Rocklin Considering Banning Residents From Smoking Outside Their Own Homes

February 24, 2012 10:49 AM

Reporting Maria Medina

Filed under

Health, Local, News, Seen On, Syndicated Local

Related tags

Rocklin, Smoking

Featured Gallery

May Is Asthma Awareness Month: Celebrities With Asthma

For more trusted health

news and information,

visit CBS Sacramento's

ROCKLIN (CBS13) – A Rocklin resident has asked the City Council to consider a ban on smoking that some say goes way too far.

The Rocklin City Council was asked to consider making it against the law for smokers to smoke anywhere outside on their property.

One homeowner complained about smoke coming from a neighbors’ backyard, saying it caused health problems for their kids.

But before going to the city council, the family first asked their neighbors to stop smoking.

One couple agreed, according to their son.

“They felt that there wasn’t any reason to put the household in any sort of health risk,” Eric Croslin said explaining his parent’s position.

But some smokers and even some non-smokers saying this ban goes too far.

“So what about people who have children in their home and they don’t want to smoke in their home?” asked non-smoker Tamara Davis.

“As a smoker, I think that smokers should be considerate,” said Rocklin resident and smoker Ryan Malonson. “But on your own property, that’s unacceptable. It’s not going to pass.”

It is already against the law for smokers to light up near businesses, parks and playground in California.

Rocklin City Manager Rick Horst originally told CBS13 the city was considering the ban. However, after the story ran and was picked up by a prominent national website, Horst contacted CBS13 and said the city has “no intention of considering the matter.”

Rocklin Considering Banning Residents From Smoking Outside Their Own Homes

Mr. Turtle

Eventually, the guvmint will have the power to ban all little pleasures. They’ll do it through their interest in health care. It will go as follows: alcohol, for example, is responsible for X numbers of deaths by DUI = Healthcare expense.So ban it. Alcoholism, a further X+Y in expense. Smoking, same story. Guns, same story. Even salt will be an expense because it causes high blood pressure, ergo heart disease and strokes. The list goes on. We face an ugly, gray, boring tasteless future, oh but healthy, and we’ll live longer, but it will seem hardly worth the bother. Live free or die!

Deb G.

You know what sucks about the salt thing? I have low salt in my blood and actually NEED more salt. What happens to me if they ban if “for my own good”? I will die without it. This is why “one size fits all” never works.
LindaInNY

They make too much from cigarettes in taxes, they’ll never ban them altogether…..maybe tax them at a higher rate…but they will not ban them.

Bob

Paragraph 3 >>===> Rocklin City Manager Rick Horst said the city has “no intention of considering the matter.”
__________________
So, what is everyone discussing? They aren’t going to consider it. It was just one person who brought it to their local government’s attention and it was refused, and (IMO) rightly so. But this is how local government is supposed to work. A citizen brought what they considered to be an issue to the attention of the council, and it got rejected. Big deal. It’s not like they’re trying to force everyone to give their money to those who are here illegally, or force us into buying health insurance from the government, or creating new taxes to keep as much of the citizenry dependent on government handouts.
Landowner

First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.
michaeljmcfadden

We have already accepted the concept of anonymous complaints for bars where customers violate smoking bans in restrooms or near doorways, and in Maryland they’re taking it a step further with Internet based anonymous complaints for what they call “minor crimes.”

A group could be formed to help good citizens network with government guidance for wider application of clean air behaviors. It could be called “Seekers Toward A Zero Health Impact” or STAZHI for short. Internet reporting and coordination could help ensure anonymity, and if there was ever a reason for “in person” meetings the participants could wear pure white hoods over their heads to symbolize the pure air and culture they’re striving for.

Long Life The STAZHI! The Smoker Problem WILL Be Solved!

Michael J. McFadden
Author of “Dissecting Antismokers’ Brains”
Ranger01

As much as I hate smoking,. I cannot stand the smell outside or on their clothing. I do not hate the smokers. Let them alone if they go outside to have a smoke. They now have the FREEDOM, to choose, as all of us should. I would say alcohol causes more deaths than smoking, but I would not want to ban that either. My gosh, all of our freedoms are going away, we cannot stand for this stupid law.
Mike M

In a European study, one of the largest of its kind, the ONLY statistically significant evidence to come out was that parents smoking at home with children present REDUCED their children’s incidence of lung cancer later in life. A little bit of a bad thing is NOT necessarily a bad thing. The study remains (well hidden) on NIH .gov site.
http://tylercralle.com/?p=9712 TYLERCRALLE.COM » Afternoon Delight

[...] Yet abortion, STILL LEGAL! « Sunrise Stories 2.27.12 [...]
Andrew

I knew this day would come, next they’ll make it illegal to smoke in your home if non smokers live there too and smoking around children will be considered child abuse. I don’t smoke and absolutely can’t stand the smell but I even think they went too far when the banned smoking at restaurants and other businesses. In my opinion it should be at the discretion of the business owner and should be clearly marked whether they allow it or not.

If someone is willing to risk losing some business because they allow smoking they should be allowed to.

Joe Lucido

You are a rare breed, Andrew, Even though I don’t smoke either, I do believe that in this country, no government idiot has the right to tell you how to live, and what you can and cannot do in or at your own home. This political correctness is way out of control, even though this city refuses to hear such an argument, some day some city is going to do this, and that will be a sad day in this country. We were built on freedom, even if that means you have the right to do harm to yourself.

Karen

not only that… This is probably one of those people who want to legalize majaunna! And if anyone has smelled that!!

Bilbo

This is actually an easy one. You can’t start placing ‘bans’ on activity on peoples private property like this …but…no one has the right to smoke out a neighbor whether it be with cigarette smoke, burning leaves or something toxic like burning tires for that matter. People are entitled to breath normal air, Cigarette smoke is toxic…period. So while you can’t ban the smoking you can and should make people responsible for containing the smoke (not easy)if it presents a health hazard in close proximity to a neighbor.

Pappadave

Not so easy. Cigarette smoke is NOT “toxic”–at keast any more so whan any other unpleasant-to-some odors we encounter daily. One of the worst ideas of the last Century is that the goverenment can (or is even entitled) to “protect” citizens from every, possible risk.

Jenna

How do you figure it’s not toxic? It absolutely is toxic, it is full of cancer causing agents. Sure, there are other carcinogens in the air as well, but cigarette smoke is more concentrated when you are sitting near a person who is smoking. The formaldehyde, benzene and other chemicals that are in second hand smoke are present for hours, and can deposit onto surfaces . While I don’t agree with the ban they propose, or a lot of the other bans that have been imposed, you are wrong on that point.
Michael J. McFadden

Jenna, it’s not “toxic” because of the quantities involved. Ordinary human exhaled breath contains over 3,000 VOC’s (volatile organic chemicals), any of which would be “toxic” in normal concentrations. If you were to sit in an average small bar with smokers it would take you roughly 165,000 hours to absorb the same amount of arsenic as you would get in a government-approved-as-safe 16oz tumbler of ordinary tap water. The exposures for the other chemicals in smoke are similar.

Hmm… not sure if I can put a link in here, so I’ll do it in a separate post. It’s to some excerpts from the “ETS Exposure” section of my book, and I’d ask you to look at the table near the end, derived from OSHA, EPA, and Surgeon Generals Report primary sources, and offer any specific, substantive criticisms you might have of it. I promise I won’t mind, and I’ll try to stop back to respond.

- MJM
Michael J. McFadden

Here you go Jenna:

http://www.antibrains.com/shs.html

You’re welcome of course to read the whole thing, but the most relevant part is the last page or two where you’ll find the table I mentioned.

- MJM
Michael J. McFadden

Oh! One more note: About that whole “depositiing onto surfaces” thing? That’s called “Thirdhand Smoke” and it’s nonsense, at least in terms of any normal exposures and real health effects. The concept/term came from an *opinion survey* analyzed a few years ago by a Dr. Winickoff. All he did was look at the number of people who thought it might be bad to take babies into rooms where people had been smoking earlier. He then parlayed that into a whole discussion about things being deposited on surfaces and played up to the press with scares about “radioactive polonium 210 which had been used in microscopic amounts to assassinate a KGB agent”!

Sounds pretty bad, right? Until you actually consult the figures and work out that if you took a toddler and made him or her lick ten square feet of smokers’ flooring perfectly clean, that kid wouldn’t get the deadly dose of the Russian agent for roughly THREE TRILLION YEARS! Since the universe is only about ten billion years old, we’d have to wait around for a good number of cycles of the expanding/collapsing to occur before there’d be a problem.

Oh… we’d also have to suspend the laws of physics so that polonium’s half life of 140 days wouldn’t spoil the fun, plus of course the poor tyke couldn’t be allowed to excrete for those 3 trillion years. If you’d like to see the figures in more detail, as well as check the scientific references, just go to:

http://globalhealthlaw.wordpress.com/2009/01/11/third-hand-smoke/#comment-52

Wanna change the diaper when the experiment’s done?

- MJM
paise

Jenna: I can guarantee you that your VOLVO or Chevy or Ford, etc.. puts out more toxic chemicals than a damned cigarette from someone smoking in their yard on land THEY OWN & CAN THROW YOU OFF OF IT IF YOU TRESPASS ON IT!

If you want to clean the air of pollutants, then get a bicycle and ride your bike to work and I’m not talking about a Harley or rice burner; I’m talking about going out and buying a 10-speed bike to ride to and from work. If you can’t do this, then you have no room to talk and should walk away from this argument right now b/c you’ve already lost. The state vehicles are more dangerous and deadly when it comes to pollutants as well so if you want to save your planet’s worth of oxygen, stop them from running, stop driving your car/van/truck, and walk your children to school b/c buses put out toxic fumes too.

Michael J. McFadden

Follow up note: Just for clarity, I should note that while Mr. Repace was encouraging the Patch board to ban my postings he didn’t actually ask for them to be erased… he probably realized such large scale censorship on a community news board would be unlikely.

However, you can see the censorship in action if you visit SmokeFreeDC’s board at:

http://www.icyte.com/saved/www.smokefreedc.org/538500

where my comment was held “in moderation” for weeks until they finally removed both it AND Repace’s initial posting and replaced them with a seemingly made-up posting dated between the two posts. Censorship in various forms has been a hallmark of the antismoking movement for all the years that I’ve studied it and fought it.

- MJM
Rocklin Resident

How about using a grill? Or driving your automobile? Using anything gas powered, this list can go on and on. While this one may not affect you, the next one might. This opens the door for all kinds of absurd bans, so then your private property isn’t so “private” anymore. Mr. Baker said himself only 10% of Californian’s smoke, so wouldn’t smoker’s be one of the least contributers of harmful toxins into the air? Lets call a spade a spade, this is a witch hunt, because if it weren’t, these people crying wolf would be giving up all things that release harmful toxins and trigger asthma attacks…..starting with those pets and vehicles. This is after all really about clean air & health, right? If we don’t like what our neighbor is doing, we have the right to move….that’s it! Being a tax paying registered voter in Rocklin, I will fight this if they ever consider it. I will not live according to my neighbors standards. As I don’t expect them to live by mine….how arrogant can one be.
marie

amen!

Pappadave

“Amen,” indeed. Only about 30% of the US Population smokes (cigarettes–we won’t get into pot here). If you don’t want to be offended by cigarette smoke, DON’T go anywhere there are smokers. See? As simple as the idea of banning smoking on one’s own property is simple-minded.
Rocklin Resident

As long as it’s still legal on the federal level……….I really don’t see how any city government could “enforce” a ban like this. Be noisy & complain about the odor all you want, it is your right. But before you go onto the “health” argument, just remember there are far greater contributors of harmful toxins into the air that the majority of the population are not ready to give up just yet……..& this is why it is still legal to smoke……plus it helps fund our schools! Be very careful what you wish for, there are unintended consequences for everything.

sindexter

All right wing consevitives are racists , war mongering , homophobic morons who would sooner live under corporate dictatorships than ever fight for freedoms. You people make me sick go home and polish you nazi memorabilia

Pappadave

Project much, Sindexter?
oljw00

Someone doesn’t have a very good grasp on history much less ideological orientation of the groups/parties/Gov’ts and their relative political affiliations..

I feel sorry for you, I mean your quip is just about as wrong as it could POSSIBLY be. But at least you stand testament to the failings of our education system. So in that regard you did us all a favor.

Whitey

I think you smokers are suffering from nicotine brain damage. Do you seriously believe second hand smoke damage is made up? Do you honestly believe your exhale puffs don’t send a cloud of smoke 20-30 feet away and bomb us like a swarm of bees?

I get that you like your habit… and I get that you’ve been beat up socially… but it’s not because the rest of us have nothing better to do. Call us nazis… liberals… whatever makes you feel better about yourselves. The fact is, I don’t care if you want to kill yourself with smoking… have at it. The fewer there are of you the cleaner our air will be. People BBQ to do something productive as an end result… like eat. And for those of you comparing it to fireplaces, that’s already getting shut down.

Seriously… fight this all you want… but don’t hate on non-smokers because your filthy air is offensive. At least be honest about that… because otherwise you just come off as whiny and full of denial. Not one of you knows jack sh!t about the harmful effects of your smoke.

Pappadave

No smoker is dumb enough to claim that smoking is “healthy”–even though smoking tobacco DOES have some salutary effects–appetite suppression, for example. Do you think it’s mere coincidence that as the incidence of smoking goes down, obesity goes UP? Yet, there is NO CREDIBLE evidence that second-hand smoke is “dangerous” to any non-smoker…period. You don’t like the smell. We get that, but where is it written that you MUST be “protected” from everything you don’t like by some government edict?
Rocklin Resident

I guarantee you, the genes that have been handed down to you by your parents will cause more problems for you long before any effects of second hand smoke do.

MAC49

Your good! I like you. “Rocklin Resident”

Michael J. McFadden

Hadit, you should do a bit more reading before posting. Smoking rates around children have been cut by more than half in the last 20 years while asthma rates among those children has more than doubled. If there’s any effect at all it would appear that nonsmokers should be forced to smoke around their kids in order to reduce asthma. Now *that* would be pretty silly, wouldn’t it? But that’s what the research would indicate.

Bilbo, you replied to another “Mike M” and asked for a study showing that wood smoke was worse than tobacco smoke. Try going to burningissues.org and look at their comparative graphs for a fireplace vs. a pack of cigarettes. The wood smoke is literally orders of magnitude worse.

- MJM

Rocklin Resident

People my age (35) and older all grew up around some form of second hand smoke and not one of us has asthma. I believe genetics plays a factor in this. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but we’re all going to die someday of something whether it be lung cancer, diabetes, heart attack, stroke, drunk driver, etc. I’ll never argue with the fact that smoking is unhealthy and smells disgusting, but so does 99% of overly perfumed people!

Chuck Roast

Send the Rocklin city consel an e-mail with your opinion! See link:

http://www.rocklin.ca.us/contact/city_manager_feedback.asp
Whitey

LMFAO! Wait, smoking is an appetite killer that helps prevent obesity? Did you actually write that?

Obesity occurs because people eat ten times the amount of calories they burn every day. Smoking might send your nervous system into shock by cutting the oxygen to your heart, thus buring calories as your lungs struggle to gain more oxygen, if that’s how you want to stay thin.

Another way is by acquiring stomach and/or esophageal cancer… another cool way to keep that petite waist you had in high school.
http://justmeasurescs.com/?p=668 Just Measures Coin Shop – TODAY’S HEADLINES 02/29/2012

[...] Rocklin Considering Banning Residents From Smoking Outside Their Own Homes -VIDEO [...]
http://tylercralle.com/?p=9811 TYLERCRALLE.COM » The Wrap Up

[...] only are the rich not getting richer, they are now getting poorer. Not [...]
disgusted with CA

I’m utterly confused. Why is everyone complaining about second hand smoke agian? If second hand smoke is so dangerous after floating across the fence. How dangerous is car exhaust while sitting in traffic? How about the fumes from a charcoal grill that was lit with lighter fluid? Mike McFadden, good job on your reseach sir, too bad mass media will never share it
http://weirdworldnews.org/2012/03/04/sunday-weird-round-up-4-march-2012/ Sunday Weird Round-up 4 March 2012 | Weird World News

[...] Rocklin Considering Banning Residents From Smoking Outside Their Own Homes [...]
http://breakingthelawtv.com/2012/05/07/breaking-the-law-is-live-2/ Breaking the Law is Live | Breaking the Law

[...] Rocklin, CA, city officials are considering a ban on residents smoking cigarettes in their own yards. In Shreveport, LA—which already criminalizes baggy pants—commissioners are trying to ban [...]
http://breakingthelawtv.com/2012/06/11/soda-bans-today-lunchbox-bans-tomorrow/ Soda Bans Today, Lunchbox Bans Tomorrow? | Breaking the Law

[...] Case 2. While many New Yorkers have ridiculed Mayor Bloomberg for his aggressive anti-freedom, anti-smoking measures in public parks, the reality is that these bans will be spreading nationwide like other bans that ban-crazy governments have imposed. Don’t believe it? Believe it or believe it, Rocklin CA is considering a ban on residents smoking cigarettes…in their own yards. [...]
http://www.scaryyankeechick.com/2012/02/26/links-3/ Scary Yankee Chick | Links

[...] CA considering not allowing people to smoke in their own yards.Might want to reconsider that religious rite at work. [...]
http://breakingthelawtv.com/smoke-em-if-you-got-em-unless-youre-in-a-restaurant-park-apartment-yard-or-car/ Smoke Em if You Got Em…Unless You’re in a Restaurant, Park, Apartment, Yard or Car | Breaking the Law

[...] already banned smoking in apartments. Another California town, Rocklin, is trying to ban smoking in your own yard. Some politician in Oregon even wants smokers to get [...]
http://breakingthelawtv.com/breaking-the-law-is-live-2/ | Breaking the Law

[...] Rocklin, CA, city officials are considering a ban on residents smoking cigarettes in their own yards. In Shreveport, LA—which already criminalizes baggy pants—commissioners are trying to ban [...]
http://bradleyhenderson.befoundin.com/2013/05/08/affordable-home-loans-rates-can-be-found-online-easily/ Affordable home loans rates can be found online easily. | Where The Hat Is

[...] were absolutely floored, but by the peak of the market we were doing 100% no doc loans. Comments:- Jule Mills: There has been a new shift with Federal Housing Administration loans which are more popular now [...]
http://johannaholt.keepincountenance.com/2013/05/09/how-is-this-great-stuff-about-best-fha-lender-has-lower-prices-mid-week/ Between Sixes And Sevens » How is this great stuff about best fha lender has lower prices mid-week.

[...] Azalee Stull: On the other hand, the seller of the home can help. Additionally, not all lenders supply contour [...]