In Santa Cruz, not all smoke is equal
The anti-tobacco zealots have succeeded in passing smoking bans all across the country — arguing that private businesses and individuals should be denied the freedom to light up because of the terrible externalities imposed on others by secondhand smoke.
In Santa Cruz, the Lefties have made an exception. Not all smoke is equal, dudes. If it’s emanating from the end of a marijuana joint, the externalities argument crumbles with the ashes:
The smoking ban in city parks could be lifted for the second time since it passed three years ago, as city leaders are considering allowing medical marijuana patients to light up during a festival at San Lorenzo Park at the end of the month.
“It’s not like a recreational marijuana event,” said Councilman Mike Rotkin, who supports the temporary lifting of the city’s 3-year-old ordinance that bans smoking in parks.
“It’s not a smoke-in, it’s not like the 4/20 thing up on campus,” Rotkin said.
That April 20 event attracts thousands of people to Porter Meadow at UC Santa Cruz each spring to celebrate the so-called 4/20 cannabis culture holiday.
Instead, the Wo/Men’s Alliance for Medical Marijuana would like the ban lifted so its 200 members can self-medicate while they enjoy the organization’s annual festival. Wammfest, a medical marijuana, hemp and music festival, is scheduled for Sept. 27.
“As patients, its really important to have access to the medicine in the most indiscreet and reasonable fashion,” said Valerie Corrall, co-founder of WAMM.
The item will be considered on the City Council’s consent agenda today. The council unanimously approved a similar temporary suspension of the smoking ban for last year’s event.
Ahem:
A closed tent will be available at the festival for those who need to administer their prescription drugs, and no pot will be for sale or distributed, Rotkin said.
However, Sentinel reports from last year’s festival showed that many participants did get stoned on the lawn, and some drove in from out of town for what they considered a recreational event by the river.
Perhaps, some residents should be prepared to sue the city for health damages when the pot smoke wafts their way this year.
These hypocritical health police could use a dose of their own medicine.
***
Commenter vickisoup: “I live in SC County and work downtown. There will be no way to distinguish this day from any other day, other than perhaps a few more people. The park is ALWAYS full of people getting stoned on the lawn.”
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Obama Chief of Staff: No More Compromise on Contraceptive Mandate
February 12, 2012 04:26 PM by Doug Powers
114 Comments
Choosing Life and Beating the Odds
February 11, 2012 11:50 AM by Doug Powers
32 CommentsObama’s fraudulent abortion mandate “accommodation” Updated: Prez condemns “cynical” opposition
February 10, 2012 10:05 AM by Michelle Malkin
245 Comments‘To Stop the Multiplication of the Unfit’
February 10, 2012 09:06 AM by Michelle Malkin
199 CommentsFormer Democrat Rep. Regrets Vote for Obamacare Due to Contraceptive Coverage
February 7, 2012 03:40 PM by Doug Powers
75 Comments
How to Make a Liberal Politician Stand Up Against Intrusive Government
February 6, 2012 04:28 PM by Doug Powers
95 Comments
Your Friday IRS regulation dump: Obamacare’s job-killing medical device tax
February 3, 2012 04:21 PM by Michelle Malkin
58 Comments
The SIGA scandal: Calls for investigation mount
January 27, 2012 02:13 PM by Michelle Malkin
58 Comments
Categories: Double standards,Health care
Redstate
» Morning Briefing for February 14, 2012Pundit & Pundette
» Bishop Jenky, Nicki Minaj, and the "98%"Sister Toldjah
» Obama’s new budget is a bad jokeJustOneMinute
» We Hear From The Department Of Good Ideas And False Choices
I live in SC County and work downtown. There will be no way to distinguish this day from any other day, other than perhaps a few more people. The park is ALWAYS full of people getting stoned on the lawn.
Call in the coordinates to FireBase 1.
But don’t you question whether or not they want to control, er, um, micro-managed your life… that’s preposterous!
____________________________
I’m sure they’ve thought of this but will there be someone on hand to ensure that medical mary jane and only medical mary jane will be smoked?
Man. Wouldn’t you just love to have the nearest cheeto concession!
Is that Tiny Tim?
I once called the police about a man who was getting stoned in his car as he was weaving in and out of the lane. I kid you not, when I tell you the dispatcher’s question to me: “Well, how do you know he doesn’t have a prescription for medical marijuana?”
I replied that I didn’t realize getting stoned and driving erratically could be excused by a prescription. She told me that the DA will not prosecute marijuana-related crimes so the police don’t even bother anymore, unless it’s a big pot-growing bust.
I’ve heard a few conservatives now bash the recent smoking bans. There is a legit freedom argument to be made. However, I view it this way: Smokers don’t have the right to oppress me with their unhealthy cigarette smoke. I ought to have the freedom to enjoy going to a bar/restaurant/concert and not deal with the health risks and headaches of second-hand smoke.
What business is it of the government to tell people they cannot drink and drive? Because if someone chooses to do so, they can ruin the health of another. You’re still at liberty to drink as much alcohol as you want at home though, as long as you don’t get behind the wheel.
Holy crap, look at the size of that joint!!!
“Farrr out Man” do you think that they would give me a toke if I blink my eyes real fast and claim that i might be coming down with something?
The joint is normal size. It is a small-brained hippie!
I’d sue the city right away.
It should have been left up to the individual establishlments to decide whether or not they wanted to permit smoking on their premises. As a result, of the ban – quite a few establishments have had to close their doors.
Smoking bans annoy me — all kinds of smoking bans.
Here in DC there were already plenty of places that restricted or forbade cigarette smoking, it was a shame when they forced the dive bars — where everyone, from the bartender to the hipster poseurs to the old-timers, would light up — to kick the smokers to the curb.
Of course, there is one favorite old haunt, where about 11:30 the owner lights up a cigar and the marlboros come out. But it’s French, you wouldn’t like it.
So, does that mean you’re against the event above. Afterall, the topic of this thread is lifting a smoking ban, so some people can smoke marijuana, not cigarettes.
BruceB, believe me: you won’t NEED a toke if you head down to the park. You’ll get stoned off the nosers!
It is a scientific fact that marijuana smoke (at least in California, still checking on the other states) counteracts the effects CO2, thus reducing the threat of global warming, not to mention returning the earth to harmony with the universe (see the Collected Scientific Papers of Al Gore, vol XIII).
Does anyone else think there might be an unusually “high” turnout?
The guy in the associated picture must have needed a lot of medicating. Chong would be proud.
#7
As I understand these laws, the issue is that these laws prohibit ANY bar/resturant from allowing smoking. It would be fine if the law said, “No smoking at the Rainforrest Cafe, but knock yourselves out w/ some unfiltered Camels at the Blue Cloud.” Correct me if I’m wrong that “smoker’s bars” are prohibited from operating. Just tellin you what I heard…
Now, the Libertarian in me wants to do some research in Santa Cruz soon. I’ll bring Doritos if anyone wants to drive.
there are studies that conclude that the same health risks exist from Marijuana. it seems to me, that the exposure to second hand smoke from Marijuana poses double the consequences. a person can receive a ‘high’ that didn’t want to nor doesn’t intend to get high as well as the risk to their health, as recent studies do show that Marijuana can cause lung cancer, etc.
If the event is rated ‘G’for general audiences; and children will be present the city council needs to get an ear full from parents. Why is it the so called ‘rights’ of these minority morons is allowed to intrude on the rights of the majority with morals?
Oh, so there’s a ban on a legal product like cigarettes, but it’s OK to smoke an illegal substance.
Riiiiight.
So, what happens if I go there and light up a cigarette?
So; folks are finally getting what I’ve been laying down for years—it’s ok to flame a doobie, but not a cigarette.
Mind you, this is all based upon shaky ‘scientific’ evidence regarding second-had smoke.
Look it up.
%$#@*&
second hand
And is there going to be a doctor on hand to write “prescriptions” for those that didn’t bring one?
What a screwed up place, give it back to Mexico.
But, like, duuuuuude, you need to pay for my healthcare, ’cause I don’t have the dinero for that.
1. Why do I think there s a community organizer behind this?
2. Will they be calling doctors to confirm the validity of prescriptions?
3. Is this what Democrats mean when they talk about having a big tent?
I was at the Spokane Washington airport and witnessed an older couple (90 yrs. old) arguing with a policeman. They were being told if they wanted to smoke they must move 25 ft from the door of the terminal. The husband told the cop that he had fought in two wars and had payed millions of dollars in taxes for this country and he would not move. The policeman walked away. GOTA LOVE IT!
Is Obama going to be there? Looks like a lot of his supporters will be there. Maybe he’ll do a shot and a toke on camera. It wouldn’t be his first from what I understand.
::Grabs an ice cold Bitburger Pils out of the fridge::
Self medication old school… now where’s my car keys? I need to refill my prescription.
This medical marijuana nonsense is a Cheech and Chong routine gone horribly wrong. It’s just a scam by the stoners to get the weak minded and uninformed to side with them so they can light up without being hassled.
* Marijuana is a dangerous, addictive drug that poses significant health threats to users.
* Marijuana has no medical value that can’t be met more effectively by legal drugs.
* Marijuana users are far more likely to use other drugs like cocaine and heroin than non-marijuana users.
* Drug legalizers use “medical marijuana” as red herring in effort to advocate broader legalization of drug use.
But it certainly will be if you allow smoking marijuana there.
Right, and standing in the middle of a crowd of thousands of people at a concert is about as far away from ‘indiscrete and reasonable’ as you can get. Idiot.
I would think that if someone is so sick they require medical marijuana, then they’re too sick to be attending concerts!
So it’s ok to go in there and light up a cigarette then too. Or even better, a big, stinky cigar. Better yet, about 50 people smoking big stinky cigars.
this attitude is scary. its akin to the people who don’t like what is being said, so lets classify it as hate speech, ban it, and arrest the offender.
you know if someone drives a car by you, you have to breathe unhealthy air too…should we provide you with a health bubble…next it will be a right
In a way, this exception does make sense. After all, we don’t want the economically disadvantaged ERRRRR bums who can’t hold a job because they’re junkies denied a contact buzz, now don’t we? War Santa Cruz values! *out*
Byzantine, restaurants aren’t public property. You really don’t have the same rights there as you do in other places. If you value property rights, you shouldn’t support Orwellian controls on the rights of grown ups do control their own environments.
In short, if you don’t like smoke, go somewhere else. Freedom is American. Or at least, it used to be.
Duuude! Back in the day, we called that a “contact high”!
Back on topic, I’m in to my third year as a reformed smoker and I have to say that, smoker or non-smoker, there are some seriously stupid anti-smoking laws out there.
I’m with 30 Pcs #12 –
Freedom of choice means just that. Choose (as the owner) to either allow or dis-allow smoking in your establishment. As a patron, choose to eat/sleep/drink at either a smoking or non-smoking establishment.
I’m more than a bit skeptical over the whole ‘medical marijuana’ thing. These folks want us to believe that there is nothing else out there that can be legally prescribed for them? Looking at the thickness of my doc’s PDR and Drug Reference Guide, I find that I just can’t quite stretch my imagination far enough to believe that.
How many liberals smoke tobacco. Bigoted selective laws.
Second hand liberalism kills far more people every year than second hand smoke.
Sanctuary Cities
Rights for Terrorists
Abortions
Animal Rights Extremists
I don’t miss indoor smoking at all. For decades smokers cheerfully blew in the faces of those of us who have allergies, asthma, or just plain don’t want to smell like an ashtray every time we left the house. Non-smokers had no rights at all in movie theaters, airplanes, offices, or restaurants. Even in non-smoking sections, the smoke would get circulated from the smoking section.
The problem with more recent anti-smoking laws is that they are not designed to restrict the nuisance of cigarette smoke to others, but instead they are designed to force the smoker into quitting. There’s no reason to ban outdoor smoking or smoking in one’s own car and home.
So do we need to buy Zombie a carbon filter mask?
Byantine – I believe in property rights and personal choice. The owner of a business should be able to put a sign on the door – “Smoking permitted” or Smoking not permitted”. Then you, as an adult, can choose for your self to go in or not.
And thats the problem I have with smoking in public. Who of you are going to pay my hospital bills when your smoking triggers an asthma attack? I spent two days in the ICU last year at a cost of 8,800 dollars. Who of you smokers wants to pony up and pay for that?
But they (non smokers) did have ‘rights’; they could patronize those places that did not allow smoking on the premises.
If you vote for Obama, he’ll see to it that all of us ‘pay for that’.
I see the anti tobacco people are coming out in droves rationalizing taking rights and liberties away as usual.
Second hand smoke is another hoax. The CDC and Europeans have done two long term studies that show that second hand smoke does not cause cancer.
Rush Limbaugh debunked this long ago.
scottydog; yes, the point of my post #22
Did I get it wrong to call it a “noser”? I am a total nerd, it’s true. So what’s a “noser”? Is that where someone blows their pot smoke into your nose as a means of *sharing*?
It looks like Cheech and Chong are back! Or maybe they never left.
John Bibb
Byantine frames the argument perfectly.
I personally welcome any and all smoking bans. I’m sick and tired of wanting to go see a band or watch a sporting event only to have to give up my lungs for three hours.
You have the right to do whatever you want as long as it does not infringe upon my rights. Smoking being different than any almost any activity in that it causes a direct (negative) effect on those around it but not participating in it, does infringe on my right to clean air and health.
Since when do the rights of smokers who are engaging in unhealthy behavior have more weight than non-smokers making the healthy choice??
“The husband told the cop that he had fought in two wars and had payed millions of dollars in taxes for this country and he would not move.”
So those give him the right to pollute the air and my lungs with the 100+ toxins in cigarette smoke? Please.
I wonder where Obama smokes while he’s on the campaign trail… his plane? Hotel room?
“In short, if you don’t like smoke, go somewhere else.”
Why? Why do I, the non-smoker, who is making a healthy decision have to go somewhere else? Why is it that I am the one has to be inconvenienced? Don’t understand this line of thinking, but then it’s coming from people who pay $4/pack to ingest rat poison so what do you expect.
“Second hand smoke is another hoax. The CDC and Europeans have done two long term studies that show that second hand smoke does not cause cancer.”
So therefore, its completely healthy and has no negative effects whatsoever on the health of those who inhale it?? Moron.
The proprietor has decided to allow smoking on his/her premises. You as a potential patron have the option of going elsewhere if smoking bothers you. I’m not a smoker and I hate the way cigarettes smell but I still think people should be free to smoke and if there is an establishment that allows it… I am free to take my business elsewhere. And YOU are too.
Prove that it has?
I don’t enjoy second hand smoke, but this is a legal product. Let them smoke outside, in thier cars, or at home. I have seen laws come about banning all of those.
It is a matter of civil liberties.
Let’s not forget that wearing a seatbelt is another ‘good idea’ that has become legislated.
It is also a ‘good idea’ to eat low-fat, high fiber diet…would you like more of your life subject to big government? Where do you stop?
Face it; smokers are just a target; an easy target.
MarcoPolo said: #34, Well said. If bars with clean air was such a commodity, people would open non smoking bars and get rich. But they couldn’t so they went the way of the nanny state. Take my home town of Springfield, Illinois. They passed the smoking ban and a lot of places were forced to close or else they are near to it. So, people go out to the county to drink and smoke. NOT SAFE AT ALL.
Why don’t cigarette smokers just buy a pack of papers and roll their own cigarettes using tobacco? Then go to this “medical” event and smoke them. No one will be able to tell the difference between the cigarettes and the joints! The smell is different but with “200″ (yeah, right) people toking up, the cigarette smell would be pretty much hidden.
To paraphrase Paul Kantner (Jefferson Airplane), “California is 163,707 square miles surrounded by reality.”
If a person who gets into a car accident dies from not wearing a seatbelt, it really only has consequences for the dead person. If a person is obese from ingesting too many calories, it really only affects the obese person.
However, as a person with allergies and asthma, I can honestly say that I do all I can to avoid cigarette smoke, since it literally makes me ill. Many people have serious physical ailments with symptoms that are exacerbated by exposure to cigarette/cigar smoke, so the activity of public smoking does affect others beside just the person doing the smoking. IOW, smoking in public affects the civil liberties of those whose health is affected by that smoke. Why would the civil liberties of a smoker in a public place trump the civil liberties of those around them who cannot physically tolerate second-hand smoke?
It should be left up to the individual establishment? Before the mandatory smoking ban in NJ, I don’t remember any establishments voluntarily banning smoking, but maybe that’s just me.
Perhaps we should also leave it up to individual establishments whether or not to continue serving someone who’s clearly intoxicated and holding his/her car keys. After all, freedom.
Pardon me, but this is a pretty lame excuse. Liberals are always claiming that “if you don’t like the overt sexuality, drug pandering, and violence on TV then just turn the channel.”
If you don’t like the cigarette smoke, then go somewhere else! If the brain-dead liberals in the county government would allow the proprietors of businesses to, wait for it, decide for themselves if they want to allow smoking on their premises, people would have a choice! I do believe that the liberals are always on about “the right to choose.” I guess that only applies to choosing the killing of innocent unborn children.
Some businesses will allow smoking and some won’t. The true expression of freedom. The smokeless businesses will advertise as such and will attract the non-smokers. Strangely, many smokers will even patronize the non-smoking establishments because they may offer goods or services they can’t find elsewhere. But…they will also have the option (choice!) to patronize a business that allows smoking!
How hard is it to understand freedom? Obviously, very difficult, if you’re a liberal.
I love my Arturo Fuentes. Stinky is in the nose of the beholder.
Must use “Hippie Logic” when it comes to understanding the nuances of smoking “Hippie Lettuce” And forget about how it is easier to get lng cancer from smoking pot. That kind of thing is just fear-based rhetoric…right?
I love how the Left says that smoking cigarrettes is bad while smoking marijuana (of all kinds) is good. One is cancer-causing, the other therapeutic. Yet both are addicting. As a former smoker I can attest to that.
Liberals and even some libertarians have made marijuana another sacred cow in their belief system. Marijuana is a drug, not tylenol. While I support medical marijuana, there are kids getting these medical marijuana cards, who are still just looking to get high. Marijuana is also a gateway drug that is habit-inducing. I had a sister go to rehab for both alchol and drug (yep, marijuana) addiction so I really just think that the whole marijuana isn’t bad motif is a lie.
Liberals are big hypocrites on marijuana and tobacco. Marijuana does as much damage (if not used in a medicinal/limited prescription) as does tobacco. For these people (ahem, hippies) to give special measures for one but not the other is ridiculous.
The slope is made slippery by the very oil they spilt on it…
Well, that’s there choice.
Just wait until they come after something you enjoy doing.
I noticed you only said that tobacco smoke(Cigs and Cigars) produces or causes asthma symptoms.
How about Diesel exhaust or Auto Emissions? How about the emissions or smoke coming out of fast food restaurants?
Or is it just the tobacco smoke that causes you so much discomfort and gets your under wear in a wad?
You see I have a really hard time with people that go into gyrations outside when somebody is smoking a cigar or cigarette. I think it is more of that because of years of anti tobacco propaganda you think you have a right to pitch a bitch and use your asthma as an excuse to tell that no good tobacco addicted smoker to put it out.
You see the 25 year longitudinal European study on second hand smoke found that second hand tobacco smoke did not significantly exacerbate asthma sufferers in a double blind experimental setting.
I would be glad to provide links to the research but have found in other debates with anti smoking nazi’s they could care less about the science and are more interested in depriving smokers the right to smoke any where in public including outdoors.
Strange in a country where tobacco was the very foundation of our economy for over 150 years.That’s right without tobacco this country probably would have never existed. Damn those Indians for introducing us to the evil tobacco plant.
Of course, liberals are doing the same thing to our oil industry right now.
TooMuchTime said:
If you don’t like the cigarette smoke, then go somewhere else!
the insanity in some of these arguments is mindblowing. just goes to show you that there are conservatives/people on the right who are just as stupid and moronic as your average Kos Kid.
“Let’s not forget that wearing a seatbelt is another ‘good idea’ that has become legislated.
It is also a ‘good idea’ to eat low-fat, high fiber diet…would you like more of your life subject to big government? Where do you stop?”
I stop with activities that have a direct impact on the health and physical wellbeing of those in the surrounding areas. Those that do not (wearing a seat belt, regulating one’s diet) I could care less about.
“You see I have a really hard time with people that go into gyrations outside when somebody is smoking a cigar or cigarette.”
No, its actually because the smell makes me physically nauseous to my stomach and has induced vomitting in me. In addition to the fact that is unhealthy and contains 100+ toxins. Moron.
“I would be glad to provide links to the research but have found in other debates with anti smoking nazi’s they could care less about the science and are more interested in depriving smokers the right to smoke any where in public including outdoors.”
Oh, Nazi comparisons….you’re really starting to act like liberals now. Again, the only thing I care about is ensuring my right to clean air. You want to smoke? Fine. Just not in public or anywhere where it might impact those who do not wish to breathe in the 100+ toxins.
By the way, if non-smokers are the ‘majority’, why do the restaurants & bars start to fold up shop & close as soon as a town or city bans smoking in these places?
I’m not fighting about being able to smoke at the dinner table in a restaurant–I don’t even smoke in my house for the same reasons. But I do take issue with those regulations that force the owner of a bar/restaurant/deli/etc to ban smoking when it very obviously hurts their business!
My point (and I made it simple & avoided calling you names) is that it starts with smoking bans on the restaurant owners & becomes other issues entirely.
Rights work in that your right only extends so far as not to infringe on someone else’s rights or freedoms. Smoking bans are like many other socialist ideals and allow the nanny state to take care of you. Yes non-smokers have a right to be in an area where there is no smoking, but smokers have a right to smoke if they want to (until it is illegal to do so). So how do we accomplish this while not infringing on anyone’s rights??? Places that you choose to go (i.e. restaurants, concerts, bars, etc.) choose to allow smoking or not based on their clientele and you as a non-smoker or smoker can choose to go and patron that establishment with your money based on their policies/practices. Let economics decide the smoking issue, not government. Conservative lesson for the day over.
It’s still about boomers hating their parents, isn’t it?
The boomers who run the establishment are doing everything in their power to ban the drugs of choice of their parents generation — alcohol and tobacco — and legalize the drugs of choice of their own generation: marijuana, and so forth.
That’s really the only way to explain the cognitive dissonance.
Some people have the same response to Gay Pride parades and gay PDA’s. Should those also be banned?