Special Report: I hate California
This entry may provoke some outrage. Many people may be thinking to themselves, “Hey, why would you start hating California so early when there are so many other states out there to hate. Where are Nebraska, Ohio and South Carolina?” This a very good question. And all we can say is that those states, among others, will have their day soon enough. But recent news out of California merits their addition to my ever-growing list. Let’s get it on!
(People being stupid in California)
This rant about California is somewhat ambitious since it is such a large state. It’s one of the largest in land area and the largest in population. So I will admit that it’s difficult to find news that shines a light on the entire state’s stupidity. And California has a lot to admire. The state is home to some of the most beautiful beaches in the world and huge and expansive national parks draw numerous tourists every year. But this state also has its demons. And I’ll be damned if I’m going to let these slide.
As we all know, smoking, and specifically, second-hand smoke, has been a hot topic for some time. I think we’d all be hard-pressed to find somebody in this country who doesn’t believe smoking has adverse health effects. This information is no longer considered controversial. But more controversial are the smoking bans that are popping up all over this country and the world. Many states in the U.S. and entire countries have enacted measures of varying degree, which prohibit smoking in certain areas. These range from restaurants to bars to workplaces to all public spaces.
Here is an index of all nations with some sort of ban on smoking and here is one for states in the U.S. If you look through information on each state, you’ll see that California was the earliest adopter of a prohibition on smoking. The state banned smoking in restaurants and workplaces in 1994 and extended that ban to bars in 1998.
These bans have supporters and opponents. Supporters claim that second-hand smoke is detrimental to non-smokers’ health so smoking should not be allowed where non-smokers are present. Opponents argue that non-smokers are not forced to go anywhere that allows smoking and private businesses should make their own decisions as to whether or not smoking should be allowed. As an opponent of the bans, I can at least acknowledge, albeit slightly, that supporters of bans could make the argument that smoking does pose some external costs on non-smokers. Fine, it’s an argument. But recent news out of California really irks me.
Two cities, Calabasas and Belmont, have recently voted to outlaw smoking in apartments and condos.
[in] Calabasas, the City Council [voted] on expanding its anti-smoking law to bar renters from lighting up inside existing apartments. It would exempt current resident smokers until they moved but would require all new buildings with at least 15 units, including condos, to be smoke-free.
the City Council of Belmont [was also] scheduled to cast a final vote on a similar measure that won initial approval last week. The ordinance, which applies to apartments and condos, would allow fines and evictions if neighbors complained and smokers didn’t heed warnings.
Ok, public spaces are one thing, but private residences? Come on, people. There’s absolutely no reason to mandate something like this. Private developers have already shown this to be true:
Tens of thousands of apartments and condos have gone smoke-free in the past five years, management companies and health activists say. Last month, Guardian Management began phasing in a smoke-free policy at 8,000 of its rental units, mostly in Oregon and Washington.
“We’ve proven the voluntary approach can work very well,” Bergman says.
If apartment and condominium complexes want to advertise as being smoke-free, potential tenants will take that information into account when making decisions. Mandating something like this takes personal choice completely out of the equation. And what the hell is this:
“Fresh air should be breathed by everybody,” Belmont Mayor Coralin Feierbach says. She cites a 2006 surgeon general’s report that says no level of secondhand smoke is risk-free.
No level of secondhand smoke is risk-free? No level of anything is risk-free. If you take a bite of food, there’s always a small chance you could choke and die. Whenever you drive your car, there’s always a small chance you could be in a head-on collision and sent soaring through your windshield into the tree on the side of the road. But we continue to eat and drive cars nonetheless. That’s because some risks are downright meaningless.
The only complaint I can see tenants making about other tenants that smoke is that sometimes the hallways smell. So what’s next, someone who doesn’t like the smell of Indian food complains to the city council in order to ban its preparation from inside a building’s walls? Get over it people. If you think you’re going to die prematurely because you smelled cigarette smoke in your apartment hallway, you really need to reexamine your sanity.
And if all that wasn’t enough for me to really hate California, there’s this video:
I mean, sure, why not visit California. The rich, white people who live there, the movie stars and moguls and famous foodies all say to come visit, so why not?! I mean, if they say to, surely I’ll become as successful and popular as them. Oh, and I’m absolutely sure, as this video points out, that I will have access to the same perks while traveling the Golden State as they do.
Idiots.
Since California is home to people like this, it is truly worthy of my hatred.