Posted on 06/13/2012 5:30:20 AM PDT by Daveinyork
York, PA - When Blaine Bosserman was searching for an apartment, he stayed with his mother until he could find a building that allowed smoking. And when he settled upon a high rise in the 400 block of East King Street owned by York's housing authority, Bosserman, 45, made sure there were no conditions in the lease that would prevent him from lighting up inside.
But a proposed ban on smoking in the York Housing Authority's 1,068 units countywide could soon force Bosserman to extinguish his cigarettes. Pending approval of the authority's board and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, officials plan to ban smoking in authority buildings and within 25 feet of entrances as of Oct.
"They've got to be realistic," Annie Coleman, a resident and smoker said. "You can't fight the government...For the type of rent that you pay, you're blessed." (Daily Record/Sunday News -- Paul Kuehnel)1. HUD, the federal department that funds the housing authority's offerings, has been strongly recommending smoke-free policies for public housing nationwide, said Richard D. Fox, the authority's executive director. The recommendation is based on research from the American Lung Association, he said.
But for a lifelong smoker like Bosserman, the ban seems unenforceable, he said. People won't stop smoking just because it's banned from the property, Bosserman said.
"I've been smoking since I was 15 years old," he said. "I'm going to seek legal action or move out...or I'll keep smoking in here until they force me out."
(Excerpt) Read more at ydr.com ...
I’ve smoked since I was 12. I’ve never smoked indoors. Its nasty..
When UN Agenda 21 goes into full effect and all private property has been zoned out of existence we will all live in government high-rise containment facilities where the big-government elite can dictate every aspect of our lives and everything we are commanded and forbidden to do.
I’ve been a pipe and occasional cigar smoker for about 45 years. What I do on my own property is my own business. What people do with taxpayer money is also my business.
This a point perhaps distantly related but a few years ago we were looking for a house. We walked into perhaps 100 before we decided to build the one we want. Of the houses we looked at, we walked into and right out of about 10 occupied by smokers. The smell lingers for a long time and there is no reason to put up with it. Likewise the used car my daughter bought. Several late model, nice cars were passed over once we got inside and could smell the smoke residue.
Smoke ‘em if you’ve got ‘em and I celebrate your freedom to do so. Just be aware that we are not alone in our preferences and there are economic consequences to smoking that go well beyond the cost of a pack.
“That section alone is enough to conclude that this is not about public health, and only to do with power.”
Of course it is, and I’m conflicted about this, but I’m unsympathetic to the people affected.
You live in Florida. This story is in PA. Stepping outside for a smoke in January is a much different experience for you than it is for these folks. Having said that, while I am a smoker, and have no use whatsoever for the nanny state, if you're going to live on the government dole, you have to accept the fact that you're going to be subject to every politically correct rule and regulation and flight of whimsy that the bureaucrats can devise.
I'm not conflicted - the government is the owner of the buildings and it is up to the owners to set policy. Now, if the city was doing this to private landlords it would be an entirely different story.
The one thing I do wonder about though, is can they do this to everyone before leases are up for renewal? Or is it going to be phased in as leases expire, since there is nothing in the lease about it?
“The one thing I do wonder about though, is can they do this to everyone before leases are up for renewal? Or is it going to be phased in as leases expire, since there is nothing in the lease about it? “
That’s the thing I’m conflicted about. However, they take the king’s shilling, and they have to do the king’s bidding, or find a job.
The thing is, these people don’t own these homes. They are welfare recipients. They are lucky to have a roof over their heads.
I understand what you are saying. I am not familiar with PA landlord/tenants codes, but in Delaware even government landlords must abide by them and such a fundamental change prior to a lease renewal date would not be permitted, unless the change also permitted the tenant to break the lease without penalty.
“But for a lifelong smoker like Bosserman, the ban seems unenforceable, he said. People won’t stop smoking just because it’s banned from the property, Bosserman said. “
Not sure if he heard about the drones?
Nicotine addiction is a disease resulting from a lifestyle choice
Cigarette smoking should be celebrated in New York
The pure, evil desire to control the behavior of others. I wish I could say this was some ingenious liberal scheme to make welfare less attractive, but I know better. People who receive government benefits are just easier to boss around and the liberals are taking more and more advantage of that fact.
They can't wait till we're all on some form of government assistance.
I understand what you are saying. I am not familiar with PA landlord/tenants codes, but in Delaware even government landlords must abide by them and such a fundamental change prior to a lease renewal date would not be permitted, unless the change also permitted the tenant to break the lease without penalty.
I have been opposed to smoking bans since the very beginning when they just wanted smoking and non smoking sections.
As to limits on what rules they can set? That cat was out of the bag long ago - once it became acceptable to ban smoking in private business establishments, the green light was given to ban anything anywhere, for any reason.
Many of us saw this coming but were repeatedly shouted down that it would never happen - including right here on FR where there are very many posters who actually support any and all abuses heaped upon smokers and business which would like to cater to them.
I don’t like it, but it is already too late, especially for government owned properties and the reason is that “yes, banning smoking will better the lives of the non smokers in the buildings because they won’t be exposed to second hand smoke seeping under doors and through vents.” Even though that is so much BS, the sheeple believe it. Smokers are an easily discriminated against minority and it is perfectly PC to do such.
A new tobacco policy recently went into effect where I work, and I noticed the e-cigarette ban as well. The thing is, how can anybody ever know you were doing it when it’s odorless and colorless, and the vapor disappears within one second? Either they’re just ignorant, or they want to be able to fire you if they find one in your pocket. Like the volstead enforcers who would check the pants pockets of those they found suspicious to see if they were sporting a flask.
I recently went to a large hospital. Not only was the hospital non-smoking (they used to have a little hut outside for the unclean), but they also had signs saying that it constituted trespassing to go onto neighboring property to smoke, and would be enforced as such. I don’t know how they did this, since there was a presumably public sidewalk, but I have no doubt that smoking out there would result in a court date.
The cat is indeed out of the bag. Nowhere in their self-congratulatory signs was there any mention of the people harmed by this. They simply don’t matter.
I have little doubt that within 10 years most privately held apartment buildings will be similarly non-smoking.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.