A smoker’s deposit is just wonderful by me, but then I’d have no problem if a private landlord wanted to prohibit smoking altogether. Landlords should be free to put pretty much any condition they please in their leases, and prospective tenants should be free to accept or reject the terms or perhaps negotiate new ones. My problem is when the state mandates such prohibitions, as in the case of the retirement homes I mentioned earlier in this thread.
I’m concerned that tobacco is becoming, for all practical purposes, another illegal drug. We don’t need any more illegal drugs. In fact, we need to legalize some of the drugs that are currently outlawed.
I’m not sure why anyone would charge a $500,000 deposit on…well, hell! Anything. Around here that’s a house…a nice house…or two. Like I said, comperable to whatever the pet deposit is.
And (look at me using underlining to emphasize my point) just because I dislike smoking does not equal me disagreeing with your rights . I would never get an abortion for my own reasons, but I respect someone elses right to do so. I don’t drink for all kinds of reasons, but you can drink away. I don’t have to like something to agree that it should have a right to happen.
I personally hate smoking. I personally hate a lot of things. I hate people that don’t use their blinkers. I hate people that chew with their mouths open or talk with their mouths full of food. All kinds of things I hate. But, that doesn’t mean I have a right to force people to stop. Never said I did. Hell, never even thought I did.
The fact is, smoking is illegal indoors where I live- and I love it. Sorry that it makes me happy, I know I should be fighting the man, but this is one thing I really like about my state.
K…and that has what to do with the right of a landlord (once again…whoever that might be) disallowing smoking on their property?
How about calling it a “security deposit”? Perhaps making it equal to one month’s rent? And how about charging it to all renters, not just smokers? Non-smokers can do plenty to damage an apartment as well.
Around here, they have something like that. It’s called a “security deposit.” It’s equal to one month’s rent. And it’s charged to all renters, not just smokers.
It’s your property, so you have every right to rent only to nonsmokers. That’s simple and clean cut. But why say you want a total blanket ban if you don’t mean it? Your exact words:
Sigh. There is only a disconnect when you don’t realize the difference between my personal preference and what I realize is right, just, and can actually happen.
One more time! I PERSONALLY don’t like smoking. I PERSONALLY wish it were banned because I PERSONALLY don’t like it.
REALISTICALLY and PRACTICALLY I understand that YOU have a right to smoke if you want to. At the same time, I have the right to not get physically ill because of a leisure activity you partake in. If somehow you drinking caused my liver to screw up, I’d kindly as you to stop, too.
So finally, a review: Me (Diosabellissima of the Straight Dope)? I don’t like smoking for all kinds of reasons. I wish it didn’t exist. I really do. BUT you have the right to smoke all you want. No problem there. I’m not for banning cigs totally or in private residences (ya know, a home you OWN), hell I think you should be able to smoke anywhere you want to outside or in your own home.
Is it reasonable to ban smoking indoors (public, of course)? I PERSONALLY think so (and clearly the state of California agrees on this one). Obviously, we will disagree here because you think the ban is bad and I think the ban is good. Face it. We’ll disagree. Fine. Just try not to confuse my personal feelings about smoking and what I realize should happen.
As far as the whole “security deposit” thing. Thank you for clarifying. I, as a property manager of three houses, had never heard of these mystical things. I really should look into it, but from how I see it: clearly smoking (much like a pet) increases the inherent risk of damage. Because of that, I can’t see why it is unreasonable to have a seperate deposit (on top of this security deposit you speak of) for smokers.
The cites I mentioned were in response to your comment that I should not invoke the Slippery Slope Defense. They were an illustration that the Slope really exists. They are an illustration that there are people and organizations and governments that will never stop adding more and more restrictions. I also took issue with your statement that you would like to see smoking banned because you don’t like it.
Isn’t it reasonable then to assume you support such bans? I don’t care if you decide to rent only to nonsmokers. I don’t care if you charge a security deposit. You see, if I am interested in renting, it can be brought out in the open and discussed before I sign the lease. I can either agree, or go elsewhere. That is a whole lot different from a government imposed prohibition.
This is something I did not disagree with. I said this was fine. What I was against was the increasing restrictions on outdoors smoking. The outdoor areas that are allowed keep getting more restricted. Get it?
I don’t know what rents are like where you are, but around here if you’re paying $1000, you’re getting away with murder. So that’s the amount of the security deposit. When a tenent moves out, as I’m sure you’re aware, the unit must be repainted. That comes out of the landlord’s pocket, and it’s usually sufficient to remove the smoky smell. If not, then fumigation might run $100-200, max. That’s more than covered in the $1000 security deposit. Extensive burn marks on the walls and ceiling, then you’ve got worse problems than a smoker–you’ve got a psychopath for a renter.
For the record, I’d hate it if landlords imposed such a rule. To me it falls under the category of “unreasonable.” If my landlord has a rule prohibiting me from tearing down walls, that’s reasonable. If he has a rule prohibiting me from listening to CDs from any bands that have an E in their name, that’s unreasonable. A ban on smoking strikes me as unreasonable, provided that the tenant doesn’t smoke in public areas and agrees to pay for all damage out of his security deposit.
In this age of smoke-free zealotry, no landlord will ever allow smoking.
Pay an extra security deposit? Or buy a house? Fuck that. This is getting ridiculous.
Yes. So there’s a bit of a grey area here. If I had my druthers, landlords could dictate smoking in that situation, but not in a many-unit building where tenants have their own keys and mailboxes. I’m not sure what legal division would make that work out.
It still is preferrable to having nanny government get involved. At least with an “anti” landlord, you have a choice to go elsewhere, and if enough people go elsewhere, then this landlord has to maintain and pay property taxes on an empty building - in effect, is “punished” by the free market with no government interference. Which hurts a landlord more? Allowing us eeevull smokers to rent an apartment, or losing the property due to foreclosure or unpaid taxes (having no renters to cover the expenses)? Money talks and bullshit walks. With blanket government bans, you lose the ability to take your business elsewhere, because there is no elsewhere.
That’s all well and good in a location where rentals are plenty. Around here, you take what you can get. If enough landlords go smoke-free, it’s smokers that will suffer, not the landlords.
Nope. It’s an easily fixed workplace hazard. I’ve made this clear over & over.
“Draconian” wasn’t my word. That’s how smokers react when you require them to stop polluting the air that people breathe. And yet I’m the “cretin”. When you deal with smokers, don’t expect much in the way of polite behavior. It’s a loooong walk to the patio and they really can’t be bothered.
You’ve proven it’s about you and not “The Worker”. If Joe Schmoe doesn’t mind working in a place that allows smoking, who the fuck are you to regulate if the business can allow it or not for the patrons?
If you know best, come out and say it. Come on. Just post that you know what’s best for us troglodytes. No matter the issue, YOU know best. What other parameters whall we base our lives on? how will we ever survive past the age of 35 without your keen insight and grand knowledge?
I swear, if I ever see a post from you bitching about laws that affect personal choices, you’ll prove just how full of shit you are to the rest of those that don’t already see it.
And yet you don’t want the world’s bars and restaurants to be your exclusive domain.
So it’s all about the workers. I find it admirable that you’re so concerned about the poor downtrodden worker. How noble. How selfless. How full of shit you are.
