MacTown Joins Rush To The Bottom
The Lost Coast Outpost reports on Mckinleyville's rush to join other communities in banning smoking, and who knows what else? Apparently their advisory committee voted 5 to 1 to race toward more senseless ordinances. At first reading, member Ben Shepherd seemed the adult in the room, but he ended up voting for the ordinance after all was said and done. I get the feeling some elected folks take more pleasure in voting for things, than against. I feel safe in writing the county Board of Supes will jump on board.
There surely must be some way we can set ourselves apart from the rest of this totalitarian state?
posted by Fred Mangels @ 8:21 AM
11 comments
11 Comments:
Sign up in support of the State of Jefferson at soj51.net
They seem to have a common sense approach to all issues.
Only time will tell, but so far I am a believer in their endeavor.
You could move.
I don't live in MacTown, and have no plans to. I used to like the place back in the '70s when it was just a sleepy unincorporated area. Now it's just like anywhere else in trying to be a big city.
Sorry, HOJ; we wen't be neighbors soon.
You and I read different articles. I don't see a blanket smoking ban. I see use restrictions not yet specified, but exceedingly likely to be in limited areas non-smokers can least avoid, such as the entrances of public buildings. Let smokers do their thing as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights (and health) of others, within reason. Live and let live. Sensible moderation seems the right course to me.
Whhen these smoking bans were first proposed, those of us who suggested they'd eventually extend to our homes were considered paranoid. Now they're doing exactly that, although not up here yet. We're starting down that slippery slope, though.
I gather you're referring to the ban in Belmont on smoking in apartments with multiple attached tenancies. That's a world apart from standalone dwellings. You should live in one sometime if you don't think non-smokers are subjected to breathing smoke on a daily basis.
Most apartment owners, per their property rights, already ban smoking indoors. So smokers in these apartment complexes do it outside where everyone else's rights are infringed in favor of the smoker's rights, except in Belmont.
I suppose such a ban is offensive if you're a libertarian who views any restriction on any type of drug use to be improper because it's the drug user's right to abuse his own body if he wants to. That's the core issue for you, not whether the locations banned are appropriate.
A timely article on topic with smoking bans, kings, and oppression. https://boltonsmokersclub.wordpress.com/2017/03/03/why-should-we-let-tobacco-control-and-politicians-depress-us/
Sad, youd be a good neighbor, just depends on what part of town like any ole other place.....plus, you hate trees.
HOJ thinks a public smoking ban in public areas is reasonable, but only if the ban itself is reasonable.....public areas versus private areas........freds afraid of the fifth element movie scene where willis lights up and the computer docks his credit account a point.
Sometimes even Libertarians fail to see that their own belief in Liberty is simultaneously and concurrently causing an abuse upon someone else.....
In what ways HOJ?
Businesses and employees have a right to establish their own rules, their own divisions.
The abuser is the dictator who dictates what others can & cannot do.
Post a Comment
<< Home