lung cancer? Are you basing this on one sitting beside the person or on a span of a number of years? By the way you worded yourself, you make it sound like if someone smokes right besides you once in a room, you're bound to catch cancer and die right then and there. If you're that worried, you best not head outside near any highways or eat out on any MacDonald's patios by the street, because you're inhaling a crap load worse stuff from passing cars and trucks, then that guy who just walked by with his cigg.

Well if I hitch a ride with someone who continually drinks, eventually I might die in a car crash..... not the same thing? I disagree.

Let me save you some time.... You would probably say that nobody would hitch a ride with a drunk and risk their lives multiple times.... and I will respond that if you don't want to catch cancer from some smoker in their home day in and day out, then don't go and visit them.... it's their home and you have no right to dictate to them what to do in their own home, just as they have no right to tell you what to do in your's.

I don't think you're really serious about the comparisons. If you were, then you would first show the correlation between smoking killing people and soft cute cuddly plush toys killing children ( our most valuable asset) when huge crates full of them come crashing into their homes as they fall out of poorly maintained planes passing over head. :roll:

Yeah, that makes a pile of sense..... what are you going on about?

If it lowers the value of a car then why are the two different?

What makes them different are the laws of a dwelling compared to something that's just for transportation.

Case in point: You rent an apartment, when you are done and return the apt back to rental, the company in charge has to repaint walls, shampoo carpet and fix any and all the damages in the apt prior to the next people moving in. With a car you might be leasing as an example, unless they are obligated to strip the inside out of the car and replace all the damages in and out of the car to make it brand new, the two are not the same.... considdering that they take the car back and then resell it after they at least make sure it is inspected and road worthy..... making the car smell like flowers isn't part of the deal and regardless if you smoked in it or not, the overall value will be less then when you first leased it..... compared to the apartment which either remains the same cost, or increases.

There are many differences.

Just slapping paint over the walls of a smoke encrusted apartment doesn't remove the smell.

Um, that's why you wash the damn walls down beforehand..... just like you don't just re-cock the bathroom tiles over top of mould..... it's called "cleaning."

At the very least all surfaces would have to be sealed, floor and ceiling included. It's pretty unreasonable to expect a landlord to completely renovate an apartment every time someone moves out.

First off.... tobacco isn't a radioactive material that soaks deep into the walls and out to the other side to kill everybody around it..... it builds up just like dust and other grime that occurs over time, like the poop stains in your toilet, and if you know how to properly clean up after yourself, then there isn't an issue. And besides, once again.... the landlord must ensure that the place is clean for the next tenants, which includes shampooing the carpet and re-painted the walls and ceiling, as well as fixing holes, and other issues..... if you think that's unreasonable, I suggest you get refreshed with the Tenancy Act because they are responsible for that part of the agreement...... if they don't want to take on that task, then they shouldn't be in the business to begin with.

Sure, but that isn't much of an excuse for your vice infringing on someone else.

It's not.... my girlfriend and I smoke.... my friends smoke, and when people come over who don't smoke and/or have an issue with smoking (Children in the apartment, etc.) then we smoke out on the patio.

When I step out into the hallway, it doesn't smell like smoke from any other apartment, including my own. Other people's health is not an issue, plain and simple, because there's no case for argument. When I smoke, then head outside, then come back in about 5 minutes, it no longer smells like smoke.... saying it does is just dumb. If that was the case, then my apartment would smell like a weed den more then it'd smell like a tobacco plant.... but it smells like neither, so the argument is irrelevent.

And besides that, even if there was a smell, and was from the walls, it's on the walls and not airborne to inhale like second hand smoke.... unless you plan on licking my walls, you have nothing to worry about..... and even if you did lick my walls, there's a lot worse on them you have to worry about besides nicotine.

And if it's just the complaint about stink..... get over it... it's my home, not your's.... I don't tell you what to do in your home, so don't start shoving your finger in my business. Don't want to come over to my place because you fear it might stink like smoke? No loss for me.

If your apartment is air tight, I can agree but it's not. And so, you have an obligation to make the effort to live up to the terms of the lease. I would say also that should someone make a complaint about it, then the landlord would be within their rights to evict you.

Wrong.... in my contract it does not state this is a smoke free building, and even if they applied that rule tomorrow, as they show above in the report, my contract is still standing and I did not agree to those terms, and therefore they can't do jack sh*t about it.

And you just ruined your whole argument: It's true, the apartment isn't completely air tight.... we have the patio and windows open just about all the time, including in the winter time. If the apartment was air tight, then the nicotine and such would build up pretty badly now wouldn't it? But since we have the windows and patio open, the majority of our smoke is sent outside anyways..... and if we have our main door to the hallway closed, which we do, then the smoke is going to travel outside through the patio and windows before it'll pass through into the hallway.

I suppose they might have a case if your smoking is that bad that it brings down property values in your neighborhood.

Well they're already trying to ban smoking everywhere in Bridgewater, NS. outside and inside - If they can think up this retarded plan and get away with it, my goofy concept probably isn't too far away. We already have idiots telling other people they can't make treehouses for their children because it blocks their precious view of some more trees and takes down their property value apparently.... what's stopping morons from doing this because people have a view of somone smoking out on their steps because they're not allowed to smoke in their homes because of children being inside the home?

It's mostly common sense for all smokers to not smoke inside with children around, and it's not too far down the road before they make that a law too..... they already got away with cars.

 

[Unforgiven]

As you state at the bottom of this post of yours "Perspective is everything" and since perspective is subjective, no one perspective should rule.

Except it does rule and that is probably the way it should be most of the time. If you own your own home, then smoke to your hearts content. If it belongs to someone else, then abide the rules they set forth or find something else. That's fair isn't it?

Coffee breath is horrible, as well as the smell of cold coffee sitting around.... absolutely putrid. Sure fresh, hot coffee smells good, but so does the first light of a cigg.

pft You don't smell a coffee drinkers hair or clothes and think of a nasty old coffee pot. You do with a smoker though. Not to mention that smoking hampers the smokers sense of smell and so, I suspect you don't smell a cold cup of coffee sitting in a room without sticking your beak almost in the cup. For that matter I bet you couldn't tell if someone was drinking a cup of coffee in a room a couple of hours after, though you could with a smoker.

Maybe the first light of a smoke smells good to you but it sure doesn't to me.

And Some stinky drunk isn't in the same ballpark? Try sitting on an hour long bus next to a drunk in the middle of the day and tell me otherwise.

The bus sucks, that's one of the reasons why people drop a lot of money to own and drive a car.

And someone who has the occasional smoke, say one or two a day, doesn't destroy their lungs or heart to the level of a chain smoker..... is no different from someone who has a glass of wine a day compared to an alcoholic.

Good luck with that. Saying it doesn't do the damage of a chain smoker is like telling someone crushed under a car that they are lucky it's not a bus. Smoking tobacco gives you Cancer. There is no safe limit.

But in the same room as them can die from lung cancer? Are you basing this on one sitting beside the person or on a span of a number of years? By the way you worded yourself, you make it sound like if someone smokes right besides you once in a room, you're bound to catch cancer and die right then and there. If you're that worried, you best not head outside near any highways or eat out on any MacDonald's patios by the street, because you're inhaling a crap load worse stuff from passing cars and trucks, then that guy who just walked by with his cigg.

Second hand smoke from tobacco is carcinogenic. It's a fact and what's more, we're talking about smoking in apartments among other people who share space in the building where the air is circulated. I think it's fair to say that outside, the air is the air. Inside, no one should be putting known carcinogens into the circulated air supply.

Well if I hitch a ride with someone who continually drinks, eventually I might die in a car crash..... not the same thing? I disagree.

If you choose to hitch a ride, then that's your problem. Make a wise choice and look for signs that they are under the influence. Feel free to ask if they are, it's your life after all. If you hop into a car and watch the driver drink to impairment, then it's not really any one's fault but your own.

Let me save you some time.... You would probably say that nobody would hitch a ride with a drunk and risk their lives multiple times.... and I will respond that if you don't want to catch cancer from some smoker in their home day in and day out, then don't go and visit them.... it's their home and you have no right to dictate to them what to do in their own home, just as they have no right to tell you what to do in your's.

As I said if they own the property then they can smoke all they like and I can judge if I want to take that risk or not. If it's an apartment, then it's the same issue with the circulated air.

Yeah, that makes a pile of sense..... what are you going on about?

Well I was trying to show how these points you raise as argument, really don't stand up.
Like your alcohol argument.

What makes them different are the laws of a dwelling compared to something that's just for transportation.

I submit that you would be surprised and somewhat argumentative should you try and test that theory.

Case in point: You rent an apartment, when you are done and return the apt back to rental, the company in charge has to repaint walls, shampoo carpet and fix any and all the damages in the apt prior to the next people moving in. With a car you might be leasing as an example, unless they are obligated to strip the inside out of the car and replace all the damages in and out of the car to make it brand new, the two are not the same.... considdering that they take the car back and then resell it after they at least make sure it is inspected and road worthy..... making the car smell like flowers isn't part of the deal and regardless if you smoked in it or not, the overall value will be less then when you first leased it..... compared to the apartment which either remains the same cost, or increases.

Reasonable wear and tear is what you are describing. Some things are expected in the term of a rental. Smoking used to be one of them but since more and more people don't want to pay for something that smells like an ashtray, the market drives the rules in this case.

While the landlord is responsible to bring the apartment up to building code and standards set out by the provincial regulations, it is only limited to usual wear and tear. Anything above that, is the responsibility of the tenant. Off lease cars and rental units are not in the same category in this particular instance.

There are many differences.



Um, that's why you wash the damn walls down beforehand..... just like you don't just re-cock the bathroom tiles over top of mould..... it's called "cleaning."

Yes and most rental agreements say that the tenant is to leave the apartment clean when they leave. Which means that the tenant cleans and the landlord paints unless other arrangements are made.

First off.... tobacco isn't a radioactive material that soaks deep into the walls and out to the other side to kill everybody around it..... it builds up just like dust and other grime that occurs over time, like the poop stains in your toilet, and if you know how to properly clean up after yourself, then there isn't an issue. And besides, once again.... the landlord must ensure that the place is clean for the next tenants, which includes shampooing the carpet and re-painted the walls and ceiling, as well as fixing holes, and other issues..... if you think that's unreasonable, I suggest you get refreshed with the Tenancy Act because they are responsible for that part of the agreement...... if they don't want to take on that task, then they shouldn't be in the business to begin with.

Again tobacco smoke is carcinogenic. Not to mention that greasy yellowish brown film that is left on every surface smells. Hence the reason behind landlords allowing only non-smokers live in their accomodations. It has to be reasonable to expect the average person in the usual routine of living in a place. Smokers are becoming the exception rather than the norm.

It's not.... my girlfriend and I smoke.... my friends smoke, and when people come over who don't smoke and/or have an issue with smoking (Children in the apartment, etc.) then we smoke out on the patio.

When I step out into the hallway, it doesn't smell like smoke from any other apartment, including my own. Other people's health is not an issue, plain and simple, because there's no case for argument. When I smoke, then head outside, then come back in about 5 minutes, it no longer smells like smoke.... saying it does is just dumb. If that was the case, then my apartment would smell like a weed den more then it'd smell like a tobacco plant.... but it smells like neither, so the argument is irrelevant.

And besides that, even if there was a smell, and was from the walls, it's on the walls and not airborne to inhale like second hand smoke.... unless you plan on licking my walls, you have nothing to worry about..... and even if you did lick my walls, there's a lot worse on them you have to worry about besides nicotine.

And if it's just the complaint about stink..... get over it... it's my home, not your's.... I don't tell you what to do in your home, so don't start shoving your finger in my business. Don't want to come over to my place because you fear it might stink like smoke? No loss for me.

But it's not yours. You're just borrowing it. It belongs to someone else. If they are ok with you smoking in their apartment, then happy days. But that doesn't mean it's the way it is for everyone. And don't take this personal, it personally doesn't bother me what you smoke in your home. Understand that I use the word "you" in the empirical sense.

Wrong.... in my contract it does not state this is a smoke free building, and even if they applied that rule tomorrow, as they show above in the report, my contract is still standing and I did not agree to those terms, and therefore they can't do jack sh*t about it.

I wonder though. I believe they are talking about no smoking in cars now. Seems that should something like that stand, it's only a matter of time before they change the laws and remove any basis for a grandfather clause in this matter.

And you just ruined your whole argument: It's true, the apartment isn't completely air tight.... we have the patio and windows open just about all the time, including in the winter time. If the apartment was air tight, then the nicotine and such would build up pretty badly now wouldn't it? But since we have the windows and patio open, the majority of our smoke is sent outside anyways..... and if we have our main door to the hallway closed, which we do, then the smoke is going to travel outside through the patio and windows before it'll pass through into the hallway.

Again you jump from the general state of law to your own personal circumstance. Law really doesn't really work that way.

Well they're already trying to ban smoking everywhere in Bridgewater, NS. outside and inside - If they can think up this retarded plan and get away with it, my goofy concept probably isn't too far away. We already have idiots telling other people they can't make treehouses for their children because it blocks their precious view of some more trees and takes down their property value apparently.... what's stopping morons from doing this because people have a view of somone smoking out on their steps because they're not allowed to smoke in their homes because of children being inside the home?

I suppose it's a good thing in the long run. Smoking is bad for the health. As for the tree house, they can build it, just not there. Again it's an infringement on others.

It's mostly common sense for all smokers to not smoke inside with children around, and it's not too far down the road before they make that a law too..... they already got away with cars.

Common sense dictates that you don't smoke at all. That stuff will kill ya man.

 

[Scott Free]

"the Nazis conducted the most aggressive antismoking campaign in modern history. Further research revealed that Hitler's government passed a wide range of public health measures, including restrictions on asbestos, radiation, pesticides, and food dyes. Nazi health officials introduced strict occupational health and safety standards, and promoted such foods as whole-grain bread and soybeans."

The Nazi War On Cancer

Thinking can be difficult sometimes, you know, facing the world with a level head clear of double think and unauthentic experience, but before giving away all our freedoms Canadians should maybe give it a try. It could easily be that we're giving away more than we think in our pursuit of an idealized liberal utopia completely at odds with the natural world around us.