Monday
September
01
2014
12:27 am
Weather
  Search Again
  Home
  Local News
  State / National / World
  Sports
  Opinion / Letters
  Business
  Arts / Entertainment
  Lifestyle
  Obituaries
  Calendar
  Submit Event
  Comics / Games
  DJ Designers
  Archives
  Advertise With Us
  About Us
 

Check out our archive of Dining Guides - Yum!

Letters
November 17, 2006, 12:00 AM
Here, here to smoking ban

The Daily Journal received a copy of this letter to Belmont City Council.

Here, here, I say, to your smoking ban ("Belmont to be first U.S. city to ban all smoking” in the Nov. 15 edition of the Daily Journal). I have had to move out of two apartments in my complex here because of cigarette smoke coming into my apartment--through the bathroom fan, through the electrical sockets, through the doorjam.

When driving, I have to breathe the cigarette smoke of the driver of the car in front of me.  And why do these smokers think they can just toss their butts out the window?

I have asthma and have had seven bouts of bronchitis in the last two years.  You can’t even walk down the sidewalk without breathing smoke. And why do workers at convenience stores, drug stores, grocery stores and other businesses feel it’s OK to sit right outside the front door and smoke? 

I personally think that smokers should be shot on site, so you should be applauded for your restraint. Keep at it.

Scott Barker

Bridgewater, Mass.


Belmont and

anti-smoking zealots

Editor,

What a novel idea, ban smoking everywhere because it can affect others health. Here’s an idea, because stress can affect others health negatively, let’s ban anything that can cause stress in someone else. Let’s start with loud cars and motorcycles, they bother people, then let’s move on to loud children in restaurants, they bother people, how about rude people in general. Let’s ban everything that can cause stress in someone else, imagine the lives we’ll save. The same people screaming about smoking will feed their kids cheeseburgers three times a week. California, the land of fruits and nuts.  

Jim Dombroski

Hill, N.H.


Bay Area is laughing

stock of California

Editor,

I’m reading my daily Drudge Report and I come across this article. Boy, is it any wonder after 45 years in the Bay Area (San Carlos and Redwood City) we moved our family to The Inland Empire in Riverside County. You guys are goofy. No smoking in your car, street, front yard? I realize that the Belmont police operate in a pseudo country club atmosphere, but I didn’t realize that they have that much time on their hands. I’ll make sure when I pass through your town during the holidays that I smoke in my car, on the street and maybe even twice. Keep up the good work Bay Area as the laughing stock of California.  

Joe Tiscornia

Murrieta

Suggestions for

possible bans

Editor,

To the members of the Belmont  Polit Bureau: Enact a total ban on smoking within the city limits? An excellent idea. Why didn’t your city council think of that before? While you’re at it I have several more suggestions:  

A. Ban the wearing of biker boots, T-shirts and Levis. Reason: They represent a seemlier element of society.

B. Ban off-road vehicles and motorcycles. Reason: They also attract people with lower class tastes.

C. Ban all fast food establishments. Reason: They promote unhealthy lifestyles and obesity.

D. Ban mascara and makeup. Reason: These chemicals invariably promote skin diseases.

E. Ban milk. Reason: Milking takes advantage of the oppressed cows.

F. Ban the wearing of camouflage patterns. Reason: The patterns represent militarism and defiance, unacceptable conduct.

G. Ban the consumption of meat. Reason: Unacceptable dominance of humans over animals.

H. Ban shaving of the legs. Reason: This practice promotes dermatitis and sexist thoughts.

I. Ban private ownership of guns. Reason: Duh. You don’t need a gun to kill someone, just use a kitchen knife.

J. Ban kitchen knives. Reason: Duh. You don’t need a kitchen knife to kill someone, just use a baseball bat.

K. Ban baseball. Reason: Baseball has bats.

L. Ban alcoholic beverage consumption. Reason: It loosens the tongue and might cause one of you idiots to reveal your true motive: self-righteous dominance of the masses.    


Dietrich von Schmausen

Montrose


This is a joke, right?

Editor,

This is going to become an enforcement nightmare. You’ll have cops picking and choosing where and when to hand out tickets, or your city will go broke hiring more and more policemen to enforce "the law” -- it is a complete joke.

"We have a tremendous opportunity here. We need to pass as stringent a law as we can, I would like to make it illegal,” said Councilman Dave Warden. "What if every city did this, imagine how many lives would be saved? If we can do one little thing here at this level it will matter.”

Sounds like the good councilman has a lot of extra time on his hands.  Why don’t you concentrate on how to deal with illegal aliens, which I’m sure you have plenty of. 

Charlene Sanders

Hot Springs, Ark.


Allowing alcohol is hypocritical

Editor,

One question: Can you still drink a glass of bourbon or scotch legally in Belmont?  A bottle of wine? If so, why? Alcohol kills many, many more than smoking each year. Such hypocrisy.

Steven Dupler

New York, N.Y.

Belmont moves closer

to becoming utopia

Editor,

Imagine a town without cigarette smoke — that would be utopia to me. I was pleasantly surprised that Belmont, the town where I was raised, was taking that bold step.  

My parents were both heavy smokers.  As a kid, I avoided spending time with them because of the smoke. I’d sit in my room after dinner, or linger in the kitchen doing dishes. On the rare occasion I’d venture into the living room, I’d spray air freshener or commando crawl on the floor with a towel over my nose. I used to get in trouble for that.   When I was 19, they died a few months apart from each other, from health issues brought on by smoking. To this day, I’ve never even tried a cigarette, and will go out of my way to avoid smokers on the street, in outdoor cafes, parks, etc. It’s foul and gross and I shouldn’t have to breathe it.

Belmont’s proposed ordinance will understandably anger many people, but I applaud the council’s gutsy move.


Deborah Hartman 

Aptos


Belmont smoking ordinance

affects all community members

Editor,

As long as smoking is a legal activity sanctioned by state and federal law, it certainly will be unconstitutional for the Belmont City Council to make smoking illegal in this city. If you are wealthy enough to own your own detached home, they will permit you to smoke. If you are not blessed with your own detached house, and live in townhouses, condos or apartments, you are not permitted to smoke, and will be subject to citations, and fines. Landlords and tenants can both be sued. Landlords may get a double whammy, since I am sure that tenants facing eviction because they engage in a legal activity, smoking, will also take it to court. I would suggest that any person that is against such far reaching intrusion into peoples life’s contacts the Belmont City Council at CityCouncil@belmont.gov.

They want all smoking in your car banned, so if you are driving through Belmont, you could be stopped and cited if someone sees a lit cigarette in your hand. If you are walking on a street (this could be a quiet street with few pedestrians) with a lit cigarette in your hand, and anyone sees you, they could call the police.

There was even a suggestion by the council to put all smokers into bunkers, which indicates their mindset. To watch the archived video of the council meeting, and see just how far they will go, go to www.belmont.gov. Click on Live City Council Webstream, go down to Watch Archived Council Meetings, and then click on Nov. 14.


Edith A. Frederickson

Belmont

Fascist smoking ban

Editor,

This ban is the definition of fascism. I’m sure there will be more of this coming out of Nancy Pelosi’s home turf.


Joyce Romano

Redondo Beach


Gosh, Belmont is so cool

Editor,

I didn’t realize that puffing a cigarette was so danged dangerous. Maybe they should amend the law so that all smokers can be shot on sight. That would be real cool. Belmont is so neat. They can pass even more repressive legislation making it illegal to eat a hamburger, or sneeze, or walk outside your door without foam-rubber padding and a football helmet for protection.

I guess that the really enlightened folks all know you just can’t give ordinary slobs any liberty because God knows somebody could get hurt. And we can’t have that.  Maybe they can pass a law outlawing tidal waves, too, and earthquakes so that, when Mother Nature herself comes to see nannies and do-gooders of silly Belmont as an abomination, she’ll be rightly ticketed for sending the whole stupid town into the sea, where it belongs.

Idiots all!


Dee Wolfe

Salt Lake City, Utah



California is a joke of a state

Editor,

It’s fascinating that the same liberal ACLU types who want this no smoking law and who claim to protect our rights are the ones that try to dictate all behavior by making everything law-abiding citizens say and do illegal. They try to dictate the way we talk and the way we live, but try to chastise a pedophile and they are right there defending that pervert’s right to be a pervert. They are much like the Stalinists who came to power (power to the people) in the Russian revolution. They claim to be all about the people but what they are really about is the power to make us talk and think the way they think we should talk and think. I have no doubt that these freaks respect Stalin but wouldn’t admit it and if given the power would enforce their communist beliefs system on us just like Stalin did.

Put simply this anti-smoking law is stupid and Communistic and these learning disabled council members are surely socialists. I don’t even smoke and I think they’re a joke. I don’t always like the smoke around me if I’m out but I have the ability to handle that myself.

Drinking can also cause a risk to others. Will we outlaw that as well? Of course not, anymore than they will outlaw the sale of tobacco? Why? Because these same liberals want the ability to tax these vices for revenue. Hypocrisy is synonymous with liberalism and California is the biggest joke of a state in the nation.


Jerry O’Laughlin

Columbia, Mo.


Nostalgic for smoking bans

Editor,

It has been my understanding that Davis, California was the first city to ban smoking within the city limits anywhere outside one’s own residence. This was quite a few years ago.

I only wish more places where I live would ban smoking in all public places, including night clubs. I miss that about California.


Julianna Berry

Wilmington, N.C.


The wisdom of our

ancestors comes around

Editor,

Thank you for your article, "Belmont to be first U.S. city to ban all smoking.” About time. The right to ban nuisances and dangers goes back over 4,200 years, to the historic Code of Hammurabi and the Law of Moses ("Thou shalt love thy neighbor,” the Golden Rule, also known in law as the "common law”). The Founding Fathers knew this. They put into the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights, the Seventh Amendment, a mandate for compliance with the "common law,” thus requiring elimination of dangers and nuisances. Readers can find background on this subject at my Web site, http://medicolegal.tripod.com/pureaircases.htm. In the past, various states banned cigarette manufacturing and selling completely, thus assuring that all harms from them are eliminated, not merely the ‘second-hand smoke’ aspects. Such states included Iowa, Tennessee and Michigan.

While Belmont is thus not, in history, a leader, it is a modern leader, as the wisdom of the founding fathers and the Bill of Rights have been forgotten over time, and moderns have to painfully rediscover what our forebears well knew. This shows the truth of the saying, that people don’t learn from history, so have to repeat it. About time the repeating process comes around. Thank you for your article. And thank you to Belmont officials for their respect for the "love thy neighbor” and Bill of Rights Seventh Amendment principles, and coming around to the wisdom of our ancestors.


Leroy J. Pletten

Sterling Heights, Mich.

This letter writer is a history of health/law issues writer


 

Tobacco resembles war

Editor,

While this proposal is drastic, and yet, this nation now with its most horrendous war machinery is basically all over the world forcing nations into being as good as Americans are to its own people, the American tobacco companies actually end up murdering yearly over 400,000 of its own citizens plus millions more the world over of poor and ignorant men women and children.

Yes, this by the nation that claims to be under God and its president ever more "orders” God to bless America, in reality for all the evil it is doing at home and abroad? Yes, Christianity insulted by the very nation that should know better, in reality serving the evil one in most of its efforts.

This from a staunch conservative Christian Republican, who ever more admires the founding fathers hopes and dreams, who were inspired by God himself to give birth to this nation for absolutely contrary activities the United States has decided to engage in ever more, like an evil Empire, making Rome look like peanuts by comparison.

This quote from the father of this nation: "Overgrown military establishments are under any form of government inauspicious to liberty, and are to be regarded as particularly hostile to Republican liberty.” George Washington as part of his farewell address. Dwight D. Eisenhower basically repeated the same in his farewell address.

As a legal immigrant of 50 years as of March 26, the above have become more and more the compass of my life in America, and wish to share it with whomever I have the chance.


H. D. Schmidt

Loma Linda


Smokers force others into their habit

Editor,

I think the smoking ban is a good idea. If someone wants to do it in their home, that is fine, but anywhere in public affects others that may not want to deal with second-hand smoke. This forces us into their habit and is not right. It should be banned everywhere in the United States.


Thomas Lewis

Boca Raton, Fla.



Dictate what people eat, too

Editor,

It is stunning to watch publicly elected officials turn on the people who voted them in, and in sweeping fashion, take away their rights, dictate personal choices and go to extreme measures to control our lives.

What happened to personal freedoms and personal responsibility? Does the government have to save us from ourselves?

Perhaps these Belmont brain trusts can just give good, paying jobs to everyone, tell everyone what to wear each day, maybe even show up and cook everybody breakfast each day so they don’t eat too much bacon and eggs, instead opting for tofu. These smoking Nazis are nuts and I resent it every time some government official shows up to tell me how to live my life in my car, my apartment or in a public park for which my hard-earned dollars support and buy. Throw the bums out and get in freedom loving Americans.  


Gary Doyens

New Haven, Conn.


Where does it end?

Editor,

This measure is completely outrageous and totally uncalled for. Thing is, I’m not even a smoker so it really doesn’t affect me whatsoever. But I’m furious over the fact that this is just one more freedom being taken away by Big Brother. It’s illegal to smoke outside now? I mean, last I checked, if you’re not standing right next to someone smoking outside, it won’t get into your lungs. Really, think about this. This council has made smoking illegal even if there’s not a soul within 10 miles.

Unbelievable. I think the city of Belmont needs to reconsider their elected officials. And next time don’t vote for the guy wearing a swastika on his arm. If they want to ban things that are bad for your lungs, then why not ban driving? Exhaust fumes can’t be good for you. Moreover, why not ban alcohol or any food that isn’t healthy? Why not make it illegal not to exercise? Not exercising is very unhealthy. Where does it end?  


Luke Burgess

Baltimore, Md.


Twinkie ban

Editor,

Everyone knows Twinkies are an unhealthy food. They can clog your arteries, make you gain huge amounts of weight and if left out children will certainly eat them. Our health care costs are soaring through the roof. Do we need the government to impose a "Twinkie” law? Anyone caught selling, possessing or eating a Twinkie will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

And if you have Twinkies around children, you are subject to arrest for child neglect. Who would treat their children like this?  Giving them fattening foods, teaching them unhealthy habits, causing low self esteem due to fat jokes from their friends. So, let’s challenge our government to govern instead of trying to tell us how to live.

How about this: try lowering crime, making tax dollars count for something, serving the people instead of being served, increasing education for our children, helping our seniors and make our towns a nice place to live. Once you master that, come back and ask us, the citizens, what needs to be done next.


Bud Haffner

Grapevine, Texas  


Wiser to ban vehicles

Editor,

It is my belief it would be wiser to ban vehicles rather than to prohibit people from smoking. Emissions from vehicles are far more dangerous than secondhand smoke. Duh.

But then again, the bastards who think themselves as saviors of the world do not possess the intelligence, courage or backbone to address the real issues that contribute to our health problems. I’m waiting to have someone in my bedroom monitor my sexual activities (and exciting they are) as that also may be hazardous to my health.

Michael G. Vogt

Ogden, Utah


Print this Page Print this Page |  Bookmark and Share
<< Back
 
  


 
You are in the Archives

Exit
  RSS feed RSS
Daily Journal Quick Poll
 
How would you best describe how you feel about the U.S. economy?

Anxious
Confident
Somewhat anxious
Somewhat confident
Meh
 
 
 

 
 
  
 
  
 
 
 
 
©2014 Daily Journal - San Mateo County’s homepage